Just my suggestion but I feel that someone who is only around to grief others should not be playing the game. It will cost this game players in the short and long run, and ironically enough it is very rarely the people that are really being targeted who get griefed.

If the only reason someone is playing a game is to grief others then they should not be a part of this community. Ban them.

You mean like LaF and SoF?

Ahh but if Laf wanted to grief we would simply randomly hit someone for no reason each and every set.

Laf farms them afterwards. So its actually just a netgaining strategy. Not griefing.

Problem is I'd have to ban half of some clans if I were to do that. How do you decide how to define that? Who gets to decide?

Are you kidding me? Half of the clans? Every single clan has a purpose and even Imag is not a group of griefers despite the fact that they war every single set. Not once during our wars with Arsenal and co did I think he was a griefer. I thought he was stupid yes but not a griefer.

Urban dictionary
griefer 399 up, 83 down
Someone, usually in an online game, who intentionally, and usually repeatedly, attempts to degrade anothers experience or torment them

Wiki
A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and harasses other players within the game, using aspects of the game in unintended ways.[1] A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals

It seems pretty damn clear to me that no clan qualifies as that. The only people who do are those who run untagged simply to suicide a certain group every single set and restart repeatedly to do so. There is a big difference between an untagged player who suicides after getting grabbed a ton and doesnt simply focus on one group set after set, compared to someone who specifically makes a country to fluff up someone elses set and continuously restarts to continue doing so set after set.

Oh and your new game changes have only made this type of player stronger.

I'm not sure if you are intentionally playing dumb or something or if you actually think this way but yah...

I'm just going to leave a question here:

Do you consider suiciding an intended game mechanic?

A clan that makes up retarded reasons to war are therefore griefers and should be banned as well. Whatever you did to get a griefer on your case, FIX IT! Don't try to change the rules, jeeez! It's a game, have fun. Afterall, the become landfarms, right?

Fix someone who only plays the game to suicide you? Alliances have rational(for the most part) discussions with eachother and can try to solve those problems. Please tell me what you do with someone who only is there to fluff with other people. I'd love to hear it.

I already said it, I farm them.

You on the other hand probably need to talk to them, find out what the grief is about, resolve it. That is what leaders do. They are a one man alliance afterall I guess.

lol you are clueless. Farm them? Sure. But then some inactive guy gets ABd anyways. Kill every untagged? Maybe. That could work.

Resolve it with someone who is only out to fluff with people? Not happening. You don't seem to get that.

I think sometimes the Griefers turn others in to Griefers making it hard to see who the real problem is.

If someone is going out of their way set after set to target you clan specifically, then your clan did something wrong. Until you understand that you cannot be helped, sorry.

Is you clan the only one on the server that farms untags? No. Is you clan the only one getting harassed by the same person? If yes, well see my earlier post. Wanna be a leader, then LEAD! Whining here ain't changing jack squat.

P.S. You should be thanking them for ABing your inactives.

Uhh why the fluff would you thank someone for ABing anyone? You truly are retarded.

Ever stop to think that someone can just be a bitter retard and suicide you no matter what your actions are? The only people who basically never get hit are people who avoid politics completely like Monsters. This has nothing to do with farming untagged countries either. If they were never hit it would still happen.

You are clearly on a different page so meh.

Lol, I'm on a different page? Your suggestion is fluff and will not be taken seriously. You are going to have to go ahead and deal with KJ on your own.

lol my suggestion follows the lines that many other games take. Griefers are not allowed in many many games online. Their behavior is limited at the very least. I wonder what you would think if Laf chose to kill every untagged every set or if they simply killed Evo repeatedly due to them having the closest connection to him. The 2nd wont happen but it would still be a bit BS.

That's the beauty of the game, it's an alliance server, should be played in an alliance, anyone playing untagged is fair game to be killed. That's a smart decision alliance leaders should have made a long time ago, but then leadership and this game is as close to an Oxymoron as you can get.

Also, LaF killing Evo everyset is not smart, cause one day they'll rise up and make LaF their floormat. You can only push a man to the wall for so long before he pushes back.

There were no connections to any suiciders when you started killing evo; the rationale seemed to be that Evo was winning, therefore you must kill us; sounds like griefing doesn't it?

Thus my point of griefers causing griefers. There is a vicious cycle of bad behavior, suiciding, etc.

It's just like when those idiots from Team suicided on people in Alliance that had never even played on the team server. It made me want to go play team and kill people.

As a matter of fact, I made a country to attack them, but then I never played it. Finished the round still in protection.

Well well well, the truth comes out at night, aye?

You are so full of fluff. There were suiciders before then and they have simply gotten more obvious since dumber players have started doing it. Go fix your terrible changes at least.

Oh and your reasons are also quite full of fluff but then you'd know that if you werent coming from a biased Evo viewpoint.

I'm not saying there weren't suiciders before; but what suiciders there were before were not even remotely connected to evo in any way; and suiciders were not part of the LaF war rationale; I discussed your reasons for war at length with hanlong around then and the sets following, and suiciders were most definitely not at issue.

But I tend to agree with Helmet; I don't think anybody starts as a "griefer", but eventually after alliances (or people) push them around enough you can "develop" a "greifer". But it may not be so much "griefing" as it is "revenge" for many resets of perceived injustice.


Most suiciders have some reasoning behind their targets. That's not to say that I condone suiciding, I'd prefer to make it less powerful; at the same time, however, it's important for individuals who are farmed to be able to strike back at those doing the farming in some way. So it's a tough balance to strike.

As for having a "biased" POV, that may be wrt Evo/LaF relations; but I would say I'm quite neutral when it comes to game/admin policy. And I think that there's no good way to discern who is at fault, nor what would constitute "griefing" vs "revenge" vs retalling vs one man tag at war.

If you wanted to make suiciding weaker why would you make all of these recent changes that make it stronger?

The changes make it weaker.

Unless you have 0 tanks =/

I'd love to see some numbers on that because from what I can tell it seems as if the Spy op bomb buildings is very very strong now and AB's seem to be extremely strong whether or not you have 3-5 times your acres in tanks. Not seeing formulas makes it tough to believe. Anecdotal evidence sucks and such but never seeing any comparisons to the old formulas sucks too.

In Primary one set I had a guy bounce on me each of the last 3 days in a row for absolutely no reason (said he was "bored"). He killed millions and millions of networth. It didn't end up being important, but if someone did that to oldman this round, it could have even prevented him from winning because even though it's just a bounce, it's so damaging. The thing is, I thought about it, and there's really nothing you can do about it as far as changing the game engine goes. I mean, what could you possibly? And in general, other scenarios too, I just don't see what you can really do about griefers if they choose to grief, without messing up the rest of the game's mechanics.

I mean I guess this thread just wants to ban them, heh... but I don't know about that

I think when they hit a certain point where it goes way beyond what is normal that they should be banned yes.

I think anyone that farms untags and thereby creating griefers should be banned.

lol farming people who choose to play untagged(They arent new people and fully understand what will happen; Anyone new gets offers to join any number of clans and is suggested to be on the primary server anyways) does not cause people to grief.

Your whole argument seems to be based on the kind of reasoning that if an alliance does something, it's politics and we should just deal with it but if a suicider does something, it's griefing, too powerful and the admins have to fix it. How many sets in a row has SoF been at war with either SOL or MD?

You don't read well. Alliances have politics and problems can be solved. Sof did not fight the same people this set as last set for example. Before that it was also not Sof and Laf's choice to fight every set.

If a suicider does something it is not necessarily griefing. Often it is just retaliating for something that pissed them off that set and they drop it. It is pretty obvious when it becomes griefing. One example is that they will restart 20 times to hit the same people over and over. Or set after set after set.

example of someone griefing

http://ffa.www.earthempires.com/serverprofile?id=12390

suicides every reset for no reason other then because he can.

umm my point is that they do, hence I said why SoF has fought either SOL or MD for about as long as KJ has been suiciding LaF

if a suicider's grudge against a clan is still valid after the 20th suicide or set after set, why is that any less valid than the same clans hitting the same other clans set after set for no reason other than some weird power struggle?

speaking from my own point of view, if RD played one set where they didn't landtrade, run internal landfarms, farm clans at war, FA people to the top etc. I'd probably not suicide them the next set. problem with the server is that they're protected politically because of the alliance politics which you seem to think are such a good way of solving problems so there aren't that many ways to try to somewhat slow them down/discourage them.

That's funny because as I said above, Sof did not pick all of those wars. Do you really think that Laf/Sof wanted to fight that many in a row? This is what the end outcome of coalition wars is. Why not argue that they fought Sof and Laf set after set despite Laf clearly not wanting to? Because it doesn't fit your view.

Oh and who are you to be the server police. You are an example of someone who simply plays this game to suicide and ignores facts from so many different angles that my conversation with you is pointless. RD is not doing organized land trading(No more than any other clan near the top in ANW not named Laf or Evo), RD has not done a single inclan hit this set, they have not been FAing people to the top, and there is no etc. You have a past grudge and simply wish to hit them.

The farming of a clan at war just happened this set and has been done by other clans in the past. I seem to remember someone farming NA in one of their wars and there are numerous other situations. I don't like everything RD does but I don't set out to ruin innocent players sets.


@Warster, that definitely looks griefer like to me. Not that hard to spot indeed.

Right, so basically your argument is that if it's done by an alliance, I'm sure there's some sort of justification, if it's done by a suicider (especially a suicider hitting me/my allies) they're just blind to the facts.

It's funny how the Evo and MD members who've posted on this thread seem to disagree with you.

in general, suiciding/griefing is not the intention of the alliance server, just like it's no the intention on the solo servers. i think it's more an issue of our "free play" policy and that folks kind bucket things under it. i think it's something that needs looking at from every angle, just like suiciding does.

that being said, if we're looking at tackling griefing from an admin level, I expect we'd also need to look at anti-competitive practices by clans or groups of clans on clan servers as well. it seems like the next logical step in that progression of improving the gameplay experience, no?

A simple change like making all previous countries known to an account I think would be an easy first step to holding people at least somewhat accountable for their actions.

I don't see any reason why we can't see who was playing every single country after a round ends.

If someone makes a second account to suicide and hide their actions they should be deleted.

Making a second game account is against the rules already.

(you can have multiple forum accounts though as long as they aren't being used to evade a ban:P)

Like I said in the other thread (and others have said here)--in the Alliance server, the alliances should accept some responsibility for their actions towards other alliances that have caused suiciding in a multi-reset timeframe. I assume that's what people mean when they refer to "griefers".

If there is petitioning for the admins to ban "griefers", there should also be petitioning on an equal scale for banning alliances that cause "griefers" (and, there probably is).

So nobody is allowed to grab anyone that can't retal and nobody is allowed to go to war?

These people are playing to cause people to quit the game. It is quite simple.

I used to believe this was true. I'd like to believe this is true. However, I am not really sure this is true anymore.

The actions of certain alliances seem to make it clear there is no way to solve "problems" other than rolling over and saying "farm me!! Thank you sir may I have another!!!"

That isn't griefing, IMHO, it is just bullying, but it cannot just be "solved" through politics. The bully isn't interested in a "solution".

Throw the suiciders out of your own alliance before asking the admins to remove them from the game.

Throwing them out of the alliance doesn't stop the suiciding. Exhibit A: BKJ

Upping an actual suggestion (beyond ban people who fluffed me up!) which may be missed in all repeated QQing on all sides, and modifying it somewhat, each account could have an account name (NOT log in name) which could be detected in s new spy op to "detect leader".

This would

1) Give an opportunity cost to detecting "known" suiciders, rather than making it a no brainer to simply click a profile and check out country names.

2) Allow alliances to handle it themselves, by pre-emptively killing off said suiciders.

3) Make it easier for others to target the ones they want to hit rather than the "poor innocent inactives" who will somehow be "driven from the game (despite being already inactive)" those calling for bans are so concerned about.

That makes it fairer does it not?

Please stop abusing the privilege of being stupid.

Obviously you're too stupid to realize I was making fun of your idiotic suggestion.

Oh, you weren't making fun. You were saying "herp-a-derp derp-a-derp my balls are in the oven".

That's great to hear that you were thinking about my balls between your fits of nerd rage.