Regional Rankings and doubts about top player locals.

Except grog, in the 800 range last week, I was getting paired with 550+ when the offerings were scarce. A few of those 550s had 700k+ grog on them, that was two or three more battles after said +0 battle, that gained me another 30PR or so. I'm assuming that's at least the temporary fix, a variable line for PR in the uper ranks. I was also paired with a couple of 1000+ PR players while in the 700s, so it seems fair from my view point. Now the people in the 1000+ range I'm sure disagree, but let's face it, they got their originally by manipulating the system, and it's nice to see them getting knocked down a peg or two.

 

Not certain about this but their numbers seem static now for some time.
1456 for I Will NOT Come Back (down where I can be hit).
1447 for his now guild mate in number two.
Something's fishy if they remain unchanged in PR.
That and he's got 5+ mil grog in storage.
If there's obsession with remaining online, using shields, etc. then what a job!

I'm with you. A shield just means I can't play for 12 hours and unless I'm sleeping 8 of em, I'll break the shield. A loss on the offensive or defensive side is a chance to learn.
Sad that manipulations still affect the top of the leaderboard for so long.

 

#1 has a cool game device which keeps him online 24/7.
The other who grew 400 in two hrs was pushed

I guess it is more important to say your top five than to actually get and stay there in an honest way

 

I read this with dismay.

I'm a little fish trying to get bigger. Why? Because that's what the game is/was about. Now it seems there's no point. I'm not kidding myself that I'm going to sprint upto the 900's, I'm a bit wiser than that. The reason to do it though has dissapeared, which is a shame as I love this game.

 

There needs to be some sort of limit for bluestacks + autohotkey keeping someone "logged in" 24/7 without actually doing anything. =/ "activity shields" are kind of lame.

 

Any specific suggestions for devs to control this? Hopefully there is a solution that can be coded easily.

 

I'm not sure. I think even if someone's logged in for an excessive period of time, they should be able to be attacked. Otherwise whatever they implement, a cleverly malicious person can work around. Its hard to tell whats legitimate behavior, and whats just someone going to base edit mode and having a script drag a piece of wall around aimlessly once a minute. But any other real direct solution I can think of would end up harming legitimate players more than it would prevent the couple players that might be doing something like this.

 

Perhaps the logic can consider whether any attacks have been made lately and whether the island editor is open. If no attacks in X number of minutes and not editing island log out? Need a little more logic to account for cheaters leaving it in edit mode, but you get the idea. Base it on activity. Real activity, not just touching the screen. Attacks are the best gauge of activity. Not perfect, but much better than current solution. Err on the side of inactive players are cheating system.

 

One thought: Just have a max number of hours played in one day.
Make it a lot, say 16, for the slim possibility of an obssessive player.
Once you've hit 16 hours in a 24 hour window (say Greenwich time), you're open for attack.
I've beat an exact replica of I Will Come Back's base, and Yes, he's still online, and still 1456.