Well… after a 7+ year forum ban, this probably isn’t the comeback post people expected. 😅 No drama. No witch hunt. Just two ideas that I genuinely think could improve KaW. Like many of you, I enjoy the PvP side of the game. One thing that has become increasingly frustrating is how valuable real-time automated tech has become between players. Instead of trying to chase every bot individually, maybe it’s time to make the information they rely on less valuable. Rather than fighting symptoms, let’s remove the incentive. Suggestion #1 – Delay Hostile Ally Notifications Separate friendly ally activity from hostile ally activity. Friendly activity should remain exactly as it is today: Ally volleys. Friends trading allies. Buying an ally back. Instant notifications are important here. However, hostile ally hires (such as strip attempts or multiple allies being taken from the same player) could have their notifications delayed by around 30 minutes. The strip would still happen. The ally market wouldn’t change. Players could still defend themselves. The only thing removed is the real-time intelligence that automated monitoring appears to benefit from. Suggestion #2 – New PvP Spell: Fog of War KaW has always been about strategy, so why not add another tactical option? Spell: Fog of War Effect: Delays ally-hire notifications to the ally owner for 30 minutes. Does not prevent ally hires. Does not stop stripping. Does not affect the ally market. Possible balancing: Cooldown. Limited duration. PvP-only. Cannot be chained continuously. This creates another strategic choice while making instant monitoring far less effective. Why These Ideas? I’m not asking ATA to ban anyone. I’m suggesting that if real-time information becomes less valuable, then automated monitoring also becomes less valuable. That’s usually a healthier long-term solution than constantly trying to detect every new tool that appears. And with AI all scared players will definitely start use AI tech bot KaW has survived for well over a decade because of its community. We’d all like to see PvP decided more by planning, teamwork, timing, and activity than by whoever receives information the fastest. So… that’s my first forum post after seven years. Please dont be gentle 💀 …. This is still KaW Forums after all. 😄 ps added text: Edit – Additional thought A few players have pointed out a potential loophole that is worth considering. Even if hostile ally hire notifications are delayed, automated tools could simply monitor a player’s highest-value allies instead. As soon as one of those allies changes owner or price, the bot would know a hostile hire occurred and could still trigger protection. To fully achieve the goal, the same delay should apply to all hostile hire indicators, not just the notification itself. Otherwise, the notification delay becomes cosmetic while automated tools simply switch to another data source. 😉
I think the problem should perhaps be explained a little further to better understand possible solutions. Not everyone in kaw has experienced fairly obvious unfair gaming practices like bot protections / exploits. Better yet bot alerts for ally hires, seemingly at certain set ally values in conjunction with account sharing. Bot alerts that ally values at or above 20Q for instance, have been bought. A player monitoring the alerts logs into the inactive account being stripped, and joins eb. Twicc provides some potential gameplay workarounds for that style of unfair gameplay. I don’t see many downsides unless you are one of the players selling the bots and providing the protection service for profit with bot alerts and account login sharing. It’s also simple and easily achieved through game mechs rather than requiring devs to monitor, detect, and ban accounts that are exploiting.
SUPPORT!!! Bots exploit weaknesses in the game!!! If ata can dramatically reduce the impact of bots without banning more accts. It would promote fair game play and strengthen kaw community.
I would support if Twicc (and company) provided a well-rounded idea that wasn’t clouded by emotion and proposed a solution that considered everyone while demonstrating an understanding of game mechs. Delaying notifications is a rubbish idea for many reasons. How would you or ATA differentiate between friendly and enemy hires? Would random market hires fall under the “enemy” umbrella? Would you get hire notifs in war? Twicc states hire notifs are important when buying an ally back or volleying, wouldn’t the same argument regarding the importance be made for people in war or that have worked hard to build bfa? or does Twicc (and company) want hire notifs when it’s convenient for them? 🗿 And before youse type a response accusing me of being some sort of ringleader that has access to everyone’s accounts so “of course you don’t want devs to fix anything”, ill make a suggestion and even piggy back off the Fog of War spell idea - Instead of delaying notifications, when you have Fog of War casted the price of the ally doesn’t change when you hire for 30 min or until spell wears off, assuming spell cannot be chained. Player who owned the ally would still get the notification but the monitoring of ally prices would be affected. Or we can all support my idea that I’ve been campaigning for a little bit now and… 🤓 GeT rId Of AlLy SpEll ☝🏼 ps - Devs can see when players are account sharing so if no bans are coming out of reports, then a logical individual can assume that player in question is innocent 🤷🏻♂️
Teefy raging* @Halo, reading comprehension isn’t your friend so I’ll help. Your biggest gripe is resolved by Twiccs proposal to make enemy ally hire differentiated through the use of a spell. Use spell, hire ally, ally price change and hire notification is delayed for 30 minutes or so. Thank you for your support now✌️
Halo, I am a fan of getting rid of the ally spell and then just locking ally’s from being hired when in EE war from everyone. But removing the ally spell doesn’t prevent bot abuse.
@_Sinan_ you are proving me right that you have 0 clue how mechanics work 🤣🤣 why do you think twiccs proposal is only favored with clanmates? Because you guys have 0 basic game knowledge. You guys definitely have my support on a garbo idea ☝🏼 looking forward to see what extra excuse comes after that one
Funny how the only person who seems worried about this is you. 😄 If nothing would change for you, why spend so much energy fighting the idea? Either way, hope you get to sleep a little better. Waking up for every strip and reacting within minutes sounds almost like a full-time job. 😂🍿
I think you might be slow mentally to even realize I was trying to help by actually providing an idea with logic behind it, and even achieving the same goal by reinforcing your rubbish idea🤦🏻♂️ but instead you and the pitch fork army insist you’re getting outplayed by 1 person due to exploits and would rather accuse someone of being a ringleader mastermind to make yourselves feel better about getting dawged. Go back to the drawing board brother. I’ll support whatever idea you have next 🍻
I’m not really interested in debating individuals. I posted a gameplay suggestion, and everyone can judge for themselves why one particular person feels the need to argue against it so passionately. At the end of the day, it’s up to ATA. If they decide to develop KaW again after five years not developing, that would honestly surprise me more than seeing you worried about one forum suggestion. 😎 I had a feeling you’d show up here… that’s exactly why I made the post. Think about that for a minute. 😉
Could you not abuse the spell by having it casted volleying what was a underpriced Allie and then pawning it off to a random player while they can’t see the price change leaving them stuck with a over priced Allie? If you wanted to lock hires while the spell is active perhaps you can bypass that problem Before NaL goes on another hate train we’re trying to fix your dumb idea and make it less dumb. However this is going to be dumb no matter what we come up with
There is nothing dumb about trying to mitigate bot and account sharing abuses that lead to unfair gameplay. But it’s good to consider potential problems with stated suggestions even if the motivation behind them is to protect the unfair gameplay. That still helps to provide better mitigation with fewer or no eventual downsides, so thanks Terry. I don’t think it’s a very likely to be abused in the manner you suggest. Ally prices don’t increase significantly per individual hire. But after a volley certainly can. How many players would really slide up to other players in the white panel van and say “Psst, hey kid I got this awesome ally you should really buy” after volleying it and how many folks wouldn’t see right through that? But scammers scam so it’s possible. The spell could also hide the ally hired like for 30 minutes like hide ally spell does. Devs could also make that ally unhireable again for the duration of the spell. Downside to that would be preventing prior owner from hiring back immediately. I think there could be some pros for that also however.