won't have all that much of an impact

cant txt back despie?

you never texted?

is this for real?

or was that "i dont know why anyone has thought of it before!" supposed to be a joke.

people would still fluff.. some of yall just like to fluff me thinks ;)

This has been brought up plenty of times, and if people are truly against self-farming, I think this is the best solution. However, there are still ways around it.

Would it only apply to your own 16 countries? Then two people could farm each other and do the same thing.

Would it apply to your own tag only? Then I could get together with a guy in an allied clan and we could farm each other.

Would ghost acres go away completely? This would certainly fix the problem, but this seems pretty unpopular.

Admittedly, it would be more work to do the first two, but it's still a way people could get around the system.

I think DR penalty to land gains should be capped earlier (At say 4-5 DR), and SS/PS should have its own DR seperate from GS/AB/BR, then presto, problems take care of itself.

Actually, here's another thought. I thought about making a new thread, but we have enough self-farming threads anyway.

Instead of a cap per country, what about a server cap. Have a total amount of land that is in the server. This would emulate the way the actual earth is, but if someone's able to grab up and have a disproportionately large percentage of the land on the server, that's fine, of course, they'll be a bigger target.

The cap could be a hard number, like 100M acres (This is a fairly arbitrary number, but I picked 35k acres x 2500 countries and it was just shy of 90M, so there is some thought given to this).

Or it could be dynamic based on the number of living countries on the server, like 35k x the number of living countries on the server.

A server cap just penalizes the 90% of the players who don't self farm. Not a good idea. It neither discourages nor hampers the self farming process.

Make it so that if you self farm, you only get 25% normal land gain if you grab yourself. That doesn't prohibit self farming, but it certainly makes it less attractive.

That is true. Would take a lot more grabs to get the same amount of land, and ghost acres would go away pretty fast.

If you think about it K4F, it most closely simulates the kind of acres your're gonna get farming untags. The only difference would be that you don't have to worry about an AB, GS, DSO or eating missiles.

Just the mere fact that you have to spend 4x as many turns to get x acres, will be its own limiter.

That's the idea. :)

I sort of like the idea of a server cap Twain.. Brings up something along the lines of colonizing and clans having to use power to gain upper hand on land in the server.. would make those old FFA world maps easier to make and they could even be implemented in the game somehow! graphics!

but then i run 4 countries that hit my clanmates 12 farms and he runs 4 that hit my 12 farms.

There is a way around everything, but being forced to work with other people adds an extra step or two to it. It doesn't have to be impossible to do, just harder to pull it off.

its ok donny. its a good idea regardless.i certainly dont want self farming eliminated. i have no issue with it being nerfed a bit though. then maybe there wouldnt be so many people complaining about it.

A server cap wouldn't necessarily encourage self-farming more. Eventually, it would actually make the self-farmers bigger targets. It would also mean there'd eventually have to be a cap to ghost acres though, which would mean self-farming would lose all effectiveness at that point (at least concerning the creation of ghost acres).

Yeah, ultimately, unless ghost acres go away, there's always going to be ways around the rules you guys are talking about. If anything, it might discourage a few people from self-farming, but it would then be even more profitable for the few that still did.

Because, as AJ said, if I can only get 1/4 hitting my own countries, why wouldn't AJ and I just trade hits between our countries?

If you make it 25% within the tag, why wouldn't I just contact someone in TKO and arrange the same agreement? Heck, then it'd even look like we were grabbing the way many of you guys would want us all to grab, since they'd be outside the tag.

I'm not saying it wouldn't stop some people. For instance, if it were anything within the tag, I wouldn't put the effort in to arrange a land-trading arrangement with someone in another tag becuase I'm too lazy/lack the time to do so, but I'd probably do it with Havoc or AJ or someone else in PAN if it were simply hitting one's own countries. Heck, sometimes when Havoc annoys me, I grab his farms just to amuse myself anyway, so it wouldn't be much of a stretch for me to use his land-farms full time instead of just grabbing them a couple times a set. ;)

I think the removal of ghost acres or some type of server cap are the only equitable ways. A per-country cap, after all, penalizes strategies that run strategies that require more land, like farmer or casher, compared to someone that runs techers. Ultimately, it'd probably balance out, because so many people would play techer that it would crash the tech market, but I think that's playing with a lot of variables that we're not fully thinking about.

removing Ghost acres completely would just make everyone go back to all x just like when ghosts was removed before