the spytrick should be changed generally ... it should be not possible to see the whole troop amount for supporters if they are not from the same alliance or if support is for example less than 25% of troopamount.
if you want to have a spyreport you should have to win a fight 
I do agree that something should be done about the spy trick as it has made spies less necessary since the beginning of Damoria. That trick alone can really turn the tide of battles and wars taking away from the strategy the attacker needs to use to win.
spy trick / trojan horse, I think it have to stay, also because it is one of the first approaches to war actions and battle reports of novice players who collaborate in alliance
My argument is simple.
I may not be a novice player as I've fought in many wars here in Damoria and ran a very successful alliance in my day but, I will say that wars aren't won with just bits and pieces of information such as just knowing how many troops are in a castle.
An alliance that works together effectively can gather a lot of information on their enemy before the first attacks are made and during the war. If an alliance is not capable of successful spy attacks against an enemy, they really shouldn't provoke them using a simple spy trick as back in my day it was considered an act of aggression and met with consequences that either had them kicked out of their alliance or had war declared on their alliance.
Once an enemy alliance sees that you're using that trick it can become far less effective because they'll just watch for and send your support troop home.
That's the difference between a novice player and an experienced player, experienced players know cheap battle tactics and how to avoid them, novices are still trying to learn them. Alliances really shouldn't be teaching their members such simple things, they should actually be teaching them how to work together, play and how to really fight so that thy can defend not only themselves but help defend their guild as well.
To do the spy trick you need to work together. Smaller alliance members can help the bigger once to safe some troops. And now with the military points the smaller support sender can do so without fear of being attacked by the bigger opponent. Good strategy and efficient use of troops and alliancemembers.
Lord Dragoon, stop playing the game you left and welcome into the Damoria of now and future.
The way you've just explained it, it sounds a bit one sided. Smaller members of an alliance can send the support without fear of retaliation? So what you're saying is that it's ok for people to take part in a trick to get information on an enemies castle without fear of retaliation?
Explain to me how this is supposed to bring about fair play and balance for the now and future of Damoria. After all, that is the goal, right?
I will throw an idea out there that I believe is fair and reasonable.
Support may only be sent to members of your own alliance or to alliances that your alliance is allied with in your alliance's diplomacy. Support may also be sent to inactive castles. If at a later time the developers decide to add a "Friends" function support could also be extended to people you're friends with.
So this game is in the Middle Ages and spies are common there. It should stay that way
What exactly were you trying to add to this conversation, Beule?
There's no problem with the spies, the thing we're discussing is the spy trick.
I see nothing fair and reasonable in limiting the use of one of the troops. Some troops have some hidden talents. And with spies one of them is that 1 well-placed spy can sometimes come with just as much valuable information as an entire army of attacking spies.
Finding out the hidden values of troops is a great thing in this game.
Having more knowledge of the game than your opponent is a fair advantage
If your opponents can spend more time in the game sending spies to your castles, then you can send back, is a fair advantage for the opponents.
Display MoreThe way you've just explained it, it sounds a bit one sided. Smaller members of an alliance can send the support without fear of retaliation? So what you're saying is that it's ok for people to take part in a trick to get information on an enemies castle without fear of retaliation?
Explain to me how this is supposed to bring about fair play and balance for the now and future of Damoria. After all, that is the goal, right?
I will throw an idea out there that I believe is fair and reasonable.
Support may only be sent to members of your own alliance or to alliances that your alliance is allied with in your alliance's diplomacy. Support may also be sent to inactive castles. If at a later time the developers decide to add a "Friends" function support could also be extended to people you're friends with.
Lord Dragoon: to be honest, it is linked to the fact that those who send troops in supports in friendly castles can thus receive reports of battles
but some variables make the strategy game much more exciting
Do you really want to prevent players from helping themselves with support? if this yes, I consider this unfair 
btw, sorry for poor english translation
What exactly were you trying to add to this conversation, Beule?
There's no problem with the spies, the thing we're discussing is the spy trick.
What is the Spy Trick? I send a spy to the enemy's castle and receive information. This is how it used to be, why should this be banned now? All sites have the same opportunity and so nobody has an advantage.
I see nothing fair and reasonable in limiting the use of one of the troops. Some troops have some hidden talents. And with spies one of them is that 1 well-placed spy can sometimes come with just as much valuable information as an entire army of attacking spies.
Finding out the hidden values of troops is a great thing in this game.
Having more knowledge of the game than your opponent is a fair advantage
If your opponents can spend more time in the game sending spies to your castles, then you can send back, is a fair advantage for the opponents.
But a player that sends for example, one light infantry to an enemies castle as support to collect a battle report of every troop in it is the game functioning as it should be? It's not even a spy unit.
I will correct you on your one statement highlighted above. When using the spy trick the only information that you can get is how many troops are in the defending castle, it doesn't tell you research levels, building levels, construction sites, resource amounts, etc. so there is no way that they can give you as much valuable information as a successful attacking army of spies.
You're saying spies when any unit's capable of being used for the spy trick. If you were sending actual spy attacks against defending spies it'd be a different story because you need to actually win to get a spy report instead of losing the battle to get one like you do with the spy trick. Does anyone really believe that that's how the mechanics of this game were meant to function? Do we really get spy reports when our spies can't successfully win a battle? No.
Lord Dragoon: to be honest, it is linked to the fact that those who send troops in supports in friendly castles can thus receive reports of battles
but some variables make the strategy game much more exciting
Do you really want to prevent players from helping themselves with support? if this yes, I consider this unfair
btw, sorry for poor english translation
My suggestion above doesn't suggest making it so that your alliance and its allies can't support you, it actually states that they're the only ones that would be able to with the way the game currently works. It would still allow your guild and its allies to see your battle reports but it wouldn't allow for an enemy guild to send a single troop to your castle and have it attacked by someone else to get a battle report revealing the troops you have their, it'd actually make your enemies have to win battles with their spies to see what you have in your castle.
I'm not stopping players from supporting themselves or from letting their alliance or allies from stopping them, my suggestion stops enemies from sending support troops to their enemies castle to get battle reports revealing how many troops are there whether they win or lose the battle. If makes an enemy alliance or player win a successful spy attack in order to see how many armies are in the castle.
I think if you are to careless to search for enemy spies in your castle you deserve to lose information. It is part of the game. And yes spytrick can be done with all troops, but when they are used to steal information, they are used as spies 
. Why do you think it is called spytrick?
Just because something can be done in a game doesn't mean that it's functioning as it should be. Take for example the glitch some people used to build massive armies, I heard plenty of people complaining about that one and accusing NATO members of exploiting it recently.
If you can't get a spy report when you lose a spy attack using actual spies, why should you get one for losing? That really doesn't sound like a part of the game that's functioning properly, does it? This is a function multi's have easily taken advantage of many, many times.
It is normal that when you send troops as support, that the troops report the battles they see to you. They are still your troops. They are not from the owner of the castle.
If someone doesn't control the support he gets, he can't control the reports that are send.
The spy trick is NOT a bug.
I think this topic needs to be in "Discussions Game" and not here.
this topic is not about the spy trick, it is about the player mentioned above and the fact he is sendng over 2000 supports a day which cant be normal because you would need to click over 4 hours nonstop
It is normal that when you send troops as support, that the troops report the battles they see to you. They are still your troops. They are not from the owner of the castle.
If someone doesn't control the support he gets, he can't control the reports that are send.
The spy trick is NOT a bug.
I think this topic needs to be in "Discussions Game" and not here
If that's the case then you'd get a battle report revealing an enemies troops if you had the surrender option on as the attacker since some of your troops return to you, right? After all, they were in the battle and seen what happened.
