Two things to add to Juflo´s post:
- After one month absence or after premium package ends - I think;
- I think, not proved, that the account can be alive for ever. If someone (VS) want can make the account live by sending resources to there and construct some buildings or other activity that stops the counting to gray state.

Quote from Dschibait

Or you should have in mind, that if you have a way to something (got 1 field) that the first reduction is now 15% (before it was only 5%) - 2nd is 10%, 3rd and more are 5%

I think that was a good update. I got a medium reduction of 17%. Its good.
BUT
So many troops to spend that no absolute need to use this feature. I leave 27% of troops unused.
(my time, my disponibility, my way of play ofcourse)
ALSO
Please make a better communication. If I knowed without doubts this was a 1 week event maybe I make a different distribution of %% at the beginning and a different strategy along the week. I supposed a 2 weeks event with more expensive residences and a bigger chainned redution. My mistake but started with a non clear communication.

Quote from Chemilla

maybe damoria should communicate more with her players for example by giving the number of active players at each event

I support that. It should concern us all.
The base statistics... is not good enough.

Hello

What is the duration of the crusade? 1 week? 2 weeks?

Tks

EDIT:
I just saw the answer on German theath. 1 week.
The start troop amount does not make sense for me. More expensive residences but also plenty of troops to spend. My first analisys: Enough troops to conquer only medium or big residences....

Hello fellow players, community,

I needed to read this item several times in the announcement:
""we are noticing more and more that supposed multi-accounts unlock the main account a “way” to a lucrative place. We want to make sure that conquering your own is worth more than letting a multi-account do it. We reserve the right, if we continue to see this procedure, to permanently exclude certain players from this feature!""
????
"supposed multi-accounts" "conquering your own is worth more than letting a multi-account do it" "exclude certain players"

???
I understand is dificcult to prove multi-accounting. Not my area but I know several ways to hide the real IP.
BUT, if I understand well the message, you are stating you can not or want not to eliminate multi accounting.
What to do? Gave all players the same opportunity. All players. All! Honest players and multi-account players. It is an advance. Honest player has now the same chance than a less honest player.
(I assume altruistic any and all players who make way for their teammates until proof of guilt.)
I want to thank. I was heard. We were heard.

Thank You for the advance notice.
Nothing like a good organization!

In Portugal gibt es einige Sprüche:
"Perguntar não ofende." "... o máximo que pode acontecer é Receberes um não."
"Fragen tut nicht weh" "... das Beste, was passieren kann, ist, Nein als Antwort zu nehmen."
Neben Diktaten ist das Fragerecht verfassungsrechtlich geschützt.

Das heißt ... die gestellte Frage kann nur rhetorisch sein. Die mögliche Antwort kann nach den Regeln nur eine sein - nein!
Die Frage an die Verwaltung, Unterstützung, ist, ob es möglich ist, ein gleiches Konto anzubieten - dieselben Burgen, dieselben Truppen.

In Portugal there are some sayings:
"Perguntar não ofende." "...o máximo que pode acontecer é receberes um não."
"asking doesn't hurt" "... the most that can happen is taking no for an answer"
In addition to dictations, the right to ask is protected by the constitution.

That said ... the question asked can only be rhetorical. The possible answer, according to the rules, can only be one - no!
The question put to the admistration, support, it is whether it is possible to offer an equal account - same castles, the same troops.

I think this forum (like all foruns) exist so the community can share experiences, discuss common issues, make sugestions...
On this forum, on the appropriated threads, I express my oppinions. I dont expect the community or owners or producers to share my visions. I hope I can contribute to a better and more appealling game. I read my posts and I think I was clear with my analyses and suggestions - I did not write against team play! The community can support my ideas or not. Community is the final judge or should be.
I play since 2012. About BP and the transition to BitMeUP I dont want to say nothing. I try to do the best with the 8 long years I invested in this game.
Nowadays the game rules are made by you (bitmeup, dschibait...). No doubt for me. More or less players, more or less paying costumers its on you hands. I hope you will do the best for the community - not for me. Today community, tomorrow community and your business sucess that is linked to it.
To finnish this issue, for me, I think Damoria is a single player game where alliance system was officialized - alliances between individuals with same purposes are natural.
MassiveMOG:
Massive? Maybe it was... once upon a time... Depends from all of us but is you that can make game changes and rules wich can attract or not players!
MOG? No doubt. But not MAOG - multiplayer alliance online game

Translators are good at words and phrases. But they do not translate ideas or how to express. Not yet.
I am not a native English speaker. I speak, I write, I understand but not as a native. The translation of "my English" into another language should get even worse.
So I hope to make myself better understood now ...
I have already written on this and other topics about the crusade. I don't want you to do the job for me. I don't want to be helped. I want more balance between the players.
Taking first place in the glory table is very appealing. What you get in attacks + 100% in both troops and resources. The same for the following places - appealing.
And here comes the reason for the analysis I shared with the community. My analysis - it is worth what it is worth.
Fighting for glory against large alliances is inglorious;) for players isolated or belonging to small alliances. There is a topic - at least - about this subject. You go down from first place to 21 in a few minutes ...
Looking for resources and / or troops is safe. Achieving a good result in these fields and in glory is my goal. I made it before, I get good glory ranking also. But first what is safe. Resources are not sabotaged. You made the rules, not me.
My proposals are aimed at balancing lone players and teams.

1- I am wrong?
I am not wrong. If I could chose only "good" fields, making the path, I would be wrong.
For glory seekers your example is good. For resources seekers that example filed is a very bad one.
I can send you a XLS table with my example but you have, or can get, better ones for sure.

That said I must say also:
- top glory player has 319000; Top resouces player has 265%; top 3 resource players have 21, 22, 23 attacks.
- 60 attacks on 1x1 field can get you maximum 120000 glory point and/or 60% resources or troops.
- the choise of what fiels I attack is mine. Offcourse. But I need 3x3 and 2x2 fields to get a good overall score.

2 - I writed about seeking resources, not glory seeking.
I think glory seek is similar to my resource seek analisys. But top scores on glory ranking has 60 attacks and not 20 and something.
I seek resources! I am not unhappy with my score like I said. My analisys reflects my game play and what I can observe from others. No judjement.

3 - The "attackpower" seems like a good ideia to me.
Similar to what I proposed.
Need some serious thinking about the relations between field type. Those I call "scouts" can have more attacks to clear the paths to others that can get the same scores or even greater scores with a smaller amount of attacks. The scouts themselfs will get better scores for sure what is good.

PS: My score was obtained with:
9 3x3
24 2x2
27 1x1 most of them clearing paths. It is the game on is essence I think.
I could do better. Not much but better with more time spent and/or with "external scouts". I do think "external scouts" are legal but unbalance to much...

Please indulge me for some thoughts. Some data analysis. Some crusades already done..
I am not mathematician nor IT technician but I do some analysis from the data I can get and I want to share and try to change something if it is possible and good for the game.

I already shared some thoughts about it. I understand the team play, the altruistic play. I understand large groups of friends or alliances can join and get a better result than individual playing. I support that.
I must say that I achieve my goals. I have the score I can get with the time I can spare and the help I can use.
But the game structure can do some leveling or can do more leveling.

Base hipotisis to someone seeking a good score in resources (my case and I think the same is valid to glory seekers):
1 - Lets say you distribute 20% to sabotage and 480% to battle units;
2- You capture only residences with a good relation cost/bennefict;
3- You can get a maximum score, lets say, arround 270-300 points;
4 - The maximum score is reachable if you can get only 3x3 or 2x2 or a combination of 3x3 and 2x2;
5 - Everytime you get a 1x1 (even with a good relation) the maximum possible score drops;
6 - Its almost impossible get only 2x2 or 3x3 good relation residences without help from "scouts" clearing the paths;
7 - Whithout "scouts":
- You need to clear paths and you can get a reduction 5% by square.
- In my case that is about 4.4% cost reduction on this crusade or "500%" initial battle units or 20% better score;
- You need to use all the 10 x 6 attacks to get the best score.
8 - With "scouts"
- You can try the maximum score;
- You need to use 20 (only 3x3) to 60 (only 2x2) attacks to spend all units and get the maximum score;
- The scouts get a bad score but, maybe, they are helped on base game.

I repeat: I am not unhappy with my game, my score.
I understand team play. I understand altruistic play. The "scout" strategy is a valid one. Unfortunatly I can not do that...
To make some leveling, even for "scouts", I propose:
- A bigger reduction for attacking adjacent places;
- A chainned places reduction. A longer path gets bigger attack reduction. First adjacent X%(more i propose), second in path (X+Y)%, third (X+2Y)% and so on;
(and repeating the previous post:)
- A bonus for those who uses all the attacks and uses the most resources (all the resources used at the best) - whatever the score is;
- A bonus fot those who can get the best score with minimum attacks, (resources+troops)/number of attacks.

#43987 - screenshot attached
Try once, try twice... reload...try again...etc...take a screenshot...someone else got it.
Ofcourse I conquered another square, a bit less interesting. My score is around the planned range - what I can get with the time I can expend.
BUT its annoying...

The problem remains. Or not totally solved.
I had it twice today. 2/10.
This time the refresh button worked. One click on refresh and the square turned red.

Is the Cruzades a standalone or a alliance/friends play? I think should be as the base game. Alliances/friends exist. I try, ofcourse, damage adversaries or competitors in base game.

What I can observe is some players only help others clearing the paths (bad relations on resources/bonus residences) and sabotaging others. Are they altruist people or something else? I support altruist playing...

As it is I dont try the glory score. Better a good bonus score than a possible great glory.

To mitigate this I sugest:
- Sabotage spreaded along the days as residence attacks (1/6 a day);
- No sabotage possible the last 2 days - first days you use it as you want;
- Link the sabotage power to the score - ie: if I have a bad (bonus + glory) score my saboteurs will do a bad work - maybe (Bonus+Glory)/(medium or maximum B+G)*(random used now)

Plenty of strategys out there. Some search resources, some troops, some glory, some want it all
How about give a bonus for:

- Those who uses all the attacks and uses the most resources (all the resources used at the best) - whatever the score is;
- Those who can get the best score with minimum attacks.
How about a reward of 5 or 10% for those players? Like on glory ranking.

Quote from Dschibait

its listed in a specified order; i only remove th parts which are not used.

...you should go to the map and scroll the mouse arround...
I did it:

I have not much time to do scouting, search residences to accomplish my strategy, relation tables... whatever need to get great scores.
I do not want you to do the work for me. I understand that the better rewards are for those who works more, spends more time. Alone or in team. Unfortunatly is not my case...
BUT you can help with simple measures:
- The resources needed to aquire a residence should be always listed the same way. The same sequence as on the disponible quantity. ** Meele ** Cavalry ** Siege ** General **
I think is not dificult and simplify and speeds up the decision make of the players who cares about that.

"Dar um jeitinho" in Portuguese. You can not do it the right way try something else... Bend somehow...
I am Portuguese (with pride) and I know how to "bend". But I do not like it, I do not do it if I can choose!
Unfortunatly I had only one attack left and I did it on another place after several trys, reloads and on/off. If a had more attacks I would try what you said... I could not choose... another things to do...
What I know is the algorithm does not work 100%. Not the end of the world but worked against my game, my score.

Just quited the conquest of residence. I have other things to do. I can not wait minutes or hours trying. Lose some resources creating the path... Didnt get the residence...
PLEASE fix it!!

I made my way to a residence and I can't conquer it.
The status color is either connected or not connected. Even with "connected" color when I do the attack nothing happens - the color changes back to "no connection" - no resources or number of attacks decreased either.
I tried to reload. I tried to get out and in again. Always the same.
I spent the resources createing the path and ... nothing.
Please review the algorithm. Something is not right.

EDIT:
Immediately after leaving the post, from many previous unsuccessful attempts and without knowing why ... I succeeded.
Something is not right but ... I got it.