trade 100,000 food for $1

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • In a coalition or between friends such trades are common. I trade food for $1 to my buddy, and he trades oil for $1 to our other coalition mate, and that other coalition mate trades me goods for $1. I suppose we could hassle with making it more complicated, but I don't have the time to discuss trades for an hour. Especially if we are not online at the same time we can put up the trade offers.

      I am not sure what is "magical" about it? I routinely buy and grow all the food I can, and yeah about day 20 my allies are out of food, but I have quite a stash.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • If it is constant, you can report suspected multi account, please create a report on the actual player, through diplomacy. Change the drop down for reason from "General" to "Multi account" and include information about these trades, and anything else that seems off, in the body of the report.
      Free Time looks good on me
    • WiseOdin wrote:

      If it is constant, you can report suspected multi account, please create a report on the actual player, through diplomacy. Change the drop down for reason from "General" to "Multi account" and include information about these trades, and anything else that seems off, in the body of the report.
      There can be a fine line between loyally supporting an ally, which is perfectly acceptable under the COW rules, and "resource pushing," whereby one semi-active ally does almost nothing but provide resources to another ally who is actively trying to win the game. Blatant "resource pushing" is a COW rules violation and will get you banned from a game.

      See here for a linked thread where WiseOdin and I were arguing the nuances of legitimate resource transfers between allies versus "resource pushing":

      > > > > "Trade cheating" < < < <

      BTW, to my way of thinking, a transfer of 100,000 tons of food to an ally seems awfully large. It's hard to accumulate that much food in the first few weeks of a game if you're actively producing units and fighting battles.
    • I once had a game in which the 5 person Coal (with all rather similar names hmmm....) was pushing resources to one player. I looked at each account and strangely they were all created on the same day within the span of an hour or so. Yes the player was banned once I reported him.
      "Es gibt keine verzweifelten Lagen, es gibt nur verzweifelte Menschen" - There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people.
      General Heinz Guderian (Schneller Heinz)

      Kenny says - You've got to know when to hold 'em, Know when to fold 'em, Know when to walk away And know when to run
    • dw98 wrote:

      I looked at each account and strangely they were all created on the same day within the span of an hour or so. Yes the player was banned once I reported him.
      DW, I recently experienced something similar in a private game among friends of a well-known and well-liked forum participant who invited a dozen or so fellow Players League and forum participants to a "friendly" match for the purpose of accumulating blueprints. Turns out two of the players were the same person, who was building his blueprint inventory for two different accounts, apparently so he could have an even bigger advantage in competitive games where he had both accounts in play. Moreover, he was also transferring large amounts of resources in the private friendly match (why?), but with no in-game communication between the two accounts (how did that get arranged?). It's what tipped me off that something odd was going on.

      Frankly, some people do some remarkably stupid and/or shady things when they are cloaked in the anonymity of the internet.
    • Oh, and by the way, when trying to assess whether two accounts might be held by a single person who is a multi-account cheater, you should also look at the game statistics. More often than not, multi-account cheaters will have remarkably similar sets of statistics because they don't vary their style of play from account to account.
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      BTW, to my way of thinking, a transfer of 100,000 tons of food to an ally seems awfully large. It's hard to accumulate that much food in the first few weeks of a game if you're actively producing units and fighting battles.
      It does depend on the map of course. I don't usually give that much away in one shot. On the current 100 player world map that I am on I had a barely active neighbor go inactive on day 14 or so, and plundered his capital for a nearly a million bucks by allowing the AI to rebuild several times. I put nearly that entire sum out as buy orders on food and so that should have bought 150,000 tons of food. I also prefer to keep my army size and rate of expansion such that I can stay positive on food production.

      I also only choose starting locations with good food resources. I have learned that you can usually buy steel and goods, sometimes buy oil, but never buy food when you need it.

      So I guess my points above are that I always have a surplus of food. I don't usually intend to trade a lot of it away, but sometimes opportunity knocks, and an ally gets a chance to annex a lot more territory then he was prepared to feed, or gets a bit overzealous building armies and there is no suitable opponent.
      War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



      VorlonFCW
      Retired from Bytro staff as of November 30, 2020.

      >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
    • VorlonFCW wrote:

      I also prefer to keep my army size and rate of expansion such that I can stay positive on food production.
      Smart. If you always maintain a level of positive food production under normal circumstances, you are very unlikely to ever experience a catastrophic food shortage when you expand quickly, or if you lose a couple of key resource provinces, because the size of any shortage will be manageable and probably temporary.

      I have watched rookies, and even some experienced players, who have 75 or 100 infantry units and are constantly adding more. That is unsustainable.
    • Stratostriker wrote:

      Is it legal for a bunch of friends to give like a ton of food? Never tried it yet, waiting to confirm.
      @Stratostriker: Read my comment above from Tuesday, 4:06 am, as well as the linked thread where WiseOdin and I discuss the difference between transferring resources from one ally to another (permitted) vs. "resource-pushing" (not permitted).

      Bottom line: If there is a pattern of one or more countries pushing all or a large portion of their resources to one country (or a select few) with the obvious aim of promoting the recipient's chances of winning above all others, that's resource-pushing, and it will get you banned.

      If you're still unclear on the difference, ask.
    • 80k food for 100k money would be in the scope of a "fair trade" as long as the same 80k food isn't sold back for like 20k money, or vice versa, which would be a fairly obvious push (of 60k money, in this instance). Keep in mind, a one time gift of 60k may be suspect, but there are a lot of other things we look for when looking at accounts/games for this.
      Free Time looks good on me
    • I can attest to what Montana BB said on the 12 of Sept. We had a player who was both multi accounting and getting pushed most other coalition members total resources. He was unstoppable. I reported him multiple times and about day 30 he was kicked. It was a win for us hones players, but in essence it ruined the game for most of us. I eventually won that game...wish I could have contacted that joker to show cheating will not be tolerated.
    • MontanaBB wrote:

      Oh, and by the way, when trying to assess whether two accounts might be held by a single person who is a multi-account cheater, you should also look at the game statistics. More often than not, multi-account cheaters will have remarkably similar sets of statistics because they don't vary their style of play from account to account.
      I see this quite a bit and though it's circumstantial, combined with resource pushing without spies revealing any communication between the two (or more), it's very suspect.

      I just finished a game where Turkey and Caucasus (on 22 player map) were online at the same time every day, resource trades without known communication, and one country was spamming militia and teching while the other was spamming TAC and building ABs. One's milita guarded the ABs while the other's TAC guarded the MILITIA.

      But what is seen as a suspicion doesn't make it a likelihood. Sometimes coincidences like that occur. I've been accused of both multi-account and high gold usage because that's what being online a lot can look like (especially if one is coordinating with others via Skype).
    • dw98 wrote:

      I once had a game in which the 5 person Coal (with all rather similar names hmmm....) was pushing resources to one player. I looked at each account and strangely they were all created on the same day within the span of an hour or so. Yes the player was banned once I reported him.
      Sometimes, a person will have one account that is more advanced and then a bunch of multis that are lower in rank. And it is those multis that are used to enhance the one account.

      MontanaBB wrote:

      Oh, and by the way, when trying to assess whether two accounts might be held by a single person who is a multi-account cheater, you should also look at the game statistics. More often than not, multi-account cheaters will have remarkably similar sets of statistics because they don't vary their style of play from account to account.
      Hm. I know of one player that actually had two different accounts, once upon a time. They didn't have the same stats in those accounts and they didn't even use them to cheat. In fact, it was told to me that the player used each account in different matches so as to not have a conflict of interest and not to cheat.

      In fact, I heard that that player tried really hard not to violate the spirit of the rules and only kept the two accounts because they were like different personalities from each other in the chats. It was a fascinating study in psychology and probably not something that should be discouraged, necessarily. However, I know also that this person eventually had to give up one of those accounts to stay in good terms with the people in charge of the game.

      injinji wrote:

      i found you can be nicer to coalition buddies and shared map players by trading stuff for shared map, sometimes i will even resurrect a fallen ally by taking his/her core provinces and trading them for shared map

      :00000441: :00000436:

      That is something of a slower way of building up your ally...and it's limited to a small amount of actual province trades. But the use of a few donated troops can make for an easy 30 second war to change the ownership of several provinces without counting against the province trade limitations. Still, what you did is a nice deed for your allies.
      It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.

      The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.

      R.I.P. Snickers <3