Trade Embargo's

[Mikiel]

This part needs to be removed from the CoC

Players should be able to Embargo each other. Its part of economic strategy and helps to stop scamming buy allowing the players to embargo scammers etc.

Please sign this petition.

[Bobj]

I agree that doing bad things should sometimes come with economic consequences. I just think they did not want this to be an economic warfare game where guilds are vying for power against each other, perhaps i'm wrong.

[Jethro702]

I agree that doing bad things should sometimes come with economic consequences. I just think they did not want this to be an economic warfare game where guilds are vying for power against each other, perhaps i'm wrong.

No I agree.... This seems like economic warfare. I think it might cause problems.

[AGamer]

How would this embargo work exactly?

[Suzera]

I don't think they're stopping you from not trading with people in the CoC. I don't even see anything about disallowing organized not-trading with people. If you don't want to trade with people trying to scam you, I'm pretty sure you can just not trade with them and be well within the bounds of the CoC.

I'm not sure what you think it would accomplish either. There's no regional scarcity of resources to give an embargo any teeth at all right now (unless they decided to cause an easily avoided scarcity to themselves), and with the way resources work, generalizing your production is the most effective use of your island's resources anyway.

So yeah, I'm not really sure what your complaint is supposed to be here.

[RageHammer]

Sometimes things that seem like good ideas lead to really horrible abuses. If you don't like someone there is nothing forcing you to trade with them. But to set up an embargo amounts to player harassment, you are trying to "legalize" a way to punish another player that you don't like for any given reason. While your reasons may be perfectly valid and have a good intent (address the scammer/trade exploiter issue), it would be far too easy to exploit a mechanic like this and run players out of the game that groups of other players don't like for other reasons. It is a game after all, maybe you should take a little break if one player is really getting to you.

CoC rule #1

Forbidden conduct:

Under no circumstances may a player use the services offered by Ubisoft for the followings:

1. It is forbidden to harass or offend another player or group of players. Ubisoft will not tolerate any form of harassment and may be obliged to sanction the user. Generally speaking, any conduct aimed at hurting another player is forbidden.

[Mikiel]

People already do it though.
they just dont say anything. so the concept of guilds not trading with people by orders of its command structure are in effect.
the rule is there just as a burden.

Lets face it, they have no way of effectively policing this.
The rule should be removed. And economic embargo is a good way to deter people.

This always stops the trash talking, because some will trash talk and not pvp, so the result is they cant be touched.
and from that they just troll and trash if we can embargo them, or pvp them they will shut up thats for sure.

i feel strongly about this, the embargo CoC law should be deleted.

[EpsilonSilver]

From the Code of Conduct post on the forums:

Petitions and calls for a boycott

Any reference or invitations to petitions and boycotts will be stopped, depending on the type and situation, and may result in a warning or a final expulsion without prior notice.

http://forum.castleempireonline.com/...ode-of-Conduct

So while I may agree in principle, I am prohibited from acting as you suggest.

That being said, there are plenty of people I will not deal with for various reasons.

[Suzera]

I just noticed there were two codes of conduct stickied. If that's the clause you're worried about, I'm pretty sure that's intended to be posting/chatting about boycotting Ubisoft in the forums/public game chat, though I wouldn't mind some clarification in case it matters when pvp is out.

[Mikiel]

Roy that is the exact point.
People ignore the rule and do it anyways.
so the rule should just be thrown out.