Re: Support planet rule
 

Besides the fact that you limit the freedom of the players with every rule.

If i take a look at the support planet rules i would violate some of them just by playing "freelancer" with a light connection to friends i played along with.

For example.
This rule is bendable like hell i could easy undermine the 25% on purpose if i would be aware of it ...
And the 3 times limitation harms my gameplay freedom.
If i would chose to play a round unallied to not get involved in the alliance stuff and would be willing to help some friends that are allied if i got in the mood and possibility to do so. This rule could obviously collide with my desired playstyle.

The funny part is the "***" obviously by creating this rule the creator of it was aware of this fact.

Why apply a rule that is harmful to the interest of some players and needs judgement in every case ?!?
Ignoring the fact that such rules tend to not be applied after all under this circumstances.

Well back from this to the OOT def.

If you would get rid of it you would erase all crossover ally cooperation.
You would force any none allied player into in gal stuff regardless if his unboundness is his own interest or because he can't get into a desired ally bunch, besides this maybe a way to get a foot in the door to join an alliance if you show your willingness to help this way.
etc.

Another reglementaion in the downward direction.
And because of what ? Beeing upset about rare OOT def or ally blocks that actualy coordinate out of tag def as strategicaly depth ? In all the rounds i played i had no real problem with OOT def anyway cause it was rarlely the case. Most of the support planets weren't even big ones because the effort into playing them was limited and therefor the benefit of their def were limited , too. Guess JBG was refering to this one allready. *shrug*

I am still wondering how OOT def will force you into doing this as a main reason besides i still lack to see the difference on this point if it is OOT or general def. You can defend FR/DE and BS/CR waves in tag with lower class ships within 2 ticks anyway, why is the the OOT 1 tick possible lower class def disadvantage higher ranked than the in tag one ? Same reason why you would chose FI/CO instead of CR/BS . Ever heard of a strategy called recall/resend ?
You can outrun the OOT def if you are clever enough to use it.
If you cut the lower requirements on research and the mainly strategical reason to go fi/co as advantage in strategic reasons in general it maybe become one but would still be a weak one compared to the times i encounter this during the rounds i played.
The stats compared to general advantage of the lower eta and therefore less reaction time on attack fleets are mainly the reason to choose it this way , besides you can still obey this none the less.
And i wonder why you want "freedom" in this way with limiting "freedom" in another way (like the freelancer way i actualy did play in some rounds).
You would take strategic depth out of the game and restricting gameplay options (wich the actual support planet rules do allready ) for limiting an ignorable sideeffect or beneficial coordination from alliances in general. :rolleyes:
Bit hypocrit i guess.

Re: Support planet rule
 

I don't think this is a serious suggestion, but on the off chance that it isn't: there are good game design reasons why this is a bad idea. For starters it'll allow the possibility that people get wiped out while they sleep. I don't see such reasons for the support planet rule.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Well I think the reason for the support planet rule is to deal with the fact that a lot of people consider that oogoocooa defense is dishonest in the sense that it seeks to abuse alliance tag limits, and could potentially indicate multis.

The first of these can be addressed by hardcoding.
The second can never be addressed, and neither can be planet sharing and I am pretty sure there are a metric arseload of people doing both these things, so really worrying about any rules in planetarion is pretty insane.

Re: Support planet rule
 

That is simply retarded. OBVIOUSLY a player playing in another tag is not a multi, MHs can see that planets are being run seperately, if I want to defend newdawn, or Euph, or App even 4 or 5 times a week, who the hell is anyone to tell me I can't?

Why would I be suspected of cheating on some level just because I'm choosing to defend somebody else other than my alliance for a week?

Idiots.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Kenny, my tag has x planets.
I have one, but the tag is now full.
I get an account on some machine from some cheap hosting company.
I then make another planet which could be in another tag, and use it to defend the ND planet.
Provided I am careful, multihunters will never know. It is not rocket surgery.
I have just signed up for an ISP that does ipv6. If PA get ip6 aware servers, I will show you punks some multi-ing. <---this bit isnt serious.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Since most tags are not even full, or have so many shit people in them if they are full, it would make a lot more sense to get ur multi into ur own tag.

Re: Support planet rule
 

I couldn't help but noticing Paisley attacking a nearly fleetless scanner with 700k cath co.

Really having priorities aren't we Paisley?

Re: Support planet rule
 

and what does that have to do with anything in this thread theam?

Re: Support planet rule
 

Thats a good point. The one thing I would find a bit tricky though, is if it is a decent alliance you might have to do some complex irc interaction as "two different people". Id be more comfortable being "myself" in my main alliance and playing as some bright eyed n00bie in the other alliance. Plus you can then get the other alliance to defend your multi and do some spying on the side. But yeah, you are right. If for some reason you don't have to worry about your alliance finding out about your multi then bung 'em both in the same tag.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Oh, funny. Your gal?

Re: Support planet rule
 

Not all support planets are Multis but shock horror all Multis seem to be coincidently support planets. the plot thickens

The fundamental differences between attacking and defending
The main planet doesnt want his nice support planets to take up the nice roid cap if he can land it alone. (if it is a Fleetcatch I am sure they will come in handy to add to the required defense tolerance needed to force a recall)

With defense support planets in comparision to planets that play properly can be regarded as expendable if they crash, retaling isnt much of a deterent to force a recall. and surprisingly they can be respawned quite easy. And have the required def ships on demand whilst an intag ally member might have the required ships out on attack/returning.

As <3 as Elviz is (And sorry for cov oping you stupid early on in the round elviz) .... he is a reknown cheater and to claim that he is on the mend :rolleyes:

Was you serious / was talking shite or were you just having a laugh?

edit

The scanner was a bit of a fatty ... it was a retal.
and I wish I had 700k co
Anyway it is going off topic.

I'll talk you through the mechanics of it ... also feel free to visit #strategy. On the basis that everyone has researched hypergate aka eta -4.
Aswell as the support planet Isnt Ingal and in the same cluster to the target.

Your fi/co fleet has a eta of 8 in base (eta 7 when it goes "red")
The Out of Tag (oot) from the target can only do an eta of 8 which means they cant do the eta and hence cant interfere with the landing.

If you launch say a frig fleet.
Which has a eta of 9 (eta 8 when it goes "red")
The OOT def cant send frig/de/cr/bs as it cant make the eta
however it can send fi/co class anti frig to the target within the eta.

the Only way OOT def can defend against a fi/co fleet is to predict the landing tick via getting a jpg of the target and have a guess at the landing tick and set the mission accordingly.

Fleetcatches and catching a higher class fleet out of base (your fi/co fleet is eta 7 to attack when the targets de/frig fleet is eta 8 return) cant be sent recall and sent again as the timing has to be precise.

Any questions?

Re: Support planet rule
 

IF the support planet is able to provide scans / intel thats fine but not showing up on my JGP scan of my target and without consequence if it is on a 1 way trip to the target.

No.... I called them sad b@$t@rd$ in a earlier post

You have to ask what players of what alliances have support planets via multi-ing.

:up:

The only support planets we had at Subh were scanners and a few spies.

Re: Support planet rule
 

So, after let's call it "a while", I'l make a post on the forums again.
There as actually only been typed a single sensable reply in this thread.

The way it is clear don't work, and/or actually does not sattisfy the players.
So, haveing the rule hardcoded would problly lead to even less variation in the game, as you would botleup the unpredictable factors. And quite effectivly ruin suprices/attack's/the urge to actually try to get some defence from friends.

And here we are on the point, the scarping of the rule.
Why? Allowing pepole to actually play again. Versus haveing to follow tre-four actions over and over agan. Actually the actions would be the same, but with a bit of variation.
Why again? Variation creats fun! :)

Re: Support planet rule
 

so, the only sensible post was on u dont really agree with?
theres been several here who has said to just get rid of the rule entirley :p hardcoding things sucks.

Re: Support planet rule
 

I have to say I'd be fairly surprised if there was a load of multiing etc going on in pa still. I'm not disagreeing with you that it might be relatively easy but most people just, well, don't.

Re: Support planet rule
 

So a scan support planet would be fine with you? That would however free up tag spaces for in tag def planets, while the scanners can overall fund their expenses by cov ops if they can be bothered. Also, it wouldn´t adress the mentioned option of having support planets run def leech attacks before you launch your real fleets.

Might have missed/forgotten that. :p

I do wonder who bothers about creating them, tbh. Not that hard to find some former players and bug them into creating a support planet for you.


You actually have real out of tag support planets opposed to the def sharing allies applied this round? Man, that makes you worse than all of us.


As to JBG latest reply:

I guess with mobile internet access via phone the use/need for account sharing at least has been gently reduced.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Thats certainly a valid point about def soaking... but even support planets need roids :P

Fair dues

The scanners were brought into tag eventually and also the spies were in other alliances tags but didnt def subh. the spies did have to join the respective allies tags and send def to keep their cover

Re: Support planet rule
 

Which brings me to a thought I had all the time: Def support planets tend to have pretty one sided fleets (as they aren´t really big mostly they need to concentrate on a certain def ship to be effective) and can rather easily be roided, which makes up for it to some (limited) degree.

Probably should have put a smiley behind my comment as I wasn´t dead serious there, though the basic point would have been correct, as I stated earlier in my post out of tag scanners would at least free up spots in tag for "real planets".
I don´t bother about spies really, as you said they need to participate in the actions of the alliance they spy on so their options for sending support fleets to their real alliance are rather limited if it isn´t ingal, which would be fine anyway.

I´d still like to see proof on a relevant use of support planets though. I said earlier I can´t remember seeing it much at all for a long time - keep in mind I don´t consider the cooperation of two allies as "use of support planets".
In the end, I think one of the basic question in this discussion should be whether support planets are an issue at all or not.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Oh man. This whole attempt by some to want to capture the game as it is 'supposed' to be played in their eyes with rules and whatnot is funny.


With funny I mean that I get an almost uncontrollable urge to poke my eyes out with a glowing red-hot spoon.

Part of the charm, which some are desperately trying to remove, is the meta-game. Personally I dislike alliance tags, as I have an irrational nostalgia for the old ways, but the way things go now are good enough.

Re: Support planet rule
 

The problem both of us would have when it comes to discussing this, is that it is totally impossible to determine what the level of cheating is and I find it surprising that you seem very sure about that.

If we can agree about how easy it is to cheat in this way, perhaps we could agree that it is at least plausible that for every "incompetent" cheat that is detected (and there are a few of them every round) there might well be one or two who are not incompetent?

Humans are extremely resourceful creatures and exploiting opportunities to gain a competitive advantage must be one of the strongest drivers of human development since the species first appeared on earth.

I think the "flaws" (I see them as such) in the game design which I have referred to provide incredibly rich opportunities for exploitation.

I would therefore be incredibly surprised if there weren't a lot of people exploiting them.

Re: Support planet rule
 

The problem is that cheating "effectively" takes so much effort

Re: Support planet rule
 

Fair enough and while your points are all valid it'd be like cheating at snakes and ladders versus a five year old. I mean, sure you're going to win and competitive advantage etc but I mean seriously, you're cheating at Planetarion 6 years after its peak. I don't believe it happens on a personal level having dced in two of the most successful alliances recently with a lot of people over various rounds in them and I'm fairly sure I'd have noticed something amiss. And if you're not going to try and avoid getting up at 2.50am, 4.50am and then 7.50am what the hell are you cheating in order to get around?

Re: Support planet rule
 

I agree completely, indeed having read this I cast my mind back to when I started playing PA (in round 4) and I must say, I came across relatively few people who...

Oh come on, who am I kidding?! ;)

Re: Support planet rule
 

Well no, back then it was a game played by tens of thousands of people, most of whom didn't know each other at all, with actual prizes (albeit shit ones) in an atmosphere which tacitly condoned cheating due to the fact it was hilariously open within every alliance community. Almost everyone I knew back then cheated and nobody gave a shit. That's just not the situation now. I mean, take someone like mista who had logins for half of the t100 planets in r2. He can't even run his own planet these days never mind account share effectively.

Edit: Upon rereading your post I think I misconstrued your post, originally it sounded like you were making a sarcastic counterpoint but are you actually agreeing with me?

Re: Support planet rule
 

People still cheat, it's just not the kind of multi-stuff we used to see. Back in the day everyone had their own planet for scans, two or three for attacking with and a host of farms across the universe. I don't think people do that anymore.

These days, farming only really happens when someone deletes their planet so they can late start in a fortress. They let their buddies roid the planet out before they delete it. They might also start their new planet before the old one is gone. Also, at the end of the round, the crap planets leave tag, split their ships into three easily beatable fleets and crash on one of the ziks in their alliance.

It's cheap, but it doesn't really affect the credibility of the entire round. It just makes the planet rankings meaningless, at least at the very top. I don't really believe most of the huge top ten ziks got their beetles and xan fleets legitimately. I guess I don't know how much I care either. I wasn't going to be in the top 10 anyway, and two hours after the round is over, no one remembers who won.

Besides, if you're cheating so you can win an internet game with no prize for the winner, you might need to reevaluate how you measure your self-worth.

Re: Support planet rule
 

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have absolutely been found wanting.

Re: Support planet rule
 

http://game.planetarion.com/show_new...ictj7kh8t0d09s
http://game.planetarion.com/show_new...xmjjtz8i1k4qhc
http://game.planetarion.com/show_new...62aoyora8n00r7
http://game.planetarion.com/show_new...8erhccozc6jjqe
http://game.planetarion.com/show_new...8iw53ociitknh1
http://game.planetarion.com/show_new...wyiktx87n2alto

There you go, all beetles I capped. That's one top 10 planet.
I know all of ATRO's breps too, and he got insanely lucky on defences that were mostly DC'd by me, signs, eksero or someone from 4 8, so he had no influence there.

I know eksero farmed inactive caths together with reese and got lucky a few times, he barely had cath crashes on him. I know he had a lot of luck in 6 9 (i farmed that gal too for beetles as you can see, but also for roids).

That's 3 out of 6 caths with an explanation. Can you please keep your mouth shut or come up with some proper reasonable doubt about significant caps?

Thank you.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Theam actually has more Beetles than I have ships (and I have a Cath co planet). :(

Re: Support planet rule
 

Unfortunately I was making a sarcastic comment.
I have come across plenty of cheats in my PA career and not just back in round 4. Maybe these aren't people who would actually cheat against a 5 year old at snakes and ladders, but would definitely not think twice about borrowing a couple of logins if it meant stealing roids from a very emotional player that is taking the game far too seriously simply for the lulz.

I am not saying that they are a majority of the player base, but I think that there are more than enough to have an impact on, for example, a committed honest player in a fairly lowly alliance.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Okay. I don't really know any people like that. There are probably a couple I don't know that well who would but to even compare it to the situation back in the early days of PA is laughable.

Re: Support planet rule
 

Disclaimer: I have not played this round, and have no evidence that any player has done anything that wasn't 100% within the rules of the game, but given the discussion I just couldn't resist:

I took these quotes from the other thread because as Mz quite correctly pointed out, there were some offtopic posts therein which I apologize for.