Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
You don't need to have the same activity.... just to have them end up crashing a fleet because they were watching 90210 and wanted to get a look at Brenda's cleavage.
|
Well quite... but you have not responded to my response. How does this constitute bringing you down to their level? If you have taught someone for a good amount of time and they now know know the game even if they crash how is that not a good thing. And moreover the vast majority of players whether nubs or vets in this game have crashed, so why should this complaint apply particularly to a new one? If you are in a gal with (plucking out of the air) elviz and he crashes has he suddenly brought you down as you so condescendingly put it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
But you want to overhaul an existing system where players that do want to play for #1 gal get a disadvantage over the current situation.
|
well guilty as charged then. In turn those who are less interested in playing for #1 gal are put at an advantage. This would seem to benefit more people than it disadvantages. Moreover you can still play for number 1 galaxy, you just need to put more effort into it, find ways to motivate your random galmates etc. This does not seem like a bad thing; #1 should require effort!
Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
Every planet that does not get hit can get a pretty decent ranking...
|
True but this is in part a choice you make. You can be in an alliance that plays for ally win and get loads of incs or in one that is aiming for planet ranks. The galaxy being random or bp does not make an immense impact on this choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
But a lot of these players keep exiling until they end up in a galaxy with a bp that is active. It has even been said in this thread, that a lot of these players go random with the idea of trying to form a fort gal.
|
Instead they will be looking for a galaxy that is reasonably active and everyone will be doing it. This does not seem much different does it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
Where is your evidence it won't? I'm expressing concerns I have with changing a system to something radically different.
|
There is very little evidence at all. The last fully random rounds that were main rounds were I think pre paX. However that said if this is the case what little evidence there is supports the random side; those rounds had lots of players. During the time with bp's there has been a gradual decline! As has been mentioned before on these forums (by I think Mz) pa needs to take a gamble at some point; big changes that may increase player numbers or a continual slow decline to nothing. I dont think that this is a big enough change but at least it is doing something to shake up the status quo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
I'm saying everything that involves full randomness to give players a starting position that differs in quality is unfair. (This includes the current system with the 50/50 buddy/random)
|
So we have democratically unfair to all vs unfair to most but with a tiny aristocracy on top.
Quote:
Originally Posted by berten
A complicated system to spread out planets throughout the universe in a balanced way would be a big improvement, but sadly is not on the table because of time and cost involved.
|
I agree that it is most unlikely to happen (as indeed is fully random based upon the usual willingness of the pa crew to change things). It would take time but I doubt the costs would be high. All the ranking data is there surely they could come up with an average quickly. And then rank them, split them into sections and shuffle. The only time consuming bit would probably be the moving the planets - though I would imagine even that could be automated.