[Banned]

Thanks for the comments

Originally Posted by Ultimate Newbie

Whilst i've not the time to go into detail now, i am curious about one thing; when resources due to a failed bid are 'lost' - where do they go? to the player who accepted the bid, to their galaxy fund, to the ether?

The resources would only be tied up for the duration of the bid, so the failed bid is returned to the bidder.

Additionally, i am not sure about having new galaxy each time someone is exiled or chooses to exile. Is it so hard to have a "Market Garden" galaxy where all available planets are listed (but with severely limited options such as no in-gal def, no gal fund, no ministers etc?). That way it would be easier to find people without a planet search...

That works too.

Originally Posted by The Real Arfy

I can see this being alot like the old Stargate thing where noob galaxies would save up all their resources to build something completely useless. I can't help but think that the already "uneducated" GCs would rally to recruit the #1 planet. However, there is probably an incredibly easy way of preventing this, so your idea is still OK.

Since they don't actually lose the money when he ignores them (just so long as the bid is standing), I don't see any harm in it.

However, I still think this will just lead to power houses again, unless we can stick to a fixed number of planets in each galaxy.

Let's ignore that for the time being and focus on whether or not we can find some actual incentives to help new players out.

On another note, if everybody in a galaxy is randomly placed, who decides to offer a player a place in the galaxy? The GC I assume, although this is worse than exiling - "will you donate to the fund so we can replace you please?" - because if this were to be implemented, I think it should force a player into a 'good start' or 'good galaxy' position in terms of available resources.

I disagree that this is somehow worse than exiling. Random galaxies have to have some way to bid for new players, the GC is the natural choice for this. Do you have a better idea?

Also if you were a big planet, why would you join a crappy galaxy because they offer you all their resources? What use is a large planet without a large galaxy other than being a farm to medium sized players?

I suppose if it's enough resources and your alliance is strong enough, it can be worth taking.

Originally Posted by Ultimate Newbie

Cynically, they would move to a crap gal, pinch all the resources, boost their planet significantly, self exile back into the market system, move to a crap (but slightly wealthier) gal, boost their score, self exile [repeat n times], be accepted into a good/exceptional galaxy because their planet is so 'good', and stay.

Thus those big planets arent a farm for medium players, they are farming them. :\

Yeah, there would need to be some time limits to prevent donations.

Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid

I must be missing something, but I can't see why a top galaxy would either take in new players or pay a lot for big planets. Surely you'd just offer next to no resources to the biggest planets out there - knowing that they'd rather be in a top galaxy than get a few resources then get roided.

I'm assuming there would be others (stupid GCs like Arfy mentioned?) bidding for the big planets, thus pushing up their price. A planet wouldn't be able to directly reject a bid, so the big galaxies would be forced to outbid the smaller ones. The planet also can't accept any bid except for the highest.

Where's the incentive to take in (let alone train) newer players?

In this system it's only indirectly present. I'm assuming all the good players will get galaxies early on (in the initial rush to build galaxies), thus leaving a lot of spots opening throughout the round in good galaxies with few established players to take them. I don't suppose the top galaxies will have much trouble poaching planets, but this will open new spaces in otherwise good galaxies etc.