Planetarion Forums - View Single Post

Beeblbrox · 15 Mar 2007, 04:19

It's late here and I am too tired to analyse the posts and replies fully (or even half as much as it half deserves).

1) Excellent post

2) The alliance subject is the most important. What has always killed/restricted PA is the dominance of successful alliances and the elitism of proper protection for noobs. The 'Lemons' analogy was utterly fascinating and highly relevant.

3) Ship Stats - For my own 2pennorth further dumbing down of PA is undesirable. People that play games *want* flavour in their choices and selections. The complications may seem bewildering but best strategies for race selections always make themselves known quite widely early on in every round - and a variety of strategies allows individualism. Genericism will put people off. (Personally I want to see the return of more complication as it allows a bit more... character? i.e. different build times and so on).

4) Scoring System - does seem a little complicated, however i think the direction PA is heading IS correct - perhaps simply removing value (after all scanning is important), or perhaps something as simple as renaming value as 'power' would help remove confusion. I don't want to see a return to score being based simply on power and like the fact that the current score system discourages bashing. It seems pretty straightforward in essence - you want high score - take higher risks. This is a good thing, and perhaps should be expressed as such.

5) Exiling
Obviously relevant but seems a minor technical note considering the more 'game direction' points of the post.

6) Cluster Issues
I agree - clusters were pointless details without ETA reduction. Anything that enhances different kinds of cohesion amongst otherwise unconnected players can only help to break/influence major alliance domination (r.e. my first point excessive elite domination).

7) Once again, excellent post. Only wish I was more sober and patient to make my reply.

15 Mar 2007, 04:19	#40
Beeblbrox Registered User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Sussex, UK Posts: 25	Re: What I'd change and how I'd do it It's late here and I am too tired to analyse the posts and replies fully (or even half as much as it half deserves). 1) Excellent post 2) The alliance subject is the most important. What has always killed/restricted PA is the dominance of successful alliances and the elitism of proper protection for noobs. The 'Lemons' analogy was utterly fascinating and highly relevant. 3) Ship Stats - For my own 2pennorth further dumbing down of PA is undesirable. People that play games want flavour in their choices and selections. The complications may seem bewildering but best strategies for race selections always make themselves known quite widely early on in every round - and a variety of strategies allows individualism. Genericism will put people off. (Personally I want to see the return of more complication as it allows a bit more... character? i.e. different build times and so on). 4) Scoring System - does seem a little complicated, however i think the direction PA is heading IS correct - perhaps simply removing value (after all scanning is important), or perhaps something as simple as renaming value as 'power' would help remove confusion. I don't want to see a return to score being based simply on power and like the fact that the current score system discourages bashing. It seems pretty straightforward in essence - you want high score - take higher risks. This is a good thing, and perhaps should be expressed as such. 5) Exiling Obviously relevant but seems a minor technical note considering the more 'game direction' points of the post. 6) Cluster Issues I agree - clusters were pointless details without ETA reduction. Anything that enhances different kinds of cohesion amongst otherwise unconnected players can only help to break/influence major alliance domination (r.e. my first point excessive elite domination). 7) Once again, excellent post. Only wish I was more sober and patient to make my reply.