|
3 Oct 2015, 22:39
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 29
|
Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Limit the amount of naps/allies an ally can have. To much sitting on the fence going on by some mass napping. Having over half the universe you cannot attack only encourages bottom feeding . Eventually those at the bottom of the food chain which includes any newbies playing (who should be encouraged to sick around) will get sick of it and stop playing.
Reduce members per ally to the 50 the same as the number counted for score. This will then allow either the formation of new or some smaller allies to increase their member count bringing them more into the mix
__________________
XTC 69
Back Out Of Retirement -
r58 till present HR
-----------------------
imarbles of Goodspliff
r2 - No Alliance
r3 -XPA / G-II
r4/5/6/7 - HC @ G-II
r8 - retired to lead a normal life and have a full nights sleep
-----------------------
|
|
|
3 Oct 2015, 22:48
|
#2
|
NE
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Agreed!
__________________
PEACE.
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 02:07
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 29
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
I agree with your idea but the problem is not only ingame naps and alliances but the out of game ones...
Somehow for preventing bottom feeding, they should include not only planet ranking but also alliance ranking in the amount of xp/roid gain only in a way that it can benefit the game. The first weeks aren't the problem, but when the cards are shuffled, it is getting boring with all the NAPs and alliances. The HCs are basically deciding every round (within their power ofc) who they let to win.
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 08:15
|
#4
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
You cannot stop out-of-game NAPs. Limiting the number of ingame NAPs will only serve to reduce transparency by making alliances do their politics where the universal relations screen cannot see it. This is a dumb idea.
As for changing the ally limit, well, I don't know, I don't think I've ever seen a thread about that before. I think we'll need at least 5 pages to go over all the pros and cons.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 10:09
|
#5
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
I would be surprised if changing nap limits would change anything. The smaller allies are just as guilty of "napping up" as the bigger allies.
Forts are a more touchy point than any nap.
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 10:42
|
#6
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkee
I would be surprised if changing nap limits would change anything. The smaller allies are just as guilty of "napping up" as the bigger allies.
Forts are a more touchy point than any nap.
|
Forts is a more touchy bit yet
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 18:16
|
#7
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by XTC 69
Reduce members per ally to the 50 the same as the number counted for score. This will then allow either the formation of new or some smaller allies to increase their member count bringing them more into the mix
|
No.......... just no.
(See Mz's post above).
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 23:16
|
#8
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Your arguments and past thread discussions are outdated Arc. Its not about bringing players in. Its about making the game interesting to play again.
|
|
|
4 Oct 2015, 23:53
|
#9
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
You're wrong - and continuing to make the same discredited arguments won't make you right. (Although, to be fair, you haven't actually bothered to make any argument at all).
Players forced to leave their alliances may find another to join (at the expense of even more former players of that alliance) but they may also simply leave the game.
Something tells me that we can't afford that.
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
5 Oct 2015, 14:37
|
#10
|
Leader Of The Gang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 455
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
1. Naps cap - Wont work because they will be done off the relations page which will confuse other allys and everything will be a mess
2. Lowering alliance member count - Is what alot of people want to see ( myself included ) but what would happen to the likes of ct? p3n? bf? fl? where would there players go that they dropped? you can say to other alliance but the chance of them quitting is still there and wont go away and we cant afford to loose more players..
__________________
Round 60 - Ultores - Rank 67th.
Round 75 - CT - Rank 19th - Galaxy Win.
Round 80 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 81 - Ultores - Rank 73rd.
Round 83 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 91 - Lucky7 - Rank 50th.
Round 92 - Lucky7 - Rank 39th.
|
|
|
5 Oct 2015, 17:16
|
#11
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
You would see a lot more 20-25 man tags full of friends that won't get nubbed on because that could be detrimental to the chances of alliances going for the win. It wouldn't be in there best interests to hit these tags all the time. Need to have limits reduced to at least 40. 50 isn't nearly far enough.
Gal sizes should also be reduced in accordance with this.
More political movement.
Arc, I don't need to make an argument. I know I'm right. Most of the people left aren't noobs, but simply people that play for nostalgia. Bored.
|
|
|
5 Oct 2015, 17:48
|
#12
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
See my previous reply..........
............... and the 74,000 ones before that.
At least Adapt, even though he'd like to see smaller tags, recognises the danger.
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
6 Oct 2015, 09:59
|
#13
|
Leader Of The Gang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 455
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
Need to have limits reduced to at least 40. 50 isn't nearly far enough.
|
true but thats how it is and will remain, reducing tag limits at this point in the game is a danger to the community, maybe sometime when the PA team pulls their finger out and asks for donations to advertise, id sure donate to see PA back to what it was when spinner ran it
__________________
Round 60 - Ultores - Rank 67th.
Round 75 - CT - Rank 19th - Galaxy Win.
Round 80 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 81 - Ultores - Rank 73rd.
Round 83 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 91 - Lucky7 - Rank 50th.
Round 92 - Lucky7 - Rank 39th.
|
|
|
6 Oct 2015, 10:45
|
#14
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adapt
true but thats how it is and will remain, reducing tag limits at this point in the game is a danger to the community, maybe sometime when the PA team pulls their finger out and asks for donations to advertise, id sure donate to see PA back to what it was when spinner ran it
|
They are allready donating their profits to charity.
<Lunar_Lamp> So, to that end, I've decided that most of the profits should be going to charity. Whilst I already have one particular charity in mind, I'd welcome suggestions from the community for a second.
Why would they ask for donations themself?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
6 Oct 2015, 12:59
|
#15
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
You guys seem to fail to recognise that there is already a mass exodus of players happening because they are sick of the same boring rounds. I know multiple people that have had enough.
It won't change anything, so in mine and many others opinion...there is no danger.
|
|
|
6 Oct 2015, 15:13
|
#16
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
mass exodus
|
Yeah, no.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
6 Oct 2015, 15:17
|
#17
|
Sain†s
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 331
|
Re: Limit naps / reduce alliance size to 50
Some people quit every round, some new random people come back. Numbers are falling but really quite slowly, and it's been a trend for probably 50 rounds.
__________________
☠ | ROCK | BowS | Sain†s
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:56.
| |