|
5 Jan 2003, 03:01
|
#1
|
Pepsi bottle
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 234:4:3
Posts: 440
|
Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Having random galaxies larger than private is really bad. There are several reasons for this, some I will list below. Any figures are based on the assumption that there are 10 in a private and 15 in a random galaxy.
1. Minister resource bonuses.
A player in a private galaxy will have a 40% chance of a minister position and thus a resource bonus. Generally they know in advance if they get one or not. Anyone going random has only a 26% chance of getting a minister position and thus a bonus. This will lower the amount of good players going random even more and make the random galaxies generally worse. And of course ignoring all other factors, less bonus/planet means lower average score and thus easier targets.
2. Primary target
Anything that will tell the universe before even ticks start that a certain group is random will put them on an immediate target list because they are easier targets, which is crucial early on. Why are they easier targets?
a) They don't know eachother, they've only been together 3 days.
b) They're less likely to have an alliance, alliances will sort galaxies for their members.
c) They're unlikely to have very many friends, if they had friends wouldn't they have a spot?
Once they get targetted early on, they'll always be behind.
3. Cluster/Parallel alliance membership.
When the alliances are set up it is usually only the tightest most elite galaxies that get invited, the rest will if there is reduced ETA for attacks be targets for the first week, thereby putting them far behind the rest. Anyone identifiable as random will have a hard time joining the alliance.
__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 03:05
|
#2
|
Evil inside
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,631
|
so true Chax.
as long as there exist private galaxies, random galaxies wont have a chance anyway.
__________________
<Germania>but you called Fury a bully, and that is terribly unfair
<Hicks>Occassionally individuals do things without Executive consent
<Dreadnought>You cant whois on Eclipse server without a registered nic, which mr ****stirrer doesnt have.
<Almeida> well i like to grow fat myself too, and when i have enough ships then i can engage in big battles
<Nantoz> Zhukov for Lord Protector!
<Jakiri> (Windows)XP was fine on release
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 03:20
|
#3
|
DLR HC
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 179
|
How many randoms do they think are going to sign up and play? 200? 500? Unless it's free I think you'll see almost no random players.
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 04:51
|
#4
|
Boy without a toy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: #ducks
Posts: 506
|
it might be a intresting experiment to have 10 - 10
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 07:05
|
#5
|
Lord of the Sheep
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: llannon, south wales
Posts: 84
|
There should be no randoms galaxies at all.
ALL galaxies should be a micture of private, with a few privates being shuffled together even. The set-up i'd love to see is:
2 groups of 5 privates mixed together then the galaxy will be open for another 5 randoms to make 15. As not many randoms will be expected then those randoms that join should be shuffled randonly through the universe (obviously ) so that overall every galaxies will have 12 or 13 people etc until the galaxies are full.
I need my newbie interaction, the friendly type :santa_wav:
__________________
Dont let spies ruin round 10 ffs!!!
Last edited by [Cymru]; 6 Jan 2003 at 02:11.
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 16:00
|
#6
|
nub since 2002
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: .de
Posts: 349
|
[Cymru]: That idea is good, I already heard that idea once or twice, but this could bring some more fun to PA:
You can play with friends and you get to know new ppl.
__________________
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to keep them for yourself
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 16:23
|
#7
|
Necro's Minion
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sheffield uni, UK.
Posts: 225
|
<Zeus> Request: Please whatever the galaxy formation turns out to be, if your going into a private galaxy, TRY and keep that galaxy one alliance. Do not mix alliances in a galaxy as it can lead to stagnation for all players.
making reconstituted galaxies of sets of 5 privates will kinda go against this though, no?
and Chax, if i am in a private galaxy i will have a 40% chance of a ministerial position.. i will however have less chance of anyone in my galaxy being online if i need defense at an in-galaxy eta..
ive been away since the start of rnd 7, but in my experiance, cluster and parallel alliances tended to be set up as parts of the "powerblock" set up. galaxies in the same P/C of the same pblock tend to ally together for any C/P tactics. whether small or big, ure best way into decent C/P alliance is through your own alliance.
as for the galaxies of 25 being obviously randoms with all the disadvantages of not having a strong alliance to cover them, fair point. i know i will find those (early on at least) the most obvious targets.
__________________
Praetorian Guard
[Elysium]
ex-NFU, ex-Silver HC
R1-nfi, R2-C4, R3-12:8:4, R4-140:15:1, R5-29:12:17, R6-27:13:2, R7-RL, R8-RL, R9-36:5:1, R9.5-Asleep
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 16:35
|
#8
|
Divine
Join Date: May 2001
Location: i dunno where i am :(
Posts: 186
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RooKie
it might be a intresting experiment to have 10 - 10
|
indeed it be difficult to know who are priv or random and be a another challenege
__________________
shak
Nosferatu
Silver
Elysium
RaH
Eclipse
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 16:54
|
#9
|
Pepsi bottle
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 234:4:3
Posts: 440
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Scaggydo
[Band Chax, if i am in a private galaxy i will have a 40% chance of a ministerial position.. i will however have less chance of anyone in my galaxy being online if i need defense at an in-galaxy eta.. [/b]
|
Surely in a private galaxy you have half the galaxy online withion 10minutes if you need short ETa def. SMS is a good thing, however in a random gal that won't happen.
__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 17:58
|
#10
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
I've also been saying the 2 * 5 + randoms is the best idea yet, I havent heard a reason why this shouldnt be introduced. The reasoning it will have 2 different alliances in the group is pretty wank tbh. It would enable randoms to get in good gals, it would be less likely to get a super 1337 gal, you meet new people.
However, this doesnt help the 2k universe.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 19:20
|
#11
|
Blood
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The States that are United
Posts: 424
|
Quote:
Originally posted by The_Fish
However, this doesnt help the 2k universe.
|
Actually it would, people who don't have enough friends to make a private gal could still end up in one and make friends with them/learn from them.
The noobs who do actually sign up now would have someone (hopefully) more experienced in the gal who can help out and keep them in the game. These noobs then tell there friends in other games and so on.
|
|
|
5 Jan 2003, 22:14
|
#12
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
yes but the noobs we need are the ones who havent played at all and as such will not pay for it yet. Hopefully some free randoms will be coming in.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 02:18
|
#13
|
Lord of the Sheep
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: llannon, south wales
Posts: 84
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Scaggydo
<Zeus> Request: Please whatever the galaxy formation turns out to be, if your going into a private galaxy, TRY and keep that galaxy one alliance. Do not mix alliances in a galaxy as it can lead to stagnation for all players.
making reconstituted galaxies of sets of 5 privates will kinda go against this though, no?
|
With the risk of repeating myself! *sigh*
Everyone knows that alliances arent going to go alone in any round and what about groups of friends who go together almost regardless of alliance?
The moral of the story in PA is that we need more interaction between not only new and old players but even between the existing players.
If anyone knows anywhere with more influence than these somewhat abused discussion forums to propose the idea to the creators please tell me!
Galaxies with 2 grops of organised players, though maybe mixed alliance wise, will go on to ineract with each other. People can get to know other players who know the game without the risk of going completely random. And adding randoms on top of them up to 15 means they will have to help and tutor the randoms into the game which is what PA needs.
__________________
Dont let spies ruin round 10 ffs!!!
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 15:29
|
#14
|
ensign forever
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 326
|
Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Chax
2. Primary target
Anything that will tell the universe before even ticks start that a certain group is random will put them on an immediate target list
|
I'll take a bet that at tick 72 I can tell apart private from random gals in at least 90% even if they are both 15 sized. Your argument of making thme visible is complete bollocks. Everybody will know very fast which gals are random and which aren't even if they are same size. In fact now I think of it you should watch the moment of the GC elections as randoms are way slower in that than private gals. If you just browse trough your cluster as soon as you can elect for GC you will no doubt find most randoms already.
Also from r7 experience as GC of a random gal I know random gals have most to fear from other random gals and not from private gals as private gals concentrate on each other and try to keep random gals at their side. Any decently skilled random GC could keep his gal friendly with the private gals in the cluster as they are a usefull ally for getting extra defence whilst not posing a threat attackingwise.
I want to play random in r9 again (in fact I'm certain to do so) and I certainly want a much much bigger random gal than any private gal !!!
hAl
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 15:52
|
#15
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Al_zz
I'll take a bet that at tick 72 I can tell apart private from random gals in at least 90% even if they are both 15 sized.
|
So you think that even a 10% chance of randoms passing as privates isn't worth it?
Quote:
Your argument of making thme visible is complete bollocks. Everybody will know very fast which gals are random and which aren't even if they are same size. In fact now I think of it you should watch the moment of the GC elections as randoms are way slower in that than private gals. If you just browse trough your cluster as soon as you can elect for GC you will no doubt find most randoms already.
|
There's a big difference between finding something out through a series of observations requiring some planning and effort vs. finding it out instantaneously through casual observation. If random galaxies are a different size, then everyone knows they're random. If they are the same size, then people might figure it out eventually.
The point, however, is this: if galaxies are all the same size then if a random galaxy does happen to get itself organized fairly quickly, then there's no reason it can't pass itself off as a private galaxy and thereby gain whatever advantages that may be had in doing so. But if random galaxies are different sizes, then it doesn't matter if a few of them get organized quickly or not--they'll always be tagged as an easy target.
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 16:16
|
#16
|
ensign forever
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 326
|
Re: Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
So you think that even a 10% chance of randoms passing as privates isn't worth it?
There's a big difference between finding something out through a series of observations requiring some planning and effort vs. finding it out instantaneously through casual observation. If random galaxies are a different size, then everyone knows they're random. If they are the same size, then people might figure it out eventually.
The point, however, is this: if galaxies are all the same size then if a random galaxy does happen to get itself organized fairly quickly, then there's no reason it can't pass itself off as a private galaxy and thereby gain whatever advantages that may be had in doing so. But if random galaxies are different sizes, then it doesn't matter if a few of them get organized quickly or not--they'll always be tagged as an easy target.
|
The chances of a random gal passing itself of as a private gal are slim to none. I said I'd pick 90% at 72 hours but in my cluster I'd be sure of all if I'd needed to know.
R8 might have mislead people into thinking that there are good random gals around that can match up with private gals but in truth in a mixed universe most good players will be in private gals so the random gals will be of much worse quality than in r8. In round 7 I think there was only 1 random gal which had no player on 3 roids after 4 days of play.
If you think a 15 person gal can organise good enough to emulate a private gal than those 15 people with 10 more added will do great in a mixed universe as well. And the chances of get 15 good players in your gal are drammatically better in a 25 person gal.
hAl
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 17:16
|
#17
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,663
|
I think a random gal of 25 planets will have better chances to match a private of 10, as they will be discovered anyway (and quite soon I think) I see no point in trying to hide them by lowering their strength.
And if i was in a big alliance HC I would certainly suggest that all the members go random. Coz with all the so called good players going private there would be a great chance to have many alliance friends ending up in the same very few random gals... There I'd find players with no alliance who would gladly join mine and in a short time the random gal could become an effective giant private gal.
__________________
<smith> You're 15 and full of shit.
<Furious_George> no, im 22
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 17:24
|
#18
|
Agitator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 99
|
Well, if the signups were going to be free, then there would of been crappy private galaxies also, which would have helped to cloak those randoms.
As it is though, I think most private galaxies will be pretty dang hardcore. ;(
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 17:30
|
#19
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Al_zz
If you think a 15 person gal can organise good enough to emulate a private gal than those 15 people with 10 more added will do great in a mixed universe as well. And the chances of get 15 good players in your gal are drammatically better in a 25 person gal.
|
If they fix exiling (make it actually affordable), that should help random galaxies improve their core of players (private galaxies won't need to do much exiling). Other non-size-related advantages could be given to random galaxies as well. For example, allow only planets in random galaxies to launch overburn attacks...
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 18:49
|
#20
|
Pepsi bottle
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 234:4:3
Posts: 440
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Al_zz
In round 7 I think there was only 1 random gal which had no player on 3 roids after 4 days of play.
|
with fewer planets the chances of having 0 ppl at 3 roids increase quite a bit though. Even private gals sometimes have some slow person in them.
__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
6 Jan 2003, 22:12
|
#21
|
Hamburger
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 221
|
Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Chax
They don't know eachother, they've only been together 3 days.
|
i came to an idea here... Random planets should start earlier. Like 1 or 2 days. And with 25 peps in a gal, they have a really fair chance
__________________
4S, Elysium, Madcows, ToT, LCH, Vision, NoX ... long break. then lately
|
|
|
7 Jan 2003, 09:33
|
#22
|
Boy without a toy
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: #ducks
Posts: 506
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
If they fix exiling (make it actually affordable), that should help random galaxies improve their core of players (private galaxies won't need to do much exiling). Other non-size-related advantages could be given to random galaxies as well. For example, allow only planets in random galaxies to launch overburn attacks...
|
vote Tacticus for creator!!
|
|
|
7 Jan 2003, 09:34
|
#23
|
ensign forever
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 326
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
If they fix exiling (make it actually affordable), that should help random galaxies improve their core of players (private galaxies won't need to do much exiling). Other non-size-related advantages could be given to random galaxies as well. For example, allow only planets in random galaxies to launch overburn attacks...
|
Giving random gals some extra advantage is a much better solution than making their gals smaller. Making random gals small is way to much of a loss for the small possibility of not getting detected early on. Actually identifying your gal early on as a random gal can help you in some cases in cluster politics.
I'm not sure though overburn is of much use to random gals. We do not want more people opting for an extra random farm planet with fast defence ETA in whole universe. I suggested already in other thread to give randoms better cluster ETA's (-1 to private) so the random gals have a good reason to allie in cluster.
hAl
|
|
|
10 Jan 2003, 13:57
|
#24
|
Stealth & Shadows
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 192
|
Quote:
Originally posted by G.K Zhukov
so true Chax.
as long as there exist private galaxies, random galaxies wont have a chance anyway.
|
Agreed.
|
|
|
11 Jan 2003, 12:45
|
#25
|
X$X
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Location: Location!
Posts: 293
|
I think the principle of having more players in random galaxies is sound, since random players are at a huge disadvantage, and the increased numbers will offset this, and will hopefully introduce newbies to the benefits of activity and co-operation - something that often failed to happen in round 8 because a 'critical mass' of people on-line never ocurred
The trick in balancing them is to make the galaxies the right size, so that the randoms are not in a weaker (or stronger) position, so that an average random galaxy is roughly as strong as an average private one.
__________________
R3 172:21:12 | R 4 136:8:5 | R5 30:25:12 | R6 11:5:1 | R7 40:25:17 | R8 30:1:5 | R9.5 36:10:14 | R10 1:5:9 Boldness of Helvetica
Proud to have been [YHQ] until the end of YHQ [VtS] until the end of Legion [Titans] until the end of Titans and |R6B| for Speedgames
|
|
|
11 Jan 2003, 15:24
|
#26
|
Necro's Minion
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Sheffield uni, UK.
Posts: 225
|
yes, but it is blatantly obvious to anyone in an organised galaxy that a large random galaxy is a soft target.. best not to stand out when ure weak..
__________________
Praetorian Guard
[Elysium]
ex-NFU, ex-Silver HC
R1-nfi, R2-C4, R3-12:8:4, R4-140:15:1, R5-29:12:17, R6-27:13:2, R7-RL, R8-RL, R9-36:5:1, R9.5-Asleep
|
|
|
12 Jan 2003, 17:45
|
#27
|
Xenoc
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 297
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Differing sizes of galaxies is bad
Quote:
Originally posted by Tactitus
Other non-size-related advantages could be given to random galaxies as well. For example, allow only planets in random galaxies to launch overburn attacks...
|
More important (IMO), keep overburn defense, but make it so it can only be used to send defense to randoms.
Or maybe only between randoms.
|
|
|
17 Jan 2003, 21:05
|
#28
|
-= Plush Puppet =-
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Portugal
Posts: 158
|
Nice post Chax!
I agree with u....
__________________
Ex-RaH BC
Ex-Olympians HC
r4 - 133:25:?? PTA
r5 - 35:7:?? MI/ViruS/NoS/PTA
r6 - 21:7:4 NoS/PTA
r7 - 21:4:12 NoS/PTA
r8 - 25:5:9 NoS / Titans & Plush / PTA
r9 - 24:2:7 Olympians / PTA
WC4 - 1:6:4 winner gal
r9.5 - 42:7:8 & 11:2:25 & 19:2:16 Olympians / PTA / Plush
r10 - XX:YY:ZZ RaH!
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43.
| |