|
12 May 2014, 23:52
|
#1
|
YAAARRGH!
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 481
|
Cluster Alliances
This havoc has presented an interesting potential path (once trodden!) to try for the game.
How would it be to remove exile function altogether, and only allow people to join a cluster alliance?
The idea behind this essentially is to force people to play with who they land up with - teach new players how to improve/learn the game, or suck.
Mix the community up a bit and avoid stagnation every round.
All the best players are being polarised into the best alliances so this would be an interesting wildcard that would make this game a lot more interesting each round.
I know people want to play with their friends, but something radical has to change if the game is to grow. I'd also like shorter rounds and also suggest adding anything which reduces the amount of time this game sucks up. Just a brain fart.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 00:36
|
#2
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connovar
This havoc has presented an interesting potential path (once trodden!) to try for the game.
How would it be to remove exile function altogether, and only allow people to join a cluster alliance?
The idea behind this essentially is to force people to play with who they land up with - teach new players how to improve/learn the game, or suck.
Mix the community up a bit and avoid stagnation every round.
All the best players are being polarised into the best alliances so this would be an interesting wildcard that would make this game a lot more interesting each round.
I know people want to play with their friends, but something radical has to change if the game is to grow. I'd also like shorter rounds and also suggest adding anything which reduces the amount of time this game sucks up. Just a brain fart.
Thoughts?
|
I enjoyed events like the xmas rounds where you were in a cluster alliance and I got to mingle with folk I wouldn't meet if they weren't in my galaxy or alliance tag.
Havoc has been similar to this aswell.
IF the whole PA community was responsible This would be a good thing, However...
This would give the means out of tag defence and out of galaxy defence and would then create a demand for "Support Planets" That would then polute the quality of the playerbase you know the planets that never come on to the galaxy channel and mingle with your fellow galaxy mates... after all who wants inactive gal mates. Because one alliance has support planets this tends to create a keeping up with the jones mentality. (Round r15 vsh planets anyone?)
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 11:11
|
#3
|
PA Team
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
I did not ever intend this to be a replacement for a real round setup.
Alliances are important communities of Planetarion and I can never see them being replaced for a full round.
I am planning on using it for part of the World Cup work and for some speed games in the future, but I would prefer both dynamics that force people to play with some people they don't know (i.e. galaxies) and also those they do choose to play with (i.e. alliances).
There is a question around if allowing cluster defence and -1 cluster ETA gain might work - but Paisley has mentioned that support planets will be an issue there, potentially.
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 11:35
|
#4
|
YAAARRGH!
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 481
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Well, what about trying a round where you remove the exile function? Because it just gets exploited and abused anyway.
Maybe new/returning players would be more likely to stay in the game if they werent insta-exiled
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 11:50
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 707
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connovar
Well, what about trying a round where you remove the exile function? Because it just gets exploited and abused anyway.
Maybe new/returning players would be more likely to stay in the game if they werent insta-exiled
|
Or the opposite because they are stuck. Think last rounds exile changes already prooved the increase of dead weight galaxies.
From what i understand, there are no announced changes besides increased bp size.
Outcome: Same as last round, but probably even bigger gaps.
And i find it funny that some use the words exploited or abused. (or both in your case)
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 11:54
|
#6
|
YAAARRGH!
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 481
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Whys it funny? Its true.
It removes the random aspect, for some gals, and creates dead gals when the active people exiled out to find a favourable home.
If people HAD to stay where they land, they would have no choice if they wanted to win but to support and improve the 'dead-weight'
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 12:02
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 707
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connovar
Whys it funny? Its true.
It removes the random aspect, for some gals, and creates dead gals when the active people exiled out to find a favourable home.
If people HAD to stay where they land, they would have no choice if they wanted to win but to support and improve the 'dead-weight'
|
You can't support or improve dead weight. Hence why they are called dead weight.
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 13:27
|
#8
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
There is a question around if allowing cluster defence and -1 cluster ETA gain might work - but Paisley has mentioned that support planets will be an issue there, potentially.
|
It does annoy me alot that we can't have cluster alliances because they are some individuals who can't see in front of them how having "support planets" affects other people's gaming experience by having IRC inactive galaxy mates (I would also bet that the support planets wont defend Ingal)
Another point is ... Would you see "support planets" in the top tier galaxies?
I think not.
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 13:33
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,143
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Without knowing what your definition of support planet is... they are very much viable in a top gal, as long as the planet in question is active
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 13:48
|
#10
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksero
Without knowing what your definition of support planet is... they are very much viable in a top gal, as long as the planet in question is active
|
Hahahahaha could you picture the 9:8 gal of last round taking in a support planet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley
planets that never come on to the galaxy channel and mingle with your fellow galaxy mates
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley
(Round r15 vsh planets anyone?)
|
I appreciate it you weren't playing in r15 so I'll go into more detail.
These were typically planets that built defensive fleets and didn't matter if they crashed defence or not in the same manor a normal player would do so.
The way the stats were that round there was demand to have pure vsh (fi class anti frig) support planets both from exil and 1up (keeping up with the jones mentality) this would also allow the actual players to launch fi fleet on attack instead of defending.
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 14:17
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,143
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
We have had support planets in our gal plenty of times. All theyve done is sit on 2-3k roids with no ships and feed res to the gal, or covop and feed the res to the gal
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 14:54
|
#12
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksero
We have had support planets in our gal plenty of times. All theyve done is sit on 2-3k roids with no ships and feed res to the gal, or covop and feed the res to the gal
|
I Would call that an active gal mate who is contributing to a galaxy strategy also they would be on the gal channel
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 15:18
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,143
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Okay, so a support planet can not be in the gal chan of the gal he/she is residing in?
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 16:22
|
#14
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksero
Okay, so a support planet can not be in the gal chan of the gal he/she is residing in?
|
They typically dont appear on the gal channel. Pretty much the way I described a r15 vsh planet
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 17:48
|
#15
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
The only gal win i have had afaik, was when i was only playing like 1/3 of the round, and idled the 2/3 login every 3 day or so.
So eksero is right, but looking at all the changes in allie size/bp size etc its unlikely today.
The problem is that you cannot make such drastic changes as what connovar is suggesting without reworking the stats to suit such a setup, and everything else.
Just remove the tag rankings, and decide the winners like we did back in the golden days.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 19:00
|
#16
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 846
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Connovar if you wanted to make Exile removed it just dooms people from day 1. There's very little you can do if 4/7 of the people in your galaxy NEVER LOG INTO THE GAME more than 2h every 5 days. Yes they will eventually get kicked into c200 or other gals but then your only going to get new late-sign ups. So being stuck in that world you cant possibly have a good round.
Making cluster alliances come back would only make the winning gals stronger as they would now have another 50 planets to defwhore themselves.
__________________
R50-55 Faceless
|
|
|
13 May 2014, 19:03
|
#17
|
Error
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 359
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
I did not ever intend this to be a replacement for a real round setup.
Alliances are important communities of Planetarion and I can never see them being replaced for a full round.
I am planning on using it for part of the World Cup work and for some speed games in the future, but I would prefer both dynamics that force people to play with some people they don't know (i.e. galaxies) and also those they do choose to play with (i.e. alliances).
There is a question around if allowing cluster defence and -1 cluster ETA gain might work - but Paisley has mentioned that support planets will be an issue there, potentially.
|
i came to the forums to post something in this way... to ask why we dont have more eta -1 incluster..
cant we do a more elaborated research about it? support planet issue really makes the entire scenario be bad? imho the game gain a lot more options of politics and war tactics.
1 round can prove this, and will not ruin the future of the game.
__________________
#braSilFTW
|
|
|
14 May 2014, 09:15
|
#18
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
The problem is that you cannot make such drastic changes as what connovar is suggesting without reworking the stats to suit such a setup, and everything else.
|
Having Cluster alliances would make the Game More defensive in nature (an extra line of defence), It is likely that the 60 man Alliance rules will override cluster alliance rules ... I.E. don't defend against your own tag. Would the cluster alliances have attacks or would the alliance attacks take preference?
I can see cluster alliances is being just an extra line of defence and maybe an irc social club
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiamat101
Making cluster alliances come back would only make the winning gals stronger as they would now have another 50 planets to defwhore themselves.
|
Its a good point, I'm not against defwhores receiving defence IF the defence is legit from an actual Player...
But not from a cousin account or "support planet" type planet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph
i came to the forums to post something in this way... to ask why we dont have more eta -1 incluster..
cant we do a more elaborated research about it? support planet issue really makes the entire scenario be bad? imho the game gain a lot more options of politics and war tactics.
1 round can prove this, and will not ruin the future of the game.
|
Worth a shout for 1 round trial... however I would have to ask that the Multi hunters impliment the "support planet rule" as per http://pirate.planetarion.com/showpo...13&postcount=1
And adapt it for cluster defence accordingly.
I suspect that nubs will get little benefit in comparison to rank and defwhores.
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
14 May 2014, 10:12
|
#19
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 707
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Attacks barely land when we don't use overly offensive stats, so adding something that will game a lot more defensive is just the wrong way to look at things imo.
The suggestion like always will only benefit the dedicated and some few lucky galaxies.
|
|
|
14 May 2014, 17:09
|
#20
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
more players bigger tags before cluster alliances can come back
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
16 May 2014, 13:21
|
#21
|
Error
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 359
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Not only clusters alliances
Im looking for clusters big wars.
__________________
#braSilFTW
|
|
|
16 May 2014, 14:43
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
i would say the game needs 4x its player base before we can think about that
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
19 May 2014, 12:24
|
#23
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
To be honest, Cluster Alliances will only work with a bigger player-base. Having Cluster Alliances with the current player-base will make landing even more difficult and will probably result in stagnation from an early stage of the round.
Last edited by Clouds; 20 May 2014 at 01:04.
|
|
|
19 May 2014, 16:27
|
#24
|
NE
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
I’m not sure if agree with you on this one Cloud’s.
I think cluster alliances would totally open up the game - currently stagnated with cliquey vets. If we bring back cluster alliances over the current alliance model, I think we would need to reintroduce higher buddy packs (let people still play with players of the same calibre/friendship group/whatever).
I’ve met some really nice people playing in havoc, people who I normally wouldn’t have had chance to meet and I’d be really keen to see the game adopt this as an approach – even just for one round.
__________________
PEACE.
|
|
|
19 May 2014, 18:11
|
#25
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
sigh, i have to agree with clouds
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
|
|
|
19 May 2014, 21:55
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 846
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
How is the universe stagnated already, you have 60 man alliances that all have there own community, culture and fun. You don't think adding another 10x9(planets) to that for every planet will not just make it impossible to land on people. If you think alliances wont exists outside the game your misguided. You will be giving planets their alliance AND their Cluster to help them.
I wish people would stop this stupid idea and just move on to making better changes to this game to help promote activity.
__________________
R50-55 Faceless
|
|
|
19 May 2014, 23:59
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 245
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Cluster alliances are a great way to meet new people and to learn new tricks. There can be no doubt about that..
In my opinion going with only cluster alliances for a full round will bring a lot of problems..
It would depend on the exact implementation tho - as in: who can see what in the alliance.
Can everyone see all fleets? If yes then it only takes one person to ruin it for the cluster.. [by telling attackers / planets being attacked what all the fleets are]
What could be a better plan is to just allow defence by the cluster without any alliance forming.
If the galaxies in the cluster want to get organized and want to start defending then they can..
If you get incs then you will need to manually go talk to your cluster (IRC, MoC, ...) to find defence (similar to the xmas round) but this will reduce the amount of information that can be leaked to your attackers / to the planets you are attacking.
For havoc 'full' cluster alliances could be used.
There is only one problem with the current setup and that is that the number of active planets aren't evenly spread out in all the clusters..
If you happen to be in a cluster where only 5 planets are playing then havoc isn't really going to be a lot of fun since you will quicky loose all roids you stole...
Likewise if you are the only planet in a galaxy during havoc..
[There are solutions to this of course but I feel that's beyond the scope of this thread]
|
|
|
20 May 2014, 13:51
|
#28
|
Error
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 359
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiamat101
How is the universe stagnated already, you have 60 man alliances that all have there own community, culture and fun. You don't think adding another 10x9(planets) to that for every planet will not just make it impossible to land on people. If you think alliances wont exists outside the game your misguided. You will be giving planets their alliance AND their Cluster to help them.
I wish people would stop this stupid idea and just move on to making better changes to this game to help promote activity.
|
Utopia u talking about.
Im trying something for now..
Anyway.. Seems like the members base its a true problem to -1 cluster.
At first i had the idea of ppl mass atacking a top alliance in cluster. Would be the opposite of stagnation
__________________
#braSilFTW
|
|
|
20 May 2014, 14:35
|
#29
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bram
Cluster alliances are a great way to meet new people and to learn new tricks. There can be no doubt about that..
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bram
What could be a better plan is to just allow defence by the cluster without any alliance forming. If the galaxies in the cluster want to get organized and want to start defending then they can..
If you get incs then you will need to manually go talk to your cluster (IRC, MoC, ...) to find defence (similar to the xmas round) but this will reduce the amount of information that can be leaked to your attackers / to the planets you are attacking.
|
The PA team cannot stop this. If a Cluster Alliance wants to cooperate together, they will.
What you (and others) struggle to comprehend is due to the small size of the Universe, Cluster Alliances will not work, and will probably make more people quit than we are experiencing already. Why? Because landing attacks will be next to impossible, with a third line of defence (Alliance, Cluster, Galaxy).
However, I do agree that Cluster Alliances will allow players to work with other players who they are not usually familiar with, and will help newer players mingle with the current Planetarion "core". But unfortunately, we need a bigger Universe for this to work.
|
|
|
20 May 2014, 14:41
|
#30
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph
the idea of ppl mass atacking a top alliance in cluster. Would be the opposite of stagnation
|
If that happens then great.
What I suspect that will happen is Alliance HCs pulling up their members for not attacking on their raids (I.E. a lack of coverage) because they might be attacking with cluster alliance.
hence I'm sticking with what I said...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley
I can see cluster alliances is being just an extra line of defence and maybe an irc social club
I suspect that nubs will get little benefit in comparison to rank and defwhores.
|
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
20 May 2014, 14:42
|
#31
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veil05
I’m not sure if agree with you on this one Cloud’s.
I think cluster alliances would totally open up the game - currently stagnated with cliquey vets. If we bring back cluster alliances over the current alliance model, I think we would need to reintroduce higher buddy packs (let people still play with players of the same calibre/friendship group/whatever).
I’ve met some really nice people playing in havoc, people who I normally wouldn’t have had chance to meet and I’d be really keen to see the game adopt this as an approach – even just for one round.
|
Unfortunately Veil05, Havoc is a completely different concept to the actual round. If you introduce Cluster Alliances on top of the Alliance model, all Cluster Alliances will offer is additional defence, which will make landing even more difficult (due to the current player-base size - already explained in a previous post).
In the today's PA (with the current player-base size), you will often see blocks forming just to land one alliance. Now, imagine what it would do to the game if these alliances have access to an additional line of defence.
Last edited by Clouds; 20 May 2014 at 23:57.
|
|
|
20 May 2014, 22:58
|
#32
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 318
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
I would have to agree with many on here that cluster alliances would be a bad idea. For those who remember way back days when we had cluster travel times, the exact thing that Clouds and others describe, would happen. Even more def would happen. I forget what round exactly but I can remember myself gathering def from alliance and friends, cluster, then galaxy, in that order, in order to cover incs. Even then the uni was well over 10k planets. Try that now and you'd end up with 1/4 the uni deffing some planets every night.
__________________
*KoN* ~~ *NoS* ~~ *Fang* ~~ *Angels* ~~ *Urwins* ~~ *TheFallen* ~~ *Spore* ~~ *Ult Def Planet* ~~
Saver of Sad
Supreme Commander of The Spider Colony
|
|
|
20 May 2014, 23:49
|
#33
|
NE
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
Unfortunately Veil05, Havoc is a completely different concept to the actual round. If you introduce Cluster Alliances on top of the Alliance model, all Cluster Alliances will offer is additional defence, which will make landing even more difficult (due to the current player-base size - already explained in a previous post).
In the today's PA (with the current player-base size), you will often see blocks forming just to land one alliance. Now, imagine what it will do to the game if these alliances have access to an additional line of defence.
|
I was thinking remove the entire current model and replace it with cluster alliances. Probably wouldn't work though.
__________________
PEACE.
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 10:13
|
#34
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veil05
I was thinking remove the entire current model and replace it with cluster alliances. Probably wouldn't work though.
|
You can't remove something that doesn't rely on game mechanics to work ie. Alliances.
They exsist on irc primarily, it just that pa team acknowledge there existence in-game.
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 10:19
|
#35
|
NE
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba
You can't remove something that doesn't rely on game mechanics to work ie. Alliances.
They exsist on irc primarily, it just that pa team acknowledge there existence in-game.
|
But if you're not allowed to defend outside of cluster, what would the benefit be? It would affectively be a chat room.
__________________
PEACE.
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 11:52
|
#36
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 846
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Because veil just because your not allowed to def because of in-game mechanics you can still attack together. So its possible to all out attack with alliance mates and use your cluster ally to defend you. As Kai said, they exist outside the game so even if you remove them from in-game they will still exist.
__________________
R50-55 Faceless
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 11:55
|
#37
|
NE
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiamat101
Because veil just because your not allowed to def because of in-game mechanics you can still attack together. So its possible to all out attack with alliance mates and use your cluster ally to defend you. As Kai said, they exist outside the game so even if you remove them from in-game they will still exist.
|
But my original post was to Clouds, who said Alliance, Cluster and Galaxy would be defending. Im saying that doesnt have to be the case.
Anyway, like I said... it's a nice idea (despite it being heavily flawed).
__________________
PEACE.
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 13:12
|
#38
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veil05
But my original post was to Clouds, who said Alliance, Cluster and Galaxy would be defending. Im saying that doesnt have to be the case.
Anyway, like I said... it's a nice idea (despite it being heavily flawed).
|
Let me expand the concept. In your game c1, c2 and c3 can join together and attack c4. Now even though c4 is friends with c5 and c6 they can't help c4 because people can't defend out of cluster in your game. On top of this you will have groups of friends in positions of power in different cluster helping to keep each other free of incs. So really for clusters to interact and counter cluster blocking you need to introduce cross cluster defence and then alliances can operate.
If you don't allow cross defying between clusters then the game becomes more of a bash fest than it is currently with no way to stem it.
The nature of game needs cross deffing, take it away and you ruin a big part of the interaction.
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 15:58
|
#39
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
havoc works because only 100 or so people play it
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
|
|
|
21 May 2014, 17:41
|
#40
|
NE
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba
Let me expand the concept. In your game c1, c2 and c3 can join together and attack c4. Now even though c4 is friends with c5 and c6 they can't help c4 because people can't defend out of cluster in your game. On top of this you will have groups of friends in positions of power in different cluster helping to keep each other free of incs. So really for clusters to interact and counter cluster blocking you need to introduce cross cluster defence and then alliances can operate.
If you don't allow cross defying between clusters then the game becomes more of a bash fest than it is currently with no way to stem it.
The nature of game needs cross deffing, take it away and you ruin a big part of the interaction.
|
Those are all fair points. I guess I'm just frustrated at the lack of new players that enter the game and holding onto any suggestion that could offer a resolve.
And yes, I realise havoc is a far cry from the real round.
__________________
PEACE.
|
|
|
22 May 2014, 14:10
|
#41
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Esper
havoc works
|
Uhh...
__________________
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.
|
|
|
22 May 2014, 16:31
|
#42
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Re: Cluster Alliances
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Esper
havoc works .....
|
Damn!! Mz beat me to it.
__________________
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
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:41.
| |