Galaxy Thoughts

[Appocomaster]

So, there has been a lot of discussion about the exile system and the general galaxy system.

I've been trying to think about a way of solving this.

The fundamental reason why the buddy pack is still the galaxy solution of choice is that it allows players to have friends and still meet new players. It forces you to get on with randoms, to some degree, and that brings you closer.

I'm not sure if it's worth re-trying a private/random setup (the problem with that is, as private galaxies fail and try and disband, the random galaxies get bigger, sparking a private-disband cycle).

Capping random galaxies both:
1) allows planets to exile into 'new' galaxies and effectively form private galaxies (to some extent, at least)
2) means new players joining mid-round get no support - they won't find it so easy to integrate into the game. Let's face it, the community is the reason why people stay and play the game - even envisaged tutorial systems can't really explain it as well as other players.



Originally I was thinking that some sort of (potentially slowly-changing) system where you had a set of "buddies" and a few others besides that formed your galaxy, maybe where galaxies overlapped like this (everyone in the green square was part of the green buddy pack's galaxy, red square for red bp, brown square for brown, etc) and random people were occasionally changed out of galaxies as new planets joined, but I'm not sure if this would help to nurture relationships with people out of your immediate "buddy pack", or if you'd just ignore them in the knowledge that they'd be disappearing fairly soon? Also, it'd be difficult to do target picking on an attack, as you'd just be hitting an area on a grid and you'd never be able to take out all of it.

I understand that sometimes galaxies "die", and become inactive, and some players still want to play and should be able to continue playing. The question is then what happens to those who stop playing and how do active players find other active players to play with? Also, what is active - someone who logs on a couple of times a day, once to launch and once to check and recall, or do they have to be on IRC all the time and login 5-6 times a day, or...?

I think that JBG famously won having spent most of the round logging in about a couple of times a day - once to send ships (after someone claimed for him every evening, he sent when he was back from the pub) and then pulled ships if texted to in the morning, so it can be done, but requiring alliance support.


So, anyway, I think that the strengths with the current system are:

-Allows (in theory) for better support of new signups compared to just throwing them in semi-active galaxies of new planets
-Allow for some escape of bad galaxies (self exile costs are lower in smaller galaxies and higher in larger galaxies)
-Allows for some mixture of playing with existing friends and meeting new people

Weaknesses:
-In reality, semi-active new planets often get exiled out of galaxies as they're not so helpful
-The exile system can be used to make something close to private galaxies
-The galaxy system is very dependent on buddy pack sizes, as has been illustrated, which can have a large effect on the round
-When a galaxy mostly dies, it becomes a landing ground for planets exiling around


What other views are there of the current galaxy exiling system, and potential improvements?

[Blue_Esper]

why not put a cap on galaxy size?

[Appocomaster]

Originally Posted by Blue_Esper

why not put a cap on galaxy size?

Originally Posted by Apocomaster (in the post you just replied to)

Capping random galaxies both:
1) allows planets to exile into 'new' galaxies and effectively form private galaxies (to some extent, at least)
2) means new players joining mid-round get no support - they won't find it so easy to integrate into the game. Let's face it, the community is the reason why people stay and play the game - even envisaged tutorial systems can't really explain it as well as other players.

[Blue_Esper]

new players need an alliance not a galaxy. i know how emo people get when they get roided and if a new player loses roids because late starters are looking for quick easy roids they will lose interest. with the passport system perhaps putting all "new" signups into a single alliance lets call this alliance "PATSA" this is the only alliance that is not capped on member size it is also an alliance that can't win a round. that way multi hunters have the closest view possible on these players and playing with the support team basically ensures that they get taught properly.

[Bashar]

I think the current galaxy setup is fine, so long as the galaxy size is controlled. I don't mean particularly limited, but the galaxy size last round was about right I feel, galaxies of 10-15 are just far too big for the current player base and alliance limit.

In my view, the problem you need to address isn't galaxy setup, it is the exile system, that is the root cause of most problems. If you make exiling far more expensive and less predictable, then you will stop people using it. The exile system is supposed to be a last resort when you cannot make it work with your galaxy, it is supposed to prevent you from being stuck where you really aren't able to have any fun and give you an alternative to quitting the game. At the moment it is being used as a tool to create super-private gals. Consequently, it is obvious that it is far too cheap and easy to control.

Basically, if you make exiling far more expensive, and make subsequent exiles exponentially more expensive, it will stop the attraction of exiling (and it shouldn't be an attractive option, it should be a last resort that is finally done because it is the lesser evil). If you reduce exiling massively and turn it into a last resort, it will force players to try and make it work with new/random players. As long as exiling is so cheap and attractive, people won't even bother to try to work together. When working together with whoever you land with becomes a more attractive option than exiling, that is when people will start to do so.

Exiling is such an anti-social and noob-unfriendly part of the game, it prevents people from giving people a chance and taking the effort to help them get involved. It gives them a selfish "Jack's alright" alternative and lets them throw any idea of proper teamwork out of the window.

[RichardLion]

Theres also a crack in the system which I fell into in the speed round.

I started in Gal A. The inactivity of 6 of the members, apparant from the first tick, meant we lost our flag on the first wave after t24. This was also because Gal B, who was organising the Alliance, refused to send us defence, and because we had 6 people who hadnt logged on when it mattered, that left three of us to defend the flag, which we were unable to do. I was also unhappy with the failure of gal B, and i then accidently denapped them, cos i was unsure what i was doing in the allaince screens, and they wouldnt explain to me (they simply mocked and insulted me - it was very very unfriendly) So I exiled about t100

I ended up in Gal C. I walked into a sh1tstorm. It was being maliciouslt and spitefully targetted, and ground into the dust by another Gal. After constant incoming, wave after wave i lost 160 roids and 25k ships in just 48 ticks, and realised this was not going to stop, so i exiled again, three more members exiled after me, and eventually the gal had to disband because the constant attacks made it impossible to play.

Now by a fluke of chance, i ended in Gal B, the ones i had fell out with due to lack of defence and hostility. We had a stalemate. I wasnt going to pay again to exile, and they refused to exile me, and only when they realsied i couldnt be prevented from seeing the alliance screens, and thus could wreck their efforts , was i finally exiled into a decent, active gal at t200, and even then it took mediation by Appocomaster.

SO i wasted 200 ticks of 670 trying to find a gal that was active enough to make it worth stopping and wasnt being spitefully targetted. That basically crippled any chance i had of getting a decent score.

ON the other hand if i had been allowed to pick where i could exile to just once, then all that would have been avoided. Or even if i could list 5 gals where i DIDNT want to go to.

Theres a crack here you need to fix..

[NirWana]

How about a "new player certificate" ?
All depends on what you are able to check and how much effort PA team is willing to put into it though, but just some random ideas.

upon signup a player can certify to be new to PA (and at the same time register his nick)
PA team then can check ip's and mac addresses from where connection is made to verify if the new player is indeed new.

deterrant from cheating -> punishment at the earliest 1 week into the game with reset of account, auto exile, change race into something random, anarchy for 500 ticks and the abilities to self exile, reset and create new account turned off. Also any purchased credits are voided for that email account.
(in short, pls do not abuse newbie status, if you do and get busted, you'll be butthurt worse than just getting closed )

Alliances get 5 extra spots for certified new players, those players do not fill regular spots even if they join the ally first untill all 5 certified new player spots are filled.
a certified new player spot remains filled once filled. it's up to the alliance to keep their players active, interested and honest.

Defending a certified new player (against player x) provides the same amount of xp as an attack (on player x) would provide, with a minimum of 50 xp
Helping a certified new player attack (by flying alongside) provides the same amount of xp as what the new player gets.
(this should be most beneficial for late starting newbies)

If a certified new player finishes the round (in a same ally & gal for 500 ticks or more) and returns next round and remains active for at least 30 days during that next round, both the alliance leader and the gc get 1 credit.


Of course, all of this depends on how well it can be verified if someone is actually new. This is also why I am in favor of (in my opinion) harsh punishments to any attempt to abuse.

[Papadoc]

How about you remove galaxies entirely?

Seem extreme? It makes more sense than you realize.

You give BP's of 3-4 the ability to defend at the galaxy eta. It solves all of the exiling problems. You could make alliances slightly bigger to off set ( B-Butcher might explode with joy) The entire coordinate system would have to change though.


You still get defense from your friends and are able to play with them. You could have a BP fund or eliminate it bc thats abused too.

[Plaguuu]

Keep it as it is, 3man bps was cool aswell.

To avoid private gals from exile function simply do this:

If you exile into a top 20 value gal
Self exile function gets a 1 day cooldown(instead of 3 ticks)

If you exile into a top 10 value gal
Self exile function gets a 1 week cooldown(instead of 3 ticks)

Effectively stops players from hunting for one specific gal, and make em settle with any decent/good gal

[neroon]

100% random seems about right

[Kaiba]

What is wrong with private galaxies? They are a potential revenue stream for the game and why cant you cap random galaxies??

In response to Blue_Esper you just quoted some run around answer but if were completely honest you could just have Private Galaxies of 8 that allow 1 latestart, then you cap random galaxies at 12-13. You keep the existing BP lines of 3 people which gives a creative core for each random galaxy.

Charge people £10-15 for a private galaxy, a seperate cost.

I see no logical reason why you cant cap random galaxies, it in no way stop new players and anyone that wants a decent galaxy and to go for the win will be in a private galaxy anyway. The 9 vs 12 is pretty even when you consider the activity level of those in a priv gal compared to a random one.

As Bashar said the issue with everything galaxy atm is exiling. Its abusable simple. Make it more expensive, make it a one off thing, make it only doable every 150-200 ticks, take away whatever factor makes it calculatable by those that use it to make super gals. DO SOMETHING!!!

In conclusion if you are looking for a cheap and easy revenue stream for PA then private gals are the answer, at worst you could have 5-8 a round being formed, thats between £50-100 a round for doing nothing, thats money that can be put INTO THE GAME. Buy some pencils and a scanner and draw some ships!!!

[Mzyxptlk]

The issue of galaxies is pure game theory. The best way to form a good galaxy is to ruthlessly exile newbies and lower tier alliance players alike in the hope of either forming a fortress or a fence. Similarly, the best way to get a good planet is by continuously exiling from bad galaxies until you either hit one that's very good, or tick 313 comes along and you can just late sign up in as good a galaxy as you have access to.

These two principles conspire to divide the universe into a universe that's vaguely shaped like a Matryoshka doll, with a very few galaxies making up the inner core of highly connected players, orbiting the black hole that is eksero & co, then several more galaxies being very active but less connected, then some more galaxies that are merely active casuals, and then a large thin cloud of idlers and new players.

The reason this is an issue is not just that it divides the veterans from the casuals from the new players, but also that it allows the veterans to actually be less active than everyone else, and still come out on top. In a good galaxy, there can be a bunch of people who all stay up late a couple of times a round, and wake up early a couple times a round. Between them, they can cover all incs. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. In a bad galaxy, there's maybe one person who wants to do well, and they're stuck staying up all night every time their galaxy gets incs, because there's no one to share the duty with. No wonder they want to late sign in a better galaxy. I would.

The solution I'd propose is two-fold, and as simple as it is undesired (by those same influential players).

1) The reason people can exile 15 or more times is that they know there's a safety net: signing up late. There are very few (if any) drawbacks, because you can just init a bunch of roids, then double that count by farming inactives for a few days, and depend on your galaxy to defend you from the small incomings you can get. I've never heard of it being used for any other purpose than to give people who either already were signed up at tick 0, or could have, a second change of being in a good galaxy, without having to deal with the randomness that everyone else has to suffer through. It doesn't even cost a second credit. Remove late signing. If you want to help people who sign up late (and you should, because the signup period is only 1 week in every 10-11), then give them about as much research and construction as what they would've gotten without population or government, rather than guaranteed immunity from incs for a week or more. You should be able to survive in a random galaxy regardless of whether you sign up at tick 0 or 900, but not handed a top 100 spot on a silver platter.

2) The ability to exile everyone who does not meet your standards is a requirement for getting your buddies in. Remove galaxy exiling, or limit it to 3 or less per round. You could make it more expensive too, the current cost is a joke. That's a different issue altogether, though.

Now this leaves us with one obvious problem. We've had to be ruthless for so long that inertia alone will encourage people to continue to attempt to force people out of galaxies. If that can't be done by simply exiling them, then make life hell for them until they exile out themselves.

Personally, I don't think most galaxies will go to such extremes, and the odds of a planet just going idle and becoming even more useless will dissuade the rest... but that will take a while. A couple of rounds, maybe, until attitudes adjust to the new situation. That would require disabling the auto-delete feature, of course, which serves no purpose anyway. Who cares if there's a couple of dead planets in every galaxy?

3) And if that adjustment does not happen, or you believe it won't happen, you can take a more drastic step: Remove self-exiling too. No more exiling, no more problems. You could even turn it off for a few rounds to let the dust settle, and then experimenting by turning it on again.

[RichardLion]

Apply your proposals to my situation, posted above. I woudl have be nstuck i na rubbish gal, or eve n a hostile gal, abnd given up and gone away, never to return.

it has to be able to cope with what i expereinced,

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

The issue of galaxies is pure game theory. The best way to form a good galaxy is to ruthlessly exile newbies and lower tier alliance players alike in the hope of either forming a fortress or a fence. Similarly, the best way to get a good planet is by continuously exiling from bad galaxies until you either hit one that's very good, or tick 313 comes along and you can just late sign up in as good a galaxy as you have access to.

These two principles conspire to divide the universe into a universe that's vaguely shaped like a Matryoshka doll, with a very few galaxies making up the inner core of highly connected players, orbiting the black hole that is eksero & co, then several more galaxies being very active but less connected, then some more galaxies that are merely active casuals, and then a large thin cloud of idlers and new players.

The reason this is an issue is not just that it divides the veterans from the casuals from the new players, but also that it allows the veterans to actually be less active than everyone else, and still come out on top. In a good galaxy, there can be a bunch of people who all stay up late a couple of times a round, and wake up early a couple times a round. Between them, they can cover all incs. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. In a bad galaxy, there's maybe one person who wants to do well, and they're stuck staying up all night every time their galaxy gets incs, because there's no one to share the duty with. No wonder they want to late sign in a better galaxy. I would.

The solution I'd propose is two-fold, and as simple as it is undesired (by those same influential players).

1) The reason people can exile 15 or more times is that they know there's a safety net: signing up late. There are very few (if any) drawbacks, because you can just init a bunch of roids, then double that count by farming inactives for a few days, and depend on your galaxy to defend you from the small incomings you can get. I've never heard of it being used for any other purpose than to give people who either already were signed up at tick 0, or could have, a second change of being in a good galaxy, without having to deal with the randomness that everyone else has to suffer through. It doesn't even cost a second credit. Remove late signing. If you want to help people who sign up late (and you should, because the signup period is only 1 week in every 10-11), then give them about as much research and construction as what they would've gotten without population or government, rather than guaranteed immunity from incs for a week or more. You should be able to survive in a random galaxy regardless of whether you sign up at tick 0 or 900, but not handed a top 100 spot on a silver platter.

2) The ability to exile everyone who does not meet your standards is a requirement for getting your buddies in. Remove galaxy exiling, or limit it to 3 or less per round. You could make it more expensive too, the current cost is a joke. That's a different issue altogether, though.

Now this leaves us with one obvious problem. We've had to be ruthless for so long that inertia alone will encourage people to continue to attempt to force people out of galaxies. If that can't be done by simply exiling them, then make life hell for them until they exile out themselves.

Personally, I don't think most galaxies will go to such extremes, and the odds of a planet just going idle and becoming even more useless will dissuade the rest... but that will take a while. A couple of rounds, maybe, until attitudes adjust to the new situation. That would require disabling the auto-delete feature, of course, which serves no purpose anyway. Who cares if there's a couple of dead planets in every galaxy?

3) And if that adjustment does not happen, or you believe it won't happen, you can take a more drastic step: Remove self-exiling too. No more exiling, no more problems. You could even turn it off for a few rounds to let the dust settle, and then experimenting by turning it on again.

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by RichardLion

Apply your proposals to my situation, posted above. I woudl have be nstuck i na rubbish gal, or eve n a hostile gal, abnd given up and gone away, never to return.

it has to be able to cope with what i expereinced,

From your forum registration date, I assume you're new to this game. That fact alone woudl mean that the odds are that you will be exiled to a rubbish galaxy even if you're lucky enough to start in a good one.

P.S. Place your reply below the quote, not above it.

[Zotnam]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

1) The reason people can exile 15 or more times is that they know there's a safety net: signing up late. There are very few (if any) drawbacks, because you can just init a bunch of roids, then double that count by farming inactives for a few days, and depend on your galaxy to defend you from the small incomings you can get. I've never heard of it being used for any other purpose than to give people who either already were signed up at tick 0, or could have, a second change of being in a good galaxy, without having to deal with the randomness that everyone else has to suffer through. It doesn't even cost a second credit. Remove late signing. If you want to help people who sign up late (and you should, because the signup period is only 1 week in every 10-11), then give them about as much research and construction as what they would've gotten without population or government, rather than guaranteed immunity from incs for a week or more. You should be able to survive in a random galaxy regardless of whether you sign up at tick 0 or 900, but not handed a top 100 spot on a silver platter.

This is extremely silly, and I think the reply emanates that you haven't played this game for a long time. There is usually 1 late start spot available, and if you want to do an exile tactics then you'll typically have many more
people failing to get in. There is no safety net for the majority of those people, and they accept that.

I covered the state of late signing in my previous post.

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

2) The ability to exile everyone who does not meet your standards is a requirement for getting your buddies in. Remove galaxy exiling, or limit it to 3 or less per round. You could make it more expensive too, the current cost is a joke. That's a different issue altogether, though.

Now this leaves us with one obvious problem. We've had to be ruthless for so long that inertia alone will encourage people to continue to attempt to force people out of galaxies. If that can't be done by simply exiling them, then make life hell for them until they exile out themselves.

Personally, I don't think most galaxies will go to such extremes, and the odds of a planet just going idle and becoming even more useless will dissuade the rest... but that will take a while. A couple of rounds, maybe, until attitudes adjust to the new situation. That would require disabling the auto-delete feature, of course, which serves no purpose anyway. Who cares if there's a couple of dead planets in every galaxy?

The main issue here is that you want everyone to rely on luck. There will be galaxies who start with nearly all actives (like 7:4 last round), and there will be galaxies where you have 3 dead planets. It's just not fair that you get screwed by randomness like that and have no way to fight it (you can at the moment with exiling them, something that's already severely limited). I don't care how good of a BP you have, you cannot compete if your galaxy has a couple of dead planets, especially not when we are talking about keeping the same galaxy size as last round.

If anything your suggestion will lead to more people exiling because of being stuck in shit gals and give massive advantages to the lucky few who start in a good galaxy.

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

3) And if that adjustment does not happen, or you believe it won't happen, you can take a more drastic step: Remove self-exiling too. No more exiling, no more problems. You could even turn it off for a few rounds to let the dust settle, and then experimenting by turning it on again.

I think you know this would kill the game, so going to ignore it.

So what can we do?

The best thing would be either allowing the people who want, to make their private galaxies, or simply make exiling so easy that everyone can do it.
If you think that we should ruin the game for half the planets in uni to avoid a few galaxies sitting at top then jealousy has risen to a new level.
You can all whine about superBP's, but the fact is that they are known usually after 100 ticks or less and each and every one of you could make an effort to stop them but didn't. Stop waiting for the game to fix something that can easily be fixed by the players.

And for anyone suggesting they get an easier ride, check out incoming stats.

[Grey]

To stop people abusing the exile feature you could create a page like the universe page that shows the planet name -players nick - and alliance and the number of times they have exiled/been exiled for that round
Name and shame the abusers
and highlight problem players

[Patrikc]

I think Mz's view on this issue is spot on, with the exception of removing self-exiling (at least in the near future). Taking RichardLion's example, there should be a way out if all other options are depleted, though they should be limited by (a significant amount of) time rather than cost resources in my opinion.

But one thing can't be stressed enough; remove late signups, as it is rarely if ever used for its intended purpose.

[Plaguuu]

Id say its a bit extreme to go full out right away. And I also see easy abusing with the mz suggestions.

Remove self exile: Well this sounds like a great way to kill the player base(ending up in awful gals and being stuck), I still think what my post said about self exiling is a better approach giving you options but limiting abuse.

Remove gal exile: --> "Oki I has a plan for our alliance. We spam the other gals with idle cousins and keep our own fort gals open for incomming exiles"

Remove late sign: --> Well being able to speed up into t100 with mass initting in a good gal is kinda lame. I still dont think removal is the right approach. Perhaps just limitting it so that players who already played in this round cant reset and latestart into a new bp. I dont see there being any big difference in a t0 signup in average gal vs t0 signup in good gal compared to latestart in good gal vs latestart in a average gal(just starting after t300 without bp code)
It is nice if you are at vacation or other stuff keeping you offline during start of round to still get to play with ur friends.

[Patrikc]

Originally Posted by Plaguuu

It is nice if you are at vacation or other stuff keeping you offline during start of round to still get to play with ur friends.

Then sign up and join their alliance. Team up with them. There is nothing limiting your ability to play with friends just because you aren't in their galaxy.

[Plaguuu]

Originally Posted by Patrikc

Then sign up and join their alliance. Team up with them. There is nothing limiting your ability to play with friends just because you aren't in their galaxy.

It's obviously more fun to play with them in the same gal fighting for same goals, and sure it's nice to be able to join their alliance but alliances can be full and not everyone wanna make room for a latestarter as they are likely to contribute close to nothing due to lack of value.
And there are plenty of limits if your not in their gal or alliance

[Kaiba]

Originally Posted by Plaguuu

It's obviously more fun to play with them in the same gal fighting for same goals, and sure it's nice to be able to join their alliance but alliances can be full and not everyone wanna make room for a latestarter as they are likely to contribute close to nothing due to lack of value.
And there are plenty of limits if your not in their gal or alliance

Sorry but this is a really piss poor excuse for keeping latestarts. If you are going to be away for 1-2 weeks at round start then you can still make a planet, give it 300 roids stick it in your BP and just let it accrue resources. In the world of smartphones, 3G, internet cafes no one is realistically far enough away from the web to not be able to log into their account whilst on holdiday.

Galaxies dont get rolling until tick 200 at earliest anyway, gals like Irvines dont start doing anything except stocking resources and exiling into the gal for the first 2-3 weeks anyway.

Latestarting is almost exclusively used to reinforce galaxies now with people who have had a crap start and want a second go or people who have tried to exile into the galaxy for 300 ticks and failed to do so. I can't think of a round when any of my latestarters have been fresh signups, they have all been failed exilers or second chancers.

Latestarting should be voided and just an extra BP slot added from start. Vacation mode should be scrapped too as it is abused in the same and the same reasons about the internet apply as a reason it is not needed. Exiling should be made hard by some of the limits suggested above. The galaxy you get given should really be where you stay, if your a good player who decided not to BP then work with the galaxy you land in and make your gal mates better at PA, so many people have so much wisdom to impart and there is soooooo many rough diamonds out there, get polishing!

[Hermiod]

Well, I was rather pissed off last round when I started out in a decent gal with ok ppl that was active, BUT I got exiled with no good reason at all. I played ok, but apparantly not good enough. That exile sent me to a shit gal with no chance of getting into it properly again, since lack of def from first gal left me with nothing.

It pisses me off that unless you know half the people here youre smurfed from the start, either it's because people can't be a**** to get to know new players or whatever their pathetic reason might be.

So yes, new player needs an alliance. The gal won't help you unless your lucky enough to end up in one with decent players that's not completely obsessed with winning and that's willing to give people a chance. So expect a couple of lousy rounds in the not so good ally that wanna take you in and work your way up. There's really no other way to do it the way things are now.

[Forest]

I agree with Kaiba

/me goes to cry in a corner

[Hermiod]

Well said Kaiba^^

[Forest]

It is very easy for a late starter to end top 50 ;p

[Zotnam]

Originally Posted by Forest

It is very easy for a late starter to end top 50 ;p

You guys are blowing late sign ups way out of proportions. There were two late signs in the top100 last round, because with 9 man gals there are simply not enough fleets/ships to keep defending them. Besides that, we have no bots and less planets than ever before, so a lot of the time you're stuck hitting 150-200 roid planets if you late sign. While it's true that there have been some rounds where late sign ups could init to 2000 and grow like that, it was caused by politics and ship stats rather than simply being the standard tactics.

It's a nice way to reinforce your galaxy, but it's a feature everyone has access to use.

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by Zotnam

This is extremely silly, and I think the reply emanates that you haven't played this game for a long time. There is usually 1 late start spot available, and if you want to do an exile tactics then you'll typically have many more people failing to get in. There is no safety net for the majority of those people, and they accept that.

Of course. Most people don't have the connections to sign up late in a galaxy where they can init and get defense. So instead, they either late sign into a galaxy where they don't get defense, which nullifies the low value advantage, or they don't late sign at all. That's why I want it gone.

Originally Posted by Zotnam

The main issue here is that you want everyone to rely on luck.

Correct. I'd rather have randomness than the strict segregation we have now, where only a handful of people can ever get gal wins.

Originally Posted by Zotnam

I think you know this would kill the game, so going to ignore it.

Incorrect. Don't ignore it.

Originally Posted by Zotnam

If you think that we should ruin the game for half the planets in uni to avoid a few galaxies sitting at top then jealousy has risen to a new level.

I think we should fix the game for half the planets in the game, to avoid these few galaxies taking one of the three possible wins every round.

The jealousy bit conflicts with the "you don't play" bit, by the way.

Originally Posted by Zotnam

You can all whine about superBP's, but the fact is that they are known usually after 100 ticks or less and each and every one of you could make an effort to stop them but didn't. Stop waiting for the game to fix something that can easily be fixed by the players.

What I want is for the game to encourage behaviour that is ultimately good for the community, and by that I mean for the long term growth of the player base. Right now, the choice is between doing good for yourself, by exiling newbies, and doing good for the game, keeping newbies and educating them so they'll do better next round. I don't blame you for picking the former, but that choice should not be forced on players in the first place.

[Heartless]

Hey mz,

remember when we discussed removing galaxies back in 2009? http://pastebin.ca/1587944

Man, those were the times...

[Blue_Esper]

Remove bash limits for those planets with 1000 or more roids

[Patrikc]

Or remove/reduce the galaxy fund.

[gzambo]

Remove all exiling and late sign up, worst case scenario if you go random is your in a shit galaxy for 7 weeks

[Blue_Esper]

and everyone would be in that same position and taking that same risk

[Herbington]

I'm just thinking out aloud here, haven't really thought through these properly.

How about, as well as making self-exiling more expensive resource-wise, you also having a timer that delays self-exiling, that increases by 24 hours for every exile. The countdown would remain if a planet is reset.

The same could apply for galaxy exiles, no new planets are put into the gal for 24 ticks after exiling their first planet, 48 hours for the 2nd one etc.

Truly inactive planets are auto-exiled without penalty.

[Truhatred]

Originally Posted by Herbington

I'm just thinking out aloud here, haven't really thought through these properly.

How about, as well as making self-exiling more expensive resource-wise, you also having a timer that delays self-exiling, that increases by 24 hours for every exile. The countdown would remain if a planet is reset.

The same could apply for galaxy exiles, no new planets are put into the gal for 24 ticks after exiling their first planet, 48 hours for the 2nd one etc.

Truly inactive planets are auto-exiled without penalty.

If you read up I had already suggested this.

[Patrikc]

An alternative is to have galaxy rankings matter in receiving exiles - in other words higher ranked galaxies (I'd suggest based on value) would be less likely to get an exile than a galaxy lower on the rankings, with the initial qualifications of number of planets still counting of course.

This however would also have its drawbacks, as it would mean that new players are more likely to end up in dead-end galaxies. Perhaps an exclusion of any galaxy in any top 10 ranking (size/score/value) from being in the 'exile bracket'?

[gzambo]

Dunno why this discussion is even taking place, exiling and late sign up will be kept to satisfy the vocal few

[Nitros]

I like the idea of removing the bashlimit for planets with more than X-roids. Maybe in combination of the planets being in the top10 galaxies.

Also, what about a hard-cap on self-exile and exiling? Lets say 3 times.
That way both players and galaxies will think twice before they exile.

[Motti]

Originally Posted by Nitros

I like the idea of removing the bashlimit for planets with more than X-roids. Maybe in combination of the planets being in the top10 galaxies.

Good suggestion, this way we can ensure everyone have average score...

But on a serious note, thats just a dumb suggestion.
With high amount of roids bashlimit adjusts itself anyway. And why only t10 gals? Should be able to hit anyone with X roids then no?

[Nitros]

Originally Posted by Motti

Good suggestion, this way we can ensure everyone have average score...

But on a serious note, thats just a dumb suggestion.
With high amount of roids bashlimit adjusts itself anyway. And why only t10 gals? Should be able to hit anyone with X roids then no?

Uhm, are you aware of the fact that alot of topgalaxies use one donation-planet...? It stays small with 1-2k roids and donates resources to the other planets. As it can't be hit, its great indirect free resources/value/score boost to the gal.

[Motti]

Originally Posted by Nitros

Uhm, are you aware of the fact that alot of topgalaxies use one donation-planet...? It stays small with 1-2k roids and donates resources to the other planets. As it can't be hit, its great indirect free resources/value/score boost to the gal.

With 2k roids you are most likely in bash for many planets in PA.
Its politics keeping that planet on roids, not bash limit.

[Motti]

Tbh, tweak whatever. What keeps the same(ish) group of players/gals at top everytime is in my opinion;

- Politics
- More politics
- Influence and/or insight in own alliance(s)
- Network of friends
- The fact EVERY alliance leak almost every intel (atleast to top gals)
- The fact that atleast one in top gal bother to DC when needed
- The fact that the core of the galaxy atleast bother to stay up at night to sen def / attack ....etc
- A small level of skill, atleast for a few in the galaxy
- COORDINATION INGAL

Most of these factors you cant really change/tweak/ban/block.

And if the goal is to make galwin mainly based on luck (if just random) then why bother?

[Zotnam]

Originally Posted by Nitros

Uhm, are you aware of the fact that alot of topgalaxies use one donation-planet...? It stays small with 1-2k roids and donates resources to the other planets. As it can't be hit, its great indirect free resources/value/score boost to the gal.

I'd like you to show me ten examples of top galaxies doing that. Shouldn't be hard if a lot are doing it. Go.

[Blue_Esper]

Or perhaps newbie players could join a larger alliance instead of trying to 1man it. As you said nothing much has changed from round 1 as essentially activity + good alliance = good rank.

[Zatoichi]

Originally Posted by Blue_Esper

Or perhaps newbie players could join a larger alliance instead of trying to 1man it. As you said nothing much has changed from round 1 as essentially activity + good alliance = good rank.

Yes, but how many newbies would the top alliances be able or willing to take each round? Also, most newbies being newbies either 1 man it or join small alliances that dont contend for the top rankings. Today, the best chance a newbie has is landing in a well connected active galaxy. I'd like to see a PA where a newbie who never played before or knows anyone can reasonably have a chance at a top 50 or better planet by being coached by vets that depend on that newbie for thier own successful planet/galaxy. Focusing on newbie success rather than alliance success should be the direction PA should be headed in imo. As Spock would say " the needs of the many(newbies) outweigh the needs of the few(alliances)". Yes, the alliance players are the majority now but THAT is why PA has so few players. The dynamics of the game needs a quantum shift change from the same ole. Its been the same so long that some of the top players just go through the same motions every round without thinking. Everything is predictable. I saw the eroc log where the winning planet just had 6 escorts every attack so easy win for him. Put the newbie on a more even playing field with the vets is what Im suggesting.

[BloodyButcher]

Removing/editing PL and removing alliance limits is the start to make this game newbie friendly.
Random gals for those that want that, only 3 tickets of exile and instant resetting of your planet if ur not happy.
Alliances can choose to have priv gals if they want to, if you go into private gal they have to either stay there and in tag or leave either one if they want to leave tag/gal.

[Motti]

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher

Removing/editing PL and removing alliance limits is the start to make this game newbie friendly.
Random gals for those that want that, only 3 tickets of exile and instant resetting of your planet if ur not happy.
Alliances can choose to have priv gals if they want to, if you go into private gal they have to either stay there and in tag or leave either one if they want to leave tag/gal.

Instant reset = exiling for free.

Innledes you stay in same gal after reset - which would make resetting pointless :-D

[BloodyButcher]

Originally Posted by Motti

Instant reset = exiling for free.

Innledes you stay in same gal after reset - which would make resetting pointless :-D

You get Three more exiles though

[Mzyxptlk]

I feel like your analysis of PA is spot on, and if it does not describe the whole problem, it comes pretty close. Alliance elitism and bashing and the lack of willingness to induct new players into the community is a large part of the cause behind the continuing decline of the game. However, your proposed solution is not feasible, nor is it ultimately desireable.

It isn't feasible because even without alliances, people can still defend each other. That's what people did pre-PAX, after all. You could limit defense to within galaxies, but that only deals with half of the issue. You can't ban a bunch of people from cooperating offensively. You need no ingame tools for that, you just launch your attacks all at the same time. Back in round 1, alliances formed spontaneously, because cooperating with other people is objectively the best way to win in PA. You cooperate with other planets in your galaxy, your galaxy cooperates with other galaxies in your cluster, clusters cooperate(d) with other clusters in alliances, and alliances cooperate with each other through NAPs. The more people you cooperate with, the easier the game becomes. Removing the ingame representation of alliances (which is all you can do!) will not change that.

It's not desireable because to a large extent, alliances make up the community. When I said that alliances were formed in order to win, that was only half of the truth: the other half is that the interaction with other people is what keeps people playing, not the game itself, which was never that interesting, and still isn't. Prod ships, launch fleet, check scans, recall or land, rinse, repeat. Not exactly the stuff of legends. Alliances make up a large part of PA's social side, and removing them will make this game worse for everyone who wants to play this game for more than a couple of rounds, which is what is necessary. People playing for one round and then quitting gain us nothing.

This leads us to the following concundrum: we can either have a game with alliances that's hell for new players, or a game without alliances that's boring. Neither is particularly desireable.

What should be done is making it more beneficient for veterans to interact positively with new players. Right now, said interaction is limited to roiding and exiling them. Unfortunately, I don't really know how to do that.

P.S. Your enter key is broken.

[Zatoichi]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

I feel like your analysis of PA is spot on, and if it does not describe the whole problem, it comes pretty close. Alliance elitism and bashing and the lack of willingness to induct new players into the community is a large part of the cause behind the continuing decline of the game. However, your proposed solution is not feasible, nor is it ultimately desireable.

It isn't feasible because even without alliances, people can still defend each other. That's what people did pre-PAX, after all. You could limit defense to within galaxies, but that only deals with half of the issue. You can't ban a bunch of people from cooperating offensively. You need no ingame tools for that, you just launch your attacks all at the same time. Back in round 1, alliances formed spontaneously, because cooperating with other people is objectively the best way to win in PA. You cooperate with other planets in your galaxy, your galaxy cooperates with other galaxies in your cluster, clusters cooperate(d) with other clusters in alliances, and alliances cooperate with each other through NAPs. The more people you cooperate with, the easier the game becomes. Removing the ingame representation of alliances (which is all you can do!) will not change that.

It's not desireable because to a large extent, alliances make up the community. When I said that alliances were formed in order to win, that was only half of the truth: the other half is that the interaction with other people is what keeps people playing, not the game itself, which was never that interesting, and still isn't. Prod ships, launch fleet, check scans, recall or land, rinse, repeat. Not exactly the stuff of legends. Alliances make up a large part of PA's social side, and removing them will make this game worse for everyone who wants to play this game for more than a couple of rounds, which is what is necessary. People playing for one round and then quitting gain us nothing.

This leads us to the following concundrum: we can yxeither have a game with alliances that's hell for new players, or a game without alliances that's boring. Neither is particularly desireable.

What should be done is making it more beneficient for veterans to interact positively with new players. Right now, said interaction is limited to roiding and exiling them. Unfortunately, I don't really know how to do that.

P.S. Your enter key is broken.

Hi Mzyxptlk. Sorry, still a comp noob aftet all these years. lol Nice to see you still here. Also posting from phone.I also now remember playing round 20something? with you in Acsendency 6 or 7 years ago. I recall we won that round too, hehe.


Anyway, I agree with you for the most part but let's test it to see if true or not for a round or 2. I'd hate to see PA fail because we didnt try things to prove or disprove theorys of ours of what would happen. Fact is none of us KNOW whats the answer until proven. We DO know however what the current course is like. The only fair way to judge is by results. Results never lie. Alliances dominate the game. Player base under 1K. Often harsh, but always. fair. Those are the results. Everything else is just speculation, conjecture, and assumptions includiing my own assessments, theorys, and suggestions. I just want PA headed in a different direction after 55 rounds. Isnt it time?

Btw, we can prevent players from different gals attacking together by having a reservation system where a gal can only attack 1 certain galaxy per daily time period except for retals. Once a galaxy reserves a galaxy to attack, no other galaxy can attack the same galaxy for the reservation time period. This would also ensure only 1 gal attacking your own gal per day or time period plus another gal possibly retaling your attacks on them. Of course info could be leaked but so what? A mow would need to research targets and reserve fast, haha. Knowing you will get incomming isnt that much help. Maybe an allianceless round could be boring to alliance players but maybe not to a newbie. Must we continue to be stuck in the catch22 of satisfying alliances at the expense of gaining new players? Just throwing thoughts out which Im sure has flaws.

The alliance community can continue to be the alliance community testing the theory that its not just about the game itself that keeps them socially interactive with each other. Test it for a round or 2 and lets see. Maybe what Im suggesting is all hogwash and stupid but we havn't tried anything drasically different since the beginning so what do we have to lose?

P.S. Hey Isil, can I join Apprime? lol Don't say you don't remember me bro.

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by Zatoichi

Hi Mzyxptlk. Sorry, still a comp noob aftet all these years. lol Nice to see you still here. Also posting from phone.I also now remember playing round 20something? with you in Acsendency 6 or 7 years ago. I recall we won that round too, hehe.

I have to admit I don't remember you. Found you in my logs though!

Originally Posted by Zatoichi

Btw, we can prevent players from different gals attacking together by having a reservation system where a gal can only attack 1 certain galaxy per daily time period except for retals. Once a galaxy reserves a galaxy to attack, no other galaxy can attack the same galaxy for the reservation time period. This would also ensure only 1 gal attacking your own gal per day or time period plus another gal possibly retaling your attacks on them.

Then you just get your friends to book your galaxy every night, and you'll never get incs.

Note that I'm not saying that reducing the scale of cooperation is a bad thing. It isn't, but it has to be done organically or else it won't work at all. People will find a way to cooperate if that's in their best interest. Straight up banning alliances will not prevent that, and as said, I don't know what would.

Originally Posted by Zatoichi

Maybe what Im suggesting is all hogwash and stupid but we havn't tried anything drasically different since the beginning so what do we have to lose?

Trust me, if it were stupid I would've told you. :P

Honestly, by this point, you might be right. The game is so small now, and getting smaller every round (though slowly) that pretty soon it will no longer be viable at all. We're already seeing significant stagnation due to the low number of alliances making it hard to create a political balance. On the other hand, I no longer play, so that's easy for me to say.