Galaxy sizes

[cypher]

Is there a final say in this matter yet?

I am wondering because i personally feel that the galaxy grow too big if we have the same setup as last round. I also know alot of other people agree with me.

Can't we change it to buddypacks of 4 or 5 and then doing 1 buddypack per gal instead of 2? This would increase the number of gals by quite a bit and in effect it would keep the planets per gal down... which is all a very good thing imo.

Can PA team comment on what the setup will be? So we atleast know 100% sure and can actually make buddypacks if we want etc?

[Kal]

somewhere in the depths of the Round 14 Galaxy setup thread is the final solution being implemented for next round.

next round buddy packs can be of size 2 or 3 - giving 6 buddy pack members per gal again.

if it was in effect a private gal of 4 or 5, then the randoms would be entirly excluded from things as all the private people would know each other.

The only way to make a private part of a galaxy smaller would be to goto 2 packs of 2 in a gal which probably endangers to many people to be in poor galaxies.

However by allowing either 3*2 or 2*3 in a gal it may well encourage people who didn;t go into packs last time to join them, thus increasing the number of galaxies and hence decreasing the size of the galaxies.

[cypher]

I think that's not true. If you wanna do well in a gal you will have to include most galaxy members which means you have to include randoms in stuff. Which in my opinion will happen sooner when you have basically 4/5 people you already know and can trust in a gal so there is less danger to get known imo. as you always have 4 people to fall back on instead of 1 or 2.

Fact of the matter is with these HUGE gals it's just too damn easy to defend and too damn hard to attack in a halfway active galaxy.

Making it 4 or 5 people private and then filling it up would make a nice change for atleast a round. You could atleast check that system instead of just looking and using 1 option. As PA team already said it would basically require almost no change in codes or anything. So therefore i don't see why you wouldn't want to try and get more galaxies in the universe to make the game more fun.

And indeed buddypacks of 2 just doesn't get you anything really... if anything happens with the other guy you're all alone so you might aswell go full random then.. that's just silly.

[Cocteau]

Originally Posted by Kal

if it was in effect a private gal of 4 or 5, then the randoms would be entirly excluded from things as all the private people would know each other.

How can you be sure this is the case? It's not the case in r12, well as far as my gal and other are concern atleast. But what you concluded there isnt always the instant case for that setup. In my impression, that gal setup in r12 saves the following round (r13), the randoms that learned from privates in r12, some atleast performed well this round and/or become active and a paying customer.

Originally Posted by Kal

However by allowing either 3*2 or 2*3 in a gal it may well encourage people who didn;t go into packs last time to join them, thus increasing the number of galaxies and hence decreasing the size of the galaxies.

Again, how can you be sure. The way i see it, it will instead encourage those who previously go in packs will try going random, an instant active random is an advantage landing in a guaranteed 2*3 packs gal.

[Kal]

ofc its impossible to be sure about anything, though lots of people did complain the wanted to be able to be in 2 person packs - especially the alliances so they could limit their incoming chances. With packs of 2 its not really nesecarry to have preround agreements on pack sharing either - and at the most it can effectivly only involve 2 alliances.

Also I find it odd that people seem to think defence was to easy.... this round has been one of the most aggressive attack oriented rounds in recent history, and a lot of people have said it was to attacking oritented, so suggetsing defence is to easy seems rather odd.

Finally, the time to suggest things for the round 14 galaxy system was when the discussion on it took place here - http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=184383 during the round. Changing plans at this late stage is not an option.

[DrunkenViking]

for goodness sake, slim the galaxies, 20+ planets per galaxy is simply way too much.

[Kal]

the size of a galaxy does not matter, its overall activity does - next round it will be much more of a pain to exile the new signups, and the less active players - which should result in much more even galaxies throughout the round and prevent some galaxies being all active players and others all inactive.

for example i doubt people would mind attacing a glaaxy with 10 active, 5 semi acitve and 5 inactive planets. the problem is in essnce the galaxies that took advantag eof things this round in roder to get 20 active planets - its not abusing the system, but it is avoiding the spirit of the system, so greater restrictions are needed to allow new planets to be in galaxies with experianced players.

[cypher]

Kal no offence but you didn't play properly did you? i have and so have the others in this thread so far..

20 planets is TOO much. Simple as that really. i doubt any player would really want that except for the lucky few maybe who got into a supergal because of it.

Besides that in that thread you posted you basically listed the things YOU want, not what the players wanted, you gave us a choice out of YOUR options not ours. Which is not the way you should think if you want to make this game playable for people.

Another thing about that thread is alot of people actually made this suggestion. You chose to ignore all of them however and simply went on with your own plan instead of listening to the players.

and come on... anyone who played pa for more then a round knows exiling is very easy no matter how you put it...

[Cocteau]

Originally Posted by Kal

the size of a galaxy does not matter, its overall activity does - next round it will be much more of a pain to exile the new signups

God help us all!

[Kal]

remember the galaxies do not start off big - they were around 15 in size at the begining of the round as I recall, so having a galaxy with 20 acitves is virtually imposisble without extensive exiling.

Also the next round exile formulae will be nothing like anything seen in Planetarion so far....

[cypher]

there is still no real reason why single packs of 4 or 5 aren't even properly discussed by pa team kal.. you just give no reasons for it yet you keep avoiding the issue.

[Svenn]

tbh, 2 ppl per pack is wank... sry for saying it so outright.... but not all alliances are as hardcore as the top5 alliances. and also alot of ppl actually wanna play with m8s that are not in their alliance or more than one. limiting us to 2 ppl per pack makes it alot harder for us to have a fun round as i see it. we'll chance ending up with 1 mate and 4 hostile players and then the randoms besides that. and also it'll be a fight for galaxy command, and then the exiling will begin and alot of buddypacks will be split up and therefore ruining the idea of the packs...
to make this a teambased game where galaxies actually matters it should be half private tbh!!!
some of the gals that have performed best r13 were galaxies with 3-5 ppl from same alliance (or block) where they have taken the randoms in and helped them and taught them the game.
by half private i mean a pack of 4-5 ppl and then fill up with randoms till the galaxy contains 10 ppl, this would also create more galaxies and could actually end up with some galaxy fights instead of just alliance fighting each other.

just my 10 cent.

Svenn signing out

[wakey]

20 planets may be too many BUT increasing the number of people in a pack isnt the way to reduce it.

This game resigned itself to struggling for numbers the second it introduced Private galaxies. They are not only a honeytrap feature that leads lesser players to believe it will help them witha good round and rather than cultivating the lower end of the game helps destroy it both on an alliance and player front. Small/New Players just cant get a foothold and small alliances find that their members are spread overa couple of galaxies this making it difficult to defend them.

On top of this it encouraged aspects like blocking which played into the top alliances hands even more while weakening the lower end of the game. And its the lower end of the game that really is the most important. We all moan about the lack of players and if thats to improve new players have to be brought in and the old players whom were scared away by the inbalance in the game need brought back which means ensuring a fun and fair game lower down the rankings.

Anyway while basically private galaxies are a great idea its not one that really fits in with this game, the game needs completly random galaxies. However the rounds of being private have left the community unable to handle a fully private round and as such a comprimise is needed which is what buddy packs are BUT buddy packs have to be kept as small as possible to limit the extent the private galaxy situation has.

The simple fact that its been limited to 3 this round has made this one of the best rounds of PA we have had and even an increase of 2 people to make buddy packs of 5 would damage this alot..

Instantly you would have more galaxies to hit, not really because there is more galaxies (as I dont see how it would have much of an effect tbh, those who can get 5 would BP up, most of those who can only get 3 wouldnt so we would probally see more randoms) BUT because your Block BP of 3 people now becomes 5 people so your block will have fewer BP and hence be less spread. At the same time you make yourself less of a target because where you may have had 2 players from a lesser alliance with less activity during the peak times for defence you have 2 of your block mates whom have high activity and have high activity in their support group as such its harder for you to be bashed. It seems very much to me like what your asking is that the games made more elite player based thus shutting out more new players.

If you want more galaxies and want galaxies smaller then go ahead and find a solution but dont start suggesting things to make your life easier while using the "the game needs more galaxies" as a mask for your true intentions. Any idea to increase the number of galaxies has to either maintain or improve the accessability of this game so it can acheive the primary goal that we all want of there being more players

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Svenn

tbh, 2 ppl per pack is wank... sry for saying it so outright.... but not all alliances are as hardcore as the top5 alliances. and also alot of ppl actually wanna play with m8s that are not in their alliance or more than one. limiting us to 2 ppl per pack makes it alot harder for us to have a fun round as i see it. we'll chance ending up with 1 mate and 4 hostile players and then the randoms besides that. and also it'll be a fight for galaxy command, and then the exiling will begin and alot of buddypacks will be split up and therefore ruining the idea of the packs...
to make this a teambased game where galaxies actually matters it should be half private tbh!!!
some of the gals that have performed best r13 were galaxies with 3-5 ppl from same alliance (or block) where they have taken the randoms in and helped them and taught them the game.
by half private i mean a pack of 4-5 ppl and then fill up with randoms till the galaxy contains 10 ppl, this would also create more galaxies and could actually end up with some galaxy fights instead of just alliance fighting each other.

just my 10 cent.

Svenn signing out

For starters it ISNT limiting you to 2 people per buddy pack, its giving you the option of playing either a)alone b) with a friend c) with two friends.

Also your argument is flawed from the start, buddy packs FAVOUR the less active people from smaller alliances. The more people you have in a buddy pack the harder it is for smaller alliances because what happens is you get your whole alliance choosing their packs from alliance mates, this often leaves a small 40 member alliance with something like 4 or 5 galaxies. Now because these galaxies are made up of mainly one alliance when they get a galaxy attack on them they then have to cover all the galaxy with x number of members out of action and not really much galaxy help available . Then a second galaxy is seen as an easy target and is attacked. You now have x*2 members out of action. If you dont cover these well you could end up having members out of action for a while which in turn makes everyone else in the alliance easier to hit. You quickly end up with a situation where alot of the alliance is totally demorilised, they arent logging in as often if at all ect and it damages the alliance. With it reduced to 3 people per BP it really makes it harder to kill and alliance off and gives smaller alliances a better chance to find their feet

[cypher]

wakey be4 you state your opinion and call it facts that i have other motives... i had a damn good gal but i found that it was too powerfull myself and unfair for others. Don't just accuse people of things which are totally untrue.
Besides that if i'm in a pack with 4 others i would trust others alot sooner then when i am with 2 buddypacks seeing as then you can't just trust others in a struggle for power that easily so to say..

[Kal]

I should hire wakey to explain what i really mean when I say things.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by cypher

wakey be4 you state your opinion and call it facts that i have other motives... i had a damn good gal but i found that it was too powerfull myself and unfair for others. Don't just accuse people of things which are totally untrue.
Besides that if i'm in a pack with 4 others i would trust others alot sooner then when i am with 2 buddypacks seeing as then you can't just trust others in a struggle for power that easily so to say..

Too powerful YET your asking to make it even more powerful. Wheres the logic in that. And the great thing about this round was that galaxies werent untouchable, they all had weak links which made them vunrelable. I was in the #6 ranked galaxy and we got attacked and had attacks land on us successfully. Ok we were maybe out of reach of uncoridinated or solo attacks but attacks on the whole galaxy would cause us some problems. The problems for attackers seemed to normally come when their own politics played a part. For example NoS attacked me as I was about the only person in the galaxy that they could attack due to their naps, no matter how much was sent it was always going to be easy to defend. That however isnt the systems fault but NoS's own fault. If your going to NAP and block you have to live with the consreuences

And at F-Crew we landed attacks on galaxies we would never have been able to in previous rounds because of these weak links that all galaxies had. The more people you have in a buddy pack the harder it becomes to hit the bigger galaxies made up of block players and the wrose the game is

[DrunkenViking]

Seriously, too big galaxies favors massive powerblocking aswell, no alliance can actively target another alliance by hitting 2 hostiles in a galaxy of 20+. Then they need to ally up to be able to take on alliances efficiently. Sorry Kal, but i'm not gonna agree here. There will allways be differences in activity between gals, dont get me wrong, but with galaxies with 20+ ppl the differences becomes too big. In my opinion any galaxy with more than 15 ppl in it is too big. My galaxy this round exiled a lot in the start, and it took AGES to fill those slots again, and when they finally came it was all freebies that didnt use irc. So the most i ever saw in galaxy channel was 6. Also, the big galaxies favours spies etc, and ppl in general becomes more paranoid and avoids galchan. I'm serious, make the damn gals smaller :|

[DrunkenViking]

Originally Posted by wakey

For example NoS attacked me as I was about the only person in the galaxy that they could attack due to their naps, no matter how much was sent it was always going to be easy to defend. That however isnt the systems fault but NoS's own fault.

Hehe, NoS not once targetted F-Crew in an organized way, tho you may have been fat and a random member wanted to eat some of your roids. But we did have probs with much ingal def when we targetted wp/hr, but we managed.

[Cocteau]

Originally Posted by wakey

20 planets may be too many BUT increasing the number of people in a pack isnt the way to reduce it.

Nobody is saying otherwise.

Originally Posted by wakey

On top of this it encouraged aspects like blocking which played into the top alliances hands even more while weakening the lower end of the game. And its the lower end of the game that really is the most important. We all moan about the lack of players and if thats to improve new players have to be brought in and the old players whom were scared away by the inbalance in the game need brought back which means ensuring a fun and fair game lower down the rankings.

This is flawed. Aint r13 more block oriented than r12? It all depends on what's the political direction an alliance wants to take, a round's gal setup must not be presented as a dependency to that or pull a weight on that.

Originally Posted by wakey

Anyway while basically private galaxies are a great idea its not one that really fits in with this game, the game needs completly random galaxies. However the rounds of being private have left the community unable to handle a fully private round and as such a comprimise is needed which is what buddy packs are BUT buddy packs have to be kept as small as possible to limit the extent the private galaxy situation has.

Agreed. Hence, balance compromise is the way to go - to mend differences on opinions accross this community.

Originally Posted by wakey

The simple fact that its been limited to 3 this round has made this one of the best rounds of PA we have had and even an increase of 2 people to make buddy packs of 5 would damage this alot..

Another flaw on what you categorize as fact. You mean to say, we owe the success of the round on the gal setup? Not in the balance of the war or to certain blocks/alliance/s not bending far too early?

Originally Posted by wakey

Instantly you would have more galaxies to hit, not really because there is more galaxies (as I dont see how it would have much of an effect tbh, those who can get 5 would BP up, most of those who can only get 3 wouldnt so we would probally see more randoms) BUT because your Block BP of 3 people now becomes 5 people so your block will have fewer BP and hence be less spread. At the same time you make yourself less of a target because where you may have had 2 players from a lesser alliance with less activity during the peak times for defence you have 2 of your block mates whom have high activity and have high activity in their support group as such its harder for you to be bashed. It seems very much to me like what your asking is that the games made more elite player based thus shutting out more new players.

Bear in mind that all galaxies are setup this way i.e. my gal and yours can equally have the same number of privates - it's not like only 10 galaxies are setup this way.

Its just that i dont agree that the power vacuum problem is caused by your theory.

And it' doesn't necessarily means that the players in a pack is automatically in the same block, PA politics is more fluid than that.

Originally Posted by wakey

If you want more galaxies and want galaxies smaller then go ahead and find a solution but dont start suggesting things to make your life easier while using the "the game needs more galaxies" as a mask for your true intentions. Any idea to increase the number of galaxies has to either maintain or improve the accessability of this game so it can acheive the primary goal that we all want of there being more players

Take into consideration the point of 'trying to keep current players playing' as also a factor - but not clashing to the 'more players' goal at the same time.

Mentoring aspect in my opinion is very effective in a half/quarter private filled gal setup.

[Cocteau]

Originally Posted by wakey

Too powerful YET your asking to make it even more powerful. Wheres the logic in that.

Too powerful that's why he's asking that to be changed?

The 'lucky' random factor made his gal superior compared to others. A gal setup that will lessen the 'luck' factor or putting it in a more simplistic shuffling approach will solve that.

[Chaos]

well. to be honest. Ingal def was insane this round. and is one of the main reasons we won this round. as all our alliances where pretty much drained with def by the time we got incomming each night.

Our gal was very well organized in the way of ingal def. I don't know if the gal's should be smaller or not.
But I don't think you should make it harder to exile. we exiled a lot of ppl, not cuz they had low scores. but cuz they didn't respond to Pa mail, and/or didn't get online on our irc chan. it was only at the end that we exiled ppl cuz of low score.

so basicly.

1. it was easy to attack in the beginning. and XP is the thing that's making ppl attack more.
2. it was hard to attack at the end. cuz of ingal def. (started with 15 ppl pr gal. and ended up with 23 in some, perhaps this is the reason?)
3. Don't make it hard for gal's to exile inactives. as then we'll only see the first 15 ppl as good and the last 5 as small inactive ppl.

Perhaps start with 10 ppl ? ( the BP with size of 2-3 is totaly fine. but I don't think making it 5 would be a problem. but if done it will be used more for tactical purposes than now.

[Chaos]

and btw. in the old days when there was only priv gals. you would have the top10 gal's just idling to the top. as they didn't even get any incomming for half the round. cuz they where just too big.

and if you put to many ppl from one gal into an ally by default, you end up with gal's "controlled" by different ally's. and then you have the alliances more involved in the gal's again.

so basicly. the nr1 gal in a priv gal round would be controlled by the nr1 ally.
but in a random round. the nr 1 will be evenly distributed. and will hafto fight it's way to the top each day. and not get a free ride cuz of his ally.

Leave buddypacks at 2-3 and don't make it harder to exile. and perhaps make the gal start with 10 planets. ?

[The Real Arfy]

The biggest reason I hated galaxy setup this round is because people could walk into my galaxy freely. Before, galaxies felt like a team, and you played with those 10, 15, 25 players all round. Now, with the fast rate of galaxy growth, I hardly knew anyone in my galaxy really well except for the starters.

I don't deny that the size of galaxies are too big - I'm saying that the way galaxies change so much during a round really puts me off playing. (As if I'd quit though...)

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Chaos

Leave buddypacks at 2-3 and don't make it harder to exile. and perhaps make the gal start with 10 planets. ?

we don;t control the galaxy size though, its just dynamic shuffling - it all depends on how many people go random - and how many are freebies at the start.

but next round we are shuffling the freebies with less than 50 roids at shuffle time into c200 - and hence all galaxies will be smaller at the start next round.

[noah02]

Originally Posted by Kal

Also the next round exile formulae will be nothing like anything seen in Planetarion so far....

Sorry havent looked round the boards for a few days, but is there somewere where i can read how the exiles are going to work next round ?

[teknik]

noah: http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...=184383&page=3 last post on that by kal

[noah02]

Originally Posted by teknik

noah: http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...=184383&page=3 last post on that by kal

Thank you
You are helpful as ever teknik

Minsters can only be changed once every 24 ticks.

I am sure I suggested that
But I dunno bout this self exile more than once thing :/
Didnt we do that once in round 11 or 12 and everyone was popping in and out everywere?

Is there a chance that if you exile/get exiled the next galaxy you go to you cannot exile/get exiled from for 24 hours at least?

Just an idea but I know a lot of ppl wont like it but its worth thinking about.

[yaeger]

Take this rounds gal #1 1:2 way to win, included all the randoms/unpayed planets, teached em planetarion and won by 20+ mill

so do include randoms is neccesarry
and fun

<3 cbk

[noah02]

Just spent ages trying to think why I hate big galaxys and i just realised why.

1st off its annoying for ppl to attack a galaxy and they get in gal defence fine fair enough it happens.

You sign up late new to the game never played it before you end up in a rocking galaxy who have itchy trigger fingers on the exile button if you aint paid or on irc within 5 seconds of being online.
So you get exiled into a galaxy which seems ok and has a few players actually playing but dont seem to be in that galaxy channel you jus looked in that doesnt have a @p.
You get bored watching incomings on gal status while awaiting ur protection finishing so you can attack while everyone else is scraping 4m score by now.
You launch ur first attack on some other small player about 100k score bigger than you and lo and behold the 23 man galaxy has 22 other ppl who could defend that just coz there bored.
Ziks all leach it and you have to withdraw and try again elsewere
You find urself just building ships constantly and launching at galaxys and recalling every time a stinking zik appears to leach ur fleet for value/score.
Next round could be worse for leaches from the rumours but we will wait and see.

Sorry about the long read but I am trying to make a point that i hope you can understand.
Thank you for your time.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by noah02

But I dunno bout this self exile more than once thing :/
Didnt we do that once in round 11 or 12 and everyone was popping in and out everywere?

Is there a chance that if you exile/get exiled the next galaxy you go to you cannot exile/get exiled from for 24 hours at least?

look at the self exile formula - the more times u self exile the mor it costs, and also the more damaging your self exile will be to your current gal (i.e. how small the gal is in terms of number of planets) the greater the cost.

[Neferti]

Originally Posted by The Real Arfy

The biggest reason I hated galaxy setup this round is because people could walk into my galaxy freely. Before, galaxies felt like a team, and you played with those 10, 15, 25 players all round. Now, with the fast rate of galaxy growth, I hardly knew anyone in my galaxy really well except for the starters.

I don't deny that the size of galaxies are too big - I'm saying that the way galaxies change so much during a round really puts me off playing. (As if I'd quit though...)

This is pretty much my view too. I never truly felt a part of any of the 'active' galaxies I was in. Maybe the last one, but I was only there for the last 2 weeks, so didn't have enough time to build anything up. In the other galaxies, there was a constant flow of planets coming through, and Exilition and WP always self-exiled or had themselves exiled at the first sign of trouble (in my experience).

[Alki]

Originally Posted by yaeger

Take this rounds gal #1 1:2 way to win, fencesit

fixed.

[cypher]

Originally Posted by yaeger

Take this rounds gal #1 1:2 way to win, included all the randoms/unpayed planets, teached em planetarion and won by 20+ mill

so do include randoms is neccesarry
and fun

<3 cbk

most bullshit reply i've ever heard and aint got nothing to do with it.

my gal finished #9 and had atleast as many as 1:2 in it. however we weren't fencesitting and therefore we didn't do aswell as them. if we had never gotten exi incoming we'd have been just as big. The same goes for other gals. The fact that gal finished high has NOTHING to do with randoms. It has to do with CBK keeping exilition away from your galaxy. (probably angels aswell)

alki for the win!

[Conall]

Originally Posted by Kal

if it was in effect a private gal of 4 or 5, then the randoms would be entirly excluded from things as all the private people would know each other.

It was pretty much that way anyway. The two (3 next round) packs made the deals and all voted for the same GC. So with 6 BPers, 5 active and 4 inactive which was about the way it was, the randoms had no chance of defeating the BPers. So you point/argument really doesnt matter here. Only way you are going to stop that to any degree is 3 man BPs and 1 BP per galaxy.

Optionally, why not just limit total BP members to 4. SO if someone joins a 3 man BP they get all randoms. Or if they join 2 man BP they get teamed with another 2 man BP. The rest are randoms. Could do the same with 5 man limit and if there are too many 3 man BPs compared to 2 man BPs then they get two extran active randoms in shuffle.

OR

Why not just allow buddy packs to continue to be formed after shuffle. That way if a new people join the round and want to play together then they have the option. When a second person joins a buddy pack they are both exiled to 200 area. When either logs in they are sent to a fresh new galaxy. and as soon as another BP is created it gets added. This way we continue to have new galaxies, plus if a buddy pack gets broken up then they can at least rejoin. You wont be able to stack buddy packs since you go to a new galaxy. Will make people make some serios choices, do I stay in this decent galaxy or buddy pack and take my chances in a new one.

Oh, and I agree that the galaxies were to big. Not because fo defense as much as you found yourself hitting the same galaxies over and over again.

[Kal]

the bp option after the shuffle is horribly abusable and would result in private galaxies.

Next round i'm farily certain galaxies will be smaller after the shuffle that they were this round, so there is no need to adjust BPs in order to control galaxy size.

[Conall]

Originally Posted by Kal

The only way to make a private part of a galaxy smaller would be to goto 2 packs of 2 in a gal which probably endangers to many people to be in poor galaxies.

This really doesn make sense either. In fact I totally disagree. If the shuffler works then the blance would be the same. With 15 man galaxies (base for round start) and 6 BPers yo got roughly 5 active randoms and 4 inactive.

With 2 man BP you would get 1.5 times as many galaxies. It would have 4 BPers - 3 active and 2 inactive (and 1 that could go either way). So the balance is roughly the same. And there is less reason to exile people. And the Randoms have at least as good of an opportunity to run the galaxy as the BPers do.

[Guran]

All have to be so complicated nowadays. Your arguments for forcing us to play with freebies are so poop. For paying to play the least I would expect is not to have to play with freebies, but no, you force us to. I miss old PA.

I will still keep on exiling every single freebie that lands in my gal.

[Chaos]

Originally Posted by cypher

most bullshit reply i've ever heard and aint got nothing to do with it.

my gal finished #9 and had atleast as many as 1:2 in it. however we weren't fencesitting and therefore we didn't do aswell as them. if we had never gotten exi incoming we'd have been just as big. The same goes for other gals. The fact that gal finished high has NOTHING to do with randoms. It has to do with CBK keeping exilition away from your galaxy. (probably angels aswell)

alki for the win!

bah.. *enter insult here*
we didn't fencesit at all. we had lots of Exil incomming. hell I even had to organize a lot of HR incomming on our gal.

we had incomming each frelling day/night so please don't spew crap like that.
1:2 won fairly. and it had NOTHING todo with alliances or their politics.

I don't belive there is any ally in the top15 that didn't attack us at one point.

infact alliance politics made it more difficult for us, since we couldn't defend hostiles in our gal.
so whenever we had incomming half the gal couldn't def the other half. and visaversa.

Your gal just wasn't as good. plain and simple. accept it. don't be a soar looser.

[Guran]

Originally Posted by Chaos

infact alliance politics made it more difficult for us, since we couldn't defend hostiles in our gal. so whenever we had incomming half the gal couldn't def the other half. and visaversa.

You think your galaxy was somehow unique in this way?

[Chaos]

hardly. it was just to make a point that we didn't fencesit.

[[hydra]rain]

Kal.
Killing the game are you?
I exiled 100+ planets last round. My gal played for the first 2-3 weeks in 7. We exiled up to 4-5 planets everyday. Point is, what use are 15 fckin inactives? If we won't afford to exile those, we'll lose interest in this game, one by one, till will die. Plus, think about the unlucky ones that end in some inactive gal and need to exile to find a better one. Those small gals won't afford that exile, and if he/she will pay for it's own exile, that will cost too damn much, you'll lose those peeps as well.
I'd say, try a private gal round for a change, that will bring more ppl, even if difference between gals will be huge, everyone will be happy playing with own friends. Cap the flag havoc was fun, but some things must be adjusted for this to work in a real round.
In conclusion: think like a PA player or at least listen to them.

[Mek]

Originally Posted by Chaos

hardly. it was just to make a point that we didn't fencesit.

ofc

[Kal]

Originally Posted by [hydra]rain

Kal.
Killing the game are you?
I exiled 100+ planets last round. My gal played for the first 2-3 weeks in 7. We exiled up to 4-5 planets everyday. Point is, what use are 15 fckin inactives? If we won't afford to exile those, we'll lose interest in this game, one by one, till will die. Plus, think about the unlucky ones that end in some inactive gal and need to exile to find a better one. Those small gals won't afford that exile, and if he/she will pay for it's own exile, that will cost too damn much, you'll lose those peeps as well.
I'd say, try a private gal round for a change, that will bring more ppl, even if difference between gals will be huge, everyone will be happy playing with own friends. Cap the flag havoc was fun, but some things must be adjusted for this to work in a real round.
In conclusion: think like a PA player or at least listen to them.

If you fully read about the galaxy setup for next round you will see it will be rather hard for you to exile all your inactives - this means that each galaxy will have some inactives and we won't get as big a differential as we had this round.

[DrunkenViking]

Originally Posted by Kal

If you fully read about the galaxy setup for next round you will see it will be rather hard for you to exile all your inactives - this means that each galaxy will have some inactives and we won't get as big a differential as we had this round.

True, but you still dont command luck. A galaxy can very well get 12 actives and 3 inactive randoms while the standard could be 5 active and 10 inactive. Point is that with too big gals, the incredibly lucky ones will have such an advantage that it annoys the hell out of others. And even making exiling harder doesnt really help the situation. As for players with less than 50 roids being exiled to c200, that doesnt help against late signups that initiate 80 roids and log in once every other week after that. I say split between free and paid accounts really, 2 different universes, and still keep the limmitations and delete free accounts every 2 or 3 weeks. The 5 freebies that obtain the highest score in their given time can be given free credits for the next round or something. Then you can have 8 planets consisting of packs(of 2) and 5(or so) paid random + possible new paid signups in addition. How hard can it be....?

[DrunkenViking]

what i mean is make free planets "trail-planets" that lasts 15-20 days before they're closed, and keep them in a seperate universe.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by DrunkenViking

True, but you still dont command luck. A galaxy can very well get 12 actives and 3 inactive randoms while the standard could be 5 active and 10 inactive. Point is that with too big gals, the incredibly lucky ones will have such an advantage that it annoys the hell out of others. And even making exiling harder doesnt really help the situation. As for players with less than 50 roids being exiled to c200, that doesnt help against late signups that initiate 80 roids and log in once every other week after that. I say split between free and paid accounts really, 2 different universes, and still keep the limmitations and delete free accounts every 2 or 3 weeks. The 5 freebies that obtain the highest score in their given time can be given free credits for the next round or something. Then you can have 8 planets consisting of packs(of 2) and 5(or so) paid random + possible new paid signups in addition. How hard can it be....?

/me sighs

Instead of complaining about the current system, its maybe worth you remembering how everyone complained about the split universe system as well. A split universe will not get us new players, this system will as they get to meet existing players. Next round will be improved as they won't be being exiled as soon as they arrive. But people will still be able to exile the people who really do do nothing, but they will have to be much more careful about it, as galaxies won't be able to exile if they get to small.

Its this simple, like it or hate it, but as long as I have a say there will never be 2 universes.

[Guran]

That's just it. In the old days I was able to play with my mates in same galaxy. Later on we could still play with mates but we were given the choise to open the galaxy to allow randoms to join if we so wanted. Now we are able to play with 1-2 friends and can't stop random freebies to join the galaxy anymore. You don't like it that some of us don't want to play with freebies so you make exiling more difficult. The way I see it, the game is becoming less and less appealing to me. Is this the only way you could come up with to try and increase playerbase?

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Guran

That's just it. In the old days I was able to play with my mates in same galaxy. Later on we could still play with mates but we were given the choise to open the galaxy to allow randoms to join if we so wanted. Now we are able to play with 1-2 friends and can't stop random freebies to join the galaxy anymore. You don't like it that some of us don't want to play with freebies so you make exiling more difficult. The way I see it, the game is becoming less and less appealing to me. Is this the only way you could come up with to try and increase playerbase?

It was decided a long time ago that private galaxies were a bad idea through a lengthy consultation with the community.

Thats not to say they don't have uses - for example they should be a part of speedgames or Capture The Flag events, and as soon as round 14 coding is out the way i'll try to get private galaxies added to the CTF game configuration, and just a standard speedgame configuration added.

But for normal rounds randomness is important. The advantage of the current system is that it gives the best possibility for all galaxies to be as equal as possible - yes some galaxies will be mroe lucky than others - but thats not to say they will win becuase of that, as long as the worst galaxies are not useless everyone has a chance to grow and hence the bigger galaxies can be taken out during the round. The aim of the galaxy system should be to ensure everyone has at least a few active people in a galaxy with them. Now everyone has a different view of what active is, and yes under this system the really really active people will probably feel less than satisfied. But this game should not be about being supremely active, it should be about skill and learning. So perhaps people should be thinking of ways to make activity less crucial so any flaws in the galaxy system cause less of an affect (and all galaxy systems have flaws).

[ChubbyChecker]

I think it would be beneficial if galaxies were slightly smaller (15-16 planets). I don't really see any way to make this happen though. Make buddy packs 2 packs of two and buddy packs are pretty much useless. Make buddy packs 1 lot of 4 or 5 and the galaxy is too dependent on that single buddy pack.

22 planet galaxies wasn't too much of a problem I think. My alliance attacks generally involved 20-30 waves across 10+ planets and the in-galaxy defence pretty much never covered more than half of that.

I think the current system is the best compromise we can hope for.

Perhaps next round you should only be able to exile one planet every 72 hours? I think not allowing exiling in the bottom 10% of galaxies isn't a big enough restriction.