Galaxy setups

[TheoDD]

Everyone has always been playing for planet ranks, no exception.
You can be hardcore or an underachiever, you still get a planet rank.

You say that these players that over and over get into the same galaxy isn't doing this from skill or activity, but yet somehow they manage? This take skills and activity to accomplish. And if they aren't skilled as you claim, then why do they have such a strong urge to play with each other over and over instead of everyone else.

And whatever "solutions / suggestions" that has come up in this thread, is in no way gonna stop these players from rising above most others again and again. This is a skill game, it requires dedication and daily strategical decisions.

And your suggestion to up the alliance size to 120 is one of the worst suggestions here imo. How will these players not be safer by this?

Stop being jealous, and rather step up your own game, and create a good loyal team that will put in the same effort they are... And maybe you can repetively rise to shine aswell. You use more energy on being negative against these skilled players than to motivate your own.

[Patrikc]

What you're arguing for, TheoDD, is one of the main reasons why Planetarion's player base is getting smaller by the round. Rather than making the game easier to get into (not to be confused with easier to do well in), for which galaxy setup should be changed, you simply tell everyone to stop having lives and start dedicating more time to Planetarion. This simply does not work.

This isn't about bringing down the top players, this is about the less active / newer players being able to play and enjoy the game. In order for this game to ever be successful again, there needs to be a change in how new players work in galaxies, other than simply exiling them and hoping your buddy gets in. In my opinion, alliances are where you play with your buddies, and other than maybe one or two others, your galaxy should be where you meet and collaborate with new people.

[BloodyButcher]

Planetarion with hardcoded alliances should be more about the alliance, not how you can abuse your alliance to help your BP friends. Thats one of the things i hate about PA today.
But the biggest problem with the current Galaxy setup/alliance setup, or what else you could blame is that new players is being kicked out of perfectly active gals, so someone who usualy plays with the BP can exile in.
That it is so common to exile these days should be a clear warning sign that something is very very very wrong with PA.

[TheoDD]

Originally Posted by Patrikc

What you're arguing for, TheoDD, is one of the main reasons why Planetarion's player base is getting smaller by the round. Rather than making the game easier to get into (not to be confused with easier to do well in), for which galaxy setup should be changed, you simply tell everyone to stop having lives and start dedicating more time to Planetarion. This simply does not work.

This isn't about bringing down the top players, this is about the less active / newer players being able to play and enjoy the game. In order for this game to ever be successful again, there needs to be a change in how new players work in galaxies, other than simply exiling them and hoping your buddy gets in. In my opinion, alliances are where you play with your buddies, and other than maybe one or two others, your galaxy should be where you meet and collaborate with new people.

1. Tbh you dont need more than 10 minutes of activity pr day to be a top player.
2. Don't think this is the reason newer players dont stay. It isn't the exile system that makes this game enjoyable / unenjoyable.
3. How many new players have you met lately? (Last 20+ rounds)

[Patrikc]

It's such a dumb myth that you only need 10 minutes a day to be a top player. Perhaps if you're lucky enough to be pampered with (good) DCs. If you're not, then you'll be spending quite a bit more organizing defense.

The exile system isn't (un)enjoyable, but it encourages getting rid of new players rather than teaching them and helping them up, which leads to galaxies of experienced/better players and galaxies of less active/newer players, which will just get attacked whenever they get decent roids.

I've met a fair few - not enough to sustain the game, perhaps, but most of them don't even stick it through for the round due to the noob unfriendly nature of the game. Even as we speak my galmates are suggesting we exile someone that's actually coming to IRC and asking (lots of) questions. And honestly I'm tempted to do so because he weakens our position.
The reason you don't see many new players is because most of them are exiled at first sight.

[Blue_Esper]

I would say that this round i have seen more new/returning players then ever before, and a lot of our playerbase this round are less experienced with the new PA then last round, I've had 2-3 new players in my galaxy this round, which we have had exiled because the level of activity from them at times of need is 0.
Yes you can play PA with 10mins of activity per day and rank t100, but its when those 10mins are spent is what seperates.

[TheoDD]

Blue_Esper is spot on the real issue. The new players are never online when needed. I've used alot of my time in the past teaching newer players, but it has always ended up as a waste of time. (No exception in my experience)

And the more you reply Patrick, the more off topic you get. There is no way around in this game to stop eliteism and noobism. Hardcode all the things anyone can come up with to balance this, and it will still not change anything.

Some players are better at scouting and timing targets, some are better at organising defence. The rest is just there to support or ruin it for those as best as they can, while having fun with their friends.

And thanks for saying what im arguing for is one of the reasons the playerbase is decreasing, as im not sure what i'm arguing over. I've just stated my view on this topic, and franctly i doubt that logic is the reason why the playerbase is decreasing.

[Mzyxptlk]

No one is suggesting that we can create a perfectly level playing field, where noobies and veterans each make up exactly half of the top 100. Nor, even, that this is desireable.

What is being suggested is that the current galaxy setup disproportionally rewards ruthlessly exiling new players to black hole galaxies, where the most they can aspire to is becoming farms for late signups, and that this makes it very hard for new players go break into the community.

The top 3 galaxies are not the direct cause of this. Yes, they ruthlessly exile people, but they target mid-level players as much as new players. And besides, we're only talking about a few spots here. But the top galaxies are a blueprint for the rest of the universe.

Every galaxy exiles their newbies. The reason they do this is because for the number 4 galaxy to compete with the number 3, they need better exiles, and the same is true for the number 21 and 20 galaxies, and 51 and 50.

Every galaxy that's active enough to educate and introduce new players to the PA community is active enough to exile those very same players. The more ruthless we are with our exiles, the more likely we are to get lucky. It's a contest in sociopathy, basically.

And now we're in a situation in which we expect that our galaxies have only useful planets in them. We've come to believe that a galaxy that's got a few useless planets around tick 500 is doomed. That's true, but only in the game as it's currently set up. We should change that.

Galaxy exiling should be removed, or least severely limited. If every galaxy had a few useless planets, we would adjust our expectations accordingly. And remember, if you can't exile your newbies, you can still choose to ignore them. No one can force you to play with the people who share your z-coordinate. But your galaxy's score would benefit if they started contributing. If everyone had a few newbies in their galaxies, that would be an incentive to educate them, to help them contribute.

That doesn't mean every single galaxy will educate 2 or 3 new players about the finer aspects of PA, every single round, but it does mean we're not actively encouraged to just get rid of them as quickly and cheaply as possible. That can only be a step forward.

[Forest]

As well as limiting exiles a lot, I would like a function whereas a galaxy gc can mail any planet at the email address they sign up with.

It is all very well mailing a planet but should they not come online and just quit, it is pointless.

If however, they get a email welcoming them and offering help, I think they are more likely to stay. There could be a default option for the GC to be able to mail that can be turned off in preferences

[Patrikc]

Originally Posted by TheoDD

And thanks for saying what im arguing for is one of the reasons the playerbase is decreasing, as im not sure what i'm arguing over. I've just stated my view on this topic, and franctly i doubt that logic is the reason why the playerbase is decreasing.

Originally Posted by TheoDD

Stop being jealous, and rather step up your own game, and create a good loyal team that will put in the same effort they are... And maybe you can repetively rise to shine aswell. You use more energy on being negative against these skilled players than to motivate your own.

This is what I take issue with. Rather than coming up with ideas to change the situation, you just say "yeah well, I've had newbs in my gal, they sucked, nothing can be done, so shut up and play better". That logic isn't killing the game, but it is sitting idly by as it happens during which you're complaining about people trying to come up with ideas. If you disagree with the proposed changes, fine, but don't tell people to shut up.


Mz described perfectly how and why the exiling system is flawed.

PS. Not a bad idea, Forest - as long as it's limited to one email per day / login (of said planet).

[Blue_Esper]

Originally Posted by Forest

As well as limiting exiles a lot, I would like a function whereas a galaxy gc can mail any planet at the email address they sign up with.

It is all very well mailing a planet but should they not come online and just quit, it is pointless.

If however, they get a email welcoming them and offering help, I think they are more likely to stay. There could be a default option for the GC to be able to mail that can be turned off in preferences

I am against this email function.
Because it's open to abuse can you imagine neilto being GC and having access to your private email address? Scary.

auto exiles reduced to 24 ticks for inactivity for those set on not wanted would majorly reduce the amount of exiles new players would be exposed to. Removal of the Exile function for gcs

[BloodyButcher]

Originally Posted by Blue_Esper

I am against this email function.
Because it's open to abuse can you imagine neilto being GC and having access to your private email address? Scary.

auto exiles reduced to 24 ticks for inactivity for those set on not wanted would majorly reduce the amount of exiles new players would be exposed to. Removal of the Exile function for gcs

ofc we wouldnt have Access to ur private email adress, but PA crew could redirect the GCs mail to the players. And in the mail it should stand something like, "if u dont wish to recive emails anymore, press here".
Its a pretty decent idea, but i doubt they will implent it anytime soon.
Im pretty sure they are all focus now on how to cap the alliance limits for NeXT round

[Forest]

Originally Posted by Blue_Esper

I am against this email function.
Because it's open to abuse can you imagine neilto being GC and having access to your private email address? Scary.

auto exiles reduced to 24 ticks for inactivity for those set on not wanted would majorly reduce the amount of exiles new players would be exposed to. Removal of the Exile function for gcs

With regards to email, thats easy done. No-one views email so cant be spammed, limit to one a day and also give players the opportunity to turn it off.

as for auto-exiles, it doesnt change anything. Whether exiled automatically or by the gal, the result is the same.

(BTW anyone noticed how many app/ult with zero roids around, or with planets building constructions/researches but not coming online so they get exiled) so as to abuse the exile function and create 14 player private gals?

[Clouds]

Originally Posted by Motti

Rather incorporate a tweak on inc scans - that show you actual LT, then it is up to the player to either

Defensive stats have been the predominant element of the game's recession, and you want to help strengthen the one thing that will turn players away?

Originally Posted by TheoDD

Lowering alliance sizes even further from 60 on the other hand, if we drop galaxy sizes from the 12 - 15 that has been going lately, is something i'd like to see.

This is quite a biased comment, as considering the alliance that you reside in is continuesly a smal tag. Of course you want to see the tag limit dropped. Furthermore, some alliances, ie NewDawn/Vikings/CT are community alliances, and if the members of these alliances cannot play with their alliance, they will just quit the game.

Subsequently, I do not agree with Buther's suggestion to increase the limit, that is just stupid.

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher

Planetarion with hardcoded alliances should be more about the alliance, not how you can abuse your alliance to help your BP friends. Thats one of the things i hate about PA today.

You are generalising all alliances based on your own previous experiences. No, not all alliances operate like this. There has only really been one buddy-pack that has 'abused' their alliance(s), and I don't need to give any introductions either.

[BloodyButcher]

Originally Posted by Clouds

Defensive stats have been the predominant element of the game's recession.

You are generalising all alliances based on your own previous experiences. No, not all alliances operate like this. There has only really been one buddy-pack that has 'abused' their alliance(s), and I don't need to give any introductions either.

Defensive stats has nothing to do with it. Offensive stats can be very hard for new alliances.

Ofc you would not name your own HCs BP in the same sentence as abuser.

[Paisley]

some fundamental changes need to be made from grass root levels as the game cant continue the status quo

[BloodyButcher]

Originally Posted by Clouds

This is quite a biased comment, as considering the alliance that you reside in is continuesly a smal tag. Of course you want to see the tag limit dropped. Furthermore, some alliances, ie NewDawn/Vikings/CT are community alliances, and if the members of these alliances cannot play with their alliance, they will just quit the game.

Subsequently, I do not agree with Buther's suggestion to increase the limit.

I think you arguments is in reality a big yes to increase the limits.
Vikings is a small community, and a quite fresh one aswell.
iirc before you founded Vikings you were told that you wernt allowed to continue as TGV due to not allowing everyone from the old core to play with TGV, i guess cus your thoughts were that they were better suited for someone else, and due to a very low limit ypu could not fit all.

[Clouds]

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher

Ofc you would not name your own HCs BP in the same sentence as abuser.

Care to elaborate, as I am not aware of any of the current HCs in Vikings abusing their alliance for the gain of their BP.

[Clouds]

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher

Vikings is a small community, and a quite fresh one aswell.
iirc before you founded Vikings you were told that you wernt allowed to continue as TGV due to not allowing everyone from the old core to play with TGV, i guess cus your thoughts were that they were better suited for someone else, and due to a very low limit ypu could not fit all.

Incorrect. The majority of members that make up the Vikings tag are from the old core.

[BloodyButcher]

Originally Posted by Clouds

Incorrect. The majority of members that make up the Vikings tag are from the old core.

Where am i wrong? Rather have u reply to my post wich concern tag limits.
I guess you try to say that most Vikings were TGV, and because that aint a new community im your eyes?