Round 10.5?

[Blazde]

Just read Spinner's interview in the newsletter, and it's a tad intriguing.

"I hope [to stick around] at least a couple of months more"
"I'm not sure if I'll be sticking around after Round 11 goes live"
-> Round 11 is still several months away (no surprise here).

"But, as I've said, "there may be other things that I'm here for", which you all don't know about yet but will hear about soon (-:"
-> There is something planned before Round 11 (oooh).

"In fact, there is a bit more planned than just the speedgames"
-> Whatever it is, it's not another speedgame (hmmm).

What is this then but a Round 10.5? Anybody overheard anything more?

[Spinner]

U want one? (-:

[Blazde]

With some tweaks to avoid the roid stagnation that plagued round 10 (eg. the changes made for speedgames might be enough), most certainly. Anything is better than the 'job' I'm being forced to fill my spare time with

And a 10.5 with free signups would be even better I can sure handle LDK winning if it means there's someone to play against.

[AllFather|away]

Originally Posted by Spinner

U want one? (-:

no
(-:

[Lupin]

Originally Posted by Spinner

U want one? (-:

fo' shizzle, ma' nizzle

[Qdeathstar]

/me hopes...

it prolly wont be free... so unless you can take cash this time it wont matter :-(

[Iceaxe]

If you did another .5 round it'd be only fair if it was free again.

edit: I wouldn't mind giving PaX a shot if it was free (then ofc I'd have to play r11 if it was decent)

[Qdeathstar]

they all say that.

[biffy]

There will be more info shortly

[Spinner]

Ah, finally, the announcement went up, and I am allowed to speak (:

After the release of PaX (and in the beta), we were told that the combat was "insufficient" for sophisticated Planetarion players. We certainly didnt have time back then to turn around, and start doing combat from scratch, but it is something that I have thought lots about since then.
The last weeks, I have spent some time running the speedgames, but also some time trying to build a new combat system, based more upon old PA than the new, with some twists.
After PaX, I can imagine that many do not have faith in my ability to present a decent combat, and I might not blame you too much. I didnt know I could do it myself either.
Not until just some days ago, when I did my first tests of the new combat, inside a Planetarion ticker.
I have implemented the old stat known as "Initiative" again, people seemed to feel this was needed. I dont disagree. I have, however, improved the Initiative system from what it was before, so now ships can share initiative, they dont have to have their own. (i.e. 3 ships can have the same initiative, and thus fire simultanously)
I have given Zikonians a "steal-like" ability, but it is most definately not the same as before. A better term than Stealing, would be "borrowing", or "subverting".
Ziks no longer sacrifice their own ships in return for other ships, but now, their weapons "take control of" ships in the combat they are in, but when the combat is over, the ships still belong to their rightfull owners. Basically, the ships "subverted" this way, shoot at their own side in that fight.
Xandathrii will have their ships cloaked again too.

And, as many wanted, in stead of weird fleet priorities, there are distinct ships for distinct tasks again. Each race has their own Pod, capable of stealing roids, and each race have their own Structure-killer, only capable of planetary bombardment.

For those who wonder, there is no "splash-damage" or secondary Targets (t2), there is just 1 target class for each ship.
More combat "explanations" will be made available in a bit.

There are, as mentioned in the announcement, some other potential changes, but not ALL the details are completely worked out. Some are though, and some will be discussed oer the next days.

You will hear more about it soon

[Nitros]

hurray, nice updates

i hope this will get us a decent playerbase back

[Spinner]

I wouldnt expect any miracle, but since we're already pulling rabbits out of the hat, lets see what else we can do (:

[s|k]

looking nice

[Smudge]

spinner, once again, YOU ARE THE DADDEH!!

[Iceaxe]

Originally Posted by Qdeathstar

they all say that.

Yes but I've played before so why is it so hard to believe I wouldn't come back? Besides, PaX's combat system was one of the main things that drove me away, even though Spinner hasn't given out much info it definitely sounds more intriguing then before....

[Blazde]

Oi, oi. This sounds good.

I can't wait till mid-March tho will there be any 10.5 beta?

[Qdeathstar]

/me parties

[Qdeathstar]

well, i dont not believe you but they all do say that :-) I hope you come back, more the merrier.

[RealJames]

Please keep the updates coming. We like to be kept informed.

[^MDK^MAN^]

Nice changes, looking good so far

[Fernando]

weeeeeeee!! thats gonna be fun to watch, at least the zikko's will be

[Chika]

hmmmm, this is mayjorly better than nothing.

[Spinner]

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=175510 pls

[Iceaxe]

Originally Posted by Qdeathstar

well, i dont not believe you but they all do say that :-) I hope you come back, more the merrier.

I'd love to come back, just gotta find the time (which is the real reason I didn't play PaX )

[Nadar]

Hell yeah, give us a r10.5 and free too!!!

[Kal]

i'm convinced people actually liked fleet priorities u know.....

also it really should be free...

also with ziks subverting doesn't that give them to much of a combat advantage

and how will cloaking fit into the exisitng scans system

[Ultimate Newbie]

Originally Posted by Spinner

I have implemented the old stat known as "Initiative" again, people seemed to feel this was needed. I dont disagree. I have, however, improved the Initiative system from what it was before, so now ships can share initiative, they dont have to have their own. (i.e. 3 ships can have the same initiative, and thus fire simultanously)

about bloody time imo . On the strategy forum and channels, we have been dicussing this for some time now (i think the idea first started around early R7, but i'm not sure about that). I've even made a set of ship stats (based on the pre R10 model) with them... If you want i'm sure i can oblige

I have given Zikonians a "steal-like" ability, but it is most definately not the same as before. A better term than Stealing, would be "borrowing", or "subverting".
Ziks no longer sacrifice their own ships in return for other ships, but now, their weapons "take control of" ships in the combat they are in, but when the combat is over, the ships still belong to their rightfull owners. Basically, the ships "subverted" this way, shoot at their own side in that fight.

Oh, DO come on! Give credit to where credit is due mate!
I've been emailing you for ages about my Psi-EMP idea (where the original concept was developed by someone else, iirc NSV's ambasador ships from R5ish), where Zikonian ships are equipped with EMP weapons which effectively take control over the units they fire upon. Look at http://home.iprimus.com.au/rourkek/Production48.html which just happens to be the latest redition of my stats (again based on pre R10 combat).

Mate, if you want to take my ideas to implement and improve on the game - by all means. That's why i've been emailing you ship stats since R4's havoc. But really, play fair! (i could say here that other units that have made it into a round have looked very familiar, but i reckon that could be coincidence).

[Stifler]

will all ships be the same eta or different etas for each class?

will it be 1 or 3 tick attacks? or other?

[mens]

sounds good, I like the zik thing.
good job Spinner, or Sovereign

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Stifler

will all ships be the same eta or different etas for each class?

will it be 1 or 3 tick attacks? or other?

Hopefully single eta (otherwise muh of the benifit of alliance intergration is lost) and single tick attacks (multiple tick attacks with auto launch is just too easy to destroy a planet with)

[DarkAngel]

mmm.

[MaT]

If Jolt wont be pushed into a free round could i suggest it be priced at £10 per gal but the GC is set GC for the whole round that gets a resource bonus that way 10 people can play because of 1 generous power hungry person and that power hungry person can also enjoy his nice 10% / 15% / 20% resource bonus

Allow private gals again and the GC to have the option of letting free random planets in the gal or only people who have the gal password and if there are no spaces in any gals that allow random planets leave them to be activated till the last 2/3 days where they can be randomly given a gal !!BUT!! there is no GC set unless the gal come to an agree ment and even if they do come to an agreement there is still no bonus

It keeps jolt happy because they get some more money

it keeps 9/10 players happy because they get to play for free

:gollum: You know you like the sound of it :gollum:


For people who dont know the price cannot be lowered below £10 or $10 ,not sure which it is, because the payment system doesnt allow transactions below that

[furball]

MaT - I like that idea


i'll be back.

[dabult]

Make it free, with the options: free and random OR buy your private gal \o/


That would make the top-x gals be proper gals and serious players, rather than cheating scumbags, bug-abusers and the old usual crap. :bounces:

[MaT]

Originally Posted by dabult

Make it free, with the options: free and random OR buy your private gal \o/


That would make the top-x gals be proper gals and serious players, rather than cheating scumbags, bug-abusers and the old usual crap. :bounces:

free accounts or not your always going to get some 'cheating scumbags' as you put it and there is no reason why 10 free players put randomly together couldnt be a top 10 galaxy


i am prepared to be paying something to play the game but £10 per player is a little on the steap side thats why i thought why not £10 per gal its fairly straight forward

Player signs up with the option 'create a galaxy' gets 9 codes sent to his/her email to give to 9 people he/she is prepared to play with they then sign up with this code
its sort of a mix between a credit and a gal password


thought of some other things to i suppose this should go in suggestions really but nm:

• get rid of self exile - if a person doesnt like his gal the gal can exile him
• lower the exile cost against the galaxy
• always have a delete account button - there were complaints that there wasnt a delete account option during the speedgames

[therealmig]

£10 for a gal is kinda cheap, The speedgames were charge at £10 for 3 accounts, so based on that oayment system a gal of 10 is going to cost £33. Thats £23 Jolt will lose per gal, maybe £30 is more resonable?

Just my two cents worth

[Qdeathstar]

but if no one is willing to pay for PA and that price jolt looses all its money.

[dabult]

Originally Posted by Qdeathstar

but if no one is willing to pay for PA and that price jolt looses all its money.

Some people will always pay, no matter the cost more or less. The number of such people drop all the time though, so I really believe in the option 'buy your own gal'.


I didnt mean that all cheaters etc would be gone, that obviously wont happen. I more of meant that if people could pay to play in a private gal, they wouldnt have to cheat and abuse in order to create their own private gals, giving them the upper hand on many others. It would level the playing-field.

[Auda]

Originally Posted by therealmig

£10 for a gal is kinda cheap, The speedgames were charge at £10 for 3 accounts, so based on that oayment system a gal of 10 is going to cost £33. Thats £23 Jolt will lose per gal, maybe £30 is more resonable?

Just my two cents worth

It might be better to work out which brings in more money in the long term, with gals at £10 you will ger more ppl playing/paying than you would at £30, however you'd need to find out if enough people were paying the £10 to make what you would if you charged £30... thats not even taking into account the need for more players to start in the 1st place.

[MaT]

the main thing is that this is round 10.5 not round 11 as its round 10.5 there is the point to argue that we have alredy paid for it being rnd 10

so really it should be free i was just offering an alternative this round is basically to give the coders more time to sort rnd 11 out

[Nitros]

r7 idea -> pay for privates free for randoms

private = 10 players a gal
random = 15 players

or something simular..

edit: heh, that is pretty much what dabult said earlier

[Qdeathstar]

i disagree with the fact that people will always pay for something. If PA charges 20pounds, i doubt any one who has any common sence would pay for it. And also that is an extreame. IF PA would lower its prices, more people would play. 5000 people playing times 20USD equals 100000 usd. however, 10000 people paying twelve USD = 120,000

More money. So as you can see, you can make more money, and have a funner game, by charging less. I dont know what the exact demand/supply curve is for planetarion... im pretty sure demand is pretty close to horizontal, but that would change if we could get some good p/r.

and its rediculous to say that your not a true PA player if your not willing to pork out 20 bucks... thats rediculous. I dont think that there should be anything free, everyone pays 10 bucks for one account and speed rounds are 5 bucks. None of this three accounts nonsense. I dont get the feeling that people think they are getting a better value that way anyway.

[mist]

sounds suspiciously like supply/demand theory. however, you neglect to think about costs.

as i'm sure you realise, costs come in fixed and variable verieties. pa's fixed costs being servers, and at the moment spinner, plus i'd imagine a portion of biffy. pa's variable costs being mostly in terms of bandwidth and CC surcharges.

as you said, the more people that play the more jolt can make, however this has to be balanced against the proffit per person - which is based on the price, less the costs. lowering the price to increase players is all well and good, but there comes a point whereby your lowering of the costs looses you money. for example:

fixed costs of £500 a month, over a 3 month round + 1 month startup = £2000
variable costs of £3 per player, over a round.

if you get 100 players, paying £20 that's £2000 in, and £2300 out. not good
if you get 500 players paying £10 that's £5000 in and £3500 out. a proffit
if you get 1000 players paying £5 that's also £5000 in, but £5000 out. no proffit

therefore, it is possible to make more money with less players. i've no idea what the costs are, but they serve for the purpose of the example.

anyway. r10.5 is allegedly going to cost less than r10, so this is all rather pointless. lets get back to the making the game better plan

-mist

[Auda]

Originally Posted by mist

sounds suspiciously like supply/demand theory. however, you neglect to think about costs.

as i'm sure you realise, costs come in fixed and variable verieties. pa's fixed costs being servers, and at the moment spinner, plus i'd imagine a portion of biffy. pa's variable costs being mostly in terms of bandwidth and CC surcharges.

as you said, the more people that play the more jolt can make, however this has to be balanced against the proffit per person - which is based on the price, less the costs. lowering the price to increase players is all well and good, but there comes a point whereby your lowering of the costs looses you money. for example:

fixed costs of £500 a month, over a 3 month round + 1 month startup = £2000
variable costs of £3 per player, over a round.

if you get 100 players, paying £20 that's £2000 in, and £2300 out. not good
if you get 500 players paying £10 that's £5000 in and £3500 out. a proffit
if you get 1000 players paying £5 that's also £5000 in, but £5000 out. no proffit

therefore, it is possible to make more money with less players. i've no idea what the costs are, but they serve for the purpose of the example.

anyway. r10.5 is allegedly going to cost less than r10, so this is all rather pointless. lets get back to the making the game better plan

-mist

a. supply and demand theory in itself doesn't look at costs
b. your theory is flawed, PA as a game requires players, indeed it requires lots of players to make it worthwhile. From your theory we can deduce that the more players we have, the lower the commericial point of PA continuing is. However as u rightly point out Jolt make more money with less players. You however do not take in to account that PA needs a higher number of players to make it worthwhile, so less players, less game play, less money. Not good. Moreover the more players you have, the more your fixed costs are lower, well not lower, simply spread out over more people, else how could businesses ever make money..Coca Cola is a popular brand, I doubt its losing money, it to has fixed and variable costs.

5000 players using the above forumula creates 25k turnover agasint 17k costs.

More players = More Money

[Qdeathstar]

besides im talking about making PA reasonable to make a profit and at a fair price

supply and demand theory is based on the matching of a supply line and a demand line.

So while on the demand side, we might want it for free, but your not going to supply it at that price

on the other hand

On the supply side, you may want to charge twenty, but most of us wil not pay for it at that price

however, at ten bucks, costs may force you to supply less, but on the other side, people wanting to play for free, will drop out, ballancing the to, and making you profit.

I understand the problem of costs, and that there are not only accounting costs like you menchioned, but aslo economic costs such as time, and opportunity cost. But that doesnt mean that a lower price, for more players is a bad trade off. It may make you a proffit.

[Blazde]

Originally Posted by Auda

Moreover the more players you have, the more your fixed costs are lower, well not lower, simply spread out over more people, else how could businesses ever make money..Coca Cola is a popular brand, I doubt its losing money, it to has fixed and variable costs.

Clearly Coca-Cola should start selling coke for 1p a can because that way they would sell more and their fixed costs would somehow be lower

On a serious note, no matter how low the costs, new players will not start playing unless they can do for free. I'm an avid PA fan, and I'd be willing to pay £20-30 a round if that's what it took. But when I first came to PA back in rd3 I wouldn't have paid even £1. Simply put, there's enough other games I can play that are totally free. Until I'm sucked in (over the course of 1-2 rounds) you can't get any money out of me. And I don't think having a seperate freebie universe does the job because it just creates a seperate community and no real incentive to ever join the pay community.

[Auda]

Originally Posted by Blazde

Clearly Coca-Cola should start selling coke for 1p a can because that way they would sell more and their fixed costs would somehow be lower

On a serious note, no matter how low the costs, new players will not start playing unless they can do for free. I'm an avid PA fan, and I'd be willing to pay £20-30 a round if that's what it took. But when I first came to PA back in rd3 I wouldn't have paid even £1. Simply put, there's enough other games I can play that are totally free. Until I'm sucked in (over the course of 1-2 rounds) you can't get any money out of me. And I don't think having a seperate freebie universe does the job because it just creates a seperate community and no real incentive to ever join the pay community.

way to go missing the point in regards to Coca Cola, that was purely to show that the more people that buy something does not mean lower profits. And if you would care to look at some economics, and for that matter reading skills, you'd see that if you have 1 customer and fixed costs of £5000 the costs of producing for that one person is £5000, however if u have 20 customers, the cost is now a mere £250 per customer. APPEARING lower *mutter mutter roll ur eyes at me know it all*

And you assume no one will try anything unless its free... damn i gotta do into town and demand everything for free, so I can 'try' it

[Blazde]

Originally Posted by Auda

And you assume no one will try anything unless its free... damn i gotta do into town and demand everything for free, so I can 'try' it

http://www.bevnet.com/news/2004/02-1...erry_remix.asp

"Coca-Cola To Sell Berry-Flavored Sprite Remix In April"
...
"The Atlanta beverage company began selling a tropical-flavored Sprite Remix last April. Since then, the company has promoted the drink with DJ-inspired images such as the "remix" stations it used as it traveled from place-to-place providing free samples of the product to consumers. "


But contrast the soft drinks market with the online games market. If Pepsi came out of my tap at home for free, would I ever buy Coca-Cola? Sure, but only if I was very loyal to Coca-Cola. If I'd never tried either I'd go for Pepsi everytime.

[Auda]

free samples... yes... PA has been there done that and moved on, free samples won't be around for ever, just as PA wasn't free forever.

[Spinner]

Hm, is it me, or is this thread wandering a bit now?
(-: