Buddy-Code, possibly a good solution for Packs

[Spinner]

In the current Beta, we are testing a version of "Private Packs" which has been slightly modified to fit the game and the current code better.
It allows up to 3 players to play together in a random galaxy, which is then either filled with other packs, random people, or a mix.
I will let you know if the testing is successfull and we can feel sure it is good to be used in Round 11, it does look good though !

[Nadar]

It does look good?

[xtothez]

Yes but the current implementation sucks.

Logical solution:
[18:24:48] <@XtoTheZ> optional tick box for 'generate a buddy code' on signup
[18:24:54] <@XtoTheZ> then its sent with the email
[18:24:59] <@XtoTheZ> and you can give it to two mates
[18:25:04] <@XtoTheZ> easy

[TheRat]

What xtothez said :-)

[Stifler]

yes, making people chose their buddy code will suck

[Seth Mace]

Its not a new idea (i think i read the suggestion 3rounds ago somewhere on these boards?) but i think its a positive move if you can get it in

[Synthetic_Sid]

My concern is that it will be abused to create private galaxies. A group of people can keep making/deleting free accounts with buddy codes until they get a few in the same galaxy then create a private galaxy. The concept is sound - but it would be far better to not place the buddies together initially, rather group them in a shuffle prior to ticks starting (with only paid planets being moved together). That way abuse would be prevented. Otherwise we'll end up with galaxies containing loads of free planets signed up in attempts to generate fully private galaxies.

Note: a shuffle is abosultely necessary with random signups anyway - and it MUST be a shuffle which combines only paid planets. Anything else leaves too many abuse possibilities open.

[Kal]

i actually think its essential for the game to shuffle the free planets in with the paid ones - otherwise we will never be able to convince them to upgrade.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Kal

i actually think its essential for the game to shuffle the free planets in with the paid ones - otherwise we will never be able to convince them to upgrade.

Why bother, they will just get immediatly exiled. We may as well save the trouble and have them all in their own galaxies

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Kal

i actually think its essential for the game to shuffle the free planets in with the paid ones - otherwise we will never be able to convince them to upgrade.

Any free planets at start of the round are highly unlikely to upgrade - unless they're just having problems paying. Those around at the moment could test the game end of round 10.5 or during the unrestricted free beta that's upcoming. If that doesn't persuade them to play, how is playing a restricted planet that's unwanted going to persuade them?

Free planets at start of the round will mainly be farms, spies and free-loaders. Very few are gonna be new players who happened to hear of PA in the week or so before ticks start.

EDIT: i missed off that a lot of free planets will be multis created to try to abuse buddy system.

[Helix]

they wont get immediately exiled if every galaxy has to start off initially with 2 free planets or something...anyways, I like the idea, but I agree with sid that there are too many ways it can possibly be abused.

[mist]

they're going to get exciled. thinking people will keep someone in their gal who can't notify their alliance of incommings is... optimism at best

-mist

[wakey]

I think that perhaps the buddy system might be better off being something that enabled upon paying and activated through the preference screen rather than at sign up. Much like the move galaxy we have now the system could allow you to enter the code once activated and move to a friends galaxy. The codes would also be better off being automatically created by the server to ensure everyone has a unique code and would be displayed to the player either in pref or perhaps on overview once they have also paid. This way you dont know your code till you pay and people can only move when they ahve paid. this will reduce the abuse of the system

[Spinner]

I give up, this crowd is impossible to please (:

[Spinner]

First of all, existing players of PA have to take responsibility for what is good for the game at some point. It has been asked of alliances, it has been asked by players, and it's time.
1: This system is not all that abusable
2: For the record, 33% of the paid planets started as free for 2 weeks, then upgraded, so don't tell me there is no way anyone will upgrade
3: There are people playing this game who actually welcome new players in a friendly manner, strange enough as this sounds to some of you. It is not acceptible to ditch the free planets away from the the paid ones again, it defeats the entire purpose. Might as well remove the exile function in stead tbh.

[fuz]

i totally agree with wakey, upgrade account first, then you can make buddy code, and 2 planets can join you, pretty much as making an alliance..

[Senater]

I agree the shuffle idea sounds better. Maybe let planets enter the buddies they wish to team with by entering the user-ids or something on prefs, though there would have to be some way to confirm the buddies want to be with you aswell.

I think the buddt system is great. but I agree it should be put in pref for after you pay. That way you won't see as many people trying to abuse it by making loads of free planets. And if they wanna pay for the 10-15 planets they need before getting a few packs in same gal it's okay by me (not realy though)

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Spinner

First of all, existing players of PA have to take responsibility for what is good for the game at some point. It has been asked of alliances, it has been asked by players, and it's time.
1: This system is not all that abusable
2: For the record, 33% of the paid planets started as free for 2 weeks, then upgraded, so don't tell me there is no way anyone will upgrade
3: There are people playing this game who actually welcome new players in a friendly manner, strange enough as this sounds to some of you. It is not acceptible to ditch the free planets away from the the paid ones again, it defeats the entire purpose. Might as well remove the exile function in stead tbh.

I couldn't agree more with what spinner has said. It is absolutely essential that we try and get the people who start of free to upgrade and get addicted to the game - this is the only way the game can ever see any real growth in paid accounts. If any free planets turn up in my gal and turn out be trying to play then I will upgrade them regardless of how good they are simply becuase I want them to be able to experiance the game we all enjoy playing.

Why bother allowing free planets at all if we don't give them a chance.

[TheRat]

I want to loooove you! pleeeaaaseee you! Wrap my arms around you!

[Guran]

I dislike the whole idea. Totally random all the way..

This system favours big alliances. With limit again at 100, this blows.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Spinner

First of all, existing players of PA have to take responsibility for what is good for the game at some point. It has been asked of alliances, it has been asked by players, and it's time.
1: This system is not all that abusable
2: For the record, 33% of the paid planets started as free for 2 weeks, then upgraded, so don't tell me there is no way anyone will upgrade

That may be more a function of when the free planet limitations kick in--why pay before you have to?

3: There are people playing this game who actually welcome new players in a friendly manner, strange enough as this sounds to some of you. It is not acceptible to ditch the free planets away from the the paid ones again, it defeats the entire purpose. Might as well remove the exile function in stead tbh.

In general, I agree. The game needs to find a way to integrate new players if it's going to have any chance of continuing. However, some people will try to cheat with free accounts and adequate precautions need to be taken to prevent that or at least mitigate the effects (restrict gal status to paid accounts, etc).

[mist]

i've no objection to giving them a chance and i'm sure others don't either. the problem is that if they're forced on people and their accounts are useless, then their place in your gal is stopping you taking someone who is use. then things move from giving them a chance to costing yourself a chance. and people object to that more.

if you want them to be kept, they *at least* need to be given a minister controled option to see the gal status

removing the excile feature will only highlight to people that you intend to force things on them. given how well that worked with limiting alliances to 75 it'll be interesting viewing.

-mist

[wakey]

The problem is Kal the free account system that being proposed doesnt really allow for people giving new players a chance. A free planet is of use to no-one if they cant see galaxy status, they cant defend you, they cant raise the alarm ect. This is why most people will exile them because they are a liability. The reason 33% of paid planets were upgrades to accounts they had been playing is simply the fact that this round the limitations were such where you werent initially hindered, you could play as a free account and decide it was worth paying for this isnt giving them this chance (and doesnt give the galaxy or alliance a chance to decide they are worthwhile members and will stick around so are worth spending money on to activate them)

There has to be a workaround which allows free players to be part of the galaxy without opeing it up to spies (for example what about giving them restrictive gal status so they can only see the attack ships and not the defending, this way they cant act as a jumpgate scan for the attackers)

Also Spinner, Sids point does seem a valid one. Dont suppose you could explain what it is which makes it a none issue?

[Spinner]

People who upgrade after 2 weeks of playing have met the constraints a while back imho, unless they are really doing the wrong things.
14*24= 336 ticks.
And at this stage, they have not yet met the 200 roids barrier you think? You start missing out on resource-income after half that time.

As for Sid point (I assume you mean the multi-abuse), that is always the case with random rounds, people making more accounts than they need and go with the one that lands with friends. Packs do not alter that sceanrio all that much, and hence I do not see the big point.

[Spinner]

Also, letting new, and probably free, accounts use the buddy-function, will give them a lot more fun and increase the chance of them wanting to upgrade once they see they miss out.

[Spinner]

Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid

Free planets at start of the round will mainly be farms, spies and free-loaders. Very few are gonna be new players who happened to hear of PA in the week or so before ticks start.

Which is also something we have tried to improve with the new "Tip a friend" section in Preferences, and the referral code. (:

[G.K Zhukov]

Spinner, you know that alot of PA players are cheaters, and will use any posibilty to get an advantage.
So Sid is 100% correct in his estimate that it will be abused, if it can be abused. I hope you remember how the LDK galaxies all got into c46 in r4.

Oh well, Im playing the other game now, witch is a) far better b) more like old pa c) where dragons\ldk cheaters are deleted (and o'boy they cry hehe). d) its even free.

And spinner, I wont defend you again, you lauzy DC

[Cayl]

Just to comment off on a tangent, I don't know why people like "The old PA" any better than the new. They're very similar, and has a load of new little things that make it more enjoyable.

As to the buddy codes, The idea is sound, but there are a bunch of little suggestions that help tweak it even better. Don't take it as criticism, its what you get when you post to "Discussions" not "Announcements"

[mist]

Originally Posted by Spinner

Which is also something we have tried to improve with the new "Tip a friend" section in Preferences, and the referral code. (:

i assume i missed the anouncement on this, so i've no idea what you're talking about

-mist

[mist]

Originally Posted by Spinner

As for Sid point (I assume you mean the multi-abuse), that is always the case with random rounds, people making more accounts than they need and go with the one that lands with friends. Packs do not alter that sceanrio all that much, and hence I do not see the big point.

making this as hard for people a possible would seem to be a sensible goal tho...

-mist

[Spinner]

Originally Posted by mist

making this as hard for people a possible would seem to be a sensible goal tho...
-mist

It doesnt make it any easier as far as I can see.

[mist]

not being in the beta this might be wrong, however going on sid's post...

without private packs you've got to get a galaxy full of the right people (lets go with 10). with private packs you've got to get 4 people in the same gal, 3 if you're happy with 9/10. i cba to do the maths, but i'm thinking it's easier to get 3 in a gal than 9

-mist

[Spinner]

in 10.5 we had some 4.000 planets, meaning some 400 galaxies.
To get 7 hits in a gal where you have 3 buddies to "claim" the galaxy, you need to hit 1 of those 400 7 times.
In pure statistics, you'd need to create a huge amount of accounts to be able to do that. SO many that you wouldnt do it by hand. And so, it is not likely that there is a practical difference in hitting that galaxy 7 or 9 times. Any such script signing up that many accounts is very likely to be detected anyway (duh!) so again, the practical difference, rather than the theoretical one, isn't really there.

[Spinner]

Ah, I see your point now. You only need to get 1 in, and then fill it up with 2 more buddies afterwards, and exile out anyone who made it in inbetween. We'll have to see what can be done about that.

[Spinner]

YOu still have to hit it though, and with 1 of 400 to work with is quite an obstacle to get over without being detected.

[mist]

hypothetically, an alliance has 100 members. what're the odds that 1 of the 100 will land in a usable position? not that i'm sure where you're getting your numbers from exactly, but even so :P

-mist

[Desse]

why not shuffle after 48 ticks ?

And shuffle the paid accounts together ?

Means you have to pay for account with the buddy, before you know, if it ends in a decent galaxy ?

[Synthetic_Sid]

Originally Posted by Spinner

YOu still have to hit it though, and with 1 of 400 to work with is quite an obstacle to get over without being detected.

The odds are rather misleading. If you have say 6 people who want to be togetehr - and they each make 5 accounts with different buddy codes, then the odds of 2 of them landing in the same galaxy are actually much higher than you'd imagine if you don't understand statistics. In practice I'm probably being too cautious about it - it's certainly not something one alliance would do - as last thing they want is 6 of their members in one galaxy. It's the sort of thing which would be abused by a group of players who want a private galaxy - but are from different alliances.

Whereas I can't see it being abused by alliances, I CAN see it being abused by some to create private galaxies - which would have an immediate advantage on other galaxies due to having all active players plus knowing/trusting one another.

[Jonas]

I am NOT playing next round if I risk ending up in a gal with freebees. I dont care if there are half priv gals or totally random. What I want is a gal with potential to win. Where I can meet active/partly active people with the intention to PLAY the game. Not a bunch of farms/scanners.

When an account is paid, it should be automatically moved into a paied random gal.

Dunno really if it is like this already...am too tired to read it all but I know I aint playing with 7 freebees in my gal.

ah who cares about me?

-JonArse-

[Spinner]

Originally Posted by Desse

why not shuffle after 48 ticks ?
And shuffle the paid accounts together ?
Means you have to pay for account with the buddy, before you know, if it ends in a decent galaxy ?

Because, we WANT free accounts in with the paid ones, or the free accounts are DOOMED to be farmed and bashed senseless. They need the protection of upgraded accounts to be able to survive in PA. And us vets need the new players in PA.

[Spinner]

But from what I can see, there is no pleasing everyone.
Seems as though some want it mixed, some wants to get rid of pack alltogether and rather have "free gals" / "paid gals" 100% random but not mixed etc.
As always

[Spinner]

I'll make a poll, sec...

[Spinner]

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=177596

[Cayl]

I've seen two good ideas that are not incompatible with whatever the outcome of the poll, and have not met with any disagreement whatsoever on this thread.

xtothex:
Logical solution:
[18:24:48] <@XtoTheZ> optional tick box for 'generate a buddy code' on signup
[18:24:54] <@XtoTheZ> then its sent with the email
[18:24:59] <@XtoTheZ> and you can give it to two mates
[18:25:04] <@XtoTheZ> easy

Mouse:
I think the buddy system is great. but I agree it should be put in pref for after you pay. That way you won't see as many people trying to abuse it by making loads of free planets. And if they wanna pay for the 10-15 planets they need before getting a few packs in same gal it's okay by me (not realy though)

I especially like Mouse's idea, as there is no large advantage in giving free planets buddy access, especially right after 10.5 and Beta. If they want in with their buddies, their friends can exert a little peer pressure to get them in. The cost is not excessive. Maybe 2-3 weeks into the game you can turn it on like you do all the other features gradually. This will prevent the worst of the abuse Sid worries about and should not overly affect the game from that point forward.

[MotoX]

Dear Mr Spinner a poll is a waste of time because you only get the”oldies” to vote not the newbie’s or the players who is the future of this game!

As we look back; you and the “rest” have looked for answers and advises from the community core (mostly alliance HC:s) and adjusted the game partly from theirs suggestions!?
Not once have their suggestions got more players to join this game!
Or for that matter stayed because every round the same alliances members seek easy roids and bash some small planet to the ground……………….often a newbie who leaves faster then he/she joins…..!!

A HC of an alliance plays this game only for one reason and that is to win, no mater what!
Have this game ever seen a major alliance recruit newbie’s? NO! They only want the top players to join and the rest including the newbie’s, they are pushed into other directions.

“We are an Elite alliance and we are playing to win so we only want 1337 players”
This is soooo lame cos we all play on the same arena and you “Elite players” have always picked roids from newbies! (How can you sort out a 1337 players from a newbie the first month?)

There are still some alliances who do take on newbie’s (all glory to them) but the same alliances are still playing in the same universe as the Elite ones, dah….. So they need to supply defence witch effect the rest: conclusion: They lose more then they gain.

When it comes to this game future some HC:s are so concern about stats, member base etc etc… but don*t give a rat arse about getting more players in.

Suggestion: It’s time to force those 1337 alliances to perform and not only to drain this game upon their own wishes – make every alliance (new or old) mandatory to take in new players!

[A2]

Possible solution to limit the amount of abuse that can be done on it:
The "self delete" option will not be enabled until after the protection period has expired. The majority of people have a finite number of e-mail addresses, and we can also be actively hunting people signing up multiple accounts, especially in the period before ticks start.

I do not agree with the concept of splitting the universe into 2 parts based on the players who have paid before ticks start.
In the first place this is unfair to the people who pay half way through the round when they realise the potential of a paid account over a free one. What would happen in a split universe? would they be moved into a "paid" gal, therefore separating them from their galaxy mates, or would they be condemned to a "free" gal, which would inevitably be bashed constantly from a paid one unless there were restrictions like R10. The "split universe" theory ends up producing a game that's separated into 2 halfs rather than one big game, and most people will probably agree that the larger the universe is, the better the game.
Secondly, if the universe is split then the majority of players on the "free" side will be either people who haven't ever played before, and therefore need guidance from experienced players, or players who refuse to pay regardless and may therefore discourage the new players from either enjoying the game or paying to upgrade their accounts. With a combined universe every player has a random chance of how many "free" players he/she ends up with. If you don't like freebies then there's always the choice of either: a) exiling them, b) teaching them how to play, and convincing them to pay.

The buddy system is intended as a solution that is compatible with the current code to implement what has become known as "private packs" over the course of the many Suggestions threads there have been about it. The alternative for r11 is to have the universe fully random, which would include a complete mixture of paid and free accounts. With the buddy system those people who really would like to be in a galaxy with up to 2 friends can do so, therefore allowing some of the continuity of private galaxies, with the anti-blocking measures afforded by random galaxies.

[Cayl]

Motox: While I can respect the feelings that are behind your post, your suggestions and illustrations show a remarkable ignorance about how the game runs and why it runs that way.

Lets work from the bottom of your post up.... You can't force alliances to take in new players or any players at all. This is just so self-evident to me that I have a hard time even breaking it down any further, but alliances largely operate outside the game. The community has to do some of the work itself. Spinner can only create an arena in which to foster a community, he can't just say "These people are in your alliance now. Deal with it".

Good active players gravitate together. Someone who is talented, willing to be active, and a good leader will rise to the top of whatever small alliance he is able to join. From there, if we're lucky he forms a community around himself, and new alliances have come out of nothing this way. However more often this person will after a round or two of being active and doing well have grounds to go to a big alliance and say "ok this is what I've done. Here are the friends I've made in your alliance, I think I can do a lot for you" and will get picked up there. Other new alliances spring up when people feel they are ready for leadership positions but these do not come open fast enough within their current alliance. The most common birth of new quality alliances is the offshoot Battle Group or Wing. These people are experienced but also recruiting, so this also creates an opening for people to join a place where they can learn.

One of the ideas thats sprung up recently that I think is a huge step forward for developing quality
leadership is the Mentor team. I initially scoffed at the idea and ignored it. But recently I've been unofficially mentoring some people interested in setting up an alliance, and really people need the help. People have played their planets for a couple rounds but have never experienced what a good alliance should be like as the people who know are off rnning their own alliance. As such when they run their alliance they make all the same mistakes that prevent them from reaching the big time.

And finally in my opinion 97% of the alliances in this game should be playing for one reason only and thats to win. If you're not playing to win, you're stagnating the round and enabling the people who DID come out fighting to stomp on everyone else by being their farm. I do think there is room for a small number of "community oriented" alliances for people who just want to stay active in the game and keep in touch with old friends. Thats great, but those "alliances" should make that goal clear to people who enter them.

[Heathred]

hmmmJust a point winning isnt everything its quite fun just playing as a team defeating attacks meeting new ppl and organising attacks together i quite understand that my alliance wont catch up to the big ones but im quite willing to keep playing just cause im a noob and the game is fun i think its pretty sad if a person is totally obsesed with winning and spends thousands of hours trying its a game just have fun make friends teach new ppl and work togethe

the buddy sytem has potential if ppl are sad enough to abuse it then thats thier problem

[Cayl]

Well maybe my point was a little harsh, of course I understand that not everyone has a realistic shot at #1, but they should be doing whatever they can in their power to boost themselves up the rankings, thwart their opponents, and generally make themselves better players.

If you're the #32 ranked alliance, gun for #31, if you're #8, work hard for #7. And when you're #2, don't say, well #2 is quite good really... get your butt in gear and plot for #1