User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 01:11   #1
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Alliance limits Round 19

In the last few rounds we've seen several alliance limit setups. With the feeling that there seem to be more rules than features each round, I'd like to try and simplify things this round. Perhaps not as much as many would like, but no one is perfect!
I'd like to see a setup with the top 60-65 members counting towards the alliance limit, and a maximum of 80 members.
This should reduce the issues of having players out of the alliance limit.
The "your alliance only gains what score you gained since leaving your last alliance" would also go.

The major issue I see with this is that smaller alliances are probably going to suffer a bit more in getting new players. I realise the best time to do this change would probably have been this round, when recruitment is probably lowest, but it's a bit late to start now.

Ideally, if we had a high average activity per player and lots of players willing to shoulder responsible roles and play to win, we could have a much lower alliance limit. However, many alliances are more mini communities, it's (apparently) becoming if anything harder to find those willing to be a BC/DC/HC "full time", and alliances need a definite infrastructure which the current ingame tools are not enough to support - arbiters, defence bots, attack bots, relay channels, etc. This lends to the idea of having a bigger alliance.

Two other possibilties would be to not allow recruitment of up to 80 members for the first x ticks (usually first few days- week, from previous setups) and to allow alliances to only recruit below their average score once they reach the 60-65 limit, to encourage the alliances to only take on smaller planets that are learning at no cost to their overall score.



The limit of scanners would possibly still stay at 10 (though there's not really a need to have an upper limit as such, as there's no delay between changing scanners at the moment, and I see no reason why there should be?)

This has been talked over with some of the alliance HCs over the last couple of days, but I now throw it open to input from the rest of the community.
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 01:28   #2
jt25man
Victim of Marriage
 
jt25man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 784
jt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud of
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I like the limits.

We were just discussing though, perhaps keeping the score rule, but modifying it slightly. To where if a member leaves your alliance, and comes right back after 72 hour hold, you get there score back minus whatever they gained in the 72 hours. This is in addition to if they leave and join another alliance, the other alliance only gaines whatever score they gained between leaving 1st alliance and joining them.
__________________
You mean there's life outside the internet...oh man I'm screwed.
jt25man is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 01:38   #3
XelNaga
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 260
XelNaga is a splendid one to beholdXelNaga is a splendid one to beholdXelNaga is a splendid one to beholdXelNaga is a splendid one to beholdXelNaga is a splendid one to beholdXelNaga is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Two other possibilties would be to not allow recruitment of up to 80 members for the first x ticks (usually first few days- week, from previous setups) and to allow alliances to only recruit below their average score once they reach the 60-65 limit, to encourage the alliances to only take on smaller planets that are learning at no cost to their overall score.
Stop trying to force behavior on alliances with those, sorry to say, stupid rules and limitations. Stop wanting to control everything in the way alliances should behave and play the game. You want my opinion? Remove alliance limits completely.

Now, I know this won't happen, so I suggest you just fix it to 60 or 65, FIX, not variable, no extra members, no extra formulae, just a plain simple number.

But let me at least try and explain why I think the alliance limit should just be removed: first, putting up an alliance limit will always lead to alliances being "full", and choosing their members more carefully, leading to what you are trying to avoid: a certain elitism. The training alliances mostly still can't take in everyone they would like to. And the small alliances still won't get more members, in my humble opinion.

The alliance limit is obsolete. It has failed it's purpose. Removing the limit would, first of all, grant much more people the oportunity to proove themselves in a high ranked alliance, possibly dragging them into the PA politics and turning them in yet another PA nerd.

Another point: I'm sure the top alliances won't just go and recruit 500 people. They will still pick carefully, give a chance to some promising new players, which wouldn't have the chance with alliance limit at all, and keep to a certain size to maintain full control and management capacities. Additionally, most players have some sort of loyalty and won't just all run to the strongest alliance in a round. Sure, it will happen, but not too much.

Removing the alliance limit will also create a lot more interesting situations. Like an average alliance with mediocre members control and organisations, but 200 members against the elite alliance with 50 dedicated hardcore players and a ruling war machine. It would give them quite some feeling of excitement to have so much incoming and to deal with it, and later maybe a great feeling of success. Plus, politics would become way more dynamic. Blocking would make its comeback: if there would ever be one such "super alliance", the other would just HAVE to get their heads together and work together. They could even merge, like the good old days.

Oh, and no more support planet problems. A problem you created yourself by putting a limit on alliances.

All in all, one of the worst things that ever happened to PA, besides p2p, is alliance limits. Just leave the alliances alone. That would be just about the best thing you could do.

P.S.: the new score rule could be put back to use in case the removal of the alliance limit would show too many people joining the top alliance mid round. It would be the best solution for the problems the no limits system had, instead of limiting the number of members.
__________________
(XelNaga) Everybody please vote for Planetarion at http://www.mpogd.com !!!! We are second, we have to get first place back!
(SethMace) omg 2nd!!!
(SethMace) we must block with 3rd to take them down!!!11

(Marneus) also the damn thing aint always right 4 + 79 = i type 81 and it kicked me back to the login again grrr
XelNaga is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 01:54   #4
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I added a further point to jt25man's excellent suggestion - that we should extend this 72 hours to 96 in order to allow them to re-apply and be accepted. Not every alliance can re-accept someone the instant they're able to, especially the smaller alliances who are less active.


In response to the original post:

I think that the top 70 should count, and that the alliance limit should be 65 (for the top 5) / 90. Why? Because we're coming up to an autumn round which is always very popular, and so we need to make sure that our smaller alliances have plenty of room.


Also, if you want to encourage alliances to work together and potentially merge, you either need to do something about the alliance scoring or re-introduce the merge system. jt25man and I were chatting and agreed that at present there's no incentive for small alliances to merge because they lose so much score overall. One alliance has to close and wait 72 ticks to join the other, making all their score void. That's not good.

Of course, we'd need a nuanced merger process. Say, a one week period after submitting it to the admins, during which either of the two alliances can, by (their own) HC majority vote, cancel the merger.

Unless the admins were asked to do the merger in a particular way, the HCs of both alliances would become HCs of the new alliance, with the officers etc no longer in place. The new HCs would then need to appoint their new officer team, etc.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
Two other possibilties would be to not allow recruitment of up to 80 members for the first x ticks (usually first few days- week, from previous setups)

and to allow alliances to only recruit below their average score once they reach the 60-65 limit, to encourage the alliances to only take on smaller planets that are learning at no cost to their overall score.
The second option seems like a bad idea to me - you're forcing alliances to recruit low. If a top alliance dissolved (like Insomnia did once or twice), you'd be stopping the other alliances from taking on these players. If a home can't quickly be provided for them, these players often quit.

The first option seems reasonable to me though.
__________________
Finally free!

Last edited by furball; 20 Aug 2006 at 02:03.
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 02:03   #5
jt25man
Victim of Marriage
 
jt25man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 784
jt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud of
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Also, if you want to encourage alliances to work together and potentially merge, you either need to do something about the alliance scoring or re-introduce the merge system...Of course, we'd need a nuanced merger process. Say, a one week period after submitting it to the admins, during which either of the two alliances can, by (their own) HC majority vote, cancel the merger.

Unless the admins were asked to do the merger in a particular way, the HCs of both alliances would become HCs of the new alliance, with the officers etc no longer in place. The new HCs would then need to appoint their new officer team, etc.
I think a week is a little long for a wait on admin approval. It would be nice to just circumvent the PA Team altogether and be able to do merges without approval in game. I'm sure they could figure out a way to do this. Make it so all the HCs have to agree, and they can choose to join one or the other, or create a new Alliance. Maybe put a 48 hour hold once the merge is set for either to back out, after that it's a done deal and you get on with it.
__________________
You mean there's life outside the internet...oh man I'm screwed.
jt25man is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 02:05   #6
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by jt25man
I think a week is a little long for a wait on admin approval. It would be nice to just circumvent the PA Team altogether and be able to do merges without approval in game. I'm sure they could figure out a way to do this. Make it so all the HCs have to agree, and they can choose to join one or the other, or create a new Alliance. Maybe put a 48 hour hold once the merge is set for either to back out, after that it's a done deal and you get on with it.
I like a week, personally. It is a big step for alliances to take, and I think it should be taken seriously. I wouldn't want to see alliances ever trying to de-merge - so making sure that they don't want to do that is part of the waiting period.

Besides, I think that it should be a PA-Team thing - they shouldn't become too commonplace. Anyway, it'd be an awful lot of coding
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 02:10   #7
jt25man
Victim of Marriage
 
jt25man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 784
jt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud of
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Besides, I think that it should be a PA-Team thing - they shouldn't become too commonplace. Anyway, it'd be an awful lot of coding
Yes, it would be a lot of coding, but should that really be a reason for it to be turned down without a proper discussion? I've seen a few suggestions lately turned down for the same reason "it would mean a lot of coding".
__________________
You mean there's life outside the internet...oh man I'm screwed.
jt25man is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 02:12   #8
SpookyVince
The Force of Spookyness
 
SpookyVince's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sol III
Posts: 122
SpookyVince is just really niceSpookyVince is just really niceSpookyVince is just really niceSpookyVince is just really niceSpookyVince is just really nice
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Ok, I've edited it down to 1 week.

Personally I think that it should be a PA-Team thing - they shouldn't become too commonplace. Besides, that'd be an awful lot of coding
Though I don't know too much about coding I think you're right. All mergers as of now are anyway discussed over the IRC I believe...

Just let the HC's have the discussions done, and come to a PA team member with a clear plan of the merger, and then, on a preset tick (indeed one week time seems reasonable), the merger happens like "magically" over-tick.

One week delay btw is long enough to give opportunity to each alliance involved to request a cancellation of that merger, should they change their mind.
__________________
[-SPQR-] of course!
Kindly adopted by [HA]
SpookyVince is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 02:13   #9
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by jt25man
Yes, it would be a lot of coding, but should that really be a reason for it to be turned down without a proper discussion? I've seen a few suggestions lately turned down for the same reason "it would mean a lot of coding".
Not at all, I just embraced the latest reason for saying no to things


This really boils down to how you view mergers in PA. I prefer the idea of PA-Team being able to operate some kind of peer-review system to keep an eye on inexperienced alliances - that way it could make sure that they don't get taken advantage of by bigger alliances.


EDIT: to SpookyVince's suggestion
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 02:21   #10
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I think what really should be looked at atm is smaller galaxies to get more galaxies to avoid triple booking at galaxies.

With the reduced members in alliances, you also need to reduce the number of people in galaxies to even out the situation.

Right now you got galaxies with about 20 members and that is infact quite powerful if you f.example look at the nr1 galaxy this round they would actually be ranked 11th in score if they were an alliance. And thats pretty powerful if you ask me.

Start out with 6 in each galaxy, reduce buddypacks back to 3 for example.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 04:15   #11
BWE533
Classified Black Project
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2
BWE533 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I agree with XelNaga's idea of removing alliance limits. I've played other online strategy games in which there were no alliance limits. The #1 alliance had 200 members while the #2 alliance had only 50. Well, what happened was that the #1 alliance declared war on #2 and #2 ended up kicking their ass because they were alot more organized and since it was easier to coordinate/control a group of 50 members than it is 200. I say let go of the limits and let natural selection take its course. You wouldn't have alot of the support planet debacle that you had this round. If you set alliance limits, people will always find ways around them.

In PA it's not the membercount that wins the round for an alliance. Being a number #1 alliance takes organizational skills, coordination, discipline, and logistics. Having 200 members in 1 alliance can be a logistical nightmare for the HC's because if you think about it the have to keep 200 members happy instead of a small close knit alliance that only uses 50. Weaknesses in having a large alliance will be greatly amplified and exposed during times of war. I believe alliances will limit membercount by themselves if you would just let them.

To me the only possiblity that a 200 member alliance could remain and stay at #1 is if they had a highly organized internal infrastructure from command, to the officers, all the way down to it's memberbase.

Most alliances have a difficult enough time managing 50 members, let alone 200. I say let them try.
BWE533 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 04:43   #12
Travler
Bona Fide Jesus Freak
 
Travler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Word of the Lord
Posts: 765
Travler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to all
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
Two other possibilties would be to not allow recruitment of up to 80 members for the first x ticks (usually first few days- week, from previous setups) and to allow alliances to only recruit below their average score once they reach the 60-65 limit, to encourage the alliances to only take on smaller planets that are learning at no cost to their overall score.
How about instead of only allowing below alliance average if there was a percentage over the alliance average of say only 10-30% over the alliance average would be allowed once you had the 60-65 limit. It would keep the very top players from being recruited but still allow for some good recruiting to smaller alliances looking to grow.
__________________
Matthew 24:9 (New International Version) "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me."
Who the hell gave you posrep you christian fundamentalist?
god is bollox, mkay and you are not discussing it
You're not the voice of Christianity di**head.

CT R22-20, [1up] R18-16, TGV R15,
The Illuminati - [NoS] - R14-13
Travler is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 05:01   #13
Ali
Subh HC
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 215
Ali is a jewel in the roughAli is a jewel in the roughAli is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I actually agree with XelNaga also. Not enough time to reply why now but I like that idea the best.

edit: if not scratch the limits then hardcode something like 80 man alliances for *everyone* and then count only the t60 by score towards alliance score. also scratching the alliance gained score and going back to traditional score = score
__________________
Subh - The rise of honor, loyalty and dedication

Last edited by Ali; 20 Aug 2006 at 05:20.
Ali is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 14:18   #14
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I'd say ditch alliance tags altogether and bring back the war game I'm struggling to remember.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 15:38   #15
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I'd prefer a tag something like this:
70 normal player & room for 10 scan/cov-op planets

For all alliances, no t5 alliances can only recruit up to ** players and the rest can recruit more.
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 20:28   #16
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by BWE533
I agree with XelNaga's idea of removing alliance limits. I've played other online strategy games in which there were no alliance limits. The #1 alliance had 200 members while the #2 alliance had only 50. Well, what happened was that the #1 alliance declared war on #2 and #2 ended up kicking their ass because they were alot more organized and since it was easier to coordinate/control a group of 50 members than it is 200. I say let go of the limits and let natural selection take its course. You wouldn't have alot of the support planet debacle that you had this round. If you set alliance limits, people will always find ways around them.

(snip)
But we did all this in Round 2 when Fury and Legion took down BlueTuba. So this is all ancient history for us. I realise that you've come from another game, but essentially PA is 1000 years in the future from that situation.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 21:38   #17
Vas
ROCK biatch
 
Vas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 92
Vas is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
that we should extend this 72 hours to 96 in order to allow them to re-apply and be accepted. Not every alliance can re-accept someone the instant they're able to, especially the smaller alliances who are less active.
I disagree
72 ticks to wait before applying to a new alliance is sufficent no need to increase it to 96 ticks which is too long.

Top5 can recuit up to 65 members at least and the rest outside the top5, 80 members max and no more
__________________
Insomniac

[VanX][ToF][xVx][PK][Subh][InS][Omen][Destiny][ROCK]

Proud to been a Member of Gal 1:6 R18
Vas is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2006, 22:16   #18
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vas
I disagree
72 ticks to wait before applying to a new alliance is sufficent no need to increase it to 96 ticks which is too long.
I'm not clear - is a planet able to re-apply within those 72 ticks but the alliance isn't able to accept them?

Besides, it's asking a little much to expect the alliance to re-accept them on the same tick as they're able to. Given that this happens more with smaller alliances (who are often less active), I would allow the alliance 24 hours to accept the member. Hence 96 hours.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 Aug 2006, 00:53   #19
Pilgrim
Bline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Texas, US
Posts: 233
Pilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these partsPilgrim is infamous around these parts
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
I'm not clear - is a planet able to re-apply within those 72 ticks but the alliance isn't able to accept them?

Besides, it's asking a little much to expect the alliance to re-accept them on the same tick as they're able to. Given that this happens more with smaller alliances (who are often less active), I would allow the alliance 24 hours to accept the member. Hence 96 hours.

You need to wait 72 ticks to be able to reapply. Making the wait 192 ticks would be better to stop faggots ship jumping mid round
Pilgrim is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 Aug 2006, 04:37   #20
Makhil
Registered User
 
Makhil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,663
Makhil is a splendid one to beholdMakhil is a splendid one to beholdMakhil is a splendid one to beholdMakhil is a splendid one to beholdMakhil is a splendid one to beholdMakhil is a splendid one to beholdMakhil is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Why not putting a limit on the number of alliances ?
Open 20 alliances spots - HCs must apply (with emails, a bit like the World Cup event) with a minimum 40(?) members to secure a spot.
On sign up players are automatically directed to the allliance that submitted their email.
Players without alliance can check a box on sign up to be directed to the alliances with less players (pre-recruit) or leave the box unchecked and join an ally later.

Otherwise i think a limit on alliance members should be based on 'number of players' divided by 'number of alliances'.
__________________
<smith> You're 15 and full of shit.
<Furious_George> no, im 22

Last edited by Makhil; 21 Aug 2006 at 04:45.
Makhil is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 Aug 2006, 08:01   #21
Ramierez
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

well, there is also the option of having all players who sign up out of an alliance being put into one big massive super alliance, or sort them into 100 limit ones. You would give them the ability to see all alliance members, get the top ten or so from each set the power to set up attacks, and do general Hc/Bc/Dc stuff. heck, you could even give them names and stuff, allow voting for HC's, and so on... would give the private alliances a run for thier money...

(this is just an idea btw, so dont flame me for putting it on the table)
  Reply With Quote
Unread 21 Aug 2006, 08:58   #22
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

The problem with abuse for this being able to rejoin and not lose your score thing is that you can have more members and just cycle them so you end up with your top players in the alliance. As long as they play on their own when not in tag, they can get away with it.
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 Aug 2006, 11:45   #23
randal
boring
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: in a bar, under the sea
Posts: 115
randal is a name known to allrandal is a name known to allrandal is a name known to allrandal is a name known to allrandal is a name known to allrandal is a name known to all
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I dunno, aren't there more important issues than 3 people more or less in some alliance here or there?

Like, how to get more players, how to give more chances to new people, or allianceless ones, or whatever..

But that's just me I guess
randal is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2006, 09:27   #24
Snurx
Dirte
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,573
Snurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Bigger is better. Best is no limits, but thats just too much to hope for
Snurx is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2006, 12:51   #25
Treveler
Its time to roll the dice
 
Treveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The barn
Posts: 876
Treveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant futureTreveler has a brilliant future
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I still have difficulties seeing what ally limits has done good for this game.

'If its not broken dont change it' is a saying the PA team should have learned a loooong time a go.
__________________
Real life peon.

Last edited by Treveler; 22 Aug 2006 at 13:18.
Treveler is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2006, 13:04   #26
Alki
Drink is Good
 
Alki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
Alki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

no limits, get rid of support planet rule, happy days
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
Alki is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2006, 17:44   #27
Hicks
Raaaaaaaah!
 
Hicks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
Hicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHicks is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwtmc
I'd say ditch alliance tags altogether and bring back the war game I'm struggling to remember.
You will be happy with sim planet !
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2006, 18:20   #28
ComradeRob
wasted
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Under the floorboards
Posts: 1,240
ComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

randal makes a good point. The alliance limit might be a little bit too high, or a little bit too low; either way, it's not worth wasting much time thinking about when there are bigger issues out there. Is this the best use of PA team's (limited) resources of time and (even more severely limited*) brainpower?


* Sorry, couldn't help myself
__________________
“They were totally confused,” said the birdman, whose flying suit gives him a passing resemblance to Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story. “The authorities said that I was an unregistered aircraft and to fly, you need a licence. I told them, ‘No. To fly, you need wings’.”
ComradeRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2006, 22:17   #29
d3c0y_n4m3l355
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4
d3c0y_n4m3l355 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Ditch the rules, they dont have any value. Creating more and more code just to wrap around more and more rules who have seem to loose their purpose. Just let the game run its own game and dont try to force it upon the players. Right now these caps are just killing the game, I would love to see F-crew and other beginner alliances to explode to 200 players and create one big teaching atmosphere instead of a limited opportunity.
But then everybody can keep on dreaming, this game will probaly be killed by regulations
d3c0y_n4m3l355 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 24 Aug 2006, 04:27   #30
DeadMan
Slave of Catwoman
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norway, Hammerfest
Posts: 89
DeadMan is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

What ever limit you will decide upon it won't really make alot of diffrence as the top alliances will always be the same. They have a habbit of finding ways to provail.
__________________
Proud to have been part of [WolfPack]
R 35 - R 46 [NewDawn]
R47 and beyond allianceless
DeadMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 24 Aug 2006, 04:32   #31
DeadMan
Slave of Catwoman
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norway, Hammerfest
Posts: 89
DeadMan is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

And ofcourse then you have those like 1up , exilition, acendancy or whatever named alliance that just kick half their members to pick up the top 5 from all the others so they have 80% of the top 50 players anyway.
__________________
Proud to have been part of [WolfPack]
R 35 - R 46 [NewDawn]
R47 and beyond allianceless
DeadMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Sep 2006, 13:21   #32
Illuvatar
Mastermind
 
Illuvatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 430
Illuvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veedeejem!
I'd prefer a tag something like this:
70 normal player & room for 10 scan/cov-op planets

For all alliances, no t5 alliances can only recruit up to ** players and the rest can recruit more.
totally agree to this suggestion. nice one VdM, 80 as taglimit for alliances while 70 members counting intag + 10 extra slots for scanners / cov oppers.
__________________

Community Leader
Illuvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Sep 2006, 15:53   #33
shik
Sorry, Chicken...
 
shik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 87
shik is infamous around these partsshik is infamous around these parts
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

top500 players should also not be allowed to leave alliances
__________________
I'm not quitting, i'm just giving up!
-[TGV]- -[OMEN]-
shik is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Sep 2006, 21:59   #34
Cmd_Carl
Omen HC
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 10
Cmd_Carl is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
In the last few rounds we've seen several alliance limit setups. With the feeling that there seem to be more rules than features each round, I'd like to try and simplify things this round. Perhaps not as much as many would like, but no one is perfect!
I'd like to see a setup with the top 60-65 members counting towards the alliance limit, and a maximum of 80 members.
This should reduce the issues of having players out of the alliance limit.
The "your alliance only gains what score you gained since leaving your last alliance" would also go.
Personally i think we got this rule on backwards.

This round, changeing ally proved difficult. Because there is no benifit for the new ally. If a ally goes totaly inactive, members are virtually "trapped" in that ally for the rest of the round.

When Kargool first suggested this rule the intencion was this:
The score you gain while in tag is the score the ally gains on you.
Meaning you cant keep players out of tag because when he joins the score would be "0". This would prevent the obvious exploit of not tagging.

Now you can still keep players out of tag, but the players have a hard time jumping ally's. And jumping ally's are healthy.. it keeps the ally on theyr toes, trying to do the best for theyr members.

So my suggestion is this:
The ally score = what players IN tag gains while taged.
__________________
R13 CoveN DC
R14 Hydra(Omen) HC
R15 eXilition (Hydra BG HC)
R16 Nice little break
R17 Omen "HC"
R18 Omen HC
R19 Omen HC
Cmd_Carl is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Sep 2006, 22:42   #35
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I know you're one of the ones hugely not in favour with it, Carl.

However, Kargool's initial suggestion was too flawed. In theory, an alliance could have won with 0 players in it.

if you quit and rejoined the alliance, you'd have effectively "saved" your score. We did have a few serious abuse concerns when other issues were raised.

I don't think it's the answer personally, but I can't think of a better one.


If there aren't too many disagreements, I'd like to add a merge function in game, as otherwise it's impossible to merge with the current limits mid-round, and at the moment the only other way is through admin intervention.
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2006, 10:18   #36
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
If there aren't too many disagreements, I'd like to add a merge function in game, as otherwise it's impossible to merge with the current limits mid-round, and at the moment the only other way is through admin intervention.
Any chance you can scroll up to the top of the thread and respond to the suggestion that myself and jt25man came up with?
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2006, 10:34   #37
Ultimate Newbie
Commodore
 
Ultimate Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
Ultimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Any chance you can scroll up to the top of the thread and respond to the suggestion that myself and jt25man came up with?
No. Sorry.

__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
Ultimate Newbie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2006, 10:51   #38
Tomkat
:alpha:
 
Tomkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 7,871
Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I think alliances should be smaller and more focussed. I'd actually be for 40 man alliances, and then every 3 days the limit increases depending on the rank of the alliance (so a low ranked alliance gets an extra 2 slots every 3 days whereas a top 5 alliance only gets 0.333 of a spot every 3 days).

I dunno, it's just an idea.

The more alliances in the game, the more fluid it should be (supposedly). Only having 5 or so main alliances means it stagnates politically quite quickly.
__________________
"There is no I in team, but there are two in anal fisting"
Tomkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2006, 11:07   #39
Ultimate Newbie
Commodore
 
Ultimate Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
Ultimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

true, but there is also a minimum size for an alliance to have a number of people online at any given time - with alliances that are too small, only 4-5 people might be on at the same time, which might get rather boring quite quickly. Also, there wouldnt be as many available fleets and the like, however there will still be as many hostile fleets (or more) due to alliances blocking/co-operating etc.

I dont mind smaller alliances, just i fear that it is possible to make them too small. which is bad for everyone involved (large and small).
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
Ultimate Newbie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2006, 13:30   #40
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

With the game we have currently I think the current alliance limits are pretty good. The limits currently in place keep the alliances in check and ensure that one alliance cant hold pretty much all the talent while it provides plenty of room in the lower down alliances for players to get a chance and also gives the alliances giving people a chance a bit of of wriggle room to allow them to actually give people a chance without massive problems if things dont work out .

Now Ive posted on many threads before that ideally id like a game with limits like Tomkats proposing but as we saw a few rounds back when the alliances limit was lowered a fair bit it hinders players a fair bit because the available spaces even in the alliances known for giving new players a chance quickly get filled up. And seeing as this game lacks people with commander skills, who has the time needed and is willing to run an alliance that isnt going to challenge for the top thats a real problem. Some of the alliances lower down are run by some of the worst people possible for running an alliance and these alliances become player black holes which isnt good for the community or the game (even those who have a good person in command normally are limited to this 1 good person and the rest hopeless which holds them back)

As for merging Appoc, Check the alliances forum thread on merging. I posted some concerns on merging a while back and I may have posted some ideas on how to counter the problems
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2006, 23:28   #41
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Has anyone ever spent a brief moment thinking what if we're going too far micromanaging the alliance hardcoded limit and XP factor?
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 00:07   #42
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Every other day for the last year or so.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 02:46   #43
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

I've probably said this in every thread consirning alliance limits but i'll say it again:
If you're going to limit the amount of players there can be in 1 alliance then it should be equal for all alliances, none of this t5 can only have ** people in tag & outside of t5 can have 20 ppl more.
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 07:16   #44
Ziw
cute and fluffy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 184
Ziw is a jewel in the roughZiw is a jewel in the roughZiw is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

To join VdM a bit...
Why encurage the none t5 ally's to have inactives in tag, they actually do more harm to an ally than good.
To join bwtmc a bit to...
A none ally tag round would be fun ^^
Private gals and smaller bg's running around bashing here and there, a war game I seem to remember too.

To rant a bit of my own..
The currently overregulating of ally's will only serv to make the t5 ally's even more elite and picky in they'r members.
A alliance aiming to win, or for t5, will NOT accpect a member that's not utterly good, and quite active.
Anyhow, with the two "superpowers(well, more or less)" gone, gl in r18, this might be insteresting ^^ There actually seems to be an opening for t5 for every1 ^^ Even for those ally's aiming for those extra players
(A shitty member is there to be booted, not to almost collect score and drain defence.)
__________________
[23:19:48] <wish> Thats gay. I like it
Ziw is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 08:59   #45
Timeline
Dreamer in Pit of Hell
 
Timeline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 443
Timeline is just really niceTimeline is just really niceTimeline is just really niceTimeline is just really nice
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

hmmm probably been suggested before, but how about giving everyone the same member limit for half the round, but adapting the code so that recruits in tag do not get counted towards score nor member count, this way alliances can still pick and choose who they recruit, but also doesnt penalise or stop the training alliances from assisting the newer players. Then after half the round has gone limit the top 5 to the basic limit which has been there all round and allow the other alliances to add 1 recruit to tag every 3 ticks.

As i see it, with 1up gone and exi playing as a smaller group, this opens up the top 5 with hopefully all of them battling for the #1 spot...and that means the possibility of training alliances such as rock, f-crew, howling rain and tof being within contention for top spots if they continue to improve as they have in past rounds. If the cap stays as it is, we 'could' end up hurting the alliances the cap was brought in to assist when it came to new players.
__________________
Fate is the blind guy who pushes you in front of a bus

random n00b - r3 & 4
MoE - round 12
Rock - round 13, 14, 15, 16
Pragmatik - round 16
ToF - round 16
Subh - round 17
Pa Team - rounds 16, 17, 18, 19
awol ever since
Timeline is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 12:47   #46
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Re: Alliance limits Round 19
Has anyone ever spent a brief moment thinking what if we're going too far micromanaging the alliance hardcoded limit and XP factor?
The over regulation of alliances as some are calling it has been the savior of the game in many respects. In fact its just a shame it took so long for any alliance controls to be put in place as they no doubt came too late to have its full impact.

Its limited players choice and its forced alliances to think more carefully about who they take and while it has taken a few rounds this has now lead us to have a game thats as competative and closely fought on the alliance front as its ever been. And if it had been implemented sooner before the unregulated system had driven pretty much all the 'training' alliances away and significantly weakened the few left around, we could have been in a situation where the playerbase could have been maintained at the higher level (and that higher level might have even made growth easier as imho the kind of level we have now and we had when the reugulations were put into place are at the lower end of the substainable level)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziw
The currently overregulating of ally's will only serv to make the t5 ally's even more elite and picky in they'r members.
A alliance aiming to win, or for t5, will NOT accpect a member that's not utterly good, and quite active.
The elite alliances will always be somewhat picky, even in rounds when they have been a fair bit under their limit they havent been rushing out to take anyway. We have a small core of players whom are elite alliance quality and they will generally be split amongst the elite alliances no matter what the limit is. The difference an alliance makes however is how many alliances fall into this 'elite' group. The limit prevents all the elite alliance quality players going to 1 or 2 alliances and instead spreads them over a number of alliances thus leaving the game with more alliances able to make a real push for a top spot.

It also means that the quality level of the second and thrid tier alliances is significantly higher which helps them thrive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziw
Why encurage the none t5 ally's to have inactives in tag, they actually do more harm to an ally than
good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziw
A shitty member is there to be booted, not to almost collect score and drain defence.
No matter what the alliance limits are alliances will hold onto some members for score. If you have a member who gets to 1mill in half the round and then goes inactive and your only options to replace them are 75k your not going to kick them especially if the replacements are unknowns who could go inactive a few weeks after they are accepted and never break 150k.

In past rounds I have had gal mates whos activity has dropped and they havent been sending attacks or defence but their #1 alliance has kept them in the alliance but defence blacklisted them even though they are at their alliance limit and could use the place for someone more active. Its a balance that all alliances have to deal with every round and the only thing equalising the member count would do would to shut the door on players access to second tier alliances and probally most of the half decent third tier ones.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veedeejem!
If you're going to limit the amount of players there can be in 1 alliance then it should be equal for all
alliances, none of this t5 can only have ** people in tag & outside of t5 can have 20 ppl more.
You often make that statement but you never back it up with a reason. Why do you believe this?

If your like some people id assume its the old "They only got the ranking they got as they have more members". While this may be the case at times I do however think its somewhat of a myth.

Its something alot of people throw at F-Crew but such claims always do us a great injustice. The extra members alliances like F-Crew are able to take while outside the top5 normally means we take alot of risks on players and are alot more patient with players than we would be otherwise. Most of F-Crew's recruits bring us no more than 200k in score when they join us and we often less than 100k. These people are also often swapped for people between the scores of 300-600k whom even with with us use up all our good will and patience we give them. Obviously these elements keep our averages lower and make us seem 'unworthy' of our ranking and I would assume others who are over the limit are in the same boat

Last round probally would have put that myth to bed, with only the top xx (was it 70?) counting towards score our averages would have been right up there. However as I pointed out to Appoc near the start of the round he had totally screwed the average score and roid calcs up (it was taking the total score and roids from just the top xx but it was diving these values by all the members including those over the level thus making the calc act as if the members whom werent counted in total score only had 0k score and 0 roids) and while he kept insisting it would be fixed by last tick it never was

Even this round if you remove the alliance with less than 25 members and hence werent really a challenger the average size and score ranks dont leave the main 4 far off their finishing total ranks, ranks that if they were forced to be more picky would no doubt be up a handful of places.

Quote:
Size
xVx - 3rd
F-Crew - 9th
ROCK - 10th
ToF - 12th

Score
xVX - 5th
ToF - 6th
ROCK - 10th
F-Crew - 13th
Ofc there are downsides to the extra members, while it allows alliances to give people a chance it means that the third tier alliances get fewer members to pick from. However theres a number of alliances in the second tier and thrid tier who seem to simply choose not to take these kind of members anyway and those that do and have any kind of quality leadership have already exceeded the limit so in the current climate im not sure its really having much of an effect. Perhaps in a few rounds it might do as the number of viable alliances do seem to be increasing but right now theres simply not enough still within their own imposed limit for it to be an issue
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 13:13   #47
Ziw
cute and fluffy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 184
Ziw is a jewel in the roughZiw is a jewel in the roughZiw is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timeline
As i see it, with 1up gone and exi playing as a smaller group, this opens up the top 5 with hopefully all of them battling for the #1 spot...and that means the possibility of training alliances such as rock, f-crew, howling rain and tof being within contention for top spots if they continue to improve as they have in past rounds. If the cap stays as it is, we 'could' end up hurting the alliances the cap was brought in to assist when it came to new players.
How the bloddy hell did HR actually improve over the past rounds?
My memory seem to think it's gone down the drain and only gotten wurse for each round in the nearest past rounds.
Soz Exode, Misty, Apoc, Tine and so on, I know I am a rude fk

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wakey
The elite alliances will always be somewhat picky, even in rounds when they have been a fair bit under their limit they havent been rushing out to take anyway. We have a small core of players whom are elite alliance quality and they will generally be split amongst the elite alliances no matter what the limit is. The difference an alliance makes however is how many alliances fall into this 'elite' group. The limit prevents all the elite alliance quality players going to 1 or 2 alliances and instead spreads them over a number of alliances thus leaving the game with more alliances able to make a real push for a top spot.

It also means that the quality level of the second and thrid tier alliances is significantly higher which helps them thrive.

No matter what the alliance limits are alliances will hold onto some members for score. If you have a member who gets to 1mill in half the round and then goes inactive and your only options to replace them are 75k your not going to kick them especially if the replacements are unknowns who could go inactive a few weeks after they are accepted and never break 150k.

In past rounds I have had gal mates whos activity has dropped and they havent been sending attacks or defence but their #1 alliance has kept them in the alliance but defence blacklisted them even though they are at their alliance limit and could use the place for someone more active. Its a balance that all alliances have to deal with every round and the only thing equalising the member count would do would to shut the door on players access to second tier alliances and probally most of the half decent third tier ones.
The limit creats suportplanets and out of tag players and get's ppl retired due the ally can't suport them intag and needs to get better and better instead of building an alliance community.

If you actually IS looking to build an active alliance wich actually could do ANY thing in a war like situation I'l ratter take an active planet with 300 ships and a inactive one with 19k.

And again, defence blacklisting is only done when the ally is so shit it can't kick a member that don't deserv to actually be in tag couse they'r scared that they'l losse the pressius score.

Let me tell you how pa is played Wakey, tho I tought you knew this by now.
You need fleetvalue to attack, but you actually need players that is active enough to attack.
And yes, they also schould defend on some ocations ;p
But mainly, they HAVETO be active. I'l ratter take a 10 man BG that's active than the whole load of inactives with some fleetvalue. Fleets, value, roids come and go, the activity that makes a player a good pa player is there from the start, the will not to giveup and not to be so inactive that he'l get his ships killed in a silly fleetcrash is what makes him a good player, or a decent one atleast.

Anyhow, I usually actually do have a load of respect to you, but stop makeing crap post to defend your ally couse that's how your ally does stuff.
Really, nothing EVER good comes from haveing inactives around, they simply takeup a place in your tag wich could have been used to get an active player.
And score is problly the wurst fk*** excuse, score makes no difference when your actually aiming to achive something as an ally, moveable fleetvalue(active players who hasn't suicided on some zik for "easy" roids) is what you'l actually need to get another ally to actually be semi scared.
Launch 100 fleets and landing about 10 fleets is NOT a ally attack, ratter an feel free to launch at will orgy.
__________________
[23:19:48] <wish> Thats gay. I like it
Ziw is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 13:33   #48
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
You often make that statement but you never back it up with a reason. Why do you believe this?
Plain & simple, i think it's bullshit.

The only reason it's there (atleast the only one i can think of that makes any sence) is so that the gap between top alliances & decent alliances doesn't appear to be that big when infact it actually is THAT big, in average skill level & average size/score.

I believe all alliances should be able to have the same amount of people in tag because it's fair for all alliances, doing it otherwise creates a double standard & that's not good in any game.

T5 alliances (the ones that are barely t5, not the alliances like eXi & 1up who could be t5 with 2/3 of their memberbase) have almost no other choice than to create support planets (scanners & cov-oppers) caus there simply isn't enough room for their hardcore players + scanners/cov-oppers in tag.

R19 should be an interesting one, with 1up gone & eXi only playing with their core-members, so why not give every alliance an equal chance, if there's going to be a limit, make it an equal limit for ALL alliances.
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 13:47   #49
Illuvatar
Mastermind
 
Illuvatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 430
Illuvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veedeejem!
Plain & simple, i think it's bullshit.

The only reason it's there (atleast the only one i can think of that makes any sence) is so that the gap between top alliances & decent alliances doesn't appear to be that big when infact it actually is THAT big, in average skill level & average size/score.

I believe all alliances should be able to have the same amount of people in tag because it's fair for all alliances, doing it otherwise creates a double standard & that's not good in any game.

T5 alliances (the ones that are barely t5, not the alliances like eXi & 1up who could be t5 with 2/3 of their memberbase) have almost no other choice than to create support planets (scanners & cov-oppers) caus there simply isn't enough room for their hardcore players + scanners/cov-oppers in tag.

R19 should be an interesting one, with 1up gone & eXi only playing with their core-members, so why not give every alliance an equal chance, if there's going to be a limit, make it an equal limit for ALL alliances.
and again I have to agree Veedeejem. double standard is so not needed..

good post dude, I give you my 3 pos rep points
__________________

Community Leader
Illuvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2006, 19:25   #50
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance limits Round 19

thx antigone

and another point to why it shouldn't be done, just the other people haven't quite figured it out yet: If top alliance y (not going to name any allies here caus they could all do it) takes a slow start on purpose, they could add people to tag to the max limit for a non t5 alliance, then when they have everybody in tag start playing for real and win the round miles ahead of the competition.

But I guess we'll need ascendancy to pull a stunt like this caus it appears they're quite good at proving how shit things are around here.
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:37.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018