User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Suggestions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 16:59   #1
Nicolos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 11
Nicolos is an unknown quantity at this point
Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

This round has been pretty boring due to one alliance become Rome with 65 members and has allowed them to have a boring round with mass vaule and defence fleets. So now its almost impossible for anyone to hit them.

I would like to suggest that it be change 55 which would give smaller alliance a chance of changing the game at any point. Even when u factor in politics. At the moment 65 membership tags would just roid smaller alliances to death in the begining so much so that even not that great gals but with high consentration of spore get very few incs. it just makes it too easy to win when u have 20 members more than a smaller alliance.

This must be changed so ppl dont get fed and quit the round all together.
Nicolos is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 17:10   #2
Paisley
The brother of Spammer
 
Paisley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
Paisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of lightPaisley is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Any thoughts from bitcher about this?
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
Paisley is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 17:16   #3
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

If your alliance isn't at 65 but wanted to be, then you should've recruited better.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 17:19   #4
Clouds
Registered User
 
Clouds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
Clouds is a splendid one to beholdClouds is a splendid one to beholdClouds is a splendid one to beholdClouds is a splendid one to beholdClouds is a splendid one to beholdClouds is a splendid one to beholdClouds is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk View Post
If your alliance isn't at 65 but wanted to be, then you should've recruited better.
Recruit better in the current player-base?
Clouds is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 17:29   #5
Bashar
Idle Git
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wandering
Posts: 1,550
Bashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet societyBashar is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Spore is one of the newest alliances in the game, in only a handful of rounds we have got to the position we are in. We started from nothing, just myself returning and dragging Zhil back with me, since then it has been a combination of hard work and genius by people within the alliance that has got us to where we are, not the fact that this round is a 65 member limit. Sooner or later, people need to stop blaming game mechanics for them not being able to win and start instead looking to themselves and where they can improve to close the gap.
__________________
Here we go again....
Bashar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 17:31   #6
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds View Post
Recruit better in the current player-base?
If we assume the top 622 members are all in alliances with more than 20 members (which is very optimistic), then that means there's 19 planets with more than 300 roids and 400k score and 32 planets with more than 300 roids and 200k value who aren't.

That's half a tag right there, or enough planets to fill all top 5 tags to 65. Are those amazing planets, played by veterans of the game, who know all the tricks of the trade? Of course not. But they also didn't give up after 5 minutes, as 200 other players do every single round. They're playing and since they apparently got the basics down without any help from established alliances, they're not completely retarded. If you want more members, you have to find them.

So yes.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 16 Apr 2014, 18:10   #7
williams
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands (Crazy Dutchie)
Posts: 31
williams is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Where are my free roids?
williams is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 10:36   #8
BloodyButcher
Propaganda Chief
 
BloodyButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
BloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud of
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Last round we had around 500 planets playing in established tags.
This round we have 600+ planets playing in established tags.
All tags must compete with each other on recruitment, just not in the game.
The fact that this rounds seems so boring is not due to Spore having 5 members more than the rest, its becasue the other alliances are lead by what looks to be generaly weak HCs that actualy WANTS this round to be boring.
The stats is also a huge reason for this round being so one sided so far.
__________________
RainbowS

RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
BloodyButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 11:25   #9
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bashar View Post
Spore is one of the newest alliances in the game, in only a handful of rounds we have got to the position we are in. We started from nothing, just myself returning and dragging Zhil back with me, since then it has been a combination of hard work and genius by people within the alliance that has got us to where we are, not the fact that this round is a 65 member limit. Sooner or later, people need to stop blaming game mechanics for them not being able to win and start instead looking to themselves and where they can improve to close the gap.
I think you mistook nicolos post as an attack on spore, i don't believe it was. I think he is merely pointing out that if/when an alliance has 10 members and 30 fleets more than any of their main competitors from the get go it causes an extremely unbalanced situation.

We once went down from 80 to 60 members because the amount of alliances that were involved in the political meta-game was too limited which led to rounds that were stale and predictable. Lowering definitely increased the amount of alliances that had an impact. This didn't mean rounds became less boring in the meta game tho, they just became less predictable. Take round 49 for example, it was TGV that tilted the meta game in favour of FAnG at pt900. Before that the round was a rather boring stalemate between 2 blocks, where neither could really break the other. A somewhat similar role was entaled for Rock in r50, where it took a switch in sides, and a resulting lack of support because of said switch to give FAnG/ND/Ult the upper hand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
Last round we had around 500 planets playing in established tags.
This round we have 600+ planets playing in established tags.
All tags must compete with each other on recruitment, just not in the game.
The fact that this rounds seems so boring is not due to Spore having 5 members more than the rest, its becasue the other alliances are lead by what looks to be generaly weak HCs that actualy WANTS this round to be boring.
The stats is also a huge reason for this round being so one sided so far.
This round we also have 3 additional tags. I honestly don't think the 100 extra players are players that were unallied last round. In fact, i am 100% certain at least 50 of them were players that had retired from this game within the past 10-15 rounds, and will most likely retire again after this round or the next. The simple fact not even an alliance like HR managed to get to full tag this round makes it obvious that those that were unallied before are still unallied, and that alliances are still fishing from the same pool of 800 alliance players that play this game on a semi-regular basis.

And while i somewhat agree that recruiting is part of the game, it isn't the beginning and end all of this game. The fact there is only 1 alliance that managed to go full tag this, and the fact they are leading are surely connected. Is it the only reason for Spore leading right now? Definitely not! They have also been blessed with a fortunate meta-game situation where everyone outright refused to help their main competitor, and they played that part of the hand they were given quite perfectly. There is still enough time for other alliances to try and play their hand tho. After all, just look at the gap bridged by Faceless last round.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN

Last edited by Influence; 17 Apr 2014 at 11:31.
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 11:28   #10
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk View Post
If we assume the top 622 members are all in alliances with more than 20 members (which is very optimistic), then that means there's 19 planets with more than 300 roids and 400k score and 32 planets with more than 300 roids and 200k value who aren't.

That's half a tag right there, or enough planets to fill all top 5 tags to 65. Are those amazing planets, played by veterans of the game, who know all the tricks of the trade? Of course not. But they also didn't give up after 5 minutes, as 200 other players do every single round. They're playing and since they apparently got the basics down without any help from established alliances, they're not completely retarded. If you want more members, you have to find them.

So yes.
Yeah because planets that are at 400k score and 200k value at PT600 are obviously perfect additions to any that doesn't have 65 members right now... After all recruiting is _purely_ about numbers and not quality...

EDIT: For example, a planet that does absolutely nothing but init up to 300 roids every time they get roided has 450k value at pt600 just from their roids (not including government or population bonus, not including refs and cores). Tell me exactly what use is a planet like that for any alliance, apart from the 500k score they don't contribute as they aren't in the top 50 of your alliance?
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN

Last edited by Influence; 17 Apr 2014 at 11:50.
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 11:46   #11
BloodyButcher
Propaganda Chief
 
BloodyButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
BloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud of
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Influence View Post
This round we also have 3 additional tags. I honestly don't think the 100 extra players are players that were unallied last round. In fact, i am 100% certain at least 50 of them were players that had retired from this game within the past 10-15 rounds, and will most likely retire again after this round or the next. The simple fact not even an alliance like HR managed to get to full tag this round makes it obvious that those that were unallied before are still unallied, and that alliances are still fishing from the same pool of 800 alliance players that play this game on a semi-regular basis.

And while i somewhat agree that recruiting is part of the game, it isn't the beginning and end all of this game. The fact there is only 1 alliance that managed to go full tag this, and the fact they are leading are surely connected. Is it the only reason for Spore leading right now? Definitely not! They have also been blessed with a fortunate meta-game situation where everyone outright refused to help their main competitor, and they played that part of the hand they were given quite perfectly. There is still enough time for other alliances to try and play their hand tho. After all, just look at the gap bridged by Faceless last round.
Last round it was 500 out of 800 planets in tag, this round 600 out of 850 planets.
This is what we want to see, a higher increase of players Connected to some sort of community in this game.
The fact that Spore is leading this round has NOTHING to do with the alliance limit being raised.
In fact alliances like Vikings, Faceless, and FAnG has chosen to not just allie up with Spore, but also said that they prefer playing with a smaller core.
What happend the last round will always decide what will be likely to happend the next round.
Last round a tag won by adding members the last day, this round allies like Ultores, Vikings, Insomnia and a few others said that their recruitment was "invite" only.
Alliances like FAnG, and ND went with "vouch only".
http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=200325

So alliances like CT and Spore should ofc have more members as their recruitment has been more or less open for all depending on if they have had any slots free.
__________________
RainbowS

RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
BloodyButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 12:32   #12
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Influence View Post
Yeah because planets that are at 400k score and 200k value at PT600 are obviously perfect additions to any that doesn't have 65 members right now... After all recruiting is _purely_ about numbers and not quality...

EDIT: For example, a planet that does absolutely nothing but init up to 300 roids every time they get roided has 450k value at pt600 just from their roids (not including government or population bonus, not including refs and cores). Tell me exactly what use is a planet like that for any alliance, apart from the 500k score they don't contribute as they aren't in the top 50 of your alliance?
What use was your planet when you first started playing?
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 12:40   #13
Forest
Don't make me declare war
 
Forest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
Forest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

There ARE players out there too, Spore have turned down a fair few.

Some alliances are just too selective.
Forest is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 12:58   #14
eksero
Registered User
What-A-Shot Champion
 
eksero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,143
eksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud ofeksero has much to be proud of
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
There ARE players out there too, Spore have turned down a fair few.

Some alliances are just too selective.
People always flock to the 'best' alliance though!
Back when Ult were at our best, we had tons of those too, and now? Hardly any
eksero is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 13:08   #15
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
Last round it was 500 out of 800 planets in tag, this round 600 out of 850 planets.
This is what we want to see, a higher increase of players Connected to some sort of community in this game.
The fact that Spore is leading this round has NOTHING to do with the alliance limit being raised.
In fact alliances like Vikings, Faceless, and FAnG has chosen to not just allie up with Spore, but also said that they prefer playing with a smaller core.
What happend the last round will always decide what will be likely to happend the next round.
Last round a tag won by adding members the last day, this round allies like Ultores, Vikings, Insomnia and a few others said that their recruitment was "invite" only.
Alliances like FAnG, and ND went with "vouch only".
http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=200325

So alliances like CT and Spore should ofc have more members as their recruitment has been more or less open for all depending on if they have had any slots free.
I didn't say it had anything to do with the alliance limit being raised, i said it had something to do with the fact they had 10 planets, and thus 30 fleetslots, more than their main competitors from tick 0. This might aswell have happened if taglimits were set at only 50. What i am saying is that the fact it happened has led to a severe imbalance, and in my humble opinion should be reason to lower alliance limits next round.

It's great that there are more players in active tags right now. I am of the opinion however that this has VERY little to do with the 7 additional slots that are now in use because of the raised alliance limit, and much more to do with the 3 additional tags that are playing this round. All 3 of which would have played regardless of the raised limit.

As for alliances like Vikings, FAnG and Faceless the choice to play with a core doesn't have to mean they are alliances that aren't near to, or on the limit. Vikings has a group of 80 players that would meet the requirements to play with Vikings right now. This doesn't mean they all play, or even play in Vikings tho. For Vikings the choice to play with an alliance made up out of mostly trusted members has very little to do with wanting to be a smaller alliance, but much more to do with wanting to play with a more managable group. In last round this meant going to a group of 40, as Faceless went on their own. That also means that last round we recruited at least 10 players that didn't play with Vikings the round before, and the same goes for this round.

As for Faceless adding a number of members on the last ticks, every alliance out there could have seen they had the potential to do so. On top of that 7 out of the 9 planets that they added applied before pt600, which every half decent intel officer could have seen if they regularly checked faceless' attacks. Yet none of the other alliances had the smarts to hit faceless when faceless were still 'small'. In fact most of the other alliances felt so unthreatened by faceless they napped them, and even helped them going after another 'small' alliance that didn't have the additional planets applied to them. Calling Faceless cheats for succesfully flying under the radar is basicly admitting you are a bad loser because you were properly outwitted by someone playing a smarter game than you did.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 15:55   #16
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk View Post
What use was your planet when you first started playing?
When i first started playing there were no alliance rankings yet. The only use my planet had for alliances then was a good source of roids, tho iirc most were stolen by my female swedish GC. I became active on irc in my first week of playing tho. And that's where the issue is, we are still reliant on an old fashioned, third party form of communication. For myself to put more time into training our new recruits, it would be nice if i had an easy way to communicate with them whenever they are logged into the game.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 17:09   #17
Forest
Don't make me declare war
 
Forest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
Forest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet societyForest is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

why can their not be a galaxy chat box that pops up when you log in?
Forest is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 17:40   #18
tobbe
Registered User
 
tobbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: North
Posts: 227
tobbe is a splendid one to beholdtobbe is a splendid one to beholdtobbe is a splendid one to beholdtobbe is a splendid one to beholdtobbe is a splendid one to beholdtobbe is a splendid one to beholdtobbe is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest View Post
why can their not be a galaxy chat box that pops up when you log in?
^
__________________
Memento mori !

VisioN Forever!
tobbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 17:41   #19
BloodyButcher
Propaganda Chief
 
BloodyButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
BloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud of
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Where did i call them cheats?
I just said this might be a tactic that other alliances actualy think that playing as a smaller tag actualy will cause them to get less incs.
Half the alliances generaly dont even have open recruitment, why is the limits the problem? Id even say we should raise the limit further to get these private clubs to get their heads out of their ar**
__________________
RainbowS

RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
BloodyButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 17:49   #20
RexDrax
Knightly Protector
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Avalon
Posts: 590
RexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
Where did i call them cheats?
I just said this might be a tactic that other alliances actualy think that playing as a smaller tag actualy will cause them to get less incs.
Half the alliances generaly dont even have open recruitment, why is the limits the problem? Id even say we should raise the limit further to get these private clubs to get their heads out of their ar**

Alliances and members can run their planets and alliance the way they want to. Who are you to say they are right or wrong? If an alliance chooses to play with a smaller tag then let them be. Stop trying to ram your ideology down their throat and make them conform to your ideals. They choose their option so leave them be with it instead of spouting the same crap you been spouting for the last few years.

The advantage to smaller tags where the alliance sizes are similar is that it promotes more more fluid politics. Look at the current round, in order to effectively take on spore and be able to land quite a bit on them you will need 5+ alliances to team up. However if spore was smaller size they would not have such a huge value lead and you would not need such a big block.

Of course part of their lead is also due to playing good politics and having a good strategy, but you cannot discount the fact that 1v3 spore can fight off any block that tries to hit them because they have 5-10 more members compared to other alliances AND their fleet value with their faking ability gives them enough of an edge.

I am in favor of reducing the alliance tag limit because I rather see 6+ alliances with 50+ members where they are with in 3-7 members of each other. This will promote more fluid politics.
__________________
TGV Ex-HC
-No I am not suffering from insanity. I am enjoying every minute of it.


Est Sularus oth Mithas
My Honour is My Life, My Life is My Honour
RexDrax is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 19:49   #21
BloodyButcher
Propaganda Chief
 
BloodyButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
BloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud of
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by RexDrax View Post
Alliances and members can run their planets and alliance the way they want to. Who are you to say they are right or wrong? If an alliance chooses to play with a smaller tag then let them be. Stop trying to ram your ideology down their throat and make them conform to your ideals. They choose their option so leave them be with it instead of spouting the same crap you been spouting for the last few years.

The advantage to smaller tags where the alliance sizes are similar is that it promotes more more fluid politics. Look at the current round, in order to effectively take on spore and be able to land quite a bit on them you will need 5+ alliances to team up. However if spore was smaller size they would not have such a huge value lead and you would not need such a big block.

Of course part of their lead is also due to playing good politics and having a good strategy, but you cannot discount the fact that 1v3 spore can fight off any block that tries to hit them because they have 5-10 more members compared to other alliances AND their fleet value with their faking ability gives them enough of an edge.

I am in favor of reducing the alliance tag limit because I rather see 6+ alliances with 50+ members where they are with in 3-7 members of each other. This will promote more fluid politics.
This is where you go badly wrong RexDrax.
Alliances and members can run their planets and alliance the way they want to. Who are you to say they are right or wrong?
Im not telling you to recruit New players, or run a larger tag.
You are saying cus you dont want to run a larger tag, the game should be more suited to Your ideology, wich would be decreasing the limit.
You can be a one man tag for all i care, but dont you try push on to Your preferense, wich might lead to fewer players in active alliances, just cus you dont have the will to Control a larger Group than you allready are.

You will prolly go on to next saying, "BUT ITS ONLY SPORE AND CT ABOVE THE 60 LIMIT!! ITS A POINTLESS INCREASE!"
You would be wrong again i would suspect.
Higher the limit means that all the small tag alliances will have to take on new members/players aswell to keep up with the small gap that was raised this round, and therefor it will again give new players an much easier task getting into a alliance.

Id keep on saying that the fact that there is well over 100+ more players in active alliances this round must be some sort of proof that this is heading in the right direction ATM, but im sure Mzxy might digg up some old stats wich has shown an increase of 20% more players in tags in the past.
(I hope you can dig it up mz <3)
__________________
RainbowS

RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
BloodyButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 21:14   #22
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
This is where you go badly wrong RexDrax.
Alliances and members can run their planets and alliance the way they want to. Who are you to say they are right or wrong?
Im not telling you to recruit New players, or run a larger tag.
You are saying cus you dont want to run a larger tag, the game should be more suited to Your ideology, wich would be decreasing the limit.
You can be a one man tag for all i care, but dont you try push on to Your preferense, wich might lead to fewer players in active alliances, just cus you dont have the will to Control a larger Group than you allready are.
A) Rexdrax didn't say he doesn't want to run a larger tag.
B) Rexdrax didn't say he advocates smaller tag sizes because he is running a smaller tag. Quite simply because that's not why he advocates smaller tags. He is advocating a limit that better reflects the average tagsize, in order to have more equal alliances. As more equal alliances has shown in the past to lead to more fluid politics, and more fluid politics lead to a more eventful round for active players in active alliances. Active players in active alliances represent the largest chunk of the active players in this game.
C) You are claiming everyone that has restrictions on their recruitment is a 'private' group, and summon those 'private' groups to get their 'head out of our arse'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
You will prolly go on to next saying, "BUT ITS ONLY SPORE AND CT ABOVE THE 60 LIMIT!! ITS A POINTLESS INCREASE!"
You would be wrong again i would suspect.
Higher the limit means that all the small tag alliances will have to take on new members/players aswell to keep up with the small gap that was raised this round, and therefor it will again give new players an much easier task getting into a alliance.
And once again you say that higher limits forces ('will have to' implies there are external influences which force a change) smaller alliances to take on new members.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
Id keep on saying that the fact that there is well over 100+ more players in active alliances this round must be some sort of proof that this is heading in the right direction ATM, but im sure Mzxy might digg up some old stats wich has shown an increase of 20% more players in tags in the past.
(I hope you can dig it up mz <3)
The fact there are 100 more players in active alliances this round simply cannot be explained only by the raised limit. As there are only 7 spots used extra because of the raised limit. The other additional players in active alliances come from the fact there are 3 additional alliances. I urge you to go talk to these 3 additional alliances and ask them if their playing this round has anything at all to do with the raised taglimit. While you are in that process, i would also urge you to go talk to the alliances that have recruited more members this round and ask them if they have recruited anyone just because of the raised tag limit.

EDIT: Considering I emplore you to go ask questions, i might aswell answer the question for my own alliance too: The reason for Vikings recruiting additional members had absolutely nothing to do with any change in the taglimit. Last round for us was incredibly more quiet for us with a smaller tag. Last round we took a hit in member numbers because of Faceless leaving our mids. This led us to recruit approximately 15 members that hadn't played with us in the 2 rounds before that. Some of them were completely new to vikings, others were returning from the rounds before Faceless was in our mids.
This round we continued that trend, with the added stipulation in our recruitment policies that recruits had to be vouched by a member that had played with us for at least 3 consecutive rounds. This lead us to recruit 17 additional members before tickstart, 9 of which had never played with Vikings before. Among our new recruits were a number of players from the brazilian BG who got invited by one of the brazillians who has been with us for ages. There were also 4 RL friends of current members added. So far we are really happy with all our recruits this round, even if it has been a bit of a struggle getting them all up and running.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN

Last edited by Influence; 17 Apr 2014 at 21:33.
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 21:20   #23
RexDrax
Knightly Protector
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Avalon
Posts: 590
RexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of lightRexDrax is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
This is where you go badly wrong RexDrax.
Alliances and members can run their planets and alliance the way they want to. Who are you to say they are right or wrong?
Im not telling you to recruit New players, or run a larger tag.
You are saying cus you dont want to run a larger tag, the game should be more suited to Your ideology, wich would be decreasing the limit.
You can be a one man tag for all i care, but dont you try push on to Your preferense, wich might lead to fewer players in active alliances, just cus you dont have the will to Control a larger Group than you allready are.

You will prolly go on to next saying, "BUT ITS ONLY SPORE AND CT ABOVE THE 60 LIMIT!! ITS A POINTLESS INCREASE!"
You would be wrong again i would suspect.
Higher the limit means that all the small tag alliances will have to take on new members/players aswell to keep up with the small gap that was raised this round, and therefor it will again give new players an much easier task getting into a alliance.

Id keep on saying that the fact that there is well over 100+ more players in active alliances this round must be some sort of proof that this is heading in the right direction ATM, but im sure Mzxy might digg up some old stats wich has shown an increase of 20% more players in tags in the past.
(I hope you can dig it up mz <3)
No this is where your wrong and I am right. You have been spouting your ideology for the last few years of bigger tag size and all that crap. However looking at the alliances, except for Spore, nobody is at full tag. If they wanted to, they can be at full tag. Its not that hard but some just prefer not to be for whatever reason they choose.

That of course doesnt matter to you because for the last few years 90% of the threads you have posted in you keep saying higher alliance tag size. You and a few others are the only ones that are saying it while the majority of the rest of the community doesnt want higher tag size and is tired of you spouting the same argument every single round. Move on, if enough people would go talk to the game admins I am sure they would increase the tag size, however since the tag size hasnt been increased it stands to reason not enough people want it, except for you.

I never said the game should conform to my ideas. All I stated was that there is a correlation between massive blocks and tag size. Look at this round, no alliance can attack spore effectively, not even a 3/4 alliance block can have success landing spore. In order to hit and land spore you would need 5-6+ alliances. So basically it leads to a very very polarized universe with a BIG block bashing another alliance. Seeing such big blocks is kinda boring. I think its safe to say most players/alliances prefer to do their own thing and not be caught up in the big block war, however with such a discrepancy between tag sizes you cannot have that necessarily.

All I stated was having more alliances with the same tag size to each other leads to more fluid politics. Weather the tag size is 40, 50 or 60+ doesnt matter. You do have to keep in mind that some players play in alliances because they like that alliance and the community. Having the same alliances fighting for the same small pool of players means there might not be enough players to go around to fill up multiple tags.

So what do you prefer? seeing 1-2 alliances at full tag and 3-4 alliances at 70% of full tag or having 4-6 alliances all within 3-5 members of each other? Which would be better with the current players and also taking into account that the more skilled and active players want to play with people around their level for the most part?
__________________
TGV Ex-HC
-No I am not suffering from insanity. I am enjoying every minute of it.


Est Sularus oth Mithas
My Honour is My Life, My Life is My Honour
RexDrax is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 21:30   #24
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
Id keep on saying that the fact that there is well over 100+ more players in active alliances this round must be some sort of proof that this is heading in the right direction ATM, but im sure Mzxy might digg up some old stats wich has shown an increase of 20% more players in tags in the past.
(I hope you can dig it up mz <3)
Here's all rounds between 14 an 55 where there was a +20% or -20% change in alliance members compared to the previous rounds, counting alliances with 40 or more members, ignoring all free rounds:
Round 52: 375 -> 515 = +37%
Round 43: 518 -> 626 = +21%
Round 41: 580 -> 437 = -25%
Round 38: 556 -> 678 = +22% (Jagex bought PA between 37 and 38)

Tag limits did not change for any of these rounds.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 17 Apr 2014, 23:49   #25
BloodyButcher
Propaganda Chief
 
BloodyButcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
BloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud ofBloodyButcher has much to be proud of
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

The politics aint fluid cus vikings dont want to hit spore. If ur content being 2nd u will never end first.
Dont even try blame it on the tag limit
__________________
RainbowS

RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
BloodyButcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Apr 2014, 01:30   #26
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher View Post
The politics aint fluid cus vikings dont want to hit spore. If ur content being 2nd u will never end first.
Dont even try blame it on the tag limit
The tag limit discussion has little to do with current round politics, or Vikings chances to win a round for that matter. Rexdrax is just using part of current round politics to point out what the impact of the current tag size resulted in. Nowhere does he state that the current political climate is impacted and caused solely by the tag limit.

In an environment with more equal alliances, a deal between 2 of those equal alliances has less of an impact on the overall state of politics. So long as those alliances limit their other deals there will be a more fluid, and more healthy environment for everyone to play in. Limitting the deals those allies have is not solely the responsibility of just those 2 allies however.

Taking that insight into this round. Any sort of deal Spore and Vikings may or may not have, would have much less of an impact if it weren't for alliances like FAnG, Faceless and CT also having a deal with Spore. To think Vikings have any sort of influence on those deals is rather absurd, so how can you put the blame for the situation solely in Vikings hands?
Furthermore, the lack of support Ultores recieved in this round can't be blamed solely, if at all, on any sort of deal Spore and Vikings may have. Fact of the matter is Vikings actively avoided Ultores as soon as we found out Spore was actively targetting Ultores, and it's not like we hit them a whole lot before that either.
Vikings also actively limited the amount deals that they made, just ask your own HC's how we didn't accept their nap request multiple times due to us having other relations at the time.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN

Last edited by Influence; 18 Apr 2014 at 01:42.
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Apr 2014, 03:01   #27
Influence
Finally retired
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
Influence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to beholdInfluence is a splendid one to behold
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest View Post
why can their not be a galaxy chat box that pops up when you log in?
a short research into the matter showed that especially on an alliance level the possibility to build and maintain bots was a big requirement for the community, aswell as some of the other benefits that IRC offers. Unfortunately there is no out-of-the-box solution available that could offer the flexibility of IRC, or allows for an integration of a webchat solution on the current IRC network. Building such a solution from the ground up would require a fair bit of time and work, which unfortunately is not something the PA team can offer.

Even to integrate common out-of-the-box webchat into the website would require a fair bit of redesign most likely. Allthough with solutions like Converse.JS (which works similar to facebook's chatmethods) that are now available a move away from IRC becomes more and more viable. Considering Converse.JS is built on the XMPP/Jabber protocol, developing and maintaining community driven bots shouldn't even be that hard.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]

In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
Influence is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 18 Apr 2014, 06:41   #28
Blue_Esper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
Blue_Esper is a glorious beacon of lightBlue_Esper is a glorious beacon of lightBlue_Esper is a glorious beacon of lightBlue_Esper is a glorious beacon of lightBlue_Esper is a glorious beacon of lightBlue_Esper is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

tbh the size of tags this round is fine.
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
Blue_Esper is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Apr 2014, 21:24   #29
M0RPH3US
idle
 
M0RPH3US's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 968
M0RPH3US is just really niceM0RPH3US is just really niceM0RPH3US is just really niceM0RPH3US is just really niceM0RPH3US is just really nice
Re: Reduce Alliance tag from 65 to 55 max

just dont higher it any further, thanks
__________________
m0rph3us formerly known as Bugz

"It´s not about how hard u hit, its about how hard u can get hit and still keep moving forward! How much u can take and still move forward!"
M0RPH3US is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:26.


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