Planetarion Forums

RooKie · 5 Jan 2003, 00:39

Quote:

Originally announced by Zeus

Request: Please whatever the galaxy formation turns out to be, if your going into a private galaxy, TRY and keep that galaxy one alliance. Do not mix alliances in a galaxy as it can lead to stagnation for all players.

This would be great, but do they really expect this to happen in 15 ppl gals?

The only logical solution must be 10 ppl. And will the alliances follow this?

...someone call the Senate! :P

Colt · 5 Jan 2003, 00:45

Quote:

Originally posted by RooKie
This would be great, but do they really expect this to happen in 15 ppl gals?

The only logical solution must be 10 ppl. And will the alliances follow this?

...someone call the Senate! :P

Even if gals are 10man can u see alliances only having their own members in there? Only them who go 'solo' will do that

And i doubt very much that many will go 'solo'

Mesiaz · 5 Jan 2003, 00:49

Tbh, one incredibly stupid request. I don't feel it needs to be explained further, Everyone should be able to see how ridiculous it is.

Oh wait...I forgot there is a few people on this earth that can't see it, a few people who are damn important to this game....*sigh*

Axis_WLF · 5 Jan 2003, 00:50

lower PA cost to 2$ and we could slack on amount of alliances in the galaxy.

Cochese · 5 Jan 2003, 01:03

You can't force alliances to do anything, and "requesting" them to do something--when other game features are crappy and people have to pay--isn't going to get them to cooperate.

ParraCida · 5 Jan 2003, 01:52

1 Alliance per gal

Thats equal to giving out your memberlist in a random universe.

CrazySpoon · 5 Jan 2003, 01:56

Have people get 10 credits for $10 so they can provide their galmates credist. How the hell do you people wana atract new players when its still p2p...

RealJames · 5 Jan 2003, 02:02

One alliance per galaxy will never happen.

Axis_WLF · 5 Jan 2003, 02:29

It can happen but not if were paying money heh. if its free then yes if not then no.

Scouse · 5 Jan 2003, 02:30

"SIF"

chemical · 5 Jan 2003, 02:48

gay

RooKie · 5 Jan 2003, 04:24

just make it cheap enuff to buy 10 credits.

Scoot951 · 5 Jan 2003, 05:13

In other words, "Make your alliances nice and vunerable, not like you're going to be having fun anyhow".

Even at 10 people a gal it would probably limit most alliances to half a dozen gals, if 2 get attacked on a given night the alliance is out of action.

at0mic.c0w · 5 Jan 2003, 05:49

it's a totally ridiculous idea and we all know it's not gonna happen.

[Cymru] · 5 Jan 2003, 09:22

Well it just highlights the stage at which PA is. It is another reason why it is hard to bring in and maintain new players.

Alliances are so "hardcore" in thier organisation, secrecies and general need for domination above all costs that they exclude some aspects of the game.

Some people say private gals create powerblocks. It is actually, believe it or not, alliances who create powerblocks. Organisation in the more "elite" alliances is such that most scenarios can be worked around.

But if anyone expects to see an alliance make a compromise for the sake of the playability and fun factor of the game then dont hold your breath.

Dizzyness · 5 Jan 2003, 10:22

'rofl'

Stals · 6 Jan 2003, 13:31

Quote:

Originally posted by RealJames
One alliance per galaxy will never happen.

Just as I was about to reply myself

WST · 6 Jan 2003, 14:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Scoot951
In other words, "Make your alliances nice and vunerable, not like you're going to be having fun anyhow".

Even at 10 people a gal it would probably limit most alliances to half a dozen gals, if 2 get attacked on a given night the alliance is out of action.

the voice of reason

Hicks · 6 Jan 2003, 14:47

It's not mixed galaxies that are the problem it's the people who lead the galaxies and alliances that are the problem. Perhaps if GCs and HCs actually had the spines to order their members to fight for their alliance then the break up of power blocks would be easier. I know if I was in a mixed galaxy I'd expect my galaxy mates to choose to get involved in a war even if it did cost my galaxies rank.

Mong · 6 Jan 2003, 16:59

The best rounds were the early rounds, when it was free and random.

Here's an idea nobody seems to have considered...

How about ALL accounts are free to start with, then require payment in order to grow past the preset limits? Keep private gals, but have max 10 in a priv, and 20 in a random.

This makes it far more appealing to new players!!

M.

Telest · 6 Jan 2003, 17:16

Well, it wouldn't be a trouble if alliances A, B and C created mixed galaxies provided they weren't TOO big together, unfortunately they quite often are.

It would be more fun to play if alliances really were limited to very few galaxies, but I doubt most will have the guts to do that, since it'll just put them at a disadvantage.

Varangian · 7 Jan 2003, 00:58

An assortment of allies in the same galaxy makes for a more interesting game.

G.K Zhukov · 7 Jan 2003, 01:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Scoot951
In other words, "Make your alliances nice and vunerable, not like you're going to be having fun anyhow".

Even at 10 people a gal it would probably limit most alliances to half a dozen gals, if 2 get attacked on a given night the alliance is out of action.

so true

Zh|l · 7 Jan 2003, 01:51

You know something is so fking wrong if you agree with Titans members and Zhukov.

Request for one alliance galaxies. What a laugh.

No sane alliance would do such a thing - its totally stupid and a braindead thing to do. Putting all your eggs into one basket.

Any alliance would find it hard to do really - even though Axis claims its possible, I really dont see how if you want the alliance to work.

Thus this means I have to support Scouse view on this rather than Axis

Scary

Legator · 7 Jan 2003, 08:49

Quote:

Originally posted by RooKie
just make it cheap enuff to buy 10 credits.

underlined

Glatze · 7 Jan 2003, 09:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Axis_WLF
lower PA cost to 2$ and we could slack on amount of alliances in the galaxy.

Indeed, thats not expensive for farms.

7 Jan 2003, 09:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Glatze
Indeed, thats not expensive for farms.

I don't understand why people would pay extra to purchase farms
=/

It must be that ePenis thing

TheUnknown · 10 Jan 2003, 03:31

Quote:

Originally posted by randomplanetarionite
Request for one alliance galaxies. What a laugh.

No sane alliance would do such a thing - its totally stupid and a braindead thing to do.

A perfect example of the attitude of most planetarion players.

The pity is that one alliance galaxies would be good for the game as a whole. Got to credit zeus for being naive enough to try. Poor bastard.

Tactitus · 10 Jan 2003, 04:17

Quote:

Originally posted by TheUnknown
A perfect example of the attitude of most planetarion players.

The pity is that one alliance galaxies would be good for the game as a whole. Got to credit zeus for being naive enough to try. Poor bastard.

If you're going to give credit for naivete then next I suppose you'll want add rules so that only n00bs can win?

Putting all your eggs into one--or just a few--baskets just isn't good strategy and no amount of special pleading is going to change that. In effect, Zeus is asking alliances to play stupidly.

A strategy game ought to reward cleverness and not insult it by asking you to check your brains at the door.

A proper approach would be to provide some incentives for alliances to concentrate their members--then it'd be a win-win. They'd have to be pretty good incentives, but I believe it could be done.

TheUnknown · 10 Jan 2003, 04:39

The last part of your post is the most constructive thing in this entire thread. Good stuff.

Ulysses · 10 Jan 2003, 07:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Tactitus

Snip~~/ A proper approach would be to provide some incentives for alliances to concentrate their members--then it'd be a win-win. They'd have to be pretty good incentives, but I believe it could be done. \~~ snip

So in effect give the alliances yet more advantages over the average player?

RooKie · 10 Jan 2003, 08:08

Its Private gals for a reason (thou I am pro-random).

Anakin · 10 Jan 2003, 13:50

2 words.

Logistical nightmare.

Battle commanders hell trying to cover 10 members in the same galaxy :/

Hicks · 10 Jan 2003, 16:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Ulysses
So in effect give the alliances yet more advantages over the average player?

Exactly what do you think the average player is ? In R9 I'll put money that he belongs to an alliance.

10 Jan 2003, 16:37

How would alliances recruit if they were "limited" to having the entire galaxy as members. Also as soon as one gal member leaked their alliance, the whole galaxy would be at risk. and then back to the post about coordinating defence for entire galaxies. it would be a logistical nightmare.

What Mong was saying has happened in the past, with limited free accounts in r7(? whenever...). It doesnt seem to have helped any in boosting the community size though

Al_zz · 10 Jan 2003, 16:49

You would need to make alliances a part of the in game actions. Private gals would be required to set a single alliance as there galaxies alliance at signup (!!!) and then you would keep rankings (without score) of the alliances in game. Sharing gals would then be less profitable as the alliances would favor the gals they know that will rank for them.

HC could maybe have a page in game to see all their alliance gals listed. Gals would not be able to see each other or only if HC allows it to avoid spying and such

This would also make for a real alliance winner of the round.

You could maybe even limit the amount of gals an alliance can rank so you can influence alliance sizes and get alliances more or less simularly sized

hAl

Robin · 10 Jan 2003, 17:42

Am I the only one who read the 'one alliance' as:
Please dont mix the gals with the 5 top alliances
so there is no chance midgame/endgame these alliances
fight each other ?

It's no problem to have alliances ... the problem is
alliances working together ... 70% of the ppl in the same
powerblock is just boring at a certain point ... for both
sides (just remember last rounds galnames of top 10)

and when it gets boring ... why should you p(l)ay ?

Kill · 10 Jan 2003, 18:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Hicks
It's not mixed galaxies that are the problem it's the people who lead the galaxies and alliances that are the problem. Perhaps if GCs and HCs actually had the spines to order their members to fight for their alliance then the break up of power blocks would be easier. I know if I was in a mixed galaxy I'd expect my galaxy mates to choose to get involved in a war even if it did cost my galaxies rank.

Quote:

Azrael
Executive & Magma CEO

Location: Magma HQ
Status: Offline
Declaration of War
As of now The Obsidian Order has officially declared war on Wolves of Elysian [WE], and give them 48 hours notice to prepare themselves for war.

We would however like to stress the reasoning behind this war is purely stagnation of the ********** Universe, and as such will be a "Friendly" war .. and does not show our intentions for future rounds of **********, as hopefully we can all come out of round 3 still smiling

With war we bring a new tagging policy, all Obsidian Galaxies are to tag [O^O] , any joint Obsidian/WE galaxies must choose a side, either Obsidian or WE, your galaxy will be judged upon its tag, and any fencesitters will be dealt with accordingly by both sides.

Good Luck my Comarades, and may the new war bring new hope, new roids, new cells and a new victory .. Its time for Obsidian to stand up alone and be counted, just remeber no matter what, Never Surrender, Never Retreat, Our Time Has Come.

Yours Truely, The Obsidian Executive Team.

Thats from the Obsidian Boards in SS, formally part of a block containing Wolves of Elysian (supposedly WP/Ely + SS players), SS ViruS, SS Rock, SS TFD.

Maybe PA alliances could take a leaf out of the SS alliance book.

Note: [WE] weren't dropped, they asked us for a friendly war first.

Killmark

G.K Zhukov · 11 Jan 2003, 05:40

I thought your planet got deleted there Killmark/Malos/The_Damned/your_bro_that_is_cnuted_by_Nods_galaxy_r4/*

Confraria · 11 Jan 2003, 16:21

in one word: impossible

Zotnam · 11 Jan 2003, 18:19

Quote:

Originally posted by G.K Zhukov
I thought your planet got deleted there Killmark/Malos/The_Damned/your_bro_that_is_cnuted_by_Nods_galaxy_r4/*

You forgot Locutus

TheUnknown · 13 Jan 2003, 00:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Confraria
in one word: impossible

Nice attitude.

Al_zz · 13 Jan 2003, 11:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Confraria
in one word: impossible

I already suggested a way to make combined gals and powerblocking less interesting in PA. There are many other ways to accomplish this.

Zeus hinted to a possibility where you need to be allied in game to be able to attack together. Non-allied fleets might else attack each other when attacking a hostile planet. In this way PA could limit the number of player allowed in an alliance who are able to attack together and seriously bring down powerblocking. Also the death of battlegroups as players could only attack together with one alliance.

Off course this still leaves possiblities to combine attacks with separate targets but that is still more limited than atm.

A possiblity is that bigger alliance will try to split into two 'in game' alliances to avoid size limits on 'in game' alliances but it will be very hard to keep up a good mentality in an alliance if you have a main PA alliance and a secondary PA alliance. Half the alliance would be losing no matter what.

Also creators could punish alliances for entering a secondary 'in game' alliance (something you can't keep hidden to long) by for instance imposing a score or roids reduction during the game or even taking out both of the 'in game' alliances alltogether and therefore removing any possibility for those planets to attack together anymore with anyone.

hAl

Kill · 14 Jan 2003, 12:03

Quote:

Originally posted by G.K Zhukov
I thought your planet got deleted there Killmark/Malos/The_Damned/your_bro_that_is_cnuted_by_Nods_galaxy_r4/*

Its 1/3 its roid and cell count in about 8 days so not bad. I wasn't accussed of multiing just profitting from knowing other people were cheating, I didn't contest that.

Killmark

Rember · 14 Jan 2003, 12:57

fun... would make much more fun though, to have ur alliance m8s all in 1 galaxy.

it can be done; check other games, with just about 5 to 20 galaxies, meaning 50 to 200 members u can cover them quite easy.. just keep the intel :/

Teh_Necro · 14 Jan 2003, 14:55

Quote:

Originally posted by RooKie
just make it cheap enuff to buy 10 credits.

aye i have to agree there.

Possibly 1 credit should = 10 accounts or something?

I mean lets look at what it will do: -

Increase Player Base
Introduce New People to Planetarion
Make Round 9 a Better round.
Not make as much money as if you went normal p2p methods.

Is that not what the pa creators want though?

-Necro

Confraria · 14 Jan 2003, 16:21

Quote:

Originally posted by ÐiSCoRPoRaTioN
I don't understand why people would pay extra to purchase farms
=/

It must be that ePenis thing

I don't understand why people wouldnt pay extra to purchase farms, when they're doing it since pa its p2p...

wake up

14 Jan 2003, 16:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Confraria
I don't understand why people wouldnt pay extra to purchase farms, when they're doing it since pa its p2p...

wake up

I'm sorry, your comment makes absolutely no sense at all. Perhaps you can explain me why people would pay money for farms.

Muzzinator · 15 Jan 2003, 05:33

it's been said before, but pa has become a game for the 'elite' over the rounds - tactics have been modified in order for groups of people to be successful as possible. mixed alliance galaxies and battlegroups are extremely effective. galaxies are more easily covered and players of similar skill can attack along side each other and take bigger and better targets. powerblocks sit next to these gals and BGs and that is unlikely to change, unless the game adapts or other tactics are found to be more effective.

in order to attract new players, this has to be changed - but in doing so, the dedicated players, which make up the majority of the remaining player base, are likely to be driven away. lower prices may attract a few more casual/old players but the gameplay is what attracts lasting players

what the creators have to do is find a balance between making the game 'hardcore' enough and compelling enough for the experienced players as well as being accessible for newer players, which is a very difficult thing to do and perhaps with the radical changes of round 10, from that we hear, this could be achieved.

blah, i can't believe i wrote so much.. i need sleep :/

Confraria · 15 Jan 2003, 16:09

Quote:

Originally posted by ÐiSCoRPoRaTioN
I'm sorry, your comment makes absolutely no sense at all. Perhaps you can explain me why people would pay money for farms.

I dont have an explanation to that, but it is a fact. People payed to have farm accounts before, so they'll do it again.