The Facist Council

[Storebo]

With all the new rules it seems as "The Council" have become more of a facist regime. Silently each round giving us new rules. Things we'll accept one by one, until it is to late, and the system got us.. Max count of roids... not being able to attack the people we want.. only being able to scan sertain people etc.. loads of restrictions.

What u guys think? Round 4 there was no such Council... none of thoose evil rules. Of course the rules was made to stop lawbreakers and cheaters, but with the new changes they are increasingly trying to control everything and everyone. Specially with the new alliance thing they put into the game. With this they will gain full control over the players.

In the end, how much are we able to decide ourself in this game in the following rounds?

They are utter twats

[Tactitus]

Originally posted by Storebo
In the end, how much are we able to decide ourself in this game in the following rounds?

I think you are confused about your role here.

Here's how it works:

Game Designers get to decide the rules of the game.
Game Players get to decide whether or not they want to play.

It's just that simple.

If you don't like the game then don't play it, and/or design your own game (although you probably have more input into PA than most other games you play, not to mention other forms of entertainment such as movies, tv shows, books, music, etc).

[Storebo]

Originally posted by Tactitus
I think you are confused about your role here.

Here's how it works:

Game Designers get to decide the rules of the game.
Game Players get to decide whether or not they want to play.

It's just that simple.

If you don't like the game then don't play it, and/or design your own game (although you probably have more input into PA than most other games you play, not to mention other forms of entertainment such as movies, tv shows, books, music, etc).

Still it was not how it was at start... as with most facist goverments.. it just suddenly evolves around u. Suddenly u are on a whole different playing field then what u started on.

[ElAlan]

Originally posted by Tactitus
I think you are confused about your role here.

Here's how it works:

Game Designers get to decide the rules of the game.
Game Players get to decide whether or not they want to play.

It's just that simple.

If you don't like the game then don't play it, and/or design your own game (although you probably have more input into PA than most other games you play, not to mention other forms of entertainment such as movies, tv shows, books, music, etc).

The point is the game designers want to make it that people want to play, looking at the new rules, and general reaction from most....do you expect many to play? i am starting to doubt i will.

[HobbieRogue4]

It's entirely your choice if you play the game or not.

[Eylisia]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
It's entirely your choice if you play the game or not.

Stating the blatantly obvious is so helpful hobbie :/

I think Stores point is that Pa used to have the feel of a game that was "for the players, by the players"
And thats lost.


Eylisia

[Banned]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
It's entirely your choice if you play the game or not.

I could swear you had a sense of humor.

To be honest, I'm not a great fan of the galactic council. But if you really want to get rid of it, this isn't the way to do it.

[McIvan]

That "your choice" response misses the point. Let's say you're an avid sports fan and play the sport yourself. You don't own the game, you just participate and pay your subscription fees.

The sport's ruling body makes radical changes that completely alter the nature of the game. There is a fan and player revolt.

It's not really an answer to say to them that they don't have to play, or watch the game. They WANT to play/spectate, and through years of participation have a considerable emotional investment in the game which arguably gives them some rights.

I suppose you could dismiss that as airy fairy; non-commercial and naive. But I don't think it invalidates the players/spectators right to criticise and ask for change, or for changes not to be implemented, nor does it invalidate feelings of disenfranchisement when the rules of a game nudge up against territory previously controlled by the players.

None of this means I necessarily agree :)

McIvan

[hAl]

Originally posted by tacite
I think Stores point is that Pa used to have the feel of a game that was "for the players, by the players"
And thats lost.

Obviously the 'players' couldn't handle that amount of freedom so they took advantage of it and abused every gap in the rules where possible. Creators are just plugging up those holes.

hAl

[Gerbie]

I don't think any of these rules will be set next round. Attacking a small player will be unattractive, i expect, but not prohibited. So will getting too many roids.

[zenopus]

Originally posted by Storebo
Still it was not how it was at start... as with most facist goverments.. it just suddenly evolves around u. Suddenly u are on a whole different playing field then what u started on.

That can be true for any kind of rule - democracy, monarchy, communism, marxism, autocracy, gerontocracy, oligarchy, capitalism (not a form of rule, more a state of affairs), etc.
Most things evolve - that is usually considered a good thing. Any kind of rule is fascist if they make decisions you don't like?

[zenopus]

Originally posted by McIvan
It's not really an answer to say to them that they don't have to play, or watch the game. They WANT to play/spectate, and through years of participation have a considerable emotional investment in the game which arguably gives them some rights.

There is plenty of evolution in sports. Branching out - with more than one ruling body; rugby, boxing, wrestling, probably loads more I don't know about (not a big sports fan). Those must have come about either because there were to different sets of rules to start with, for global-political reasons or because a group of people did not like the way the old body was taking the sport (I would not hazard a guess - never studied sport history).

[The_Fish]

re: having too many roids, surely this isnt a big deal to most players as it will only affect the top 10/20 planets, and I know it wont be me there.

[cypher]

it's kinda old news this is gonna cost em players... and council is prolly just some stuck up twats wanting to be important:/

[Bootlord]

ah well there's loads of clones. play those if you dont like changes...

[Andy_r]

Just wait until they tell you to build the turret construction in round 10, after Spinner has removed the pds, THEN you can start complaining.

As for in-galaxy attacks being prohibited, the 20% min size to attack and so on, I have mixed feelings. Both were introduced to make farming/bashing harder, but I think that adjusting the cap formula to encourage attacking bigger planets would have been a far better option.

[Scouse]

I think one or two people are getting confused in this thread to exactly what the 'council' is.


And as for the example about having too many roids, that has always been a problem in PA, as the more you have the better target you are and so the more incoming you get, plus the more amps you need.

[HobbieRogue4]

Originally posted by tacite
Stating the blatantly obvious is so helpful hobbie :/

I think Stores point is that Pa used to have the feel of a game that was "for the players, by the players"
And thats lost.

It's still entirely your choice if you play the game or not.

they stopped caring about their players along time ago.
their focus is 110% on making money, 0% on the people who play it.

Their goal is to get fresh players every round, make them signup and pay, if they dont like it after that, why should they care.
The money will then be in their pocket,and more idiots will come the next round and take their place.


The onlything they are forgetting,is that planetarion isnt that good anymore,no matter what changes you got.
"kicking out" many of their current players,and hoping that tons of new ones will come.
they are living a dream,and when they all get kicked out in 1-3 rounds from their homes,their posessions are collected by the people they ow money, they will snap out of their fantasy world,and see me sitting on the bench across the house eating popcorn,laughin out aloud.

[at0mic.c0w]

can't we wait with the rantings until all details about r10 are public, it's not like anyone cares about the players' input anyway...

[ComradeRob]

Originally posted by The_Fish
re: having too many roids, surely this isnt a big deal to most players as it will only affect the top 10/20 planets, and I know it wont be me there.

I don't think this is necessarily true. For most people, attacking in PA is what keeps them active. Once 'stagnation' sets in, and attacking becomes unprofitable, people stop playing.

The purpose of the roid limitations seems to be something like this:

For every x roids, you need to have some kind of 'mining facility' to extract the resources from those roids. Any further roids you cap will not generate resources until you build another 'mining facility'. So, if you have a lucky attack one night, and cap 200 new roids, there will not be any point in getting roids for another day or two, until you have built your new mining facility to extract resources from the roids you've already got. This seems to be something that could affect all players, not just the top ones.

I could explain in very great detail exactly why this is a very bad thing, but I've been harping on about this since r6 and I can't really be bothered with repeating myself.

[TeraHertz]

Originally posted by Storebo
With all the new rules it seems as "The Council" have become more of a facist regime. Silently each round giving us new rules. Things we'll accept one by one, until it is to late, and the system got us.. Max count of roids... not being able to attack the people we want.. only being able to scan sertain people etc.. loads of restrictions.

What u guys think? Round 4 there was no such Council... none of thoose evil rules. Of course the rules was made to stop lawbreakers and cheaters, but with the new changes they are increasingly trying to control everything and everyone. Specially with the new alliance thing they put into the game. With this they will gain full control over the players.

In the end, how much are we able to decide ourself in this game in the following rounds?

Personaly, I wanted the "council" to have a set of coords for e to attack. Me, a nice peaceful guy being ORDERED to attack people, and partake in espionage. Screw the council. DIE!

[Lerxst]

OMG! The game I played and get used to changes! The world changes! Everything changes!

Hey - things keep changing - that's the only constant factor in the world. You can't expect PA nowadays just being like in "the good ole days". Circumstances changes, game was sold to Jolt, Spinner wore a dress. Tomorrow will never be like today. Face it. It makes me sad that all the young ppl here are so afraid of changes, always mock about everything and talk about the golden times...

But at least there is a spark of light in this sinister times. In total difference to your real life, there is one thing you all should keep in mind:

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
It's still entirely your choice if you play the game or not.

[Morden]

Originally posted by ComradeRob

For every x roids, you need to have some kind of 'mining facility' to extract the resources from those roids. Any further roids you cap will not generate resources until you build another 'mining facility'. So, if you have a lucky attack one night, and cap 200 new roids, there will not be any point in getting roids for another day or two, until you have built your new mining facility to extract resources from the roids you've already got. This seems to be something that could affect all players, not just the top ones.

The same thing goes for ships, which means that wars will never be won decisively, thus after 8 weeks most of the command staff of alliances will be burnt out,

and just about everyone else will be bored of the same old, same old,

the only thing worse than stagnation, is a war you can never win due to game dynamics.

[Storebo]

Originally posted by hAl
Obviously the 'players' couldn't handle that amount of freedom so they took advantage of it and abused every gap in the rules where possible. Creators are just plugging up those holes.

hAl

The cheaters allways finds new ways to cheat. So the restrictions punish the honest guys mostly.

[Storebo]

Originally posted by zenopus
That can be true for any kind of rule - democracy, monarchy, communism, marxism, autocracy, gerontocracy, oligarchy, capitalism (not a form of rule, more a state of affairs), etc.
Most things evolve - that is usually considered a good thing. Any kind of rule is fascist if they make decisions you don't like?

Nah.. u have to see what rules and restrictions they give u. Say they sensur all the media perhaps? Now that would be a facist thing. All the changes makes it easier for pa to control it's members.

[Storebo]

Originally posted by Bootlord
ah well there's loads of clones. play those if you dont like changes...

nah... they are ugly... Don't like em =) Is like renting a video u wanted to see... but the tape is all messed up and all the good scenes u can barely see. It is not the same =)

[Storebo]

Originally posted by Morden
The same thing goes for ships, which means that wars will never be won decisively, thus after 8 weeks most of the command staff of alliances will be burnt out,

and just about everyone else will be bored of the same old, same old,

the only thing worse than stagnation, is a war you can never win due to game dynamics.

Seems they try to kill the big alliances cause they are killing the game. But they are also the last thing keeping players here. The alliance wars... the community.. next rounds revenge etc..

[The_Fish]

Good point Rob, I wasnt sure how it was meant. I thought Spinner meant something different to that, but didnt have a clue what. fair point.

[KoeN]

i like it.


and hobbie was right btw. if changes are made there's not much you can do against it. you can play the game as it is, or you can quit. it is just that simple.

[Quetzovercoatl]

When I read the topic title "The Facist Council" and saw that it had twenty replies, I clicked the link wondering how many posts were made before some smartarse pointed out the obvious error.

On reading no such posts, I just couldn't resist

a fascist council would be the dictatorial regime the author intended to describe

I'd imagine a facist would be someone who really didn't like faces

[/pedantry]

[BLACK_OPPS]

agreeing with storebo

[Monkehpimp]

round 4, without the restrictions was still the wankest of the earlier rounds.

[Eylisia]

Originally posted by KoeN
i like it.


and hobbie was right btw. if changes are made there's not much you can do against it. you can play the game as it is, or you can quit. it is just that simple.

Point ofc being that NOONE has contested that..
Those of us that are playing r9/r9.5
dont automagically go on playing r10 tho,
so this is part of finding out whether one will play or not.

Thats why stating the blatantly obvious,
(or pointing out ppls spelling errors),is so neither here nor there.
Its like ppl talking just to hear their own voice.
Rather annoying really.

Eyl

[Dave]

Originally posted by Monkehpimp
round 4, without the restrictions was still the wankest of the earlier rounds.

Round 4 was still far more fun than any round that has come after it.

Still, the 10% cap is still a pet hate of mine .

[Forest]

I seem to remeber in r2/3 ? these boards alive with plp screaming that ni-gal attacks should be banned, and that they should limit the size you can attack.

The creators listened then.

And the council tasks we are set, only really follow the 72 tick plan to some extents, and helps the new players learn the game rather quickly, with the added bonus of being able to gte a few roids/resources, into the universe for us to cap.


I like the council, it helps newer players and older players alike, with sensible tasks set for us.

[Al_zz]

Originally posted by Dave
Round 4 was still far more fun than any round that has come after it.

Still, the 10% cap is still a pet hate of mine .

Round 4 was the worst round I have played in. The gameplay sucked, the stat sucked, the rules changes sucked (even to mid round changes extent) half the universe was filled with multies. I found round 9 virtually unplayable because of the massive powerblock but round 4 was about as bad as that. Any other round is better than those two.

hAl

[Storebo]

Originally posted by Al_zz
Round 4 was the worst round I have played in. The gameplay sucked, the stat sucked, the rules changes sucked (even to mid round changes extent) half the universe was filled with multies. I found round 9 virtually unplayable because of the massive powerblock but round 4 was about as bad as that. Any other round is better than those two.

hAl

dunno...i liked that round. The universe was fresh. The blocks was small.. And it lasted long. Also there was no rules. And ofcourse that round saw multies like that top1 guy who ran his whole gal with 2 other guys etc.. But he got deleted and stuff. And probably there where lots of guys not detected. I know that I only made 1 account that round, even though everyone says everyone made more then 1. Only round I've never lost a roid in also :P

[Som1]

Originally posted by Al_zz
Round 4 was the worst round I have played in. The gameplay sucked, the stat sucked, the rules changes sucked (even to mid round changes extent) half the universe was filled with multies. I found round 9 virtually unplayable because of the massive powerblock but round 4 was about as bad as that. Any other round is better than those two.

hAl

I can't believe how anything that breath on this planet cannot consider r5 as the worst round ever.

[ComradeRob]

Originally posted by Som1
I can't believe how anything that breath on this planet cannot consider r5 as the worst round ever.

R5 was a 'nothing' round. It was just really dull... it wasn't horribly bad, just very boring, both in terms of gameplay and politics.

Ofc, that's just my personal opinion, other people's opinions may differ

[Banned]

Originally posted by Som1
I can't believe how anything that breath on this planet cannot consider r5 as the worst round ever.

He was in my parallel, and we weren't very nice to him.

[-CP-]

Originally posted by Tactitus
If you don't like the game then don't play it, and/or design your own game (although you probably have more input into PA than most other games you play, not to mention other forms of entertainment such as movies, tv shows, books, music, etc).

This is a very common, and quite rediculous argument in any discussion. Everyone knows that they can quit if they don't like it, and that is not the point. The point is that many of us loved pa the way it was and for each round that has passed since r3-4 we have liked it less and less. (And the player base gets smaller and smaller) We could quit, like so many have allready, but being the loyal players that we are, we would rather try to influence the game to be something we love again.

[Eestlane]

Originally posted by Storebo
With all the new rules it seems as "The Council" have become more of a facist regime. Silently each round giving us new rules. Things we'll accept one by one, until it is to late, and the system got us.. Max count of roids... not being able to attack the people we want.. only being able to scan sertain people etc.. loads of restrictions.

What u guys think? Round 4 there was no such Council... none of thoose evil rules. Of course the rules was made to stop lawbreakers and cheaters, but with the new changes they are increasingly trying to control everything and everyone. Specially with the new alliance thing they put into the game. With this they will gain full control over the players.

In the end, how much are we able to decide ourself in this game in the following rounds?

that's what George W Bush is doing...