|
8 Jun 2003, 16:46
|
#1
|
(.) (.)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NI
Posts: 410
|
faster ticks?
I would pay for faster ticks, not like a speedround, but say 10 min ticks or 15mins, instead of an hour, but maybe make etas longer or keep the the same with a 4-8 hr sleep mode?
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 16:48
|
#2
|
Damn Dog
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,249
|
since some planets dont seem to tick until 10 minuites past the hour anyway, 10 minute ticks would be...interesting...
__________________
"that's a stupid thing to say and you're a stupid person for saying it."
the tolling gang
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 17:49
|
#3
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
People who ask for faster ticks are failing to understand something fundamental about this game.
It is currently possible to sleep for just under 4 hours and guarantee that you will still have a fleet when you wake up. This is clearly not long enough (and is the reason I always argue for the removal of cluster & parallel ETA reductions for attacking ships). I currently manage an average of 5 hours sleep per night - the worst that is likely to happen is that I have to run away from an ETA1 attack and restrict my losses to roids only.
Suggesting that ticks should be every 10 minutes means that you'd have to go into vacation mode every time you had to leave the house.
If you want shorter ticks - go and find a different game!
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 18:10
|
#4
|
Rah's def wh0re
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Humpering Maddix for defence
Posts: 643
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ArcChas
People who ask for faster ticks are failing to understand something fundamental about this game.
It is currently possible to sleep for just under 4 hours and guarantee that you will still have a fleet when you wake up. This is clearly not long enough (and is the reason I always argue for the removal of cluster & parallel ETA reductions for attacking ships). I currently manage an average of 5 hours sleep per night - the worst that is likely to happen is that I have to run away from an ETA1 attack and restrict my losses to roids only.
Suggesting that ticks should be every 10 minutes means that you'd have to go into vacation mode every time you had to leave the house.
If you want shorter ticks - go and find a different game!
|
AGREED
__________________
Rd1 ---> 2 26 9 Captain Stone Chance of Dalriada [WAC/Leviathan federation]
Rd2 ---> 53 25 20 The First General of P'holt [TFD]
Rd3 ---> 22 16 20 The First General of Posterholt [TFD]
Rd4 ---> 246 24 10 Silverwolf of Limburg [TFD] [Cell] [NFU]
Rd5 ---> 34 11 19 The great Returning of me [Cell] [NFU]
Rd6----> 6 25 10 Chappa'ai of NOX Homeland (Whitebull) [Silver BC]
Rd7----> 18 18 1 Klaj Demon of Gateway from Hell [RAH]
Rd8----> 36 5 6 1 More TIME of Free Traders Inc [RAH]
Rd9----> 16 2 10 Clan McIntosh of Stardust Guardian [RAH]
Rd9.5 ---> 15 9 9 Nightshade of Sherwood forest [RAH]
Rd10 ----> [RAH]
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 18:27
|
#5
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ArcChas
People who ask for faster ticks are failing to understand something fundamental about this game.
It is currently possible to sleep for just under 4 hours and guarantee that you will still have a fleet when you wake up. This is clearly not long enough (and is the reason I always argue for the removal of cluster & parallel ETA reductions for attacking ships). I currently manage an average of 5 hours sleep per night - the worst that is likely to happen is that I have to run away from an ETA1 attack and restrict my losses to roids only.
Suggesting that ticks should be every 10 minutes means that you'd have to go into vacation mode every time you had to leave the house.
If you want shorter ticks - go and find a different game!
|
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 19:02
|
#6
|
(.) (.)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NI
Posts: 410
|
of course, losing your fleet wouldnt be such a big deal as when 1 hour ticks. as you could rebuild 6 times faster
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 19:18
|
#7
|
Retired
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Back Porch Bar
Posts: 2,593
|
Quote:
Originally posted by CoD
of course, losing your fleet wouldnt be such a big deal as when 1 hour ticks. as you could rebuild 6 times faster
|
Except you're losing roids too...and you couldn't rebuild 6 times as fast without those roids.
Instead, you will be outgrown by the rest of the universe X times as fast, whereas with 1 hour ticks, it's reasonable to "come back" from a loss and recover.
__________________
I'd rather be fishing.
Utterly useless since r3
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 20:04
|
#8
|
Motherfracker
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,985
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ArcChas
People who ask for faster ticks are failing to understand something fundamental about this game.
It is currently possible to sleep for just under 4 hours and guarantee that you will still have a fleet when you wake up. This is clearly not long enough (and is the reason I always argue for the removal of cluster & parallel ETA reductions for attacking ships). I currently manage an average of 5 hours sleep per night - the worst that is likely to happen is that I have to run away from an ETA1 attack and restrict my losses to roids only.
Suggesting that ticks should be every 10 minutes means that you'd have to go into vacation mode every time you had to leave the house.
If you want shorter ticks - go and find a different game!
|
You could of course just sleep and relax and give up on your quest for personal glory.
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 22:39
|
#9
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
I've never played for personal glory - I have no delusions about ever finishing in the top 10. I have a full time job and a wife - both of which prevent me from being online enough to stand a realistic chance of winning.
However, if you're going to play a game it is important to do your best and to be competetive - fast(er) ticks prevent both (over any significant period of time).
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
8 Jun 2003, 22:50
|
#10
|
Klaatu barada nikto
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 3,237
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cochese
Except you're losing roids too...and you couldn't rebuild 6 times as fast without those roids.
Instead, you will be outgrown by the rest of the universe X times as fast, whereas with 1 hour ticks, it's reasonable to "come back" from a loss and recover.
|
Well, less unreasonable perhaps.
__________________
The Ottawa Citizen and Southam News wish to apologize for our apology to Mark Steyn, published Oct. 22. In correcting the incorrect statements about Mr. Steyn published Oct. 15, we incorrectly published the incorrect correction. We accept and regret that our original regrets were unacceptable and we apologize to Mr. Steyn for any distress caused by our previous apology.
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 12:09
|
#11
|
(.) (.)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NI
Posts: 410
|
Yes I had to stop playing PA because when it went p2p every gal had at least 2 die hard players in it, who were online all the time and it made it impossible to attack even the non active players in anygal unless it was in the early hours of the morning, impossible for me during the week.
In 10/15 min ticks you have a chance to attack a gal, this would also speed up the action alot as limits chances of defence so the lead could chance hands right up to the end.
Dont forget the idea of a sleep mode, i didnt explain it well above so here: basically you can put your planet into sleep mode, so you can get a chance to rest. Your planet continues to get resources in this mode but no one can attack, you can also not log in untill the set time is up (say 6 hours) so you cannot attack/defend or even log in till its up
You would also only be allowd to use this option once every 24 hours, so if you went into sleep mode at 2300cest, you couldnt use the mode again till 2300cest the next day.
Like vacation mode if an attack has been launched on you and then you go into sleep mode, the attack will continue to go through but no more fleets can be luanched at you.
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 13:49
|
#12
|
General (Adjective Army)
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
|
Quote:
Originally posted by CoD
Dont forget the idea of a sleep mode, i didnt explain it well above so here: basically you can put your planet into sleep mode, so you can get a chance to rest. Your planet continues to get resources in this mode but no one can attack, you can also not log in untill the set time is up (say 6 hours) so you cannot attack/defend or even log in till its up
You would also only be allowd to use this option once every 24 hours, so if you went into sleep mode at 2300cest, you couldnt use the mode again till 2300cest the next day.
|
Back to what I said about people (like me) who work full time. I could be wiped out every day.
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 14:06
|
#13
|
used to register
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 979
|
Re: faster ticks?
Quote:
Originally posted by CoD
I would pay for faster ticks, not like a speedround, but say 10 min ticks or 15mins, instead of an hour, but maybe make etas longer or keep the the same with a 4-8 hr sleep mode?
|
In the time i travel from home to the uni I could be dead
__________________
R1: ??:?? | R2: 51:6 | R3: 37:12 | R4: 186:13 | R5: 13:17 | R6: 1:25
R7: 15:14 | R8: 34:4 / 52:10 ¤ | R9: 16:2 | R9.5: 34:6 / 41:6 ¤
R10: 2:2 | R10.5: 15:4 | R11: 28:8 | R12: 22:9
Damn, outdated and too lazy to edit, retired now
-----
Started playing again Still too lazy to update though
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 14:30
|
#14
|
(.) (.)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NI
Posts: 410
|
u could be dead in real pa ne way
also theres the thing of instead of paying for one round, you could get 4 rounds in place of one, and there could be a really low cost for one round, so people can try and come back
and a free round wouldnt lose much money as it would increase the fan base and would only have to last about a month, then start charging for the next month
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 14:47
|
#15
|
used to register
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 979
|
Don't talk poo. Noone can kill me in that 80 minutes i travel from home to the uni or back...
And the load with 10 min ticks would be increadible, meaning they would need 6x more servers than they have now. And 6x more bandiwth. That's quite a huge bill they'll have to pay then.....
Maybe you can donate 18 servers to them?
__________________
R1: ??:?? | R2: 51:6 | R3: 37:12 | R4: 186:13 | R5: 13:17 | R6: 1:25
R7: 15:14 | R8: 34:4 / 52:10 ¤ | R9: 16:2 | R9.5: 34:6 / 41:6 ¤
R10: 2:2 | R10.5: 15:4 | R11: 28:8 | R12: 22:9
Damn, outdated and too lazy to edit, retired now
-----
Started playing again Still too lazy to update though
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 15:29
|
#16
|
Ensign
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 70
|
If the machines could keep up faster pace it might be good to increase ticks...
Faster ticks without faster game pace. Currently that one single tick is so powerful. Tick late defence or partially late defence is often a disaster, tick of roids is quite a lot etc.
Double ticks, double etas, double amount of attack/defence ticks, half roid cap, half gunpowers, half resource production. --> general gameplay and combat results from 1 attack stays close to same both ship and roid wise. But the power of tick is halved. Might make the game more interesting...
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 17:05
|
#17
|
Bean Bag
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 24
|
Cod thx for describing unity wars for us. It was a fun game but 10 min ticks(or what ever the tick speed was) were far to fast, u had to be online all the time or you had no chance of getting into the top 100 + the fact that attacking was so quick organising any real defense was difficulty when ur m8s were not online.
Faster ticks would kill the game I reckon as only 'hardcore' players would be willing to spend all there time playing and many would quit simply because after they were annihilated the first time it was impossible to get back up into a position to properly threaten the top 100.
Ofc there are exceptions to this but overall pa could never be 10 min ticks. What needs to happen is new features and more promoting of the game to get new players, a few more free rounds in between the random ones would be advantagous but they should promote them.
And lastly, THE SERVER WOULD NEVER COPE with 10 min ticks, it could hardly cope this rnd with 14000 players and 1 hour ticks, imagine what would happen with 10 min ticks.
__________________
I will rule one day, until then I am just a small minion of a big world!
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 17:22
|
#18
|
Punk
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 397
|
__________________
Rd13 SiNND (12:4:3)
Rd6&7 4D (20:8:6) & (20:2:10) Rd14 ND (2:5:4)
Rd8 Did not play Rd15 Did not play
Rd9 4D/SWaRM (13:4:10) Rd16 ND (14:1:6)
Rd9.5 SWaRM (42:7:4) Rd17 ND (13:10:8)
Rd10 SWaRM (21:4:7) Rd18 ND (13:6:8)
Rd10.5 SWaRM (5:5:10) Rd19 ND - HC (1:9:3)
Rd11 ND (32:2:10) Rd36 ND 7:9:7
Rd12 ND (30:10:1)
|
|
|
9 Jun 2003, 18:19
|
#19
|
The [Fury] of the [z0r]
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 130
|
Quote:
Originally posted by ArcChas
People who ask for faster ticks are failing to understand something fundamental about this game.
It is currently possible to sleep for just under 4 hours and guarantee that you will still have a fleet when you wake up. This is clearly not long enough (and is the reason I always argue for the removal of cluster & parallel ETA reductions for attacking ships). I currently manage an average of 5 hours sleep per night - the worst that is likely to happen is that I have to run away from an ETA1 attack and restrict my losses to roids only.
Suggesting that ticks should be every 10 minutes means that you'd have to go into vacation mode every time you had to leave the house.
If you want shorter ticks - go and find a different game!
|
what he said.
-whoop
__________________
<@whoop> it was zik pds too...
<@Sugar> zik pds kicks ass
<@whoop> yeah
<@whoop> I know
#milo
|
|
|
14 Jun 2003, 15:44
|
#20
|
Miles Teg
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dom City
Posts: 5,192
|
30 minute ticks are perfectly doable.
__________________
Audentes Fortuna Iuvat
|
|
|
14 Jun 2003, 16:54
|
#21
|
used to register
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 979
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Knight Theamion
30 minute ticks are perfectly doable.
|
Thats 2,5 hours max (if you sleep instantly that is) if you get in a para war.... Don't be rediculous
__________________
R1: ??:?? | R2: 51:6 | R3: 37:12 | R4: 186:13 | R5: 13:17 | R6: 1:25
R7: 15:14 | R8: 34:4 / 52:10 ¤ | R9: 16:2 | R9.5: 34:6 / 41:6 ¤
R10: 2:2 | R10.5: 15:4 | R11: 28:8 | R12: 22:9
Damn, outdated and too lazy to edit, retired now
-----
Started playing again Still too lazy to update though
|
|
|
14 Jun 2003, 22:12
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7
|
sigh ppl trying to make pa a totally different game....
are you ppl not happy with the little sleep you are already getting? you must clearly be a masochist to suggest something like this o.O
|
|
|
15 Jun 2003, 16:21
|
#23
|
Spinner Flamer Flamer
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 100
|
Quote:
Originally posted by agrokid
And lastly, THE SERVER WOULD NEVER COPE with 10 min ticks, it could hardly cope this rnd with 14000 players and 1 hour ticks,
imagine what would happen with 10 min ticks.
|
Well, 10 minutes to do 14k Planets is quite good, especially considering the amount of attacking thats going on this round. The load on the servers has increased more than just the rise in players, the rise in attacks takes up resources too :eek:
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by Zh|l
Who are you exactly?
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Zh|l
Why are you quoting me in your signature?
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:14.
| |