[Declined] Lemme sleep (without losing my fleet)

[Gerbie]

Ok, the idea here has been suggested before, but not realy the way I present it now.

The basic idea is simple: give players the opportunity to somehow save their fleet in base.

I know you can prelaunch you fleet away: but I aim at inactive people like me (I play some PA clone, and not realy active: I logged in only to find my fleet bashed a couple of times.)
When I prelaunch me fleet away and it takes me > 11 ticks before returning:
- people see it and can attack me to catch my fleet on the way back;
- people might retal if I fake attack;
- def is not always a good option: I fled my fleet to 1:1:1 once back in rnd 7 or so. It's not a safe place to run and land a defending fleet....
- the time is still only 31 ticks (11+10+10) and I'm sometimes away for a weekend (but shorter than 72 ticks).

Possible implementations:
- an extra base fleet that is in safe mode
- indefinite prelaunch time
- an option to set your base fleet to 'safe mode' or 'on patrol' (you can have this option affect fleets that have returned as well)
- base fleets never participate in battles

So who gives cares? This is mostly usefull for the noobs. This doesn't realy affect the game.

But it can.

This opens the door to other changes:
- Shorter travel times are possible without having people lose their fleets too often.
- Salvage (which is mainly this high to protect people who keep losing their fleets) can be lowered.

[jerome]

I dislike the simple basis of this suggestion that inactivity should be 'protected'. Logging in once every 6hours is really not that much to ask.

[Gerbie]

Sometimes I have to visit customers abroad (I need to pay my bills if I want to keep my CC). It sometimes is too much to ask from me to be online every 6 hours. If you want more players, then make the game attractive to more players.

[Conall]

I guess the basic question is this a strategy game or an activity game. If it is a strategy game the idea makes sense. If the primary determination of "good" player is activity then it does not. But as we see the shrinking base of players, that do not have the time to devote to PA that a small percentage has, then the question must be asked "where is the future of PA". I know about 2 dozen RL players that brought me into this game in Rd 2, none plays today because the activity required is too much for them and balance a RL. Many of us are not talking PA vs. RL in the sense of can't go party or have fun elsewhere, rather I need to work to pay my bills, spend quality time with my children and wife, not abandon RL friendships that have developed over decades.

If the measure is predominately activity then the base will continue to shrink, if it truly strategy then PA may have a future. So to dismiss Gerbie's idea out of hand is potentially detrimental to the game. But I guess there will always be those that think he is wrong. The problem is this, those that don't have the time to spend will never be as good as others even though they may be better skilled. They will continue to leave the game in droves. As the active players grow bored (with shrinking base I might add) and retire from the game it creates a downward spiral from which PA may not be able to recover.

Certainly there is a middle ground that will reward players for activity but no punish good strategic players for having a RL.

[Banned]

Vacation mode sounds perfect for you.

[Conall]

Actually not playing makes more sense tbh. Which what I think most former players have choosen, and which I think Jolt wants to remedy.

[Conall]

Originally Posted by Banned

Vacation mode sounds perfect for you.

I take it from your response you beleive that PA should be an activity ranked game as opposed to a skill besed game?

[Kal]

the point of vacation mode is so that people can go away with dying - surely that is protecting the skill based aspect of the game - we could just take out vacation mode and let everyone who is inactive die.

[jerome]

Heh, "skill". Don't lie to yourselves, there is very little skill in pa "left", there was quite some in r11 when not too many people had "complete understanding" of the game, but now, we're quickly getting back to 'NEEDING' activity as the defining point between player 'skill' as the amount of people who've sort of 'maxxed out' their skill is growing rapidly.

[SleepingBear]

I agree with Gerbie there should be somekind of option/fleet , that leave's you're fleet at you're planet. But that fleet doesn't participate in attacks. It's not that hard to check you're planet each 6 hours to see if you got incommings, but you have to think about the future of this game. It's like Conall said, make the game more attractive to more players.
I know how it feels to lose you're entire fleet, i can't remember how many fleets i lost in my first rounds i played. That's sometimes frustrating, but i kept on playing and got better ( I guess ), but for some players ( the new ones) this can be something to make them quit...
Just give Gerbie's idea a serieus thought... it's better then you think

[Conall]

No and that is not what we are talking about here. People like Gerbie and me as well as others must travel for out jobs. 12-14 hour flights and additional travel time is not uncommon. Not to mention 12-14 hour work days where you are locked in a conference room with a group of executives that wouldn’t be thrilled about you taking a break every 6 hours to check your planet.

Activity overrides skill in PAs current incarnation, for that matter it always has. My bigger question is, is that the best way for PA to survive? If Jolt feels it is then great, if not these questions should be addressed.

[Conall]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

Heh, "skill". Don't lie to yourselves, there is very little skill in pa "left", there was quite some in r11 when not too many people had "complete understanding" of the game, but now, we're quickly getting back to 'NEEDING' activity as the defining point between player 'skill' as the amount of people who've sort of 'maxxed out' their skill is growing rapidly.

Then that needs to be addressed, even if activity remains the primary factor in determining winners from losers. The less skill that is required and the more activity becomes a determining factor the more people will leave the game. Even those that have zero RL and can spend 20+ hours a day in PA will loose interest or find other things more challenging than staying awake for extended periods.

[jerome]

Pre-launch +12 then just cancel the attack before you launch? and please don't tell me logging in once every 12hrs is too much, if it is, then your just playing the wrong damn game.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Conall

I take it from your response you beleive that PA should be an activity ranked game as opposed to a skill besed game?

No.

[barney]

Originally Posted by Conall

I take it from your response you beleive that PA should be an activity ranked game as opposed to a skill besed game?

Why is it so black and white, why does it have to be activity vs skill, tbh atm it is fairly balanced there is the option to send your fleet away for a long long time 11hr pre + traveltime there-back tbh if you can't get online in that timeframe then your looking for vacation mode!

r/l should come first but tbh if you cannot spare 5 minutes in 20 or so hours you shouldn't really care that much if your fleet dies. please save something in the game for those of us who want to be active!

Plus wouldn't putting returning fleets into this "safe fleet" destroy another fun tactic of the game?
Fleet catching?

[Gerbie]

Let me emphasize that the current way to protect players against getting their fleets bashed is the traveltime of 7 or more hours. This is a rather ineffective method and reduces the dynamic of the game.

My suggestion can be more effective and could make the current method abundand.

If you want a more dynamic game with shorter travel times then there needs to be another way to prevent fleets getting bashed in-base. If traveltime is reduced then active players can make better use of their activity by doing more attacks per day.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

Let me emphasize that the current way to protect players against getting their fleets bashed is the traveltime of 7 or more hours. This is a rather ineffective method and reduces the dynamic of the game.

That's not entirlely true. The traveltimes have a lot to do with defense, counter-measures etc. The traveltime is at the bare minimum of what's needed. Realistically, you need your galaxy to phone you to move fleet.

My suggestion can be more effective and could make the current method abundand.

Your suggestions are terrible and would have really bad repurcussions. Fleetcatches would be impossible, there would be no risk involved with leaving ships at home with 3 fleets out.

If you want a more dynamic game with shorter travel times then there needs to be another way to prevent fleets getting bashed in-base. If traveltime is reduced then active players can make better use of their activity by doing more attacks per day.

Reducing travel time is a really bad idea. Currently people can get some sleep in between launch and landing, if you reduce traveltime you make activity even more of a factor, not for just for defending, but also for attacking.

[Kal]

I agree with everything banned just said

[Gerbie]

Originally Posted by Banned

That's not entirlely true. The traveltimes have a lot to do with defense, counter-measures etc. The traveltime is at the bare minimum of what's needed. Realistically, you need your galaxy to phone you to move fleet.

I disagree. There are windows of defence: alliances have only one or two hours to defend their members. Galmates have more time. After eta 5 it is impossible to send defence. Traveltimes could for instance be:
eta 3 ingal def (current 5)
eta 4 cluster/ally fi/co def (7)
eta 5 fi/co attack, fr/de def (8)
eta 6 fr/de attack, cr/bs def (9)
eta 7 cr/bs attack (10)

Your suggestions are terrible and would have really bad repurcussions. Fleetcatches would be impossible, there would be no risk involved with leaving ships at home with 3 fleets out.

I have presented several options. Only 1 of these makes fleetcatches impossible.

Reducing travel time is a really bad idea. Currently people can get some sleep in between launch and landing, if you reduce traveltime you make activity even more of a factor, not for just for defending, but also for attacking.

Well opinions are mixed. Some people seem to want activity to be the main deciding factor. I use prelaunch: I won't lose sleep over an attack.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

I disagree. There are windows of defence: alliances have only one or two hours to defend their members. Galmates have more time. After eta 5 it is impossible to send defence. Traveltimes could for instance be:
eta 3 ingal def (current 5)
eta 4 cluster/ally fi/co def (7)
eta 5 fi/co attack, fr/de def (8)
eta 6 fr/de attack, cr/bs def (9)
eta 7 cr/bs attack (10)

I have presented several options. Only 1 of these makes fleetcatches impossible.

A base fleet with ships caught at home (unable to move) is a caught fleet. All of your options make fleetcatches impossible.

Well opinions are mixed. Some people seem to want activity to be the main deciding factor. I use prelaunch: I won't lose sleep over an attack.

You want eta to be lower, so you want activity (how many times you can launch attacks) to be the deciding factor. The ideal planet has 2 fleets out on missions to attack constantly*, not just twice a day.

* This is less of a factor mid-game, but early on it's a big one.

[mist]

banned's right

that said, i think getting no resources at all during vac mode is a little harsh. 50% or something would seem fairer.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by mist

that said, i think getting no resources at all during vac mode is a little harsh. 50% or something would seem fairer.

(Though I hope you're not too attached to that number.)

[mist]

just seemed a compromise between the current 0 and the 100% that you'd get if you risked it and were lucky.

[Conall]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

Pre-launch +12 then just cancel the attack before you launch? and please don't tell me logging in once every 12hrs is too much, if it is, then your just playing the wrong damn game.

Wow - were can I get that +12 pre-launch, mine stopped at 11. And clearly you don't get what we are saying, nor do most here, including Kal.

As for me I am doing fine. I had a top 150 planet and frankly it didn’t take much skill, maybe none. Just the fact that I work on a computer 12 -14 hours a day and have a good time zone, plus a little luck that I wasn't caught when I was traveling or in marathon conferences. DCing takes far more skill than playing.

I also find it a bit telling that most people on this forum immediately ascribe self-centered motives to people who have ideas that differ from theirs. I personally would like to see PA around for another 5 years, but looking at the trend lines it may not happen, getting more people playing could certainly reverse the current trend.

[Conall]

Originally Posted by Banned

No.

Originally Posted by barney

Why is it so black and white, why does it have to be activity vs skill, tbh atm it is fairly balanced there is the option to send your fleet away for a long long time 11hr pre + traveltime there-back tbh if you can't get online in that timeframe then your looking for vacation mode!

r/l should come first but tbh if you cannot spare 5 minutes in 20 or so hours you shouldn't really care that much if your fleet dies. please save something in the game for those of us who want to be active!

Plus wouldn't putting returning fleets into this "safe fleet" destroy another fun tactic of the game?
Fleet catching?

Please enlighten me. What skills are required now?

[mist]

if you actually want to play, rather than being a mindless drone, then the ability to organise attacks/defence are rather important

[Troglodyte]

Which brings us back to gal fleets.... (where you give the ministers access to a fleet at your base. If the Ministers see you are about to be bashed they can simply move your fleet away.)

This achieves the objective of not getting your fleet bashed, plus it keeps the skilled based element (i use skilled based loosely) as you are now dependendant on your gal infrustructure for your survival + defence while you are 'sleeping / away'

Sorry, i dont mean to hi-jack this thread... but i believe it might provide a soultion.

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=176725
ps. You might have to scroll down a bit.

[mist]

gal based fleets are a problem not a solution, as was demonstrated in the last thread about them. *sigh*

[barney]

Originally Posted by Conall

Please enlighten me. What skills are required now?

hmmm... the ability to organise attacks/def (thanx mist), fleet combo's are important, who you can attack with best (racewise), a lot of skill interpreting the stats, playing with calcs to make the best use of your fleet, and often other peoples fleets, and im sure there are a lot more i can't think of atm..

nothing to do with the thread, but you asked!!!

this keeping your fleet away would just remove most of the benefits of activity.

given you obviously believe there is no skill left in the game, and you are trying to remove the need for any sort of activity. out of curiosity why do you play ???

[Conall]

Originally Posted by barney

hmmm... the ability to organise attacks/def (thanx mist), fleet combo's are important, who you can attack with best (racewise), a lot of skill interpreting the stats, playing with calcs to make the best use of your fleet, and often other peoples fleets, and im sure there are a lot more i can't think of atm..

nothing to do with the thread, but you asked!!!

this keeping your fleet away would just remove most of the benefits of activity.

given you obviously believe there is no skill left in the game, and you are trying to remove the need for any sort of activity. out of curiosity why do you play ???

As I said DCing and by extension BCing takes some skill, but organizing att/def are at an alliance level, not a player level. So those skills are need by a select few. Everything else you mentioned is stats based. It doesn't take any skill beyond reading and simple math, and failing that if you can read you can use bcalc. I don't count that as being skilled or requiring skill.

[Orion Treet]

Activity will always remain the decider of who wins, no matter how tactical you make it, cause the super active ones will still then have advantage over the inactive, which I only fair I gues. If you are willing to stay up to 4am, and get back up between 8 and 9am to scan before you land, and are on 10+ hours a day it's only fair you do better than people who are on 1-3 hrs online and sleep from 10pm till 7-9am or whatever.
I do like the idea however, roidlos you can take and recover from fairly quickly but having your fleet killed totaly sucks and is very discouraging if you come on and have 0 ships left, so good idea imo.

[noah02]

Originally Posted by Kal

the point of vacation mode is so that people can go away with dying - surely that is protecting the skill based aspect of the game - we could just take out vacation mode and let everyone who is inactive die.

Why you Evil man what if i end up in hospital like i did the round just gone?
Do I deserve to die
I am all upset now feel like you just ripped out any chances of me ever playing PA again if i get run over

[Conall]

Originally Posted by mist

if you actually want to play, rather than being a mindless drone, then the ability to organise attacks/defence are rather important

Its stats based, a program can be built to spit out exactly what you need to attack or defend with, so it clearly doesn't require human intelligence. There is no skill required beyond reading a simple math. Oh, except the ability to keep yourself awake for extended periods, again there are drugs that will do that - so I guess there is no skill there either.

Face it there is not real strayegy and only fundemental tactics at the player level. I can buy into the skill arguement for leadership levels of an alliance but not at a player level. If you can read, do simple math and stay awake for extended periods at the computer with nothing else to do, you can win.

[mist]

if you know exactly what's comming and have enough ships to defend then yes, a program can be written to deal with it.

however, once you get inexact data, more people needing defence than you can cover etc it becomes tricker it code

[Conall]

Originally Posted by mist

if you know exactly what's comming and have enough ships to defend then yes, a program can be written to deal with it.

however, once you get inexact data, more people needing defence than you can cover etc it becomes tricker it code

You don't need to know exact data. We know what the percentage error for scans are, so that can be calced. The number of ships you have has a little to do with your skill but very little.

But, as I said once you start looking at defending other you start moving toward DC skills, which does require more skill. But even in gal it is an issue of statistics.

Oh, and my wife reminded in of interpersonal skills, which plays a role in PA. Of course I forgot that one, as I am often accused of lacking them.

[mist]

i agree that 'normal' playing requires no skill. hence the reference to most alliance members as drones.

however, i'm not quite sure what the relevance of this is to the origonal post

[Alessio]

If Conall stopped posting on the forum the game would improve...

/me hides

Edit: sorry, we can still be friends right?:xmas:

[Conall]

Originally Posted by Alessio

If Conall stopped posting on the forum the game would improve...

/me hides

Edit: sorry, we can still be friends right?:xmas:

Ofc - you can be wrong and still be my friend, in fact most of the people I know are wrong in one manner or another

[evil n00b]

I lost all my ships the last 3 days because I shouldnt login due to RL.
But I still got top 25
Now, if my score had been value based I had been totaly powned. (or prolly not )
How many would have left a top 20 value based planet totaly unprotected the last 3 days of the game considering there is no ally def to get and the top 1 ally would love to kill your ships?
Im sure 95% would have a friend to send away your ships from base when needed and they wouldnt even think about it as cheating. The other 5% would think its cheating but do it anyway :P
(vacation mode is not possible at this point of game)

An option to send away your fleet to hmm "unknown space" for unlimited time would:
a) reduce cheating
b) make the game playable for people that cant be online 24/7 3 months in a row -> more players can play it
c) gives more targets as inactive players wont lose their value all the time (40% value limit)
d) not affect fleetcatching in any ways cos when you want to fleetie someone, you dont attack him if he has all fleets at base and expect him to keep them there.

More players actually means a worser rank for most players, its much harder to get a top 10 place if there were 10k players instead of 2k. This is the real reason to why people is against making the game more playable. People without skill doesnt think it would be more fun with competition cos they cant compete.
The question is if you want extra players that would have their ships protected a few times in a round, rather than not have those players at all.

[Orion Treet]

Originally Posted by evil n00b

I lost all my ships the last 3 days because I shouldnt login due to RL.
But I still got top 25
Now, if my score had been value based I had been totaly powned. (or prolly not )
How many would have left a top 20 value based planet totaly unprotected the last 3 days of the game considering there is no ally def to get and the top 1 ally would love to kill your ships?
Im sure 95% would have a friend to send away your ships from base when needed and they wouldnt even think about it as cheating. The other 5% would think its cheating but do it anyway :P
(vacation mode is not possible at this point of game)

An option to send away your fleet to hmm "unknown space" for unlimited time would:
a) reduce cheating
b) make the game playable for people that cant be online 24/7 3 months in a row -> more players can play it
c) gives more targets as inactive players wont lose their value all the time (40% value limit)
d) not affect fleetcatching in any ways cos when you want to fleetie someone, you dont attack him if he has all fleets at base and expect him to keep them there.

More players actually means a worser rank for most players, its much harder to get a top 10 place if there were 10k players instead of 2k. This is the real reason to why people is against making the game more playable. People without skill doesnt think it would be more fun with competition cos they cant compete.
The question is if you want extra players that would have their ships protected a few times in a round, rather than not have those players at all.

If you're say a top 50 planet chances are very large you'll be caught if you let someone else login for you since they monitor those planets and top gals very closely (someone in my gal last round had someone else log in for him once and got deleted the very next day)

[Gerbie]

Originally Posted by Orion Treet

If you're say a top 50 planet chances are very large you'll be caught if you let someone else login for you since they monitor those planets and top gals very closely (someone in my gal last round had someone else log in for him once and got deleted the very next day)

If you don't login yourself then you won't get caught. You only get caught if for instance 3 hrs aftter you logout in Europe someone in Australia logs in on your account. Especially if that someone plays from an IP where 'another' player also logs in from.

[evil n00b]

Originally Posted by Orion Treet

If you're say a top 50 planet chances are very large you'll be caught if you let someone else login for you since they monitor those planets and top gals very closely (someone in my gal last round had someone else log in for him once and got deleted the very next day)

You dont ask someone to babysit that doesnt know what he is doing, do you? And if you dont know how these things is done or doesnt want to cheat then you dont make that top 20 planet if you know you cant be on the last 3 days.
And anyway I would prefer to get caught rather than letting someone have the fun of blowing up my ships :P

Actually there is still the possiblity of having you galaxy to exile you so you end up in c200, or have a few of your friends to make fake cheating reports on your planets while you do stuff that looks like cheating so your planet is closed, and then when you come back you make em to open it after proving there wasnt any cheating. Tought im not sure how these things works at end of round.
The solution to make the less skilled players to whine less would be to have separate ranks for activity, where the one that is most active gets top 1. Im sure a few of you would love it

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Conall

Please enlighten me. What skills are required now?

the art of coffee drinking, the secrets and techniques of waking up, the 'i'm-going-to-stall-my-friends-so-i-can-join-a-group-attack-with-my-alliance tactics, the cigarette-smoking-biceps-work-out strategy, and speed-typing.. also gives you a good reason to get various contemporary styles of prescription eye-glasses every 3 months because your prescription gets shittier everyday.. hehhe

activity-based is Pa because it's tick-based sync'ed with realtime and youre opponents are human beings and not just some computer-program where you can pause anytime you want to.. not too much skills required - inactivity should not be supported

[Conall]

You forgot the surviving without sunlight discipline.

And I don't mean to reward activity, reward skills of strategy more and activity less. If you are an inactive hack you cannot win. If you are a fairly active uber strategist you cannot win. If you are hyper active 15 year old with no real life you are the favorite to win!

Come to think of it, maybe it just fair that the hyper active kid with no life wins at something.

[fizzyxl]

sweet!!! im not doomed :P

nah i agree it is way too time domanding but its better atm than without it (ie like between rounds!!!)

[Troll]

After reading through most of the arguments for and against the proposed protected base fleet I tend to agree with Banned on the game dynamic changes that would be caused if this was implemented. I however see the point Gerbie is trying to make and agree with his Ideal not his Idea.

So just for the hell of it I’ll propose something in the middle that although not entirely thought to fruition may start some brighter minds working on a true solution to this problem.

Currently we have the option of DEFEND, ATTACK and FAKE ATTACK for our fleet spots. I propose we add a fourth option FORTIFY. The fortify option would protect the fleet perhaps it could be a researched field 25% less damage to 80% less damage cause to a fortified fleet. Even an engineering option would work. Oh and fortified fleets should not be able to fire? Or there rate of damage inflicted is reduced by the same increase in protection. So a 50% reduction in loses is also a 50% reduction in damage to the attacker. It just might be more simple to just say the fleet does not fire and in turn is not fired upon but I just enjoy making things more complicated.

These solutions, I believe, will solve Banned’s worry about caught fleets and also imposes a penalty on a player using fortify by removing a fleet spot he could other wise be using to defend his alliance with. In the end I think this goes right down the middle. The damage to the fortified fleets is arbitrary and only there as an example of what could be done. This should make PA more accessible to the less dedicated (a far better word than activity) which means more players for the dedicated to play with (as a cat plays with a mouse)

[Kal]

thayts an interesting idea, I await the complaints

[DEATH2]

i think the fortifying is a good idea. it would need some tweaking tho.

you could think of it as hiding your fleet in an asteroid field, its harder to be hit but also harder to fire out of.

it could also be done that your base fleet is set as this by default so instead of using a fleet (which would be used to run your ships anyway). the amount of fortification would then be determined by an engineering setting.

[Kal]

hows about your firepower drops by the amount your armour increases or something similar

note all of this is impossible with the current combat engine - but engines can change

[mist]

i think it would be better using a fleet slot, rather than the home base