Planetarion Forums

Planetarion Forums (https://pirate.planetarion.com/index.php)
-   Planetarion Suggestions (https://pirate.planetarion.com/forumdisplay.php?f=95)
-   -   Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet (https://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=201160)

Buddah 6 May 2016 10:12

Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Remove alliance fleet -> add landing tick to inc scan even if you are blocked
Then prelaunch def can be sent to prelaunched attack.

booji 6 May 2016 11:05

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Reasoning for why this is better?

Mzyxptlk 6 May 2016 11:34

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Alliance fleets + 'secret' prelaunch fleets = people can send in the evening and land at night.
No alliance fleets + visible prelaunch fleets = people will be incentivized to wake up at night to send.

I think the latter is worse because only a handful of people are willing to do that, which unnecessarily increases the gap between casual and hardcore players.

Buddah 6 May 2016 13:40

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Cause the alliance fleet is not you playing.

Why not just allow account sharing or multiple planets right away? Multiple planets will make universe bigger, account sharing will make more planets competetive. The alliance fleet just lets def planets be more useful.

Different timezones should have different advantages/disadvantages.

Mzyxptlk 6 May 2016 14:06

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddah (Post 3251428)
Cause the alliance fleet is not you playing.

That has no gameplay repercussions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddah (Post 3251428)
Different timezones should have different advantages/disadvantages.

I couldn't disagree more. Something you can't change should never have advantages or disadvantages.

BloodyButcher 6 May 2016 16:13

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddah (Post 3251425)
Remove alliance fleet -> add landing tick to inc scan even if you are blocked
Then prelaunch def can be sent to prelaunched attack.

Forget it.
Ive been suggesting this for years. They dobt want to nerph PL

Buddah 6 May 2016 16:25

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
I don't care about pl. I really can't stand this new ally fleet function.
It only makes the game more defensive and it's someone else playing your planet. Worst change since p2p

Cochese 6 May 2016 16:48

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Getting up at night for a game is utterly ****ing retarded.

There, I'll be the one to say it plainly.

Buddah 6 May 2016 16:51

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
I agree... So don't. But livelaunching should have an advantage. If not we can all just play turn based (m)mog.

Clouds 6 May 2016 17:29

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Getting up at night to launch defence is silly, and your solution is 'to not get up at night' ? I didn't even need to get intel that you're in Norse, because I'm probably right. Your opinion on this matter is biased to the core because your alliance doesn't defend at all and rather likes to trollwave/escort for planet win, and scrapping Alliance-Fleets will make this so much easier for you guys.

The Alliance-Fleet implementation helps the less active tags play a bit more competitively if they are organised enough. If they scrap Alliance-Fleets, then it'll go back to the more active tags dominating again. And no, my opinion isn't biased because my alliance will still have good defence even if they remove alliance-fleets.

Let's remove AFs so alliances like Norse can lolwave the less active tags where they have no chance to cover. Let's make it easier for you and more difficult for the less active tags. Great suggestion.

BloodyButcher 6 May 2016 20:59

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouds (Post 3251435)
Getting up at night to launch defence is silly, and your solution is 'to not get up at night' ? I didn't even need to get intel that you're in Norse, because I'm probably right. Your opinion on this matter is biased to the core because your alliance doesn't defend at all and rather likes to trollwave/escort for planet win, and scrapping Alliance-Fleets will make this so much easier for you guys.

The Alliance-Fleet implementation helps the less active tags play a bit more competitively if they are organised enough. If they scrap Alliance-Fleets, then it'll go back to the more active tags dominating again. And no, my opinion isn't biased because my alliance will still have good defence even if they remove alliance-fleets.

Let's remove AFs so alliances like Norse can lolwave the less active tags where they have no chance to cover. Let's make it easier for you and more difficult for the less active tags. Great suggestion.

How i read his suggestion, just like ive suggested before, if you were able to defend vs PLed incommings while your awake, you dont have to wake up in the middle of the night to send defence.

The reason why this game is being played at night time is because of the PL function encouraging this.

Mzyxptlk 6 May 2016 21:24

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher (Post 3251438)
if you were able to defend vs PLed incommings while your awake, you dont have to wake up in the middle of the night to send defence.

With this change you'd have to wake up in the middle of the night to attack instead, because if you send before you go to sleep, your fleet will be lit up like a Christmas tree for everyone else who's still awake.

Makhil 7 May 2016 05:26

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Replace alliance def fleet with galaxy def fleet
MoW and GC would be allowed to launch them.

booji 7 May 2016 08:09

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
I think my difficulty with the Galaxy def fleet rather than ally def fleet is that you often have less control over what Galaxy you are in than what alliance - with a BP of just 2 or 3 how do you ensure you have round the clock coverage. Moreover most people these days play for alliance rather than their Galaxy, can you imagine the chaos and bad blood that it would create when a Gc launches someone's fleet in defence against that player's own ally mates?

Buddah 7 May 2016 09:02

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouds (Post 3251435)
Getting up at night to launch defence is silly, and your solution is 'to not get up at night' ? I didn't even need to get intel that you're in Norse, because I'm probably right. Your opinion on this matter is biased to the core because your alliance doesn't defend at all and rather likes to trollwave/escort for planet win, and scrapping Alliance-Fleets will make this so much easier for you guys.

The Alliance-Fleet implementation helps the less active tags play a bit more competitively if they are organised enough. If they scrap Alliance-Fleets, then it'll go back to the more active tags dominating again. And no, my opinion isn't biased because my alliance will still have good defence even if they remove alliance-fleets.

Let's remove AFs so alliances like Norse can lolwave the less active tags where they have no chance to cover. Let's make it easier for you and more difficult for the less active tags. Great suggestion.

We tried to escort for planet win 4 rounds ago. This shitty round none of us cared. Last round there was some escort fleets sent, still less than in bf ult or any of the other allies. So get your facts right.. And how has it helped the less active tags? Made the game even more boring to play. The opinion in norse is pro allydef.. Mine is not. With allydef we can actually Def since we have some working nightshift and a few from non Eu timezones.
I'm against it cause it makes Def planets even more useful,because it's not yourself sending the fleet, because it benefits bigger tags (value and numbers) because it makes it harder for the smaller tags to fight back without lol waving and gangbanging. The less active needs more organization, more organization needs more activity... So you just picked your own defense of the ally fleet apart. Good job!!

And when have Norse ever lolwaved the less active tags?
From where does this notion that we don't defend come from?

Buddah 7 May 2016 09:04

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Makhil (Post 3251449)
Replace alliance def fleet with galaxy def fleet
MoW and GC would be allowed to launch them.

Also a good Suggestion! You can choose to turn it off booji! This will make some gals better and might stop some nub bashing

booji 7 May 2016 09:14

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Eh? Will you know in advance Buddah that your galaxy will be hit by, and then use your fleet to defend against your alliance Buddah? If it is a gal raid then fair enough, but most of the time it will be retals or random targeting. Generally I thought the whole point of the option was to help inactives; those who will NOT be on in time to disable it. So you are proposing they never have it turned on so that they avoid the problem... In which case why have the option at all?

Buddah 7 May 2016 09:17

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by booji (Post 3251456)
Eh? Will you know in advance Buddah that your galaxy will be hit by, and then use your fleet to defend against your alliance Buddah? If it is a gal raid then fair enough, but most of the time it will be retals or random targeting. Generally I thought the whole point of the option was to help inactives; those who will NOT be on in time to disable it. So you are proposing they never have it turned on so that they avoid the problem... In which case why have the option at all?

Not able to defend against alliance tick box.
The not enabling it was in regards to your playing for ally comment!

booji 7 May 2016 09:23

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Sounds like something slightly more complex. But yes I was thinking that a not being able to use it against alliance would be the sensible thing. To be honest I would not even bother with a tick box just make it impossible. Though even with this I still don't like it for the other reasons stated. This option would not be to help those who are less active but would be to help the more active in their big fort/fence gals that we profess to be against! When it is an alliance option at least all alliances have a decent chance of being able to use it; any alliance of 40 odd (unless geographically based) will have some people on at all times. Not so inative galaxies.

Mzyxptlk 7 May 2016 11:37

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddah (Post 3251454)
From where does this notion that we don't defend come from?

3 rounds. 1339 ally def fleets total. 3059 incs total. 43% recall rate. That's where.

Advantix 7 May 2016 14:07

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3251459)
3 rounds. 1339 ally def fleets total. 3059 incs total. 43% recall rate. That's where.

What was recall rate from Norse last round?

BloodyButcher 7 May 2016 19:06

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by booji (Post 3251453)
I think my difficulty with the Galaxy def fleet rather than ally def fleet is that you often have less control over what Galaxy you are in than what alliance - with a BP of just 2 or 3 how do you ensure you have round the clock coverage. Moreover most people these days play for alliance rather than their Galaxy, can you imagine the chaos and bad blood that it would create when a Gc launches someone's fleet in defence against that player's own ally mates?

If you dont want you MoW to use your fleet, then dont tick the box allowing him to do it.

Atleast this would help new players being usefull in galaxies.

The change to 40 counting planets in tag means that there is "room for" 20 "support planets" in each tag.
If you have 20 planets building all their value into a spesific ships, it means that they often can solo cover 4-5 man team ups with only logging in once a day.
As Buddah has aimed at, having a harder time landing attacks means that blocks will be bigger, and the game will be more defensive minded.
We have allready seen what politics did to the last two rounds, the only way to win is to not get blocked against.

booji 7 May 2016 19:42

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
That has already been covered. I am talking about not having an objection to the Galaxy using my fleet but then it being used badly damaging trust. Yes I can in future say no to using my fleet but only at the cost of damaging the Galaxy. The check box seems to be a blunt instrument and the suggested not being able to send a fleet to def against the player's own alliance is a much more elegant solution to my initial objection so why go back to the lesser one?

Ok let's take another tack; 1, why are we limiting this to MoW and GC? Why should these few be specifically privileged? Are all MoWs and GCs somehow more trustworthy than the rest of the community?

I am also skeptical about the new players argument. New players are useful by getting them active and able to play pa well, not by having a single fleet from them. As you yourself mention the counting score means that there can be support planets for alliances, this has yet to happen for galaxies. Yes it provides an incentive to keep someone who is a defplanet in the gal but these will mostly be experienced players. If you have a nub who is active enough to have communicated with you and agreed to build one ship then s/he is worth the investment to teach to be a real player and an overall contribution to the game.

Edit: I should note that I am not necessarily totally against Galaxy def fleets, I however don't think that using the ally def fleets as a model for how it should be done is necessarily the thing to do. Ally def fleets is designed to solve a problem that is pa being played at anti social times (whether it is successful seems to be a matter of opinion but that is not important for this argument)... On the other hand this is not so much of a problem for Galaxy defence which a, has a lot more time to respond, and b, is usually happening at around the time where most players (Europeans) are checking in the morning. A bigger issue for galaxies than idle fleets therefore tends to be that the fleets were launched several hours before and can't get back in time! Also gal def fleets seems to me different enough to need a new thread not hijacking one about adding pl+x to the inc scan.

On the ally fleets issue; While I generally agree that it being harder to land may well result in bigger blocks last round can hardly be used to show that this is the effect of ally fleets. If an alliance is going to win a round it needs to use all members all three fleets... Not just one. For the winning alliance therefore the ally fleet likely makes almost no difference except for making life a bit easier and cutting down on sms/call expenses.

Zh|l 7 May 2016 20:39

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Advantix (Post 3251460)
What was recall rate from Norse last round?

What was the incomings on Norse last round?

Don't try and counter the point Norse are hardly known for great defending.

BloodyButcher 7 May 2016 20:59

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by booji (Post 3251467)
That has already been covered. I am talking about not having an objection to the Galaxy using my fleet but then it being used badly damaging trust. Yes I can in future say no to using my fleet but only at the cost of damaging the Galaxy. The check box seems to be a blunt instrument and the suggested not being able to send a fleet to def against the player's own alliance is a much more elegant solution to my initial objection so why go back to the lesser one?

Ok let's take another tack; 1, why are we limiting this to MoW and GC? Why should these few be specifically privileged? Are all MoWs and GCs somehow more trustworthy than the rest of the community?

I am also skeptical about the new players argument. New players are useful by getting them active and able to play pa well, not by having a single fleet from them. As you yourself mention the counting score means that there can be support planets for alliances, this has yet to happen for galaxies. Yes it provides an incentive to keep someone who is a defplanet in the gal but these will mostly be experienced players. If you have a nub who is active enough to have communicated with you and agreed to build one ship then s/he is worth the investment to teach to be a real player and an overall contribution to the game.

Edit: I should note that I am not necessarily totally against Galaxy def fleets, I however don't think that using the ally def fleets as a model for how it should be done is necessarily the thing to do. Ally def fleets is designed to solve a problem that is pa being played at anti social times (whether it is successful seems to be a matter of opinion but that is not important for this argument)... On the other hand this is not so much of a problem for Galaxy defence which a, has a lot more time to respond, and b, is usually happening at around the time where most players (Europeans) are checking in the morning. A bigger issue for galaxies than idle fleets therefore tends to be that the fleets were launched several hours before and can't get back in time! Also gal def fleets seems to me different enough to need a new thread not hijacking one about adding pl+x to the inc scan.

On the ally fleets issue; While I generally agree that it being harder to land may well result in bigger blocks last round can hardly be used to show that this is the effect of ally fleets. If an alliance is going to win a round it needs to use all members all three fleets... Not just one. For the winning alliance therefore the ally fleet likely makes almost no difference except for making life a bit easier and cutting down on sms/call expenses.

Not to sound like a total newbie, but i dont actualy know how galaxy is scored, never bothered checking the manual for it. But from you post i take it that its the same as alliances, 1/3 of the allie not counting for score? :confused:

What Buddah suggested would make DCing at none-anti-social-times possibole.

I dont know how the defence fleets worked this round, but since you ask why it should be limited to MoW/GC, i take it that every members in the alliances had options to control the defence fleets? And if not, then why?

Originaly the galaxies did have a "defence fleet", back in R2 you could donate your ships to the galaxy, and they would be automaticly sent to the planet under incomming, iirc. It was a very dumb feature, and was removed for R3

Mzyxptlk 7 May 2016 21:38

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Advantix (Post 3251460)
What was recall rate from Norse last round?

I believe in your ability to apply basic division, but: 39.5%.

booji 7 May 2016 22:08

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher (Post 3251469)
Not to sound like a total newbie, but i dont actualy know how galaxy is scored, never bothered checking the manual for it. But from you post i take it that its the same as alliances, 1/3 of the allie not counting for score? :confused:

This was certainly not what I meant. The point I was trying to make is that galaxies score is counted for all members of the galaxy, unlike alliances. As such they are unlikely to benefit so much from having a def planet focusing on a single ship as such a def planet will likely be a drag on the overall galaxy score. Sorry for any confusion. Galaxy score is all planets scores, but only for the time they have been in the galaxy - score accumulated before exiling in does not count to galaxy score.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher (Post 3251469)
What Buddah suggested would make DCing at none-anti-social-times possibole.

You mean the original prelaunch showing on scans? Yes to a certain extent it would - I was not responding to that but to galaxy def fleets for which I believe it is usually unnecessary due to the dcing ingal mostly not being at such anti social times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher (Post 3251469)
I dont know how the defence fleets worked this round, but since you ask why it should be limited to MoW/GC, i take it that every members in the alliances had options to control the defence fleets? And if not, then why?

Good question... p3n had it so that everyone could launch fleets. I presume however that it could be set along with the fleets access level. Someone who was a HC and looked at it please enlighten us! Jumping on that train of thought yes it would be much more sensible imo to have galaxy fleets restricted to trusted, or having a separate option where the GC can decide who all can launch them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BloodyButcher (Post 3251469)
Originaly the galaxies did have a "defence fleet", back in R2 you could donate your ships to the galaxy, and they would be automaticly sent to the planet under incomming, iirc. It was a very dumb feature, and was removed for R3

Yes indeed. I was vaguely thinking that almost every suggestion of galaxy defence fleets I have seen since has been a variation on this (though I personally cant remember how it worked); but I am pretty sure that it involved an extra fleet not using existing ones.

p.s. once again galaxy fleets should be discussed elsewhere... respond to this post on them and I promise I wont respond! :D

BloodyButcher 7 May 2016 22:26

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by booji (Post 3251472)
This was certainly not what I meant. The point I was trying to make is that galaxies score is counted for all members of the galaxy, unlike alliances. As such they are unlikely to benefit so much from having a def planet focusing on a single ship as such a def planet will likely be a drag on the overall galaxy score. Sorry for any confusion. Galaxy score is all planets scores, but only for the time they have been in the galaxy - score accumulated before exiling in does not count to galaxy score.


Well, the obvious question should alliances benefit from having def planets focusing on a singel ship?
If not, whats the cause of action? making all 60 planets count for score?
Remove defence fleet from alliance so they wont be benfiting from it nomore?

NoXiouS 12 May 2016 23:20

Re: Replacment suggestion for alliance fleet
 
Imo, every planet in tag should count to score, hence limiting the benefits of single ship def planets. Allyfleet as such needs at least one more round of "testing" before any decisions are made. This round (R66) made so little sense that it shouldn't be taken as base level in any comparison.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:03.

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