Planetarion Forums

Planetarion Forums (https://pirate.planetarion.com/index.php)
-   Planetarion Suggestions (https://pirate.planetarion.com/forumdisplay.php?f=95)
-   -   A few suggestions (https://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=197796)

Demvaril 6 May 2009 16:15

A few suggestions
 
Here's a few ideas as I'm sitting at work bored!!!

How about making alliances only between Galaxies? max number of galaxies allied to 4-5? Make exiling people only possible with damn good reasons, not just the old "he aint active enough" rubbish - exile requests to be passed to admins to decide if the request is reasonable. Devise a mentoring scheme so experienced players can mentor less experienced Gal mates. Introduce more technologies, attack formations, defence formations (hehe could be fun). Have diplomacy - declaring war would increase roid caps for example, trade agreements whereby each person can nominate 3 trade routes which would bring in extra resources (outside own galaxy only) depending on the size of their trading partners - which also would allow a player to blockade trade routes until the traders saw him off.

Just a few ideas thrown into the ring off the top of my head. Not easy to do them i know but as we were bandying stuff about hehe

side note - I played early rounds, then missed a load of rounds and came back 2 rounds ago, if these have been tried already or thrown out then excuse me :)

I copied this from a thread i posted it on as its more at home here.

[B5]Londo 6 May 2009 16:21

Re: A few suggestions
 
I dont like making alliances a galaxy thing particularly; It would mean presumably allies cant control who their members are, beyond the 25 of 5 bp's.
I think a lot of this stuff has been suggested before; I would like more complexity and modes of combat but its all the sort of stuff that dissapears onto the back burner because its not seen as a pressing issue

MrLobster 6 May 2009 17:34

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Demvaril (Post 3173411)
1) How about making alliances only between Galaxies? max number of galaxies allied to 4-5?

2) Make exiling people only possible with damn good reasons, not just the old "he aint active enough" rubbish - exile requests to be passed to admins to decide if the request is reasonable.

3) Devise a mentoring scheme so experienced players can mentor less experienced Gal mates.

4) Introduce more technologies, attack formations, defence formations (hehe could be fun).

5) Have diplomacy - declaring war would increase roid caps for example, trade agreements whereby each person can nominate 3 trade routes which would bring in extra resources (outside own galaxy only) depending on the size of their trading partners - which also would allow a player to blockade trade routes until the traders saw him off.

for those who cant read the block of text.

Anyway I was looking at 5 and thought of a different idea of sorts.

Trade links between alliance and player. It would be a link where your lower alliance players (lower 10%) could get a boost in resource from the alliance every tick.

The trade link would be off set by the tax the alliance fund has, or perhaps a small amount of interest could be added per tick to the alliance fund (1-2%).

The trade link would replace the current alliance donation function.

Ave 7 May 2009 05:04

Re: A few suggestions
 
2-5 sounds all good. I would like to see people stand up for their gals to make them grow and not disband them right away by the actual vote or by exiling themselfs or their galaxy mates.

Mentoring, accessing others planet details would be a good thing and would help certainly to give the new player guidance.

I believe my previous post about ground troops covers the need for new tactics and formations. It will obviously also bring in some more technology.

Setting a public war/nap status. IE declaring war or making agreements would be viable by the community. You could gain some eta bonus to sort your battles. It gets more interesting to all without access to politics. Perhaps some sort of negatination system could be created also. But will get back to that, gotta run to work.

Makhil 7 May 2009 06:25

Re: A few suggestions
 
Exiling people is a good option when you're unlucky with the shuffle. I see no reason to penalize a gal further. Exiles should be allowed between tick 36 and tick 72. Then I have no problem with your suggestion.

Appocomaster 7 May 2009 18:20

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Makhil (Post 3173457)
Exiling people is a good option when you're unlucky with the shuffle. I see no reason to penalize a gal further. Exiles should be allowed between tick 36 and tick 72. Then I have no problem with your suggestion.

so where do those players you exile out go? Do they go to c200, and then if they log back in tick 73 and fill up the 'holes' created ticks 36-72, what then? What about galaxies where inactives are the 'norm' rather than the 'exception'

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ave (Post 3173456)
2-5 sounds all good. I would like to see people stand up for their gals to make them grow and not disband them right away by the actual vote or by exiling themselfs or their galaxy mates.

It's hard work when you have galaxy members you feel less active than you. When you see your roids lost because they don't send defence, or when you attack and gain roids to help the galaxy grow and they don't, it's discouraging. If there's only a few people in your galaxy, you want to exile those people. If you are in a galaxy that has lots of those people, you want to exile (or disband the galaxy).
What happens to those people that are exiled / left in the inactive galaxy?

Quote:

Mentoring, accessing others planet details would be a good thing and would help certainly to give the new player guidance.
Speaking as the last surviving member of the mentor team in 2004, when we got 5-6 people together to mentor and were an absolute failure, before moving into the support team, it's hard to get people together to want to help out and mentor, especially arranging coverage from volunteers. Allowing players to access other players planet details would be a huge trust issue; though less so if mentors were only assigned to specific planets. Adding in such settings obviously takes time, and it's much easier (though more inconvenient) to work with planets by getting them to paste / describe their issues and talk them through.
I still don't know that we'd
a) get enough people willing to spend the time to talk (or do more than the current support team do), or
b) have any sort of direction or aim beyond "helping players", or
c) have enough infrastructure coded and in place to successfully support b) and/or potentially reduce the issue of a)


Quote:

I believe my previous post about ground troops covers the need for new tactics and formations. It will obviously also brng in some more technology.
I'm not sure about this whole ground troops thing. Whilst some players do want new features, others just want a game they can understand and play easily. I'd only be willing to add something like ground troops in if it were optional and not compulsory, for that reason. It's the same reason I'd also want some sort of auto option for any micromanagement added.

Quote:

Setting a public war/nap status. IE declaring war or making agreements would be viable by the community. You could gain some eta bonus to sort your battles. It gets more interesting to all without access to politics. Perhaps some sort of negatination system could be created also. But will get back to that, gotta run to work.
Covered at least some of this in my blog (quoted below).
I assume you mean viewable /visable by "viable". I disagree with eta bonuses; I far prefer asteroid cap changes and xp bonuses (the XP one obviously feeding off the asteroid cap bonus). I'm not so sure about the NAP system, but it could come into effect with a similar startup/cooldown period, perhaps to complement a "friendly fire" feature.

Quote:

Originally Posted by me
War

I know this has been knocked around in some forms, but I'd like to introduce an option for galaxies and alliances to go to war with other respective galaxies / alliances. It would be a case of:
gc / hcs specify target
12 ticks "warmup time", during which you can cancel the war
target mailed / war announced on "feed"
48 period of 1 way "war", during which you get significant xp bonuses and an increased roid cap on targets
12 tick "cool down" period, during which you cannot attack anyone else

no intel will be provided when you go to war with someone, so intel is important for alliance wars
you can only go to war with 1 player

I was also looking at some sort of ranking system, i.e. you'd get (their initial score)/(your initial score) * function( xp gained in war, roids capped in war), and you could average this to find how effective you were in war, and have a 'warlords' ranking.

I added in the 12 ticks either side to give the dcs a rest, really. I'm more worried about that than anything else.

p.s.
these should all really be in different threads :(

Makhil 8 May 2009 00:38

Re: A few suggestions
 
I think exiles shouldn't go to C200 but to 1:1

MrLobster 8 May 2009 01:22

Re: A few suggestions
 
only allow 1 attack fleet? with 2 def fleets?

Makhil 8 May 2009 03:57

Re: A few suggestions
 
time to allow friendly fire and/or fire on non ally attacking same target...

Ave 8 May 2009 04:22

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Appocomaster (Post 3173512)
so where do those players you exile out go? Do they go to c200, and then if they log back in tick 73 and fill up the 'holes' created ticks 36-72, what then? What about galaxies where inactives are the 'norm' rather than the 'exception'


It's hard work when you have galaxy members you feel less active than you. When you see your roids lost because they don't send defence, or when you attack and gain roids to help the galaxy grow and they don't, it's discouraging. If there's only a few people in your galaxy, you want to exile those people. If you are in a galaxy that has lots of those people, you want to exile (or disband the galaxy).
What happens to those people that are exiled / left in the inactive galaxy?


Speaking as the last surviving member of the mentor team in 2004, when we got 5-6 people together to mentor and were an absolute failure, before moving into the support team, it's hard to get people together to want to help out and mentor, especially arranging coverage from volunteers. Allowing players to access other players planet details would be a huge trust issue; though less so if mentors were only assigned to specific planets. Adding in such settings obviously takes time, and it's much easier (though more inconvenient) to work with planets by getting them to paste / describe their issues and talk them through.
I still don't know that we'd
a) get enough people willing to spend the time to talk (or do more than the current support team do), or
b) have any sort of direction or aim beyond "helping players", or
c) have enough infrastructure coded and in place to successfully support b) and/or potentially reduce the issue of a)



I'm not sure about this whole ground troops thing. Whilst some players do want new features, others just want a game they can understand and play easily. I'd only be willing to add something like ground troops in if it were optional and not compulsory, for that reason. It's the same reason I'd also want some sort of auto option for any micromanagement added.


Covered at least some of this in my blog (quoted below).
I assume you mean viewable /visable by "viable". I disagree with eta bonuses; I far prefer asteroid cap changes and xp bonuses (the XP one obviously feeding off the asteroid cap bonus). I'm not so sure about the NAP system, but it could come into effect with a similar startup/cooldown period, perhaps to complement a "friendly fire" feature.



p.s.
these should all really be in different threads :(

And again its highly discouraging for the less active or new players to see every decent player to leave the galaxy, simply because they feel to be better than the rest. The whole idea of random gals dies when u let people disband their galaxies or jump over till they find friends/friendly gal.

Bring back private gals then?

People are really jumping over to satisfy their allinace wishes, or simply cause they self are lame loosers who cant stand up for anyone else than themselfs (and probably not that either.)

I was more like thinking of setting a referal code and whom has matching referals can get access to some basic details of the friend playing. ie. u do have a friend/referal list and clicking one of their names/coords, opens up the developement procress, mine/fleet ratio, fleet, + whats ever nessesary details to mentor. And I am only speaking of mentoring your friends or people u have invited to the game. Not some public mentor team.

Yeah I can speak from experience that how ever sucky the game is, when its slow and simple enough someone will come to it (**********.) For everyone that seeks for some action its plain stupid and sucky tho. How ever automating some basic features u dont fancy handling wouldnt be a bad idea at all.

Appocomaster 8 May 2009 07:25

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ave (Post 3173544)
And again its highly discouraging for the less active or new players to see every decent player to leave the galaxy, simply because they feel to be better than the rest. The whole idea of random gals dies when u let people disband their galaxies or jump over till they find friends/friendly gal.

Bring back private gals then?

People are really jumping over to satisfy their allinace wishes, or simply cause they self are lame loosers who cant stand up for anyone else than themselfs (and probably not that either.)

I was more like thinking of setting a referal code and whom has matching referals can get access to some basic details of the friend playing. ie. u do have a friend/referal list and clicking one of their names/coords, opens up the developement procress, mine/fleet ratio, fleet, + whats ever nessesary details to mentor. And I am only speaking of mentoring your friends or people u have invited to the game. Not some public mentor team.

Yeah I can speak from experience that how ever sucky the game is, when its slow and simple enough someone will come to it (**********.) For everyone that seeks for some action its plain stupid and sucky tho. How ever automating some basic features u dont fancy handling wouldnt be a bad idea at all.

private galaxies would support the less active players how? They'd be grouped together and roided like now.


That mentor system sounds a bit abusable unless it's done via referrers and buddy packs. I'm not sure on it's uptake either.

Ave 8 May 2009 14:35

Re: A few suggestions
 
It does take away the need to ask around for the progress as u can self view it, this does not mean u can actually click something over there... just the data gets pasted to u or something.

Then u can simply mail the new guy instrcuctions how to go forward for example.

If priv gals change nothing, why dont u allow them straight away? The random gals can get several protection set ups... Or divide them under willing mentors/oldies playing random to guide them. Its far more better than getting shit from over half of the community who act like pricks...

MrLobster 8 May 2009 21:25

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Makhil (Post 3173543)
time to allow friendly fire and/or fire on non ally attacking same target...

Ooohh i like that one, however is does restrict attacks, and doesnt pervent multi waves.

Crazy Idea #210
Capping % decreases the more times a planet has been attacked.

[DW]Entropy 8 May 2009 21:29

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MrLobster (Post 3173565)
Crazy Idea #210
Capping % decreases the more times a planet has been attacked.

So if you were attacked enough you could potentially be immune to roid loss?

MrLobster 8 May 2009 23:00

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by [DW]Entropy (Post 3173566)
So if you were attacked enough you could potentially be immune to roid loss?

Like losing all your roids.

The Cap % would increase after each tick without hostiles.

[DW]Entropy 9 May 2009 09:59

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MrLobster (Post 3173567)
Like losing all your roids.

The Cap % would increase after each tick without hostiles.

but would the attacker be able to see this? not much point landing on someone if you have a 5% roid cap you didnt know about...a waste of 14 ticks.

Patrikc 9 May 2009 12:13

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by [DW]Entropy (Post 3173598)
but would the attacker be able to see this? not much point landing on someone if you have a 5% roid cap you didnt know about...a waste of 14 ticks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manual
Jumpgate Probe
This scan will reveal any fleets traveling to the same planet, both hostile and friendly. It does not require a ship, launched or not, or even a free fleet slot.
This scan costs 7000 of each resource.


I guess something like 30% cap on first wave, decreasing 5% every land directly after that with a minimum of 15%, and increasing 5% every tick without a landing.

I like the idea.

MrLobster 9 May 2009 16:28

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by [DW]Entropy (Post 3173598)
but would the attacker be able to see this? not much point landing on someone if you have a 5% roid cap you didnt know about...a waste of 14 ticks.

Do people get to see cov-op chance? But seeing as cov-ops are instant, then yes i guess some way of getting a basic info.

Maybe a basic system like All Clear, Yellow Alert, Red Alert and you would see if in the news like.

"Due to recent hostile actions, our military status has been raised to Yellow Alert".

and when it decreases.

"Our fleet status has been lowered to All Clear".

Alert status also directly limit roid capping.

All Clear = 25%
Yellow Alert = 15%
Red Alert = 5%

So your still capping at red alert, but its more worth while to attack another target if you want a higher cap.

Also this could even lead to people actually launching attacks through out the the day to beat the midday landers.

Mzyxptlk 9 May 2009 17:34

Re: A few suggestions
 
I don't understand anything you said there.

(Also, for the love of god, not another "hey guys, I have a bunch of random ideas" thread.)

MrLobster 9 May 2009 23:19

Re: A few suggestions
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3173642)
I don't understand anything you said there.

(Also, for the love of god, not another "hey guys, I have a bunch of random ideas" thread.)

Presume you mean my thoughts, and Its not random ideas, its called the Crazy Ideas.

1) Everyone starts on "All Clear".

2) Once you get attacked your status get modified, decreasing the max cap loss on the next incoming.

3) Every tick your not attacked your status is change to increase cap loss.

Modifying status would be

Lander Hostile = +4 Point
No hostiles = -1 Point

Note: I'm going to change the names of each Alert Status to Green, Yellow, Red.

Green = 1-3 = 25% Cap Loss
Yellow = 4-6 = 15% Cap Loss
Red = 7-10 = 5% Cap Loss
If Alert Level is above 10 then its dropped down to 10

So lets say your on Alert Status Green, and you get 3 hostile incoming 1 tick apart.

First Wave
When the first one lands he caps 25%, then adds +4 to the Alert Level. Because the Alert Level is at +4 your Alert Status changes to Yellow and posts it in your news (for all to see).

Second Wave
Second wave hits, they cap 15% (Yellow Alert max cap). After roid capping Alert Level is increased by +4, bringing it into range of Red Alert, which is then announced in your news.

Third Wave
Now the max cap for red alert is set to 5%, meaning its very little in the way of roids. But if the attacker does land then it adds +4 to the Alert Level after capping roids. But because the max Alert level can only be 10 then its dropped down.

Now for every tick with no hostile your alert status drops by 1, so with in 10 ticks your back at Green Alert.

So if anyone wants full cap after an attacker landed, they would have to wait 4 ticks. But at 15% its not too bad.

This would most likely reduce multi fleets down to 2 a day.

Mzyxptlk 9 May 2009 23:56

Re: A few suggestions
 
Doesn't solve the problem, just disguise it.

P.S.
This bit:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk (Post 3173642)
(Also, for the love of god, not another "hey guys, I have a bunch of random ideas" thread.)

Was aimed at the OP.

Makhil 10 May 2009 01:26

Re: A few suggestions
 
I like the idea, and it would be an improvement in the game to have it implemented. I'm not sure about the status being shown in News coz of the 4 ticks delay in news scan.
I'd rather have a green/yellow/red led just next to the planet name on the gal page. People who don't like it should have the option to turn it off (grey) in Preferences.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:49.

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