User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 07:19   #1
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Next round alliance limits

With all the round 23 threads going around, I thought I'd kick start this discussion.

It really should be at least 150 so my inactive ass warrants a spot in the Ascendancy tag next round.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 07:29   #2
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

... It should be kept at 70.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 07:48   #3
Alki
Drink is Good
 
Alki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
Alki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Next round alliance limits

because...?
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
Alki is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 08:15   #4
Walldo
Stealth & Shadows
 
Walldo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wall|y-doh
Posts: 102
Walldo is on a distinguished road
Re: Next round alliance limits

No limits is fine aswell, the lesser restriction in this game, the better it is.
__________________
"The Mighty Walldo Experience"


Playing since RND1 and counting

Proud to have been

Newdawn

Wolfpack - WPO - OoO - Kralizec Stealth & Shadows - []LCH[] - [1up] - VisioN - TFD
Ultores - Conspiracy Theory - Concordium - WaC - Blue Tuba - Fury - Thieves & Pirates - OUZO -Vengeance - Elysium - Mistu - LOST - 4S - GoCi - FAnG - Novus Ordo Seclorum - Xanadu - BULL - VGN -xVx
Walldo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 08:25   #5
isildurx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Noruega
Posts: 2,999
isildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond reputeisildurx has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alki
because...?
So TGV doesnt have to recruit\do any work?
__________________
"Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of War"
isildurx is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 08:52   #6
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

I think i've listed my reasons for wanting a low alliance limit so many times I cannot be bothered listing them yet again.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 09:06   #7
Zaejii
This Space for Rent
Speedy Thief Champion, Turbo Turtle Champion, Cop-For-This Champion
 
Zaejii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 583
Zaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud of
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I think i've listed my reasons for wanting a low alliance limit so many times I cannot be bothered listing them yet again.
low ally limits would be cool (40ish) but only if this whole support / blocking thing went away imo. its bad enough for 2-3 big alliances to team up on one let alone have 4 'smaller' ones team up against one.
__________________
When in doubt, blame Ascendancy.
#pastats
Zaejii is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 09:14   #8
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

I want the supportplanet rule changed, I am currently working on a suggestion in regards to it to ease up on the current nazi order of interpreting the supportplanet rule.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 10:05   #9
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaejii
low ally limits would be cool (40ish) but only if this whole support / blocking thing went away imo.
Does it look lie this "support" thing is going away? It's not like it hasn't been around since what, round one or two? Given that assumption, the logical follow-up is that low alliance limits will be bad because the support thing definately isn't going away.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 10:07   #10
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Next round alliance limits

If people want a 40 man tag limit I'm fine with that but for the love of god stop with the idea that there's only going to be 40 people in the alliance or that that would be even a vaguely good idea.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 10:19   #11
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I think i've listed my reasons for wanting a low alliance limit so many times I cannot be bothered listing them yet again.
How about you dig up an old post and link to it at least?

I think the alliance limit should be higher than any current alliance's member count, as to allow for growth, but at the same time low enough that no alliances will be able to be competitive solely by way of recruiting.

150 is a good balance here. On the one hand, it allows approximately 50-110% growth of most alliances. This is a good margin and means that the cost of accepting a new member is very low. However, the current 70 best players will still beat 150 'weak' players. If not by pure score, they can recruit newbies/small planets*.

* A very specific, strong incentive for the 70 players to include "other people" by whatever definition. It's cheap, it's easy and it gets us more players.

Edit: Oh yeah, while I used to be a big fan of the 'very low' (15-40) limit on alliances, I have absolutely no desire to play with alliances that small, as they allow only the 'hardcore' to play competitively. That sucks.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 11:37   #12
paolo
Kwaak
 
paolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 296
paolo is a name known to allpaolo is a name known to allpaolo is a name known to allpaolo is a name known to allpaolo is a name known to allpaolo is a name known to all
Re: Next round alliance limits

I'm also for at least 150 man alliances. If you want to make planetarion bigger again, set up the game to cater for that increase. We have to stop putting limits on everything, because it makes the game less attractive. It takes people too long to really get into the game and get hooked and when they finally get hooked on the game, it's even harder to get into a good alliance. We really have to make the game more approachable and open.

The large bucks aren't with the hardcore elite players, but with the less active casual players. With the current set up you keep those players out of most alliances, which makes the game less attractive and fun for them.
paolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 12:20   #13
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
How about you dig up an old post and link to it at least?

I think the alliance limit should be higher than any current alliance's member count, as to allow for growth, but at the same time low enough that no alliances will be able to be competitive solely by way of recruiting.

150 is a good balance here. On the one hand, it allows approximately 50-110% growth of most alliances. This is a good margin and means that the cost of accepting a new member is very low. However, the current 70 best players will still beat 150 'weak' players. If not by pure score, they can recruit newbies/small planets*.

* A very specific, strong incentive for the 70 players to include "other people" by whatever definition. It's cheap, it's easy and it gets us more players.

Edit: Oh yeah, while I used to be a big fan of the 'very low' (15-40) limit on alliances, I have absolutely no desire to play with alliances that small, as they allow only the 'hardcore' to play competitively. That sucks.
Even by the current account numbers (about 2900 active planets) which is bound to be less by the next round being a paid one, 150 planets is quite alot, infact its more than 5% of the current base. with an high estimate of 2500 planets next round it will more or less grade to at about 7% of the playerbase. With this free round and a limit at 70, we've seen several new alliances being formed, some old returning and a few others being rejuvenated. I think that positive growth in the communities around is a positive development.

You dont need to have 149 allymates in this game to have fun, or to be a force in the game, 70 or even 60 is plenty enough. The arguments I still stand for is that the variety of alliances helps keeping the game alive, plus it also evens the playing field. Yes, there have been some who have been abusing the limits and having more planets than allowed, but whatever the limits is, that will always happen, and should not be an argument for changing the limit.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 12:28   #14
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Next round alliance limits

Definately, if the limits are kept at 70, some descisions need to be made regarding how the limits are, if they are, enforced. Just "because this alliance HC is nice and fluffly they get to break the rules, and this one guy is annoying, so he doesn't" isn't really a great way to enforce that sort of things.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 12:46   #15
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
Even by the current account numbers (about 2900 active planets) which is bound to be less by the next round being a paid one, 150 planets is quite alot, infact its more than 5% of the current base. with an high estimate of 2500 planets next round it will more or less grade to at about 7% of the playerbase. With this free round and a limit at 70, we've seen several new alliances being formed, some old returning and a few others being rejuvenated. I think that positive growth in the communities around is a positive development.

You dont need to have 149 allymates in this game to have fun, or to be a force in the game, 70 or even 60 is plenty enough. The arguments I still stand for is that the variety of alliances helps keeping the game alive, plus it also evens the playing field. Yes, there have been some who have been abusing the limits and having more planets than allowed, but whatever the limits is, that will always happen, and should not be an argument for changing the limit.
Major new alliances have, to the best of my (admittedly fairly poor) knowledge about these things, come from old alliances. If we look for new alliances that aren't old players coming back for a free round, we have to look around rank 18-20.

I've just mailed all the alliances that are significantly below the limit of 70 members to see exactly how many members they had applying to them.
I know that the top10 alliances were very much over-applied for, but early indications suggest that almost anyone who wants to join an alliance joins an alliance in the top 15 or not at all.
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 12:50   #16
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
You dont need to have 149 allymates in this game to have fun, or to be a force in the game, 70 or even 60 is plenty enough.
Given that 'fun' is entirely subjective, how are you to judge what I find to be fun?

Incidentally, I don't need 149 other people in my alliance to have fun, I just need the right 10-20 people. And those 10-20 people probably each need the right 10-20 people. There will be some overlap, of course, but who decides where to draw the line?

Why does your definition of fun cause 60-70 to be some sort of magic number?

Quote:
The arguments I still stand for is that the variety of alliances helps keeping the game alive, plus it also evens the playing field.
I think you're missing a word or two here, I don't follow.

Quote:
Yes, there have been some who have been abusing the limits and having more planets than allowed, but whatever the limits is, that will always happen, and should not be an argument for changing the limit.
Actually, given that it's been used as an argument for keeping the limit (only one alliance hit the limit this round, therefore the limit should go down), that's exactly what it is. I don't have access to the alliance reps forum at the moment, but I'm sure you can find the threads I'm referring to.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 12:56   #17
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Given that 'fun' is entirely subjective, how are you to judge what I find to be fun?

Incidentally, I don't need 149 other people in my alliance to have fun, I just need the right 10-20 people. And those 10-20 people probably each need the right 10-20 people. There will be some overlap, of course, but who decides where to draw the line?

Erm, I think you are overdoing the drama here to be honest, yes, fun is subjective, I wont find a universe with only a few big alliances fun ,but rather extremly boring. Playing in such an enviroment is not something I feel like trying nor would care to play in.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:03   #18
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Next round alliance limits

Personally (though I think that this has been stated by others elsewhere), I think that increasing the alliance limit to something sufficiently high would force the HCs to choose how many members they actually want in their alliance.

In the earlier rounds, the active but more compact alliances were often able to win over the bigger, more unmanagable alliances because they were better able to co-ordinate.

It's not dissimilar to relating it to the issues with several alliances co-ordinating attacks on other alliances at the same time. 300 members in an alliance - how realistic is it to do defence calls, arrange attacks and so forth?


On the other hand, how many experienced people are willing to start up alliances now? there's quite a lot of overhead, and more people are willing to play semi actively in alliances with friends
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:14   #19
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Next round alliance limits

The nature of PAX as opposed to PA means that the game is more weighted towards the "newbie mass" than the guys putting in the hours now though.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:19   #20
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
Personally (though I think that this has been stated by others elsewhere), I think that increasing the alliance limit to something sufficiently high would force the HCs to choose how many members they actually want in their alliance.

In the earlier rounds, the active but more compact alliances were often able to win over the bigger, more unmanagable alliances because they were better able to co-ordinate.
The biggest difference is the playerpool, there was enough people around to keep it going, now there isnt. You got the stats, how many people are in an alliance?
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:21   #21
Appocomaster
PA Team
 
Appocomaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
Appocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAppocomaster spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Next round alliance limits

Ignoring c200:
1377 people in an alliance
36 people applied and waiting
950 people not in an alliance
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
Appocomaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:22   #22
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Next round alliance limits

Part of what jester is saying is that increasing the size of the alliance limits is going to bring in more people kargool.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:25   #23
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Part of what jester is saying is that increasing the size of the alliance limits is going to bring in more people kargool.
I doubt it will bring in more people. Thats my problem with it.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:36   #24
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
Personally (though I think that this has been stated by others elsewhere), I think that increasing the alliance limit to something sufficiently high would force the HCs to choose how many members they actually want in their alliance.

In the earlier rounds, the active but more compact alliances were often able to win over the bigger, more unmanagable alliances because they were better able to co-ordinate.

It's not dissimilar to relating it to the issues with several alliances co-ordinating attacks on other alliances at the same time. 300 members in an alliance - how realistic is it to do defence calls, arrange attacks and so forth?


On the other hand, how many experienced people are willing to start up alliances now? there's quite a lot of overhead, and more people are willing to play semi actively in alliances with friends
Tech is miles better, but I subscribe to Rob's argument that alliances over a certain size become unmanageable by societal nature.

This is one of the reasons I think that alliances should be allowed to be as big as they want. There's an obvious disadvantage to having too big alliances. Especially now that the scoring rule offsets 'pure' recruiting drives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I doubt it will bring in more people. Thats my problem with it.
Unfortunately for both of us, the only way we can find out is by trying it out a round or two, preferably announced well in advance so alliances can adapt. Now is a good time to do so, more than three weeks before next round starts.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:46   #25
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
Tech is miles better, but I subscribe to Rob's argument that alliances over a certain size become unmanageable by societal nature.

This is one of the reasons I think that alliances should be allowed to be as big as they want. There's an obvious disadvantage to having too big alliances. Especially now that the scoring rule offsets 'pure' recruiting drives.

Unfortunately for both of us, the only way we can find out is by trying it out a round or two, preferably announced well in advance so alliances can adapt. Now is a good time to do so, more than three weeks before next round starts.
I think it's rather stupid to be thinking in to broad terms here, adapting the game to societal natures?

One round last 7 weeks, and using sociological arguments for advancing the removal of alliance limits is downwards just an overdo.

Well, me as an alliance hc is completely against it, and so is several other hc's in various alliances.
It is time to put this neverending saga to rest and just accept the fact that the game needs alliance limits.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:57   #26
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I think it's rather stupid to be thinking in to broad terms here, adapting the game to societal natures?

One round last 7 weeks, and using sociological arguments for advancing the removal of alliance limits is downwards just an overdo.
This isn't parsing for me.

Quote:
Well, me as an alliance hc is completely against it, and so is several other hc's in various alliances.
It is time to put this neverending saga to rest and just accept the fact that the game needs alliance limits.
Likewise, I think that you and the other whining gits should let go of the Obiora case and just accept the fact that the world needs violent cops
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 13:58   #27
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I think it's rather stupid to be thinking in to broad terms here, adapting the game to societal natures?

One round last 7 weeks, and using sociological arguments for advancing the removal of alliance limits is downwards just an overdo.
Actually it is not, because sociology is about social relationships between people. These did play a huge role in earlier rounds - just remember how often split-offs from huge alliances happened and as such new alliances evolved. If that ain't supporting the thesis jester and rob are basing their assumptions on, then I don't know what should be.
Maybe you also deny evolution and rather believe the creationists because it is much easier to believe into some rubbish without having to think about its background?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
Well, me as an alliance hc is completely against it, and so is several other hc's in various alliances.
It is time to put this neverending saga to rest and just accept the fact that the game needs alliance limits.
Too bad that alliance hc's are not designing the game then, is it?

I wonder why alliance hc's would be against it, nobody forces them to recruit additional members. Personally I think some HCs are simply too afraid that people dislike their alliance and thus don't want to join it, but there's a simple solution for it: make your alliance attractive towards people.
Or would it be that alliance hc's just want some kind of equality? Well, every alliance has equal chances, they just have to take them.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 14:01   #28
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
I wonder why alliance hc's would be against it, nobody forces them to recruit additional members. Personally I think some HCs are simply too afraid that people dislike their alliance and thus don't want to join it, but there's a simple solution for it: make your alliance attractive towards people.
Or would it be that alliance hc's just want some kind of equality? Well, every alliance has equal chances, they just have to take them.
Personally I think they prefer smaller alliances, and therefore don't want to be "forced" to accept more members under the assumption that they must recruit to the limit to be competitive.

Or maybe it's harder to say no to people when they're under the limit.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 14:06   #29
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Actually it is not, because sociology is about social relationships between people. These did play a huge role in earlier rounds - just remember how often split-offs from huge alliances happened and as such new alliances evolved. If that ain't supporting the thesis jester and rob are basing their assumptions on, then I don't know what should be.
Maybe you also deny evolution and rather believe the creationists because it is much easier to believe into some rubbish without having to think about its background?



Too bad that alliance hc's are not designing the game then, is it?

I wonder why alliance hc's would be against it, nobody forces them to recruit additional members. Personally I think some HCs are simply too afraid that people dislike their alliance and thus don't want to join it, but there's a simple solution for it: make your alliance attractive towards people.
Or would it be that alliance hc's just want some kind of equality? Well, every alliance has equal chances, they just have to take them.

I just happen to disagree with using it for a community as Planetarion, based on the fact that sociological environments are based on immensely bigger societies than the current playerbase of this game. We still have split offs, but its no longer 150 people splitting out, its 10-15..
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 14:12   #30
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
The nature of PAX as opposed to PA means that the game is more weighted towards the "newbie mass" than the guys putting in the hours now though.
Not to mention the relatively short rounds. *hint*
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 14:12   #31
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I just happen to disagree with using it for a community as Planetarion, based on the fact that sociological environments are based on immensely bigger societies than the current playerbase of this game. We still have split offs, but its no longer 150 people splitting out, its 10-15..
Care to bring up some "split off" examples from the previous 5 rounds or so? What I experienced was rather people quitting instead of splitting off to form a new alliance.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 14:25   #32
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I just happen to disagree with using it for a community as Planetarion, based on the fact that sociological environments are based on immensely bigger societies than the current playerbase of this game. We still have split offs, but its no longer 150 people splitting out, its 10-15..
Actually sociology deals with any distinguishable group which exists. I haven't seen very many split-offs to be honest. Certainly not in the last few rounds.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 14:27   #33
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I just happen to disagree with using it for a community as Planetarion, based on the fact that sociological environments are based on immensely bigger societies than the current playerbase of this game. We still have split offs, but its no longer 150 people splitting out, its 10-15..
*sigh*

Edit: I think I need to expound. I'm not saying that the PA community is hitting Dunbar's number. I'm saying that alliances are societies, and as such are affected by Dunbar's number. That's the 'societal nature' I'm talking about half a page up that Kargool obviously didn't get.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......

Last edited by Jester; 31 Jul 2007 at 18:08.
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 20:10   #34
Gerbie2
Alive and kicking
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Kingdom of the Netherlands
Posts: 220
Gerbie2 is a name known to allGerbie2 is a name known to allGerbie2 is a name known to allGerbie2 is a name known to allGerbie2 is a name known to allGerbie2 is a name known to all
Re: Next round alliance limits

Alliances are not societies. People band together quite losely. So according to Dunbar we should be looking at 30-50 ppl in alliances, given their nature. Might work i.m.o.
Gerbie2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 20:14   #35
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerbie2
Alliances are not societies. People band together quite losely. So according to Dunbar we should be looking at 30-50 ppl in alliances, given their nature. Might work i.m.o.
"A society is a grouping of individuals, which is characterized by common interests and may have distinctive culture and institutions."

I guess alliances are societies after all then.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 20:14   #36
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerbie2
Alliances are not societies. People band together quite losely. So according to Dunbar we should be looking at 30-50 ppl in alliances, given their nature. Might work i.m.o.
Your alliance maybe, mine is tighter than an 8 year old's hoo-haa.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 20:47   #37
gzambo
Fightin-irish for life
 
gzambo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: guinness brewery
Posts: 2,177
gzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant futuregzambo has a brilliant future
Re: Next round alliance limits

i wouldnt have a problem with raising the alliance limit , although the the likes of the support rule would have to be adjusted or removed

having larger alliances may mean we dont have the current political situation where its 1 half of the top 10 versus the other half
larger alliance will require more work but each alliances hc can decide if they wish to recruit to the maximum limit or not

personally i would prefer keeping some sort of upper limit

i'm thinking of an intial limit of 80 which can rise to 100 , the last 20 members must be under each alliances average score ,

getting back to the initial post a desicion on this would be better sooner rather than later
__________________
Ascendancy, now with added Irish

"In the absence of orders, find something and kill it."
-Rommel
gzambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 20:54   #38
Wandows
[Vision]
 
Wandows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 897
Wandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

I'm all for removing the alliance limit, or increasing it to 150 (which is pretty close to removing it). I've always hated the fact we had to turn down recruits because of ingame limits. I also know various players quit the game because the game limits prevented them from playing with the group/community they wanted. You can argue the limits all you want, but fact remains that a out-of-game (irc) community simply cannot be restricted by ingame limits. It doesn't work, ever. You have ppl meeting eachother, enjoying to play with eachother, and they won't seperate because the game tells them to (well they have to atm, but that doesn't really make the players happy).

It serves absolutely no purpose at all, not to mention that atm there isn't any decent alliance left with open spots. If you honestly think that is better than perhaps ending a round with bigger gaps between alliances due to quality/communities standing out more, i don't know what you are thinking. Obviously it will mean a shift of players, some quality players might leave lower quality alliances for better ones. But in all honesty, this isn't a problem, if they leave because game limits allow them to join a better alliance, they most likely weren't that happy and/or loyal to begin with.

Currently all seems to be done to support the desperate plea of "shit" alliances who risk losing their good members to better organized/quality alliances once space opens up (or them being annoyed by having to put in more work to compete). I doubt we'll see he huge change in the amount of alliances, there are simply to many existing communities that want to play their own way. No or higher alliance limits would allow for more players to experience "good" alliances, teaching them alot about the game, and should eventually give more experienced and quality players. Once alliances grow big, it becomes hard to please all members and that will most likely result in split-offs who think they can do better. This is a much better envirement for alliance "flow" than we have currently, as atm new/poor players have to play with other new/poor players and by that can hardly learn to play the game properly. And that doesn't help anyone, as its more likely to make those players quit.
__________________
[Vision] in a lost dream, contributing to The 5th Element at present
Wandows is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 21:48   #39
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by gzambo
i'm thinking of an intial limit of 80 which can rise to 100 , the last 20 members must be under each alliances average score ,
No matter what the limit is, I can live with anything but that. The 'members under each alliance average score' thing is daft.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 22:01   #40
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
No matter what the limit is, I can live with anything but that. The 'members under each alliance average score' thing is daft.
I completly agree with you on that. Ever since they invented that shity rule/thing i've wondered why exactly there was ever a need for it.
Same goes for counted score towards galaxy & alliance, there might be some great masterplan behind it but i just don't see why we need it.

On topic: I think a memberlimit of 100 should be enough, 150 might be a bit too much but 70 is definetly not enough.
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 22:17   #41
Zaejii
This Space for Rent
Speedy Thief Champion, Turbo Turtle Champion, Cop-For-This Champion
 
Zaejii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 583
Zaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud of
Re: Next round alliance limits

^^ if my memory serves me, i think it was to prevent exiles from determining gal winners late in round and to prevent late round tagging of hidden high score people out of tag (or that had been in another tag) so your ally would win.
__________________
When in doubt, blame Ascendancy.
#pastats
Zaejii is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 31 Jul 2007, 22:18   #42
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

70 is plenty enough.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Aug 2007, 00:01   #43
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I think it's rather stupid to be thinking in to broad terms here, adapting the game to societal natures?
Actually, it's exactly this sort of blinkered thinking (PA IS SPECIAL DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO) that's holding PA back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
One round last 7 weeks, and using sociological arguments for advancing the removal of alliance limits is downwards just an overdo.
We should make the rounds longer. The alliance that wins this round will have won a roid race, and not much else.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerbie2
Alliances are not societies. People band together quite losely. So according to Dunbar we should be looking at 30-50 ppl in alliances, given their nature. Might work i.m.o.
Of course they're societies. I HCed an alliance of 70 members with only two fellow HCs and it was no problem at all, 100 members would have been dandy and 150 would probably have been the limit without using a fully-fledged wing system. I could have told you that without Dunbar's Number as well, but we may as well acknowledge sociology while we're at it.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Aug 2007, 05:11   #44
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaejii
^^ if my memory serves me, i think it was to prevent exiles from determining gal winners late in round and to prevent late round tagging of hidden high score people out of tag (or that had been in another tag) so your ally would win.
Hidden high score people out of tag is just your excellence. If you've kept them out of tag all round, and they've made it to high score. The scoring system prevents taghopping or galhopping to reward, so you only contribute from the gains after you left your latest galaxy/tag. The below-average thing is made to magically prevent recruiting better planets so that shit players yay get to join big alliances and something about F-Crew.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Aug 2007, 07:26   #45
Jester
Pedantic hypocrite
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
Jester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond reputeJester has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veedeejem!
Same goes for counted score towards galaxy & alliance, there might be some great masterplan behind it but i just don't see why we need it.
The counted score rule is OK. It's not terribly bad, and it does have some good side effects. The bad is that it becomes more difficult to swing leads by recruiting, essentially the merit of a player doesn't transfer wholly to an alliance unless it's their first/only tag. This is bad because it has a psychological impact on the people who aren't winning, that might make it more difficult to mount resistance against the winners. Mind you, since the exact same thing applies the opposite way under the old scoring rules, you're pretty much the same place you left off.

So the bad isn't really all that bad. The good is that galaxy and alliance score actually mean something other than 'aggregate score of members', which is in itself a positive thing. Mostly it comes down to being about the sustained growth rates while together. So while the counted score rule reduces the calculated score to less than the sum of the parts, it actually turns galaxy and alliance score into a judgment of the whole, rather than the parts.

It also stops bitches whining about shipjumpers, which is way cool.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 1 Aug 2007, 10:09   #46
Illuvatar
Mastermind
 
Illuvatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 430
Illuvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the rough
Re: Next round alliance limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
Ignoring c200:
950 people not in an alliance
says enough, thats what we should aim for. when I started playing pa the exciting point was when I joined my first alliance in R4 (TSU) and saw the dc calls in private. My first impression was "hey, theres much more going on in pa". So I played and never forgot about this game, made a comeback in R9 and R14 and now I'm still here and kicking. I'd say raise the limit a bit, I'm personally fine with the idea of recruiting a bunch of those 950 allyless players as I'm sure the fun starts for at least 20-30% through alliances which is 300 players. If we all agree to that we might actually help pa if thats one of the intentions of this thread. lots of complaining is going on instead of improving, I do understand that to a certain limit. especially the eula must be more strict regarding support planets. I will call a spade a spade: atleast 3 alliance used them this round and didnt get caught. and thats a huge problem in pa. We need to talk about problem solutions - complaining doesnt get us any further. A few voted to remove the ally limits completely, leaves a problem with multi planets - I say we gotta be much more strict on that. recruit more multihunters who arent biased in the first place...no offence but still thats the major problems in pa atm imo. my 5 cents here..
__________________

Community Leader
Illuvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Aug 2007, 14:42   #47
Awake
Asleep.
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Leeds.
Posts: 48
Awake has a spectacular aura aboutAwake has a spectacular aura aboutAwake has a spectacular aura about
Re: Next round alliance limits

I think keeping them at 70 would seem to work well.

Although I haven't played the game with these new alliance features (not played with an alliance since round 6) but from what I've read up on and can tell, from an outsiders point of view they seem to have worked well and been reasonable.
__________________
Awake.

Plastic Brilliance
Awake is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Aug 2007, 21:34   #48
Veil05
NE
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
Veil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud of
Re: Next round alliance limits

I think removing alliance limits is a great idea. If an alliance wants to have 150 members, there more likely to recruit shit/inactives/spies. It adds a whole new tactic to the game. you can either play:

A) small and elite
B) large and brute force

i say no alliance limits at all.
__________________
PEACE.
Veil05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Aug 2007, 15:46   #49
_Kila_
break it down!
 
_Kila_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,087
_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society_Kila_ is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Next round alliance limits

At first I was skeptical about Jester and Rob's "let's remove the alliance limit" arguments but after a little thought, I think that it would work out as alliances would have to stop recruiting at some point as having too many members will merely damage an alliance.

The complications, however, are that two seperate alliances may be able to share a tag, function seperately and borrow defence from each other - they wouldn't get too big to function and would be able to benefit fromt he score of both alliances. This would, however, mean that the two alliances only gain half the credit of the win :/
__________________
I put the sex in dyslexia!
_Kila_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Aug 2007, 16:51   #50
Cochese
Retired
 
Cochese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Back Porch Bar
Posts: 2,593
Cochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond reputeCochese has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Next round alliance limits

Remove them for a round.

If it turns out to be shit, change it back for r24.
__________________
I'd rather be fishing.

Utterly useless since r3
Cochese is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:39.


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