|
27 May 2006, 03:02
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austria, Vienna
Posts: 326
|
OOGOOA/alliance fund
inspired by a thread on AD i suggest two things:
about the out of gal/cluster/ally defence rule: either hardcode it please if possible for next round or just get rid of that rule.
about the alliance fund: there should be a hardcoded limitation to prevent abuse (having planets out of tag saving resources, join the tag for a tick, donate all resources, leave tag again)
members should only be allowed to use (donate and trade) the fund only if they spent a specific time in the ally.
maybe something like this: if a planet joins the ally at tick 100, he can use the fund only from tick 160 on.
or joins at tick 300 he needs to wait until tick 480
so basically a waiting time of 60% of the ticks already done at the tick of joining.
__________________
eXilition
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 03:32
|
#2
|
I can be your hero!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 42
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Unsure on the restrictions, they seem quite severe.
One alternative to reduce all abuse with the alliance fund is to perhaps change it into an alliance tax. It could be set to a small percentage of a players mining income whilst they're in the alliance. This way would make it impossible for any player to stockpile resources and join/leave an alliance.
I seriously doubt if people would like the idea though!
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 03:48
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austria, Vienna
Posts: 326
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
the 60% was just my first idea; i am pretty sure that ppl who are better with formulae can find a nice solution
and yeah i think the tax as u suggested wouldn't be wanted by many ppl :P
__________________
eXilition
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 06:00
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
remove allifund all together as its an abuseable future ingame or set on a % of the members incomming res so the donating monkeys stops
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 18:51
|
#5
|
The Dance King
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 66
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
I think to get rid of the ally fund is the better option.
Noone ever uses that, tbh, I didnt even knew there was an "ally fund" just discovered after the events with 1up.
__________________
R12 - First round in MISTU
R13 - Second round as HR's DC (when we were covering something)
R14 - 1up's MO
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 20:29
|
#6
|
Hamster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murador
I think to get rid of the ally fund is the better option.
Noone ever uses that, tbh, I didnt even knew there was an "ally fund" just discovered after the events with 1up.
|
The likes of 1up might not use it BUT its extreamly useful for alliances like F-Crew. It allows alliances to develop their less experianced and smaller members and helps alliances encourage people to be scanners
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 20:45
|
#7
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murador
I think to get rid of the ally fund is the better option.
Noone ever uses that, tbh, I didnt even knew there was an "ally fund" just discovered after the events with 1up.
|
Well, its only been around for a little while. While I agree that the "abuse" that 1up have made from is wrong, it still makes me feel that the alliancefund has its rights.
I was talking about with Appocomaster earlier about how to use the alliancefund as a tool for developing the alliance and I think that a taxation instead of trading with the alliancefund might be the solution here. Tax the planetets in the alliance instead of having them donating. If we get a tax system working you can also have it so that the members can vote (or maybe even decide what they want to donate), everything between 1 and 5% of the income from that planet. You could also make it so that the planets ranked below average paid less in tax than the planets ranked higher.
1% - Planets 50% or lower than the alliance value
3% - Planets 50% below or 50% higher than alliance value
5% - Planets 50 higher than alliance value.
Just a suggestion..
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 20:52
|
#8
|
[TGV] Wots It
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 135
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
I like Kargools idea - but add the option for alliance HC's to turn taxation on or off. That way, alliances who choose not to use the fund, or who feel they have sufficient resources can turn it off.
__________________
TGV Wots It
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 20:55
|
#9
|
Hi there ...
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 481
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murador
I think to get rid of the ally fund is the better option.
Noone ever uses that, tbh, I didnt even knew there was an "ally fund" just discovered after the events with 1up.
|
i use it a lot and i am a quite bigger planet in the universe - my galaxy contains mostly of Ziks and i am Zik myself - that means there is hardly the option to trade Eonium with galaxy because nobody puts any in.
The alliancefund is great for it because only a small part of 1up are Ziks afaik.
__________________
#Reunion
[Ascendancy] - While you were trying, we were sleeping
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 22:22
|
#10
|
The Dance King
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Brazil
Posts: 66
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Ahh, this fund has only being around for this round on, I though it was around but nobody used it (I am not playing for 2 rounds).
Anyway, perhaps kargool had the idea to keep the fund, it is reasonable.
__________________
R12 - First round in MISTU
R13 - Second round as HR's DC (when we were covering something)
R14 - 1up's MO
|
|
|
27 May 2006, 23:47
|
#11
|
Hamster
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
Well, its only been around for a little while. While I agree that the "abuse" that 1up have made from is wrong, it still makes me feel that the alliancefund has its rights.
I was talking about with Appocomaster earlier about how to use the alliancefund as a tool for developing the alliance and I think that a taxation instead of trading with the alliancefund might be the solution here. Tax the planetets in the alliance instead of having them donating. If we get a tax system working you can also have it so that the members can vote (or maybe even decide what they want to donate), everything between 1 and 5% of the income from that planet. You could also make it so that the planets ranked below average paid less in tax than the planets ranked higher.
1% - Planets 50% or lower than the alliance value
3% - Planets 50% below or 50% higher than alliance value
5% - Planets 50 higher than alliance value.
Just a suggestion..
|
I'm not sure I like that tbh. While a tax system would obviously be good for the alliance as it forces the donation and thus guarentees a certain level forcing people could cause some resentment and also could breed a nature of people feeling they are owed something by the alliance.
With a donation being something thats of their choosing its more a goodwill guesture and they are doing so as they choose to for the good of the alliance. They arent expecting something in return and arent being forced to not build something. And if someone wishes to donate more than the tick amount they should be able to.
If you want to reduce the donation abuse then I'd much rather see a limit on the amount you can donate in 24 hours or something like imposing a universe tax on donations over a certain amount, perhaps on some kind of sliding scale so donations to the fund under a certain amount would be free but as you went over that amount you ended up losing more and more in tax so that dumping a lot in 1 tick become inefficient and if you wanted to dump 100mill you would hence have to do it over a longer period or waste loads that could have been more helpful being used poperly. You would have to dump it slower over a period of time and would hence have to stay in the alliance over this time
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
|
|
|
28 May 2006, 05:23
|
#12
|
Commodore
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
I hate Taxes, people who impose them upon others in this game are just silly methinks.
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
|
|
|
28 May 2006, 05:52
|
#13
|
Bona Fide Jesus Freak
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Word of the Lord
Posts: 765
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultimate Newbie
I hate Taxes, people who impose them upon others in this game are just silly methinks.
|
Not much different from getting gal mates to donate res in order to exile inactive. In the most extream case you would tell a gal mate no defense until they donated something ect.
Ally fund has been great this round cause scanners don't have the "no res" excuse like last round.
The Ally fund has an 8 tick delay in the resourses being handed out. Plus there is a percentage limit as to how much a person can accept.
__________________
Matthew 24:9 (New International Version) "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me."
Who the hell gave you posrep you christian fundamentalist?
god is bollox, mkay and you are not discussing it
You're not the voice of Christianity di**head.
CT R22-20, [1up] R18-16, TGV R15,
The Illuminati - [NoS] - R14-13
|
|
|
28 May 2006, 10:41
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
well those who thinks its good are those who want the option to cheat the system and the scanner thingie, come on its not like it havent worked before
so remove it, nice option in an ideal world but ppl are fruitcakes so it will not work
|
|
|
31 May 2006, 11:45
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 35
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
I suggested this on AD in another conversation.
Alliance HC's can decide who the scanners of the Alliance are and check somkind of box or something. Alliance funds can not be donated directly to a scan planet, but official scanners (those who HC's have selected) uses directly ally fund to make the scans. So when scan planet scans he won't loose his own resources. That way he may use his planets resources to ships or anything else he chooses of. This solves the supportplanet donations, this encourages Alliance to keep their scanners intag, but unfortunately this wouldn't help the beginning planets.
__________________
Rd 4 - 19 -- n00b
[Elysium] []LCH[]
|
|
|
31 May 2006, 12:03
|
#16
|
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
I agree with almeida on hard-coding the OOGOOA rule or removing it.
For the ally fund I suggest the following:
- make it based on taxes only, where the tax can be any number between 0 and 50 so that alliances which don't want to use the feature can simply set it to 0 (default).
- resources can only be donated to peoople smaller than the average alliance member value
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
|
|
|
31 May 2006, 13:21
|
#17
|
PA Team
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,449
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
- resources can only be donated to peoople smaller than the average alliance member value
|
Resources can currently only be donated to those who remain below the average alliance member value AND the average alliance member score after the resources have been donated - calculated as if the resources were going straight into ships, not stored as resources.
There are obvious issues with the support planets and alliance fund, and they do need looking at. Feel free to keep discussing, as quite a few different ways have been suggested already. We're also discussing these matters, among others, privately
__________________
r8-10 RaH r10.5-12 MISTU
|
|
|
31 May 2006, 14:02
|
#18
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
well how do you plan to solve the issue with the support planets, as closing them isnt helping as there must be a counterpart that gains on the support.
that should be in question of the closing too. in this case the hc who controls the fund
but that prolly a feauture too i guess then?
Last edited by robban1; 31 May 2006 at 15:34.
|
|
|
31 May 2006, 18:14
|
#19
|
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
There is no way to solve the issues with things like the oogooa support planet rule except for a) removing or b) hard-coding it. There will always be discussions about objectivity in MH decisions and that's clearly something the game can't affort if it wants to grow.
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
|
|
|
1 Jun 2006, 16:18
|
#20
|
Your typical Troll
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 414
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
mmh... here we are again discussin alliance fund issue.
I do like flexible taxation system. I think total amount of taxation should be flexible in other ways. There could be an entire economical system using alliance fund. Those in "higher total roid/income bracket" would have to pay higher taxes, while those who are under certain income level could be eligible for "Social Security" programm, maybe even getting some resourses from the fund rather then actually paying tax.
Mind you that system has to differ from alliance to alliance, with different roid brackets depending on current roid total of the alliance versus its member count. That would require soem serious coding, but, imo, nothing that couldnt be done.
This system will result in more even alliance asset distrubution, when, eventho taking away from top alliance members something, helps the rest of the alliance, making it have stronger memberbase and putting even more pressure on alliance BCs, as capping roids would become even more essential then it is now. That said, there are also obvious positives for going solo, and those who would be successfull while doing so would have a partial reimbursement for not being in an alliance and rather helping create a fortress galaxy.
I believe this idea would significantly decrease difference between planets aswell. Besides making PA more team based, making alliance members care alot more about keeping their roids where they belong, etc.
This also coudl be implemented on the galaxy level. But, imo, for that to happen galaxy exile costs have to be significantly decreased, if not removed.
This also would give MoDs alot of work to do, with that many different options to consider.
__________________
[Destiny] awaits, ex- [Omen]
Nothing on the top
but the bucket and the mop
And an illustrated book about birds
See alot up there
But dont be scared
who needs action, when you got words....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbg
reading this line is explicit acceptance of my superiority over you
|
|
|
|
1 Jun 2006, 16:29
|
#21
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
Re: OOGOOA/alliance fund
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remo
I suggested this on AD in another conversation.
Alliance HC's can decide who the scanners of the Alliance are and check somkind of box or something. Alliance funds can not be donated directly to a scan planet, but official scanners (those who HC's have selected) uses directly ally fund to make the scans. So when scan planet scans he won't loose his own resources. That way he may use his planets resources to ships or anything else he chooses of. This solves the supportplanet donations, this encourages Alliance to keep their scanners intag, but unfortunately this wouldn't help the beginning planets.
|
thats how the alliance fund worked in the PAN design.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:24.
| |