ingal distwhores

Just a thought... and not one I've spent a lot of time with, so forgive me if this is idiotic.

How's about being able to select which members of the gal are immune to your distorters?

This could be accomplished easily by allowing 'trusted' members of a gal to be able to scan through distorters, but perhaps this isn't the ideal solution.

How about adopting a similar system to the one in the alliance tag, whereby HCs can set the permission levels of gal members. So in this case GCs can set for their gal who (out of not wanted/wanted/trusted) can see what (out of outgoing/incoming/immune to dists).

That way if a scanner wants to help a gal who's particularly high in distorters... but there's maybe other people in the gal who you wouldn't want to get through the dists, then this could be under the discretion of the GC(/MoC?).

Like I said, just a thought.

[Zaejii]

i'm slightly confused by this Kenny. as a dister, if you have a scanner in gal (and you actually want to get scanned), you pm them or ask in gal channel to do for instance a jgp on you, then you turn off the blocking, get the scan, turn them back on. yeah its a pain, but its functional, and it makes it so you can only be scanned by wanting to be scanned. i'm not quite sure why'd you want to allow an in gal scanner to "help a gal" by allowing them to scan them outright by having a setting. maybe i just don't understand because of the way its worded or something?

No, you did get what I was trying to say, I think where we parted understanding is where the value of having an ingal scanner lies.

In the gal I'm in at the moment there are two planets I can't scan. Now last night, where there were lots of waves over all planets, I jumpgate probed the entire gal to check for incomings, then took AU scans on all visible attackers. This meant that everyone who I could scan could benefit from having the information ahead of attackers being launched. The planets that I couldn't scan however, didn't get that information, meaning that in the gal we had to wait for the inc to appear before doing scans.

I've put a bit more thought into and decided that there isn't really a LOT to benefit from this, but it certainly wouldn't be detrimental.

If you have an ingal distwhore who wants to be scanned (even in his absence, to check for incs etc) then he could select an option in preferences to say "trusted members of the gal are immune to distorters". This means that people trusted to the gal can scan him, but every other Tom, Dick and Harry who has an amp or two can not.

Like I say, it's really a minor thing but it's a slight inconvenience that could be avoided. Just thought I'd expand on the whole 'trusted' concept.

But the other parts of my arguments are still perfectly valid - by allowing a GC/MoC set 'access' levels to incoming/outgoing/dists it gives the GC greater freedom of control in the gal, without imposing rules unilaterally.

[ElAlan]

Originally Posted by Zaejii

i'm slightly confused by this Kenny. as a dister, if you have a scanner in gal (and you actually want to get scanned), you pm them or ask in gal channel to do for instance a jgp on you, then you turn off the blocking, get the scan, turn them back on. yeah its a pain, but its functional, and it makes it so you can only be scanned by wanting to be scanned. i'm not quite sure why'd you want to allow an in gal scanner to "help a gal" by allowing them to scan them outright by having a setting. maybe i just don't understand because of the way its worded or something?

Only way i can think of is in the situation where said high dist planet isnt online and the galaxy has a lot of incs, so here there may be someone organising which def to go where and needs to know what ships that planet has, or more likely and simpler is ofc jgp'ing but kind of same situ, where its a case of "call me if i got prelaunched" thing etc etc...

Originally Posted by ElAlan

Only way i can think of is in the situation where said high dist planet isnt online and the galaxy has a lot of incs, so here there may be someone organising which def to go where and needs to know what ships that planet has, or more likely and simpler is ofc jgp'ing but kind of same situ, where its a case of "call me if i got prelaunched" thing etc etc...

Er, yeah. What he said.

[Zaejii]

yeah, good point. maybe even make it simpler by giving the options of 'trusted are immune to distorters', 'whole galaxy immune', and 'nobody immune' on the preferences page. would basically give you more options over who could scan you i guess. even an individual politics page with a 'can scan' or 'can't scan' for each individual planet would probably suffice (over ruled if alliance members are in gal etc). not sure how intensive that would be on the coding level though - or even on the practical level - but i could definitely say it could be advantageous allowing people to see what you have home / can defend with.

[Mzyxptlk]

Activity is the key. If those galmembers who you couldn't scan were online, they could've turned off their dists for a few minutes. Since they weren't, they were at a disadvantage. This seems a completely normal and even desirable situation to me, thus I am against this suggestion.

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Activity is the key. If those galmembers who you couldn't scan were online, they could've turned off their dists for a few minutes. Since they weren't, they were at a disadvantage. This seems a completely normal and even desirable situation to me, thus I am against this suggestion.

*hears the fabric of the space time continuum being torn apart as he agrees with Mz*

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

Activity is the key. If those galmembers who you couldn't scan were online, they could've turned off their dists for a few minutes. Since they weren't, they were at a disadvantage. This seems a completely normal and even desirable situation to me, thus I am against this suggestion.

I thought you were all for diluting this game to make it easier to play and thus more accessable to more people, hence your position on prelaunch?

It's weird that we should have opposing views so often, as with prelaunch you say it should stay because it makes the game more playable and thus more people do so... yet you're now against an idea because it's not in the spirit of rewarding activity?

The scale of impact is considerably great between the two arguments, so I'll let it slip this time mate

[Alki]

whats the point. I mean honestly, considering all that is required is activity which was the premise of this game originally, even still what is the point making everything so easy, where is the fun?

Originally Posted by Alki

whats the point. I mean honestly, considering all that is required is activity which was the premise of this game originally, even still what is the point making everything so easy, where is the fun?

Yeah, after some thought I also think this is a bad idea.

Curse the person who thought of it.

(no sarcasm)

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by Kenny

I thought you were all for diluting this game to make it easier to play and thus more accessable to more people, hence your position on prelaunch?

It's weird that we should have opposing views so often, as with prelaunch you say it should stay because it makes the game more playable and thus more people do so... yet you're now against an idea because it's not in the spirit of rewarding activity?

The scale of impact is considerably great between the two arguments, so I'll let it slip this time mate

Making the game playable is one thing, making activity meaningless is another.

[Vladel]

Shouldn't planetarion be looking to simplify things and not make them overcomplicated? how is the game to grow when new players or returning players get baffled by such things

Vladel, I've already conceded this was a naff idea.