|
|
13 Oct 2004, 15:04
|
#51
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester
All we (I) ask is that the galaxies with 10 randoms (or rather, with no private segment) are broken up and distributed among the remaining unfilled private galaxies. Including those that aren't filled*.
* This means that the new randoms will fill position 6-10, leaving space open for people to join the private bit within the next 72 ticks**.
** Notice how this allows randoms in the same gal to join the private section to allow for more new randoms***.
*** Isn't that pretty cool?
|
a galaxy is no longer private if it has 5 people regardless of whether they were moved there by us or used the password. So we cannot touch private galaxies with less than 5 members.
though its an interesting idea to just break up gals that have say less than 3 paid planets in them for example
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 16:18
|
#52
|
Who cares?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 248
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
My main issue really wasnt the not totally filled gals but more the abuse.... I know you'll say there isnt much abuse etc but point is if 1-2 gals abused the fact of no shuffle they will be in top possitions making it matter etc.
Just make it fair and announce shuffle before sign ups from now on EVERY ROUND so noone will even bother with signing up multiple acc for example. People who allready upgraded their randoms should have untill there was an official announcement (own fault etc).
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 16:24
|
#53
|
Currently Unavailable
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 428
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Righto. There will be NO shuffle.
Quote:
149 full gals
54 gals with 1 free spot
39 gals with 2 spots
28 gals with 3 spots
29 gals with 5 spots
|
There is little to gain by shuffling. Any new accounts signing up will get put into the empty spots, unless a new gal is created.
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 16:31
|
#54
|
Who cares?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 248
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
looks like you really listen to what ppl say on these forums, I dare say the pre shuffle was a majority...
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 16:36
|
#55
|
Sir peon to you
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 275
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Nice bias figures your giving out. You forgot to mention a lot of those 'full' galaxies are full of randoms, not 5priv/5random galaxies. So all those people who signed up random quickly at the start are stuck in 10man random galaxies. Without taking into account the abuse of the signup system this allows, i cannot honestly believe PATeam would be this irresponsabile to people who have signed up to play the game. We want to encourage people, not scare them off by destorying their round with a fully random galaxy.
Im sure this saves you effort though, I hope for your sake you dont honestly believe this will benefit the game and encourage randoms to play and maybe even pay in the future.
__________________
Ðragon to the Death!
"The only easy day was yesterday."
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 16:37
|
#56
|
a simple pe0n
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: holland
Posts: 226
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
shuffle
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 16:42
|
#57
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
shuffle ffs...or game died before it start!!
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 17:14
|
#58
|
.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,382
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
the lack of shuffle probably stems more from a lack of effort in coding a decent shuffle than anything else. regardless of the claims that spinner could code one during prot, which he may/may not be able to do, but apparently just won`t.
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 17:33
|
#59
|
lolly roffle
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 5,514
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blixxard
149 full gals
54 gals with 1 free spot
39 gals with 2 spots
28 gals with 3 spots
29 gals with 5 spots
|
Thats 149 full gals versus 150 non-full gals.
Assuming a gal can cope with losing 1 player, thats 96 gals that are screwed before even getting out of protection. Nice way to treat your paying customers.
__________________
eXcessum
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 17:53
|
#60
|
Winker
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: IOW
Posts: 319
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
IN addition to nearly 50% of your customer base not being in completed galaxies, you havent produced the numbers for people in galaxies of less than 5.
Or are you saying there aren't any ? or are they unimportant ? if you include these galaxies into your breakdown, over 50% of the universe are in incomplete galaxies
Can you please reconsider and do something about it.
__________________
prestel
Yeah so what Im an Original Pr0nstar
some of us have serious jobs
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 18:15
|
#61
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
well are we not having a merge, so gals with less than 5 are 'zipped' up with gals with more than 5, thus creating gals of 10?
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 20:10
|
#62
|
Stolen
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 487
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Shuffle is not an option It's as obvious as my dinner. - Come on open your eyes PA TEAM!!
SHUFFLE NOW !
__________________
Who, me?
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 20:25
|
#63
|
Drunken Boozer
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 298
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
will be a really funny round.........
quick n painfull
__________________
Geilheit ist KEINE Schande !!!!
! [ToT]-KC !
Äscendäncy, we got Penis inside!
|
|
|
13 Oct 2004, 21:12
|
#64
|
I see you!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoX
Come on open your eyes PA TEAM!!
|
No.. they're busy ... eating ice-cream is way more important than taking care of customers you know.
|
|
|
14 Oct 2004, 07:07
|
#65
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 35
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
I say they stick all the randoms into a cup, put a lid on it then shake it really really hard and pour it back into pa and where they end up is where they end up. It'd save PA Team work considering it appears they use the muscles involved in such a thing already by eating ice cream, typing useless code and downing their strawberry vodka tonics yes?
__________________
The subconscious is a state in which reality is just a visitor.
|
|
|
14 Oct 2004, 08:02
|
#66
|
Stolen
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 487
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
As it is now you get punished for going random – Gal have 10 members and only 3 are active……… at least kick the inactive!?
__________________
Who, me?
|
|
|
14 Oct 2004, 09:13
|
#67
|
Black Power MotherF*ckas!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: JAPAN
Posts: 1,812
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
This wouldn't be a problem if there were more planets. There are not enough planets. Get over it. NO, PA admins will not shuffle the gal, there are not enough of you. Play the round and be happy. You don't like it? Sue them. Oh, wait, they work for nothing. So you will get nothing. There is one more option: DON'T PLAY!!!!!!!
Thanks
__________________
Ascendancy
When Doves Cry
|
|
|
14 Oct 2004, 10:07
|
#68
|
Sheep
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IRC
Posts: 563
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
plz don't let chika have the last word...
__________________
WP
Ðragons
eXilition
|
|
|
14 Oct 2004, 10:22
|
#69
|
InSomniac
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 1,473
|
Re: so...shuffle or not? (again)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal
there are very few gals in that position, have a look through the universe, most gals have 8-10 players. And rememebr as signups continue the inbalence will even out with people quickly filling the other gals.
|
im in a cluster with approx 5 gals with only 5 players....that reallyworks...
__________________
Runner up in the InSomnia 'Drunkest HC' competition - Currently on the wagon
Elysium | HR | eXilition | OuZo | ND | InSomnia | DLR
db battlegroup founder and spiritual leader
Sexytime HC of Belgians (#s3xytime)
Not so retired anymore....
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:13.
| |