The Support Planets Rule

[cypher]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

I doubt it. Will each exilition (i'm just using them because their name has been linked with all this so much) planet be allowed one personal friend not in an alliance who can send them defence? Will they be allowed more than one, after all most people have more than one good friend in PA.

i would assume no and indeed as forest said it's sad to see a few normal players getting a bad deal because of this. But seeing as multihunters made this rule it must have been really bad. which ruins the game for far more people even.

ofc you having a known name and you also play the game for yourself helps. which was clearly not the case in alot of those other support accounts.
For example. would you make an account to help jester (you mentioned him) and wake up every single night without ever attacking, just to defend him? i doubt it personally.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by cypher

problem is multihunters would need 72 hours in 1 day to be able to check all of that for all planets, hardcoding it just solves the problem and there is no room left for discussion.

I wouldn't be so sure. Currently all planets have their previous defence fleets launched in the databse. A tool which counts the number of these for each planet which are not to a planet in-tag and alerts multihunters once this number goes above say five planets wouldn't be that difficult.

[tpb]

Suggested the following to PA team by mail a couple of weeks ago.

>Make all def fleets sent to an allied planet from a planet outside of ally
>tag get +1 eta penalty.
>
> All defence innside ally tag is -1 eta (like it is now)
> All defence to unn allied planets got no eta bonus (like it is now)
> All attacks got no eta bonus (like it is now)
> All defence fleets from out of ally to an allied planet gets +1 eta
(same offcourse applies between allys)
>
> Hence a Viper fleet with all travel techs done is eta 9 to defend from out
> of ally tag to an allied planet.
> Same Viper fleet is eta 8 to defend any unn allied planet so that exi can
> keep deffing theire scanners .
(And people can keep defending theire neewbie friends untill they get innto an ally and should start learning to rely on and play with ally)

> And once more same Viper fleet is eta 7 to defend somebody inn same ally
> tag.
>
> You can explain it with something inn the lines of that due to the defence
> grid required to maintain the eta -1 bonus innside ally all fleets not
> wearing the ally tag are threated as hostile unless they clearly state
> theire intentions.
> Due to that alliances are complex enteties with a certeain degree of
> berocrasy this takes time.
> But then again its better to wait one tick for a friendly fleet then to be
> threated as hostile and shot down.

As far as I can see this would solve the problem.

To those saying it would ruin theire round not to be able to defend theire friends.
You should bloddy well be inn same ally as youre friends then.
If youre not inn same ally as youre friend youre not suposed to defend them.
Thats the whole point with allaince member cap!!

Now still if youre friend is unallied then you can defend all you like.
Be that if his a scanner or a neewbie.
If however youre friend is a top ally planet competing to win he shouldnt need youre help.

And just because Im curious.
How mutch defence out of ally out of gal has allys like f-crew reseived??
My guess is very little if any at all.
So no reason to restrict the rule to just apply to top 5 allys.
Those exploiting the loophole afterall are top 5 allys.

ps.
I voted hardcode althou I belive planets innside an allaince tag should be able to defend planets not inn any alliance tag.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by cypher

For example. would you make an account to help jester (you mentioned him) and wake up every single night without ever attacking, just to defend him? i doubt it personally.

Up until recently any night I'm not out with my friends I'd probably be partly using the internet. The extra effort involved on my part would have been fairly minimal. That said if I'd gone to the effort of signing up an account I'd probably attack once in a blue moon.

[cypher]

true it would indeed not be that hard to code.

about second point tho
being on standby 24/7 is a different matter tho, surely when you keep in mind not everyone is online THAT much and there have been alot of those hyperactive people which was why the rule was made.

[Stoom]

Originally Posted by cypher

true it would indeed not be that hard to code.

about second point tho
being on standby 24/7 is a different matter tho, surely when you keep in mind not everyone is online THAT much and there have been alot of those hyperactive people which was why the rule was made.

Though I agree with you, I do have a feeling that perhaps the multihunters read too much AD orso and get influenced by the people complaining and not because of the actual facts. I for one would like to say, I hardly saw any out-of-tag defence on eXi planets or the planets eXi attacked, and I have seen a lot of jgp's.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by cypher

about second point tho
being on standby 24/7 is a different matter tho, surely when you keep in mind not everyone is online THAT much and there have been alot of those hyperactive people which was why the rule was made.

True, there's no chance I'd be online 24/7. But maybe jester could have a different friend from a different time zone to help out with those times Regardless I'm pretty sure I could do enough to be classified as a support planet.

[Kieker Jan]

Hehe
seeing im in 1 of the alliances that have had flaming the other day for using the alliance crossdef
it prolly easy to tell where i stand on this.

i say leave it as it is... the rule is clear enough any nub with the slightest common sence can feel what is helping a m8 or friend alliance & what is abusing the system.
dont have to repeat all the post giving reasons why its not to hardcode but i agree with most of em :P
As long as it stays incidental and not a daily thing theres nothing wrong with using the -1 clustertick to get help from outside tag .. it was the whole point of the tick.

i think a mh tool scanning for suspicious planets is a good way to go.. (dont remember so quick who suggested it) tho theres 1 problem with it... if u scan for obious fleetcombo's and attackhistory.. ull hit scanplanets.. i know a few who being cath for instance build 10K vipers for defence... nothing else they dont attack yet only defend and need ships to avoid their ally dropping to much in averege score.

if u can get an other alliance to send sum def @ a major fleetcatch (exi) or when u have i dunno how much 100s of K incomming and cant cope with it urself (which most allys wouldnt even if theyre "big") i say wel done u used the political part of the game (which is imo 50%) and u made friends outside ur own ally that will sacrifice their own deffleets to save ure behind.If you dont fall in this catergory...vote yes hardcode

sofar ma humble point of view

[cypher]

Originally Posted by Stoom

Though I agree with you, I do have a feeling that perhaps the multihunters read too much AD orso and get influenced by the people complaining and not because of the actual facts. I for one would like to say, I hardly saw any out-of-tag defence on eXi planets or the planets eXi attacked, and I have seen a lot of jgp's.

and i'm sure enough people could dig up other jgp's with loads of those planets tho.... never ending circle take the day this rule was set... it was because of a certain exi gal.. i can't remember which coords exactly... they even had 2 ingal closed cuz of it heh

[Phil^]

for those saying to just get rid of it : a question

How would you propose to prevent the very real probability that support planets will be abused as a result of the removal of this rule?
unless you can answer this very significant question satisfactorally, I believe the rule, or at very least a hardcoded limit should remain as a safeguard to ALL players against those who would abuse the system otherwise.

ps , its all well and good saying "pateam should code something to scan for abuses" , but unless you have an inkling of how such a scanner would be created its pretty much useless.
There are a number of situations to consider - such as distinguishing between those defending their friends who all *happen* to be in the same alliance, and those who are planets set up to defend the same alliance while launching the odd attack and defence outwith of this to avoid being caught on any scanners being one noteable example.
another being distinguishing those planets who actively attack other alliances as flak before another alliance attacks, and those who attack but coincidently are before another alliance hits a certain target.

Given i wrote the multihunting tools that they are currently using, I know the scale of the task involved to make such distinctions given the data source available. its not a 5 minute job let me tell you

[Mistwraith]

Yes - hardcode it so planets in a tag can't defend/be defended outside of alliance and galaxy

so compleletly remove cluster def .. and cluster alliances ... make this game purely for the alliances .. that way it harsh for the smaller players or the unallied ..

way to go all u voters for that ... sure we used the cluster eta last night for a few members .. the total never even got to double figures btw.. but how many people have used the cluster alliance/eta as a last ditch attempt when alliance cant cover ( you telling me that every person in yiur cluster alliance is your friend ? .. your the guys and girls that will get hit by that.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Mistwraith

so compleletly remove cluster def .. and cluster alliances ... make this game purely for the alliances .. thats way to harsh for the smaller players or the unallied ..

small players who are in an alliance can be covered by that alliance. those not in one arent subject to the rule.
i fail to see how this would suddenly be harsh to them given they can still in both cases be further defended by their galaxy

[Kieker Jan]

Originally Posted by Phil^

ps , its all well and good saying "pateam should code something to scan for abuses" , but unless you have an inkling of how such a scanner would be created its pretty much useless.

hehehehe i just come up with the idears the brilliant coders of PA-team can figure out how to do it...
u dont see a designer actualy build the cars he designs either do ya

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Kieker Jan

hehehehe i just come up with the idears the brilliant coders of PA-team can figure out how to do it...
u dont see a designer actualy build the cars he designs either do ya

this is why designers are the butt of jokes by engineers
also the cause of many a headache

[cypher]

it's funny to see people complain about all those small players suddenly... either vouch em in your alliance if you feel so bad for them or quit moaning.

unallied players have NOTHING to do with the rule except for the fact they can't def ALLIED players.

[Buddah]

exactly cypha.
i was unnallied in the start scanning for ex. i deffed ex i deffed 1up etc i think i even might have deffed 1up vs ex
i deffed who asked me etc.
and those 2 closed were both scanners afaik.

[cypher]

nah they didn't nearly have the amps to be a scanner and did have the c mines don't worry they were nothing like scanners

[lokken]

it's not as if allied players need more help, with those alliances protecting them and that.

i think it might be worth limiting the hardcoding to say the top X alliances though.

[Cannon_Fodder]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

I doubt it. Will each exilition (i'm just using them because their name has been linked with all this so much) planet be allowed one personal friend not in an alliance who can send them defence? Will they be allowed more than one, after all most people have more than one good friend in PA.

I was going on about 'its who you know' etc.. so that your case would be an exception

[Yeh_of_Arcanum]

Allways hard question...even how much thinking given to. For example currently, what chances does Exilition has if they arent allowed to be defended by other alliances? What i sense situation they are surely so hated, that if outside alliance def is refused, they got 2 choises left: to be roided all the time and leave game or gather powerblock from smaller alliances to prevent "old pa alliances" to **** em over. And if defending is banned, then it would result to going exactly back to old times...attack coordination between block and defences inside alliance.

Only thing that comes into my mind is that deny all attacks & defences outside own alliance official wars. And that then prevents random roiding. But atleast it would be 1 vs 1 battles, not cowardly 3 vs 1. But then again that gives alot bad tactics. Somehow i doubt there will be ever good rules in this situation. PAX worked cause there was so few players left & good game saving morale within those. Now we will see what happens when player amounts & grudges are growing.

[Remy]

Originally Posted by mens

this was actually my first thought aswell.

You got deleted this round i think ^^

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Yeh_of_Arcanum

Allways hard question...even how much thinking given to. For example currently, what chances does Exilition has if they arent allowed to be defended by other alliances? What i sense situation they are surely so hated, that if outside alliance def is refused, they got 2 choises left: to be roided all the time and leave game or gather powerblock from smaller alliances to prevent "old pa alliances" to **** em over. And if defending is banned, then it would result to going exactly back to old times...attack coordination between block and defences inside alliance.

and how hated were 1up after winning two consecutive rounds?
swings and roundabouts.
difference is, 1up never stooped so low as to use out of gal, out of alliance defence farms

[Yeh_of_Arcanum]

Did 1up have chances to get enough support alliances behind them? Somehow i doubt. And how is exilition so hated in universe if they get biggest force behind? Its imo just 3 alliances that hate them...hate them cause they couldnt 3:1 gangbang them and get victory to old pa-alliances.

Or maybe 1up just didnt want any outside help...its possible too

[Rinoa]

Support Planets should only be allowed for the number 1 planet and only for 30% of the round.*






* Welcome back yeh