Planetarion Forums

Shyne · 16 Oct 2006, 00:23

This didnt get a voice in the 'portal hour' so it is rearing its head here.

My suggestion is an alliance for all non allied planets, below a certaiin score.

This score should represent any non alliance player below [some figure]. This number is to be ascertained and could possibly be the average score of all alliances in the game.

The idea is that anyone under [some figure] in score is a member of an alliance (one large alliance) automatically and they can communicate in a channel together where they can exchange scans and organise attacks.

As a serious addition to this, I see a member of this broad alliance capable of receiving one defence fleet, with alliance ETA bonus.

The idea being that 'noob' planets can share scans and defence in a limited format while automatically achieving some of the alliance bonuses.

wakey · 16 Oct 2006, 10:38

Forced alliances for players under a certain size isn’t a new idea and I still don’t think it’s a good idea. I just can’t see any real benefit to doing it.

For starters these players need to be in an environment that helps them learn, and alliance which is pretty much made up of other new players is an alliance that equates to “the blind leading the blind”.

To make it anywhere near being a viable option there need a consistent and good leadership and command team. However who is seriously going to take on such a difficult, time consuming and thankless task. Having been in a situation where I have run an alliance that’s taken chances on new players only to have them poached the minute they reach a certain level I can tell you how annoying it is. You get the player to appoint where they can give back and the next thing you know they are gone and the alliances problems never get fixed while the command get ill from the time and effort that they are having to put in. The advantage you have in a none forced alliance though is you can persuade people to stay on, it can take rounds to get enough of a core built up to be relatively stable but you can do it. However the forced system means once they hit a reasonable score they are gone and you’re stuck with the small and often inactive members.

If we want to get players to work together and into alliances then it would be a lot more productive if a big red “YOUR NOT IN AN ALLIANCE, JOIN ONE IMMEDATATLY” message was shown on every page as at least then your pushing them towards groups that are ready to take on players, even some of the worst alliances (the ones I call player black holes) would do a better job introducing players to the game than such a forced system

WreCkeRer · 16 Oct 2006, 13:30

imo there r many alliances out there for noobies. im sure every1 can find one if they search. If they cant be arsed to search why should we force em into an alliance?

wakey · 16 Oct 2006, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by WreCkeRer

imo there r many alliances out there for noobies. im sure every1 can find one if they search. If they cant be arsed to search why should we force em into an alliance?

BTW myth might attract alot more players if you treated your potential membership base with a little more respect

Ptraci · 16 Oct 2006, 14:31

I don't like the idea of a forced alliance for small people. They should be free to make their own choice, but I think having alliances solely devoted to teaching new players how to play is a good thing, with just a few experienced players there to give advice etc. This is what I envisioned when I set up Insurrection, having seen for myself how difficult it was to find an alliance as a returning player who'd forgotten everything

. So far it seems to have been popular, but perhaps a hard-coded alliance for new players that they could opt to join from their preferences page wouldn't be a bad idea. We're still missing a lot of new ppl out there who could use a hand.

wakey · 16 Oct 2006, 15:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ptraci

I don't like the idea of a forced alliance for small people. They should be free to make their own choice, but I think having alliances solely devoted to teaching new players how to play is a good thing, with just a few experienced players there to give advice etc. This is what I envisioned when I set up Insurrection, having seen for myself how difficult it was to find an alliance as a returning player who'd forgotten everything

. So far it seems to have been popular, but perhaps a hard-coded alliance for new players that they could opt to join from their preferences page wouldn't be a bad idea. We're still missing a lot of new ppl out there who could use a hand.

The problem is the kind of alliance your describing is little more than a feeder alliance and being in a position of a feeder alliance is the worst position an alliance could be in for both the HC and the members.

An alliance normally finds itself in the ‘feeder’ alliance position either through their own choosing or more often than not because the games politics force it on them (they aren’t as appealing as a top alliance and when interest from above comes the members are off in a flash).

Now the reason it’s the worst position to be in for the HC is the pressure. When you’re good players are being fed into better alliances you haven’t got much support to fall back on. You as a HC have to be so hands on in every area of the alliance that it requires an obscene amount of effort and time. Its why in alliances that find themselves in such a position it’s not uncommon to find the command burnt out and often ill as the round approaches the end.

The reason it’s not good for the members is that people learn from others and the small rely on the big to help protect them and help them grow. When the good players leave it reduces the quality in the alliance and hinders others progress (and when one goes others often follow)

Its also bad for the members as the HC who are probably the alliances real core of experience are so busy that they have less time to be of help to the members or to make improvements in areas of the alliance that would help everyone.

You don’t need to have grand ambitions to be the #1 alliance but any alliance who wants to train new player’s needs to have grander plans than to simply be a feeder alliance. They need to get to the point where they have a solid core of returning members each round that can sustain a viable alliance and support the training of new players

Ptraci · 16 Oct 2006, 17:56

I have a core of about 15 ppl who stayed from last round to help tutor new players and be officers in the alliance - all of them started as new ppl last round, yes they will eventually move on - that's the point of starting an alliance to train new players to PA, but as they decide to move on, I recruit more mentors and officer from this rounds new starts, and so on. I admit this is only the second full round we've played as an alliance but it seems to be working well so far. It does mean we have nearly as many officers as the top 10 alliances do, for far fewer players which is no bad thing as they can support each other and there's nearly always a more experienced officer to help the new starts. Having a mentoring system means that the HC are not overstretched and have time to help the new players as well as running the alliance. It was hard work last round, but it seems to have paid off with so many ppl wanting to give something back to the alliance this round. This system could be put into place as a built in feature of the game, but it would require a lot of dedicated players to help make it work.