A strange question....
 

Would you pay £5 for 2 rounds of 5 weeks long with research being slightly faster or would you say its not worth it due to round not being long enough?

Just a thought from something wakey mentioned in AD about wanting new ppl to stay for 2 rounds in a training alliance.

Just a curious question tbh nothing more.

Re: A strange question....
 

Yes, rounds last way to long on the whole, very few end to short, and tbh, if they did, whats the big problem?
We just start all over again.

Re: A strange question....
 

Yes.

We don't really have enough players left to justify ten week rounds - the winners are usually decided in about half that time anyway. In the end we're just left with people idling out the final weeks with either a domanating planet that can't attack anyone or a shattered planet that can't hit the top ones.

Re: A strange question....
 

Oh and on a side note would it be preferred if this ws possible to have 2 5 week blocks for £5 that there was no havoc but a weekend break between instead with only slight changes in the next round.
Sort of more like a round 14-1 and round 14-2 for £5 then round 15-1 and 15-2 but round 15 being a bigger change in stats etc... and the normal longer 3 week break between round 14-2 to 15-1 and maybe a small havoc in round 14-2.

Re: A strange question....
 

I'd rather pay £2.50 for a 5-week round. I would pay £5 for two 5-week rounds if credits could be saved. That way I could play, say, two rounds per year and skip the ones that were at bad times for me.

Re: A strange question....
 

I think it depends on the round tbh. Some rounds seem to need time to really get going but others burn themselves out pretty quickly.

An idea that came up on suggestions along this line was to have a longer round of around 12-14 weeks but rather than playing it as we do now it would be split into 2. You would play half a round and then winners would be declared. The game would then be down for a week before all our scores ect were reset and we would go at it again with our galaxies and alliances ect ect intact. At the end of the second half of the round we would then have

Winners of Part 1, Winners of Part 2 and then the combined score of the two rounds which is something I think would be intresting and would allow the rounds to be less intense and would mean that doing badly in the first half wouldnt restrict you to doing badly in the second half so would give you something to keep playing for

Re: A strange question....
 

I'd love to pick up and down the game a bit more easily like that. It'd be far less detrimental to, in general my life.

Re: A strange question....
 

I like the two-round overall-winner-from-combined-score idea. But a bit confusing to explain to new players perhaps. I think the biggest support query would be "Why are you resetting? I'm just starting to do well!!"

Re: A strange question....
 

Or for new ppl "I have learnt a lot more how to play the game now would love to start again asap to put into practice my new skills rather than waiting for another 5 weeks. Being a n00b for another 5 weeks getting bored and bashed as the round starts to stagnate and forget about PA coz i couldnt be bothered waiting"

Or for Old ppl "Look at me doing well again \o/ bring on the next round coz i am gonna kick more butt again"

Dont worry kloopy it wasnt a suggestion it was just a question about how ppl feel about it.
PA survival is more important than anything atm.

Re: A strange question....
 

Hmm, you may well be right in fact. It's something I'd like to see seriously considered at some point. However at the moment I think all our efforts are going into bug fixing and testing ready for R15.

Re: A strange question....
 

Sounds like a plan :)

Re: A strange question....
 

imo all that this would change is you'd get a smaller playerbase and certain alliances would just play 1 round and skip the other..meaning you can't ever get a full playing field...

if an alliance would win 1 round they'd just quit the next and come back after etc... seems a bit pointless...

Re: A strange question....
 

I like the fact that PA takes some time. Some researches could be a bit quicker, but other than that, I like it as it is now. Id probably pay for your alternative aswell tho

-J-

Re: A strange question....
 

We aint all exilition.

Re: A strange question....
 

if you play just 5 week with your alliance you never 'win' - so why quit ?

and if you mean after 5+5 weeks - why ? what would be different to the current winners ?#

a problem that i see is that at the start of the 2nd period of a round all cords would be known and you have no chance if you won the 1st period as everyone will come after you early on (but maybe taht is a "wanted" effect of this system ;))

i wouldnt mind to try it out tbh ... sounds like a challenge for the alliances and makes the game more dynamic at same roundlenght.

Re: A strange question....
 

To add to this, certainly under the system I raised the grand winner would still be the best overall one. Winning one of the rounds would be a case of winning the battle not the war.

As for the issue you raised jupp, yes that could be a problem although it could also be an intresting twist and would give anyone who walks part 1 a challenge in part 2 rather than letting them walk it. However if you wanted to prevent this and Kloppy had time to code it you could force ruler and planetname changes and then shuffle the galaxies. Anyone who doesnt manually would be autorenamed

Re: A strange question....
 

Well I think the easiest way to test this theory is to do a split speed round. Speed rounds have in the past had two 12 hours periods of play, why not try making those two 12 hours periods independant with a restart in the middle, then have an overall winner? Would be interesting to see the results imo, and would give the players a chance to see how it would work.

Re: A strange question....
 

We have credits saved, I believe, since p2p was first started. Any credit bought is stored up against e-mail addresses etc until used in the future :) If people return from r7 and have credits left over, they can use them up now...

Re: A strange question....
 

I quite like the idea of 5 week rounds. Keep the ticks at 1 per hour and halve the research time for all research (Heavy Cargo Transfers should maybe not be reduced by that much though).
Construction might be a problem though. The obvious solution would be to halve the amount of time it takes to complete a Construction but then you'll have people completing their structures in 5 or even 2 ticks. Perhaps to make up for this it should be possible to queue your constructions. Have maybe 1 or 2 queue slots, that way you don't have to wake up every couple of hours to do more constructions.

Jolt won't want to have transactions of lower than £5 due to the fees they have to pay but I don't think this is too much of a problem. Just have each credit worth half as much as they are now. So £5 would buy you 2 credits, £10 would buy you 6 credits, etc...

Should help attract new players too as the end game boredom won't be such a problem so freebies that sign up late in the round won't be put off by the lack of activity. They also won't have to wait weeks and weeks for the new round to start. I imagine that the current length of 10 weeks puts a lot of new people off.

Re: A strange question....
 

if i understood it correctly 1 credit would pay for the 1st and the 2nd 5 weeks of each round. So it's like round 16.1 and 16.2 where you have 1 account for 1 credit just that you have a reset and some modifications between x.1 and x.2 smth like a reset or whatever to give everything a new and fresh go.

Score is counted up in sort of "final ranks" that is made up of x.1 and x.2 score. so it would not make sense to just play one of both parts as they are pretty dependent on each other final-score wise :)

suggestions suggestions

Re: A strange question....
 

Paying for 2 rounds is a great idea imo..
To get new players really into this game...
So they can use their learned skills in the second round...

And that 2 half round ideas is also very nice imo, gives the game a twist..
So the losers of the first half can get on the winning side in the second..

I don't really see a bad side 2 this..

/me applauds

Re: A strange question....
 

I quite like this idea, would be nice to give it a go.

Re: A strange question....
 

pay nothing and don't play.. I like it that way

Re: A strange question....
 

id be up for that option:) always get bored after a while normally