0 Members and 1 Guests are viewing this board.
- Excellion
- Enthusiast
- 296 posts
- Reputation 118
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Never back down, never surrender, no fear
Sep 09 2014 3:30 am
For me, gaming is about playing with friends first and foremost. On Abyddos, allies are 10 players where on Chulak, allies are 5 players. That leaves some friends out in the cold. I'd like to share an idea to correct that problem: flexible ally sizes.
On Abyddos, the BASE ally size is 10 players. The ally leader can invite up to 2 additional players BUT for every player past 10, the entire ally is -5% to all stats, as if they lost a status level.
On Chulak, the BASE ally size is 5 players. The same concept would apply but the penalty would be -10%.
Collectively, the ally is stronger with the additional players but individually, each member is weaker.
Benefits of a larger ally are larger pools for defensive and naq buys, along with more options for attack platforms (e.g. ally planets / ss).
Love it? Hate it?
I hunt the sheep of war...
- Shadowing
- Devoted
- 1440 posts
- Reputation 240
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Captain of the boat or captain of the Sea?
Sep 09 2014 3:32 am
ya interested to see what people say on this
What ever you can do or dream you can always begin it because boldness has genius, power and magic in it
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Sep 09 2014 3:36 am
I agree completely about being able to play with your friends, and that is why I suggested that shadowing make it 10 players on Abydose rather then the 5 he was originally going to make it. Alliances are about teamwork, and that's what I like about it.
Though I think your idea is solid, I just think it's unnecessary and overly complicated. I think it's a good idea, but I don't think I would go that way if I were Shadowing. And I doubt he would do it either.
Also, I think with your idea, everyone would just do that +2 members and it would even out when everyone had -5 stats, so he might as well make it 12 player alliances, although that's is a really weird number to go with, so might as well just keep it as 10.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Endersshadow
- Irregular
- 73 posts
- Reputation 51
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Fear the Ashrak
Sep 09 2014 3:39 am
that's actually not a bad idea. a lil tweaking would be needed i'm sure but it could work another Idea would be have it be realistic instead of all stats decrease by 5% have it be like drone usage cost more, income is reduced somewhat and agents are slightly less effective due to stretched supply lines or something or instead of a negative stat boost make buildings, units and stations cost more the more over pop the alliance is.
Worship the TACO or face it
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Sep 09 2014 3:44 am
-5 stats or whatever ender is suggesting with the negative todrones and agent strength is an extremely small price to pay to have two extra hands, two extra fleets with full endurance and drone bars themselves. It sounds to me like Vitopian has two friends he wants to add to his alliance, I'm in the same position on Chulak. I want to play with Anoobis and Sadeyes over there, but I also want to play with Intrelzar and I really like the group I'm in now. But we can't have everything.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Dissenter
- Irregular
- 84 posts
- Reputation 44
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- I love 26horses Productions
Sep 09 2014 3:48 am
Well the problem is someone willing to dump a bunch of money in alliance naqidah packs can take big advantage or the extra people/endurance/attacks. I see it by far benefiting the big spenders' alliances the most as they can offset the negative impact of inviting an extra member by spending money.
In my opinion, this only makes it that much harder for little guys just starting out who come into conflict with an alliance early on. I think this would put new players at a even bigger disadvantage, resulting in fewer people sticking around long enough to get really interested.
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Sep 09 2014 3:51 am
^I like that guys point too. I hadn't thought about that particular point, but that's exactly the kind of thing I mean when I say that everyone will do it causing it to even out and it will benefit some more then others.
I like the way he put it.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Excellion
- Enthusiast
- 296 posts
- Reputation 118
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Never back down, never surrender, no fear
Sep 09 2014 4:29 am
It seems the players often perceive an evil plot of some sort. I have always, and will continue to, make recommendations to improve the game, even if it puts me at a disadvantage. A few recent examples:
1. I repeatedly recommending removing inactive players from the game even though I was farming them. It is better for the game.
2. I am a Goauld Infiltrator with a million jaffa. It is highly likely I have the strongest agent usage on Abyddos yet I suggested Destroy Infrastructure, which I use regularly, is overpowered.
3. Just today, I won the GNT challenge. Shadowing made an error and gave me 300k. I called it out to him which he fixed.
I can go on but I kindly suggest I have offered game adjustments in an effort to improve the overall game, not my personal place in the game.
To address the two specific items, I do have 1 player in mind we wish to add to the ally, but not two. The numbers can be adjusted anyway.
When you say it makes naq packs more powerful, you are correct; however, I can share three of the 5 players in our ally can participate in 1 naq buy per month, and not on both servers. If I was looking for power, I would proceed in one of two directions:
a. Put together 5 naq buyers and go to town, which is not my playstyle at all.
b. Put together the most active players.
Personally, neither me nor those I game with are looking to dominant the game. We achieved our goals on both servers and have "backed off" to allow everyone to enjoy the game.
Shoot down the suggestion on it's merits, or make alternate suggestions, but please don't speculate about my personally biases.
I hunt the sheep of war...
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Sep 09 2014 4:39 am
Hmn... I don't think anyone was suggesting it is a plot or saying anything about you trying to do...whatever. I am just saying that it seems like something that would benefit you and that's why you're suggesting this particular idea in the first place--not that that's a bad thing. I know you're saying it to improve the game.
And I don't believe that that other guy was talking about you, he was just saying that in general, it would cause a problem with the market.
So you really didn't have to defend yourself...At least not to me...and as far as I can tell, nobody else either.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Excellion
- Enthusiast
- 296 posts
- Reputation 118
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Never back down, never surrender, no fear
Sep 09 2014 5:11 am
*sniffles* I am just so sensitive this time of month...
I hunt the sheep of war...
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Sep 09 2014 5:12 am
It's okay, I understand. I'm a Canadian, remember?
I'll brew you a nice hot cup of Coffee from TimHortons and some slice some bacon.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
26horses Production