[Rant] About the game

lol

I love the idea of a Reset server, supported it when it was suggested before.

Nomad wrote:I love the idea of a Reset server, supported it when it was suggested before.

yeh but as i said, it's a double edged sword

plus from a practical viewpoint, a few things would need readjusting, and considering the time of the year...

I think the mistake has been made, that admin didn't say that game will NEVER reset.

We can have two games going on at once.
One server where the game continues forever

and one server where it might reset at predefined times.

I would definitely not agree to reset the present game. Never!

Admin wrote:

Reset Server:
I'd never reset the main server without everyone's permission.
Why would I do that? Seriously, do I look like george or the other guys that did it?


SA your own post:
Now, throwing your weight around can be done constructively .
If someone offends/annoys you then massing them is a normal reaction, but there's a lot that can be done afterwards which helps the game long term anyway, such as sending a pm (if you know said player is obviously not experienced enough to know it yet) about why you did it and give them some good advice for the future, yes i'm preaching and almost likely something most people know, especially you. But throwing around your weight can be done in good and bad ways. And holding back again might not always be the best option.

Good to know on the "reset" aspect.

As for your "preaching", I'm sure you havent seen all my PM's, but thats pretty much what I have done up to this point, I have even helped WR members with questions and such. As for Not staying my hand. I would have acted in the Tackless Shadow incident had you not involved yourself in it. Kenzu was entirely in the wrong and deserved to get smacked. It still disturbs me that even today you publicly continue to back WR by posting in their Alliance Recruitment thread where he make some really pathetic claims.


1 Question for you Admin.

Why dont you just ask players to split their alliances and dissolve their empires for the health of the game instead of trying to come up with ways, not to balance the game, but to start blindly punishing those who play longterm, hard, dedicated, and smart?

You might be suprised, and you might not.

As for the AI bots, my opinion. If 50% is average size, then I say they hit every account over the 75% mark, and hit them all EVENLY, as in killing 1%, stealing 5% or what ever. They continue to do this daily until the players unite and defeat them by doing XXX amount of damage in 1 turn, one hr, 4 hrs, 8 hrs, 12 hrs, or 24 hrs, what ever you decide. So if the players dont act they get hammered daily, if the player react the first round of attacks maybe they can end the threat that same round.
BUT ABOVE ALL,

NO RANDOM massings, no singular massings, and no massings taking 25% of one man army and 2% of another. Its just not fair.

Special Agent 47 wrote:I would have acted in the Tackless Shadow incident had you not involved yourself in it.

Although I dont really see any extent of my involvement considering my posts never went above the observing-and-commenting-spectator level of the other univolved people, I'll work harder to avoid fueling such misconceptions.

Special Agent 47 wrote:It still disturbs me that even today you publicly continue to back WR by posting in their Alliance Recruitment thread where he make some really pathetic claims.

Now i'm really baffled with this since I'm definitely sure, considering I just searched the section, I have posted a total of 4 posts, two of them being about whether or not to lock the topic, the third being about warning everyone not to spam.
None of them were in WR's topic.

Other than that, you consider this down here a backing of WR alliance?

Admin wrote:

Sandwalker wrote:go get em tiger.

RAWR

Special Agent 47 wrote:Why dont you just ask players to split their alliances and dissolve their empires for the health of the game instead of trying to come up with ways, not to balance the game, but to start blindly punishing those who play longterm, hard, dedicated, and smart?

You might be suprised, and you might not.

Ok.
This is an open, honest and public request:
Would any alliance leader whose respective alliances make up a significant proportion of the active players, either in terms of membercount and/or memberpower, mind to disolve their alliances without any further ties for the health of the game?

Special Agent 47 wrote:NO RANDOM massings, no singular massings, and no massings taking 25% of one man army and 2% of another. Its just not fair.

I fully agree with you, would be unfair. And the idea of forcing people, even from different alliances, to band together to defeat the AI bots, which would be attacking the players, was part of the starting idea.

Oh yeh, about the AI bots, should they ever get released, it shouldn't be considered as trying to screw over those who play longterm and know what they are doing.
It's supposed to be something that will give them something to do after they have no one else to compete with lol

The main problem with disbanding alliances, is that power will tend to stay where there is power.

retro22 wrote:The main problem with disbanding alliances, is that power will tend to stay where there is power.

not just stay, but also gravitate towards.
So assuming the halucinoid fairytale of the big and powerful alliances disbanding and cutting their ties completely, we'll be in a similar situation within a few months top again

not to mention that friendships make those bonds re-adhere more quickly....


not sure...I'll keep thinking about what to do on this front...

Special Agent 47 wrote:
1 Question for you Admin.

Why dont you just ask players to split their alliances and dissolve their empires for the health of the game instead of trying to come up with ways, not to balance the game, but to start blindly punishing those who play longterm, hard, dedicated, and smart?

You might be suprised, and you might not.

As for the AI bots, my opinion. If 50% is average size, then I say they hit every account over the 75% mark, and hit them all EVENLY, as in killing 1%, stealing 5% or what ever. They continue to do this daily until the players unite and defeat them by doing XXX amount of damage in 1 turn, one hr, 4 hrs, 8 hrs, 12 hrs, or 24 hrs, what ever you decide. So if the players dont act they get hammered daily, if the player react the first round of attacks maybe they can end the threat that same round.
BUT ABOVE ALL,

NO RANDOM massings, no singular massings, and no massings taking 25% of one man army and 2% of another. Its just not fair.

I know it's not directed at me, but I agree with SA47 on the dissolving of alliances in the way that it would make the game very balanced and fair, but on the other hand I know it's impossible, because those who have alliances will most likely not want to see them shatter (including me) and even if there were restrictions on membersize, maybe 5 or 10 members per alliance, or there would be no alliances at all, people would find ways to unite and form united fronts. It's human nature to unite and form communities, no matter where, even in games.

I support the idea of AI bots, but they have to be thought through very well and they have to fight equally against every member. For example there will be 1 bot created with 50.000 population to attack you as soon as you have 100.000 population. maybe he will have no up and after you mass him completely, he will back of and dissappear. If you reach 1.000.000 population, there will be a bot who will have 750.000 population and go against you... just an idea.

the bots, if they ever exist should attack everyone by certain rules, it cannot be random. There could be a bot alliance, which would farm people, maybe even mass if someone has so much kuwal out or untrained that massing would be cheaper than the value of the units.
but it can not be random, and big players shouldn't be punished more simply because they have higher population.

they would clearly be punished more if they were to let it slip and say fall off of PPT and then the bot alliance sees them with a few days income and masses them and steals their kuwal.

Idk...there's many flaws and many intrigues about the bots

I think that we can combine this with an idea i had years ago...assuming I can find that old suggestion post...

there's tons of ideas, I even had a mutated version of ians pirates where actually players could be invited to join the pirate faction. Their gameplay would be different in some aspects

- attack others and take enemy "killed" units into slavery boosting their own income production
- cannot trade with anyone except other pirates
- act as mercenaries, where players can put up offers to destroy parts of other players account (defense only, or strike too, or some miners, etc.) and the pirates can do the destruction and get payed in resources (with some funny aspects to make sure people dont use this as a trading mechanism)
- some other things i can't recall anymore

that could be an interesting twist, joining the bots and wrecking havoc on players. I would personally find that more interesting then simply scripted bots doing an attack at a predictable point in the game.

And who knows? It might relieve some of the pressure between alliances as of late

slambot#4 wrote:that could be an interesting twist, joining the bots and wrecking havoc on players. I would personally find that more interesting then simply scripted bots doing an attack at a predictable point in the game.

And who knows? It might relieve some of the pressure between alliances as of late

it wont, the pirates idea can't work cos those pirates will still join their own alliances, partially defeating the point of them in the first place

fair enough, i seemed to have left the loyalty to the alliance part out again

have we not got ae already to (not punish shouldn't use punish) affect the growth of the bigger players or are we saying that like the growth limit in another game its not effective. Adding another vehicle to migrate the bigger players position is the same that has been tried in many games. Only true way for someone to catch up to long term players is money or time.

On splitting up alliance (power houses) whats to say even if they split up that they will not remain together. Sorry to mention another game but FUALL in TGW is prime example. All were large powerful alliances and now it is a collection of more alliances together with medium number of players in each but still as effective and always stand together when time comes.

On creating another server that resets what effect is that truly going to have expect maybe divide the number of players you have between 2 servers. As i have seen in other games where resets occur, people that can either pay wuth time and especially money always get ahead.

OK, ** turns and walks carefully out the room hoping nobody notices him**

kingkongfan1 wrote:OK, ** turns and walks carefully out the room hoping nobody notices him**

Then out of nowhere Godzilla challenges Kong to a duel.

** hands Godzilla a banana, pats him on the back, wishes him well, asks how the kids are, & tells Godzilla to check with him tomorrow about that duel**

Godzilla says," ok meet me at monster island at 3:15 tomorrow I'll be waiting your going down kong".