Delaying Alliance Attack Logs? :o

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

I've heard that there is a proposal with strong Admin Jason / Admin Juliette support to delay / lag (alliance?) attack logs by 30 minutes...


As a long-time former member as well as a long-time former leader of The Magnificents alliance,

I think that this would really hurt the ability of newbie and independent alliances

to survive in a game that is based in real time.


I would like the admins to address the community,
and share their reasons for why they think that an idea this dramatic is necessary at all,
let alone a 30 minute delay!

10/1/14 -

Currently live, and being tested on dev, is a 1 minute lag to attack logs.

- Caprila

[IFLuX]

There no need to be any reasons they are admins ... it's their game they can do what they want

[Duderanch]

As a long-time former member as well as a long-time former leader of The Magnificents alliance,

I think that this would really hurt the ability of newbie and independent alliances

to survive in a game that is based in real time.

How so?

[~Dä Vinci~]

why would u delay it 30 mins makes no sense.. the only reason people would want it changed is because a certain alliance has a lot of log checkers lol and they catch most masses. hahaha

[Caprila]

This has been the hot potato topic of the last 4 irc meets. With them active again, it's a great place to hear the admin thoughts, direct from the source so to speak

The 'for a change' arguments

.1. You may have noticed in the other coming update, Double strike is getting a big nerf. Likely to be ~20% and wipe all your glory on doing so, same for glory phase. No more double+glory snipers. Now, as I understand it, double strike was brought in, in part, as a counter to alliance logs, and allow people a chance of 'bursting' through.

The question that brought up was, ' Is it fair to leave alliance logs at full strength, whilst diminishing the effects of double strike/glory functions ' ?

.2. The 'automation' factor, means that browser and app plugins auto-refresh alliance logs, allowing the user to 'sit back' and watch the logs, without any effort at all. This gives the ability for 1 person to 'play' for 30, that are not even signed in, by easymoding.

The question that brought up was something like, 'Is automation such as this good for the game, and the power it gives alliances? '

*

The 'against a chance' arguments

.1. Alliance functions, namely the ability to 'watch your friends backs' while they're vulnerable at work, or sleep, encourages team work, co-ordination, and to build stats (knowing there's a chance to defend them). Lagging the logs, and limiting functions, might mean more people don't bother. Or feel as if alliances are 'worth' being in.

.2. Alliance logs in real time, better enable 'onliners' which many people find the most thrilling part of the game. Lagged alliance logs would mean not seeing who has stats, or something killable, until they've untrained, sold up, or already gone to PPT.


**

The 'proposals' currently on the table.

30 minutes of delay to alliance logs.

Or

5 minutes of delay to alliance logs.

Or

No delay to alliance logs, but a 30s? minimum on refreshing the alliance logs. (I.e to counter automated apps)

Or

No delays at all.


This is all still discussion, and we're only talking about a proposed test, as it were, and recieving feedback, rather than a set in stone permanent change.

Sorry about the points I missed out, did try to keep it to the bare bones of the argument, as I saw it. With ~ 8 hours of logs on it, stuff had to be missed out Was a great debate though, lovely to see so many people passionate about the game.

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

[05:31] Caprila: 8 hours is no joke either, we've had like four 1-3 hour irc meets on it now lol
[05:32] Dublin Warrior:
[05:33] Dublin Warrior: No delay to alliance logs, but a 30s? minimum on refreshing the alliance logs. (I.e to counter automated apps) << that part can do a lot of good...

though I might suggest a 5 second minimum on refreshing...

oh... wait, that might not stop the automated browser refreshing from continuing afterward...

hmm... yes, 30 seconds is good.

even 60 seconds isn't bad.

[ƒëmmë]

might be beneficial too though, sorry Cap your posts are tooooooooooooooooo long for me to read so you might have covered this but

could stop retell hits by some gangho member on a person that the person being attacked permission .. ie planet sales, needing to use up lifers etc.. gives ppl time to calm down and find out if there is a genuin reason for it

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

might be beneficial too though, sorry Cap your posts are tooooooooooooooooo long for me to read so you might have covered this but

could stop retell hits by some gangho member on a person that the person being attacked permission .. ie planet sales, needing to use up lifers etc.. gives ppl time to calm down and find out if there is a genuin reason for it

nope, not covered by caprilla.

ya, log watchers and alliance members get unsettling surprises in alliance attack logs a lot...
but usually people just stress/freak out/start posting in alliance chat/forums/sending messages to attacker... but it's common enough, and with fault of members on both sides that it doesn't even contribute to starting major conflicts...
that I know of.

[~Odin~]

1) this was not mentioned in the admin meet I attended last week (to the best of my knowledge)
2) I vote no on any delay in the attack logs
3) If you put a delay on attack logs and have an alliance member as an officer have you thought about how that will effect the officer/commander bond?

[Duderanch]

How would it affect the officer/co bond?

[Master Rahl]

This would just hurt larger alliances more. If a big player (alliance) wants to zero a (small, training, newb) alliance they will with or with out this. But this would make it easier for smaller alliances to cause havoc on larger alliances. It will make using alliance PPT/repairs harder to use as efficiently.

this is just my thoughts
I am for it.

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

This would just hurt larger alliances more. If a big player (alliance) wants to zero a (small, training, newb) alliance they will with or with out this. But this would make it easier for smaller alliances to cause havoc on larger alliances. It will make using alliance PPT/repairs harder to use as efficiently.

this is just my thoughts
I am for it.

As leader / log watcher of the Magnificents alliance I was able to stave off / prevent 1 or 2 massing by Ricos, thanks to helpful intel and diplomacy.

If I was better prepared, I would have been able to stop at least one additional massing.

**Tormented** was a different barrel of fish, unfortunately.

[Huxley]

As a long-time former member as well as a long-time former leader of The Magnificents alliance,

I think that this would really hurt the ability of newbie and independent alliances

As leader / log watcher of the Magnificents alliance I was able to stave off / prevent 1 or 2 massing by Ricos, thanks to helpful intel and diplomacy.

If I was better prepared, I would have been able to stop at least one additional massing.

Ha, yeah that's the reason you don't want this update isn't it, Mr Over Emphasis Much. Everyone knows the real reason why you don't want it, why are you trying to cover it up? It puts your alliance at a disadvantage, fair enough, why not just admit it?

Affect smaller alliances? Pffft, please.

[Norbe]

As a long-time former member as well as a long-time former leader of The Magnificents alliance,

I think that this would really hurt the ability of newbie and independent alliances

As leader / log watcher of the Magnificents alliance I was able to stave off / prevent 1 or 2 massing by Ricos, thanks to helpful intel and diplomacy.

If I was better prepared, I would have been able to stop at least one additional massing.

Ha, yeah that's the reason you don't want this update isn't it, Mr Over Emphasis Much. Everyone knows the real reason why you don't want it, why are you trying to cover it up? It puts your alliance at a disadvantage, fair enough, why not just admit it?

Affect smaller alliances? Pffft, please.

A delay in the attack logs would put every alliance at a disadvantage. It reduces the ability of teamworking to help each other. And it means massings will nearly always be successful, so less defenses will be built and all wars will become 0 stat fests again.

It will benefit the snipers who play alone, as they can now remove defenses from even the most active alliances on a whim.

It's just a bad idea for the game overall. The system works well, massings need to be carefully planned and can take several attempts. Yet still every defense built has fallen.

~Norbe~

[Guild]

What a ridiculous idea, this potential update has just come up because TA (lets not beat around the bush here) are better than other big alliances at watching logs.

they have it practiced and perfected, you all need to just man up and improve yourselves rather than nerfing others