Fixed; Multiplier / DM Sniping / Ranking / Statless accounts

[~Tziki~]

So i was talking with SoL and here is what we considered.

Long story short....

- Ascended server holds no value of physical stats other than to aid or stop farming.

- When farming, there is a multiplier which determines how much of the DMU you actually get from the farm hit. Which thereby means you can only have stats between turn change, resulting in many planets being unarmed if your forced to logout or wait for turns etc

- This multiplier punishes those that build stats and risk losing them, compared to those that sell up and remain statless.

- Of these statless people many remain that way contempt and being difficult to descend with no desire to do anything else.

- These people often believe remaining statless is okay, but being farmed due to it is not.

- This results in inactive/semi-inactive accounts DM'ing other active players and players willing to try and better themselves and others in the race to be the alpha god (goddess, sorry Robe ).

- For Small players this hinders the chance to grow and catch up with larger players and the rate at which farming can be done.

- For inactive players this encourages them to do as they please and disuade newer players from playing the server.

UPDATE:

Thusfully I think my approach might be something to look into.
"Not building any millitary stats ? then you have a higher chance being descended because your personal levels are less effective."

Possibly the best suggestion in this thread so far.

There should atleast be drawbacks to something that is used as such an advantage.

I could see that...

I wish I understood what my current risk of being descended is before I passed judgement on it though.

During our debate we tried to think of logical reasons why the multiplier makes sense, and why it does not.
How to stop players sniping, and how to stop more established players abusing lower level players. How to stop lazy players getting more benefit than enthusiastic players.


Does the ability to Destroy Military ona player need revising?
Does the cost of training and untraining units need revising?

How can we encourage all players to build stats and add a sense of purpose to the game other than to descend or be descended?

right now the server has one purpose, increase personals. deny descension, descend others to gain advantage in main.

With that comes the desire to reach these goals, which in turn opens up the possibility for others to inhibit that ability with no cost to them.

Should there be another factor involved when Destroying military? e.g x% of the value of assassins sent must be trained in supers and y% in normal planets. This must be done so that the assassins have a safe rendevous point or safe house for after their mission is accomplished.

(This forces the semi-active or inatcive players to have some form of strike / defense before they are able to DM without a great cost)

[Rudy Peña]

How to stop players sniping, and how to stop more established players abusing lower level players.

Stop trying to force your game playing style onto others.

How to stop lazy players getting more benefit than enthusiastic players.

There is no such thing in ascended.

Does the ability to Destroy Military one player need revising?
Does the cost of training and untraining units need revising?

1. It has already or will be done
2. With the amount of DMU out in the open, yes the price to train needs to be upped a bit more. However, if you add prices to untraining units. Then you must have to do the same thing in main.

How can we encourage all players to build stats and add a sense of purpose to the game other than to descend or be descended?

If some people dont want to build stats in ascended, they dont have too. Like I said, stop trying to force your game playing style on others.

right now the server has one purpose, increase personals. deny descension, descend others to gain advantage in main.

You are wrong, You said 1 purpose....You just stated 3 of the main ones.

With that comes the desire to reach these goals, which in turn opens up the possibility for others to inhibit that ability with no cost to them.

What kind of goals, everyone has different ones. It always cost something...in this case DMU to get to that goal.

Should there be another factor involved when Destroying military? e.g x% of the value of assassins sent must be trained in supers and y% in normal planets. This must be done so that the assassins have a safe rendevous point or safe house for after their mission is accomplished.

Just no, stop trying to fix something that is not broken.

(This forces the semi-active or inatcive players to have some form of strike / defense before they are able to DM without a great cost)

Yes this does forces people to play by other peoples rules and game playing style. Stop trying to force people to play by how you want to play. If it aint broken, dont frakking fix it.

[Coulson]

I'm inclined to side with Rudy on this.
What gives you the right to take admin or his aide aside and tell them how the game should work, period? To each their own opinion, of course, but this is ott. Of course you can tell admin what you think, but announcing this like you're the guy upstairs is sketchy.

[Clarkey]

How to stop players sniping

How many times do people have to say this, sniping is a style of gameplay, just because you don't like it doesn't mean that admin should be expected to "patch" the game to prevent that style of gameplay.

If he was to do that then i'd cry bloody mary to prevent scamming, which I might add is another form of gameplay but would have more merit to "patching" it than sniping would.

Stop trying to control how people play the game.

[~Tziki~]

Your all reading into this to much.

Sniping is not a style of play.. its not playing full stop. Its sitting back and destroying the fun and hard work others are putting into the game and making the game work.

Sniping is a lead cause to players getting bored with the game and leaving.


and ontop of that i am not talking like this hAS to be done. I am presenting with what many consider issues, for the masses to discuss and improvise on.

The above posts have done neither but insinuate personal agenda's on my behalf.

[Clarkey]

Sniping is not a style of play.. its not playing full stop. Its sitting back and destroying the fun and hard work others are putting into the game and making the game work.

Yes it is playing, logging in and banking is considered playing if that is how someone wants to play. You do not dictate what is considered playing and what is not.

If someone creates a sniper account, logs in and uses it that is 100% playing. Not playing would not be logging in or not having an account.

As I said, stop dictating how this game is played by other people. And don't make the excuse that people are leaving because of snipers. I can probably say with confidence that some people have left in the past because of people trying to dictate how others play.

[ƒëmmë]

Tziki, Tziki leave our ascended alone.. (play on Pink Floyd's- The Wall)

[Juliette]

Tziki, Tziki leave our ascended alone.. (play on Pink Floyd's- The Wall)

Good one.

Your all reading into this to much.

Maybe you should say less, then?

Sniping is not a style of play.. its not playing full stop. Its sitting back and destroying the fun and hard work others are putting into the game and making the game work.

Sniping is a lead cause to players getting bored with the game and leaving.

.. is your opinion, and that is cool. Now us. We do not agree.

and ontop of that i am not talking like this hAS to be done. I am presenting with what many consider issues, for the masses to discuss and improvise on.

"After I spoke with admin, we agreed miners should be killable." Now tell me, does that sound like "hey guys, here's a thought, miners should be killable", or does that sound like: "Admin will make miners killable."

Precisely.

The above posts have done neither but insinuate personal agenda's on my behalf.

Sucks to be you and have a few people on a forum disagree with you.

Here is some advice. Take a lesson in "how to communicate my ideas after high school and deal with criticism".

[Clarkey]

more forum troll and tziki insults plz.

hell lets just rename the topic, everyone troll at tziki instead on considering how to improve ascended by debating about genuine idea's.

No-one is trolling your thread. We have disagreed with your ideas (or some of them) and stated that here. I'm sorry that no-one has posted in support of your ideas yet. But if you go around claiming that people with sniper accounts are not playing then what response do you expect?

Your suggestion to prevent snipers from being able to play the way they want is not, I repeat not, a genuine idea. It is an attempt to prevent someone from playing in a mode that you dislike and do not, under your understanding, accept that it is "playing".

Just because some, or all of the responses here have not provided their own suggestions or alternative thoughts on your ideas does not mean they should not have a right to reject your idea with criticism. No-one is required by forum law to provide suggestions or alternatives. We shoot your idea down (or part of it) because it is an idea based on someone that does not like a certain gameplay type and wants to prevent anyone else playing that way. I.E. A selfish idea.

I suggest you look up the term trolling and apply it to where it is relevant, which is not anywhere in this thread.

[~Tziki~]

its not an attempt to outright stop them. If you want to play that style then it is fine. But it shouldnt be so easy to do as it is now, there should be atleast SOME drawback to doing it, otherwise you could be one man vs the entire server and still never be beaten as there are little to no costs involved in doing it.

[Drought]

Perhaps add a higher chance of getting descended when your stattless ?
In like, make the personal levels less effective when you have a very low military rank.
just a thought

[Rudy Peña]

its not an attempt to outright stop them. If you want to play that style then it is fine. But it shouldnt be so easy to do as it is now, there should be atleast SOME drawback to doing it, otherwise you could be one man vs the entire server and still never be beaten as there are little to no costs involved in doing it.

There are drawbacks, like the snipers losing there planets when attempting to DM someone. In which both people lose planets. The only difference is both of there CER's, if there sniper's is bigger then the other person might consider to up his CER more to close or more than the snipers.

With new updates in asceneded it is now a bit easier to grow and farm to upgrade your account, not just for snipers but for anyone wanting to play. If some player doesnt play or doesnt want to upgrade and some sniper kills all the work in less than 12 hours. Well its the player's fault for not playing or upgrading.

A example, a few weeks ago. I DMed someone who was 20 bil with less than 400,000 fleets and about or less than 800 charisma. A short while later he left his alliance in main, i think its cause he had a big army in ascended and lost it all and will take him months to get back to 20 bil.

This example here is of people not upgrading there accounts.

[~Tziki~]

Perhaps add a higher chance of getting descended when your stattless ?
In like, make the personal levels less effective when you have a very low military rank.
just a thought

An intresting theory...

Im sure it would cuse many to rage about it though.

As it stands the more you have trained, the less DMU you get per hit. So forcing players to be a higher rank, would make players growth less effective. However people sniping for very little cost does this to.

@rudy, my point isnt that those who are big and lazy shouldnt be sniped. But those that are NOT being lazy and are actually trying to improve themselves, will at some point farm a person that is to damn lazy to play, but is still willing to destroy someone elses gaming experience and force them to be unable to play for a certain amount of time. Sniping is keeping potential up and coming good players down.


Now just a reminder, this is nothing about myself or my own personal account. it is an observation i have made and something im trying to discuss or improve on for other players.

The more active players on ascended the better in my oppinion.

[Drought]

Perhaps add a higher chance of getting descended when your stattless ?
In like, make the personal levels less effective when you have a very low military rank.
just a thought

An intresting theory...

Im sure it would cuse many to rage about it though.

As it stands the more you have trained, the less DMU you get per hit. So forcing players to be a higher rank, would make players growth less effective. However people sniping for very little cost does this to.

I read some other posts where people seem to want ascended to be somewhat the same like main.
But in reality, its almost the other way around.
The strong high leveled ones build as little as possible to gain as much as they can, whereas main they build up to preserve their goods. The top ranked actually sit at the top, this is not so on the ascended realm.
It seems a bit weird.

It got me thinking about a question, now brace yourself: how can a high leveled ascended account be damaged ?
They can not be descended (almost), and hardly have anything to loose, that goes for the vast majority of high leveled players up there. Whereas opposite they can take higher amounts of DMU and descend those below them. It doesnt seem to have any negative drawbacks for having a very strong ascended account.
Again, it seems a bit weird, somewhat unbalanced.

Thusfully I think my approach might be something to look into.
"Not building any millitary stats ? then you have a higher chance being descended because your personal levels are less effective."

[~Tziki~]

Thusfully I think my approach might be something to look into.
"Not building any millitary stats ? then you have a higher chance being descended because your personal levels are less effective."

Possibly the best suggestion in this thread so far.

There should atleast be drawbacks to something that is used as such an advantage.