house vote power

[thorsworld1]

[quote="Rudy Pena":**Filtered**][quote="thorsworld1":**Filtered**]Sounds a good idea

I feel sorry for the weaker alliances where a more powerfull alliance wants to take house and to make it easier go and mass some poor unsuspecting alliance to 0 just so they can gain majority power.

Another change to benefit the stronger and more willing and determined people to gain or keep power.

[b:**Filtered**][u:**Filtered**]at least with the old way the smaller guys, those who dont want to be massers of the universe had something, now thats going to be taken away from them.[/u:**Filtered**][/b:**Filtered**]

If they had $$ I suppose they would be able to buy their losses back, but hey not everyone has or is willing to put $$ into this game[/quote:**Filtered**]
How is it taking away from small people? [/quote:**Filtered**]


well lets say alliance a has like 52 people and total population of say 4b
lets say alliance b has like 13 people and a total population of say 2b

alliance a because they are just lets say a group of friendly polish, joined together purely because they are all polish. they have small accounts with not great large stats, they control a house purely because there are many of them.

alliance b wants the house bonus, with the old system, they stood no chance, with the new system they can just mass the whole alliance, most likey only using 1 or 2 players and wham bam they get control of the house.

[thorsworld1]

There will be a change to how your 'influence' is calculated towards house vote.
it is currently based on population.
There will be a modifier added, which is the cube of your rank.
This will give the 'powerful' a bit more pull than the 'population only' accounts....but not by tons.

examples:

population 1,000,000 current value = 1,000,000

old system: all 1,000,000

new system:
same account:
rank 1 = 1,000,000
rank 8 = 1,000,000 / 2 = 500,000
rank 27 = 1,000,000 / 3 = 333,333
rank 125 = 1,000,000 / 5 = 200,000
rank 1000 = 1,000,000 / 10 = 100,000

etc...

to go live next week...

tell me something... Rhett had a chat with you and suddenly u changed smth for yr pupil. good job jason.

pupil? PUPIL?!!!!!!!!!!! Lihium you noob!!


But seriously, it's fair..it's not totally benefitting power and not totally benefitting population. After all anyone can create an alliance full of inactives and send them to take control of houses. Now atleast, if you want control of a house, you have to somewhat earn it.

See my previous response, does not have to be an alliance with inactives does it, can just be smaller guys grouped together with the same idea or way of playing, not every person joins alliances because of war or protection, some just join to be a social group

[Rudy Peña]

Now switch it around. Alliance A has 4bil planets while alliance B has 10bil planets. Though alliance B has no power while alliane a does.


Alliance C asked alliance b to kick alliance A due to war.


See how it can be turned either way.

[BMMJ13]

Bad idea in the way it is described. Someone can join a house and build up right before they would be voted out to vote the controlling alliance out, nothing to stop people from being statless for the first 7 days only to build up right before to take house. For this to even be close to a reasonable suggestion, it would have to be an average of your rank since joining it. Add to the fact that you can just ppt for much of it, especially if you join and build up at the end, and this is a terrible suggestion.

[Juliette]

[quote="Rudy Pena":**Filtered**][quote="thorsworld1":**Filtered**]Sounds a good idea

I feel sorry for the weaker alliances where a more powerfull alliance wants to take house and to make it easier go and mass some poor unsuspecting alliance to 0 just so they can gain majority power.

Another change to benefit the stronger and more willing and determined people to gain or keep power.

[b:**Filtered**][u:**Filtered**]at least with the old way the smaller guys, those who dont want to be massers of the universe had something, now thats going to be taken away from them.[/u:**Filtered**][/b:**Filtered**]

If they had $$ I suppose they would be able to buy their losses back, but hey not everyone has or is willing to put $$ into this game[/quote:**Filtered**]
How is it taking away from small people? [/quote:**Filtered**]


well lets say alliance a has like 52 people and total population of say 4b
lets say alliance b has like 13 people and a total population of say 2b

alliance a because they are just lets say a group of friendly polish, joined together purely because they are all polish. they have small accounts with not great large stats, they control a house purely because there are many of them.

alliance b wants the house bonus, with the old system, they stood no chance, with the new system they can just mass the whole alliance, most likey only using 1 or 2 players and wham bam they get control of the house.[/quote][/quote]

Chill out, thorsworld1, no need to swear.

What you described would be exactly how the 'little folk' would gain control of a house that is currently controlled by a member rich but inactive alliance.

[thorsworld1]

Now switch it around. Alliance A has 4bil planets while alliance B has 10bil planets. Though alliance B has no power while alliane a does.


Alliance C asked alliance b to kick alliance A due to war.


See how it can be turned either way.

I am presuming alliance c is a sister alliance or a friendly alliance joined in a war for instance.

in which case under the new system, alliance b can be kicked by alliance a on rank and size
under the old system alliance a could get sister or friendly alliance to add to their numbers and support alliance a, providing their numbers are greater then they get house bonus..

Consider this, either build another alliance or recruit new members into an existing alliance that way you get what you want and you protect the smaller alliances or even better be diplomatic and build relations with the existing house members and control the house between more than 1 alliance

[Rudy Peña]

Bad idea in the way it is described. Someone can join a house and build up right before they would be voted out to vote the controlling alliance out, nothing to stop people from being statless for the first 7 days only to build up right before to take house. For this to even be close to a reasonable suggestion, it would have to be an average of your rank since joining it. Add to the fact that you can just ppt for much of it, especially if you join and build up at the end, and this is a terrible suggestion.

This does have some merit.

Though the the system we have now is flawed. The new one is not that much flawed. Yours is still flawed a bit.

[jedi~tank]

Now switch it around. Alliance A has 4bil planets while alliance B has 10bil planets. Though alliance B has no power while alliane a does.


Alliance C asked alliance b to kick alliance A due to war.


See how it can be turned either way.

I am presuming alliance c is a sister alliance or a friendly alliance joined in a war for instance.

in which case under the new system, alliance b can be kicked by alliance a on rank and size
under the old system alliance a could get sister or friendly alliance to add to their numbers and support alliance a, providing their numbers are greater then they get house bonus..

Consider this, either build another alliance or recruit new members into an existing alliance that way you get what you want and you protect the smaller alliances or even better be diplomatic and build relations with the existing house members and control the house between more than 1 alliance

Indeed, see it doesnt have anything to do with kissing ass or being a sloppy hoe..or a neat one for that matter.

[thorsworld1]

[quote="Rudy Pena":**Filtered**][quote="thorsworld1":**Filtered**]Sounds a good idea

I feel sorry for the weaker alliances where a more powerfull alliance wants to take house and to make it easier go and mass some poor unsuspecting alliance to 0 just so they can gain majority power.

Another change to benefit the stronger and more willing and determined people to gain or keep power.

[b:**Filtered**][u:**Filtered**]at least with the old way the smaller guys, those who dont want to be massers of the universe had something, now thats going to be taken away from them.[/u:**Filtered**][/b:**Filtered**]

If they had $$ I suppose they would be able to buy their losses back, but hey not everyone has or is willing to put $$ into this game[/quote:**Filtered**]





How is it taking away from small people? [/quote:**Filtered**]


well lets say alliance a has like 52 people and total population of say 4b
lets say alliance b has like 13 people and a total population of say 2b

alliance a because they are just lets say a group of friendly polish, joined together purely because they are all polish. they have small accounts with not great large stats, they control a house purely because there are many of them.

alliance b wants the house bonus, with the old system, they stood no chance, with the new system they can just mass the whole alliance, most likey only using 1 or 2 players and wham bam they get control of the house.[/quote][/quote][/quote]Chill out, thorsworld1, no need to swear.

What you described would be exactly how the 'little folk' would gain control of a house that is currently controlled by a member rich but inactive alliance. [/quote]

I dont know what happend there as I did not use any swear words or cut down words, must be the way I used the quote button or cut something short, Im sure a mod can check and clear that up

[Mathlord]

I always find it amusing when people complain about a system they have had no problem with for years just because it doesn't suit them now Oh well, we'll all move on and deal with the fact that once again some people would rather change the game then learn how to play it as it stands.

@ Rudy, the current system isn't flawed at all. It's based on population of an alliance. Inactives don't join alliances, otherwise they wouldn't be inactive. If they became inactive later on, an alliance has two choices. Either boot them to cheapen alliance repairs and PPTs or maintain them for house superiority. Both have merit and both have consequences...

Believing that houses should be based on something other than population doesn't mean there's a flaw in population driven house decisions...it just means you want the game to be based on something else instead. You have the right to do that, but interesting timing as always...

[jedi~tank]

So now lets all buy c40 so we can compete to stay in a house **Filtered** **Filtered**.

[Lithium]

this update has not been set for any discussion , its is to be implemented , I 'd like to know what triggered Jason to do it. just his thoughts cuz we already proving it can be bugged using the built-up stats to gain more power rite before being voted thus resulting taking control of a house with temporary stats and booting other alliances.

How would admin fix this bug , the alliance once getting control might lose the stats but the damage is done.

How come Admin have this idea ready to go live in a time when OE alliances get booted when they try to overcome their enemy houses.

Rhet it suited you when OE had 100 members but it doesnt now that is reduced to misery.

[Rudy Peña]

Ahh but math, you are forget it both pop and power.

[Rudy Peña]

this update has not been set for any discussion , its is to be implemented , I 'd like to know what triggered Jason to do it. just his thoughts cuz we already proving it can be bugged using the built-up stats to gain more power rite before being voted thus resulting taking control of a house with temporary stats and booting other alliances.

How would admin fix this bug , the alliance once getting control might lose the stats but the damage is done.

How come Admin have this idea ready to go live in a time when OE alliances get booted when they try to overcome their enemy houses.

Rhet it suited you when OE had 100 members but it doesnt now that is reduced to misery.

For Taf to think OE or ETL or someone in OE has something to do with this update.

Take your whining ingame and stop trying to have oethers think we are "fixing" the game for us.

[Huxley]

Say it's like king of the hill, and then there are 1000 zulu warriors armed with spears going to attempt to take control of it from 100 Royal Marines armed with the best equipment possible, that could wipe them all out before they get even near... See were this is going?