StarGateWars Forums

Top 1000 ranks?


How would new players ever get the chance to get in there?

They would be educated before they ever had a chance to ascend.....

I agree that deleting that small accounts which have been inactive for 1 month would be a great idea

Temptress wrote:don't know if they cause lagg, (thought everyone turn farming was doing that) but yeah there should be some sort of autoprune of inactive accounts.

I recon it would because the game has to update each and every account with their turnly u.p/income/rank changes, taking away half the accounts is going to reduce lag,

And yes they shouldn't be deleted but vaulted and no longer on rankings basically vacation, If anyone ever re-logs into them, they'll come off vac.

Agreed with the suggestion!

if the G&R concept is changed than by all means.

If not, NO.


Like it was pointed out, it`d virtually kill off any chances of new ppl to get into the G&R range (especially once FUAvTF war is over lol). Its logic isnt it, if you wipe the accounts the zone shrinks to what it was, when 2 years ago. And you had fewer and smaller accounts then for the new guys to "compete with" for the spots. If you apply the same framework to todays playbase it could and would turn very ugly for the up&cummers.

Brdavs wrote:if the G&R concept is changed than by all means.

If not, NO.


Like it was pointed out, it`d virtually kill off any chances of new ppl to get into the G&R range (especially once FUAvTF war is over lol). Its logic isnt it, if you wipe the accounts the zone shrinks to what it was, when 2 years ago. And you had fewer and smaller accounts then for the new guys to "compete with" for the spots. If you apply the same framework to todays playbase it could and would turn very ugly for the up&cummers.

Not really, G+R is supposed to be moderatly hard to achieve, Should only be based off a % of active players.

But players were on average, what, 1/4 (if that) of todays size in the time frame were talking about, provided we cut a drastic ammount of accounts.

I mean top 400 today and top 400 2 years ago... I know who I`d rather copmete for the G&R spots with if I were a relativly fresh guy lol... I dont think it`d be just "moderatly hard" as you put it heh...

I think the accounts need deleting, but I'm agreeing with Brdavs here too. I mean alot of us have incomes that require defenses larger then a good portion of the game has in total population. The major players in TJP and FUALL carry rather hefty stats by default, because they are needed. A large reduction of the G&R range could be detramental to growth of new accounts.

Maybe set a cap on G&R, say after 100K you stop earning them and are removed from the G&R ranking to make way for some who actually wants to ascend. Afterall, most of the long term players have no will or want to ascend, but have to carry stats and rank just to keep the account safe.

maybe the G&R range needs to increase a bit?

The way it is.. I believe the ranking is about 1.5K for 1 GnR/turn, no? I think it might be just a tad bit lower. But I was getting GnR at around 1400+-.

But as I said before, delete the old accounts with less then 1500 army size.. but find a new way to make it so those smaller, newer people can ascend.

I do beluieve G&R is just before 1800

Vacation or delete is fine as long as they disappear from ranks!

I say delete those who didnt pay for SS but vacation the ones that have

I'd say, and have said before that all accounts regardless of size should be put on vacation if inactive for 30 days, then maybe deleted after 3 months.

I know raiders dont want this and only want smaller accounts reduced so they can find the juicier raid targets easier.

Also the G&R thing is a good point, % would have to be changed after numbers reduced, it already far to easy to get in G&R ranks.

And if any of these accounts that you are so eager to delete has paid for SS? Will that be paid back too? Highly unlikely.

I don't really see a major need to delete these accounts. The only one that would be of any benefit is to reduce lag - but then I don't believe that they cause it.

If the army is below a certain size and inactive for a certain amount of time, then sure - put it in vacation - that is all that is necessary. Otherwise there is bound to be a situation where an account gets deleted (with SS or not) and then some irate user complains about the fact that their account was deleted and says something along the lines of "surely if you think an account is inactive, then the best course of action is to put it in vacation? That way if the user does come back, they can simply login to reactivate it."

Simply deleting the accounts leaves the Administration open to all kinds of criticsm and claims, which could not easily be defended.