StarGateWars Forums

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

Indeed, if it does that i am all for it.

Jedi~Tank wrote:

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

Indeed, if it does that i am all for it.

If you feel that the ascended server should be made redundant then make your own thread about it.

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

You talk about this suggestion would pretty much stop all descensions of remotely active people, well what's the point in descending remotely active people anyway, if they are remotwely active then descending them isn't really going to hurt them cause they obviously don't care enough.

Yes this suggestion could increase activity on ascended a bit, maybe not much, but a bit. But it just seems to me those that are against it are against it because they wouldn't be able to descend remotely active people, ah shame, maybe with this suggestion you'd actually have a challenge in trying to descend someone instead of going the easy route and looking for remotely active players.

Try looking from all angles instead of your own personal interests.

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

I doubt that Rocky.
I think it will create more awareness with Ascended, which will entice more people to play it.
As it is now, I mainly read people here opposing who no longer realy have to worry about descension. And those are frustrated enough as it is when its already hard to descend someone.

Perhaps here lays another problem.

A strong player, wanting to descend someone below him, but none someone very 'weak'
The time it takes to descend them will likely still be in the range of a day or perhaps two.
Perhaps its an idea to look at that bit at the same time.
Not that you would instantly get everyone descended in say 12 hours, but perhaps instead of something turning out to be 2 or 3 days, that its brought down to 15 or 18 hours.

This effectively could give you an option: The Clairvoyance choice

If enabled, your max descension time becomes 18 hours, and the button will glow red on moments where your on hand life force is 0.

the 18 hours here being, when it would have taken more then 18 hours, it then takes max 18 hours.
but if your max descension time was below 18 hours, for example 12 hours in this particular battle, then it will remain 12 or the time it would have taken, with the alarm option enabled.

This gives the high hitters a bigger chance descending someone strong if the option is enabled.

Perhaps a bit far fetched, but it gives an edge to a greater playerbase.



@clarkey

Clarkey wrote:

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

You talk about this suggestion would pretty much stop all descensions of remotely active people, well what's the point in descending remotely active people anyway, if they are remotwely active then descending them isn't really going to hurt them cause they obviously don't care enough.

Yes this suggestion could increase activity on ascended a bit, maybe not much, but a bit. But it just seems to me those that are against it are against it because they wouldn't be able to descend remotely active people, ah shame, maybe with this suggestion you'd actually have a challenge in trying to descend someone instead of going the easy route and looking for remotely active players.

Try looking from all angles instead of your own personal interests.

what :S if someone is remotely active its hard to descend them, why on earth would you make it harder.

there is no point descending people that arent active in main... because they dont play enough for it to be worth it

the accounts can be linked so one click and you can check, no need what so ever to make a flashing red beacon telling you, you are about to be desceneded in 9 hours time !!! stupid suggestion

Clarkey wrote:

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

You talk about this suggestion would pretty much stop all descensions of remotely active people, well what's the point in descending remotely active people anyway, if they are remotwely active then descending them isn't really going to hurt them cause they obviously don't care enough.

Yes this suggestion could increase activity on ascended a bit, maybe not much, but a bit. But it just seems to me those that are against it are against it because they wouldn't be able to descend remotely active people, ah shame, maybe with this suggestion you'd actually have a challenge in trying to descend someone instead of going the easy route and looking for remotely active players.

Try looking from all angles instead of your own personal interests.

Do you even play ascended? This update would make it borderline IMPOSSIBLE to descend people. That would make ascended even more INACTIVE. As it is, people occasionally have to log in to make sure no one is descending them. Make it so that they get alerted in main and hardly anyone will even bother with ascended at all.

The only way to descend people is to catch them off-guard. Give them a warning, and you might as well remove the personal assault button entirely...

RepliMagni wrote:

Clarkey wrote:

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

You talk about this suggestion would pretty much stop all descensions of remotely active people, well what's the point in descending remotely active people anyway, if they are remotwely active then descending them isn't really going to hurt them cause they obviously don't care enough.

Yes this suggestion could increase activity on ascended a bit, maybe not much, but a bit. But it just seems to me those that are against it are against it because they wouldn't be able to descend remotely active people, ah shame, maybe with this suggestion you'd actually have a challenge in trying to descend someone instead of going the easy route and looking for remotely active players.

Try looking from all angles instead of your own personal interests.

Do you even play ascended? This update would make it borderline IMPOSSIBLE to descend people. That would make ascended even more INACTIVE. As it is, people occasionally have to log in to make sure no one is descending them. Make it so that they get alerted in main and hardly anyone will even bother with ascended at all.

The only way to descend people is to catch them off-guard. Give them a warning, and you might as well remove the personal assault button entirely...

ya i agree with guild about making it harder, however what about if the user is on ppt?Send message then?

You misinterpret 'remotely active', Clarkey. Anyone who has even the tiniest glimpse of activity can not ever be descended, save for them being distracted by force majeure. Language barrier.
"Anyone who is even remotely active", as in "anyone who logs in occasionally, doing nothing else but checking ongoing attacks".

Clarkey wrote:

Rocky wrote:It has been said a few times, but ill just say it again, this update would stop pretty much all descensions of any remotely active people, thus making ascended much less useful or significant and therefore less used and less active.

You talk about this suggestion would pretty much stop all descensions of remotely active people, well what's the point in descending remotely active people anyway, if they are remotwely active then descending them isn't really going to hurt them cause they obviously don't care enough.

You have clearly been out of touch with the game for too long. The only descensions that can be done these days are inactives and people who 'miss a few days' due to external circumstances. Agreed, descending an inactive is rather pointless, but it is impossible to descend anyone else. Why? One DMU hit, convert to Life Force and you are back with filled Reserves. It takes 12 hours to descend even the weakest of the weak. While there are still excellent arguments against decreasing that time, giving lazy people a boost to make them harder to descend is unnecessary pampering.

Clarkey wrote:Yes this suggestion could increase activity on ascended a bit, maybe not much, but a bit. But it just seems to me those that are against it are against it because they wouldn't be able to descend remotely active people, ah shame, maybe with this suggestion you'd actually have a challenge in trying to descend someone instead of going the easy route and looking for remotely active players.

A challenge? Seriously? It takes weeks to descend someone who is active, and even then, you almost have to shoot their sister to get them to drop offline long enough for you to descend them. There is no 'challenge' in something that is made impossible. Pampering, tampering with the game's mechanics to favour the lazy assed ijits who don't care about ascended anyway.

Clarkey wrote:Try looking from all angles instead of your own personal interests.

*cough*

~Wolverine~ wrote:ya i agree with guild about making it harder, however what about if the user is on ppt?Send message then?

That makes no sense. lol. If you're on ppt in main, why would you be logged into main instead of simply checking ascended?

RepliMagni wrote:The only way to descend people is to catch them off-guard. Give them a warning, and you might as well remove the personal assault button entirely...

Sounds a bit like an off line massing on main realy ...

If thats realy the case, the matter of being able to 'catch someone of gaurd' isnt it perhaps an idea to take a deeper look in the mechanics of ascended, and specifically 'when' life force is effective.

I brought up something else the other day, that being when you have low to none military stats on ascended then your personal levels would work less effectively.

I would like the idea, that accounts on the ascended server are build up to protect themselfs from descension, instead of hardly building anything, relying on logging in once a day being enough.

Being massed down, loosing your defences, zeroe'd sorta say, that would be a situation where I expect my enemy to be at his weakest, and that I could attempt to descend him, realising this weakend state will aid my ascended attacks. Effectively possibly bringing anyone on ascended down and in the 9 hours to descend range.

It almost seems like there is a group of people intent on creating bogus suggestions, with the idea of sabotaging Ascended to a point where it becomes unplayable. We have had the paradigm shift of '07 which ruined the accounts of most people who were actively playing ascended back then, we don't need another fiasco like that by devaluing stats across the board.

Julietta Putina wrote:It almost seems like there is a group of people intent on creating bogus suggestions, with the idea of sabotaging Ascended to a point where it becomes unplayable. We have had the paradigm shift of '07 which ruined the accounts of most people who were actively playing ascended back then, we don't need another fiasco like that by devaluing stats across the board.

So, your not supportive of the idea, and now there is a conspiracy because some people see merrit in some of the ideas ?

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Julietta Putina wrote:It almost seems like there is a group of people intent on creating bogus suggestions, with the idea of sabotaging Ascended to a point where it becomes unplayable. We have had the paradigm shift of '07 which ruined the accounts of most people who were actively playing ascended back then, we don't need another fiasco like that by devaluing stats across the board.

So, your not supportive of the idea, and now there is a conspiracy because some people see merrit in some of the ideas ?

Don't act like you are ridiculous, we both know better. I'm being sarcastic.

Julietta Putina wrote:Don't act like you are ridiculous, we both know better. I'm being sarcastic.

no your not, you were serious

Duck Dodgers wrote:

Julietta Putina wrote:Don't act like you are ridiculous, we both know better. I'm being sarcastic.

no your not, you were serious

About the suggestion being bad, yes, I was serious. We have clearly illustrated that.
About people coming together to throw a wrench in Sol's and the Ascended Server's wheels, no, sorry, that was sarcasm. You could have told that from my use of the 'shock' smiley.