Page 22 of 55
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:56 am
by Mojo Rising
DMU-LF conversion rate should not change, especially not based on the Max LF stat. It is akin to the increasing of the fleets cost. You are punishing those that invested in LF. The suggestion that I made to you several months ago (when no one was above level 500 in anything) was to exponentially increase the costs of levels above 500. Now you have levels close to 700. Increasing the DMU - LF conversion rate is just punishing the larger players (and believe me, we have been punished enough.)
My suggestions:
1.) Not sure how possible this is but, find the highest level in each stat currently in the game. Choose a nice round number slightly above that. Above that level in that particular stat, the costs increase exponentially (a factor of ten will probably do). If that is too "code-heavy", stats above 700 get increased exponentially. It affects EVERYONE equally and fairly (imagine an update that does that?)
2.) Resource planets: the overwhelming majority (read: the quick ascenders) want them protected. Remember, it works both ways: if yours are protected, so are mine. I will abstain from further discussion on this issue until Forum definitively states that he is going to change the way it is now.
3.) Descension: a lot of folks are now complaining that descension will become easier if the LF stats are raised. Well, considering that descension is IMPOSSIBLE currently, I would say that that is a GOOD thing. I don't expect descension to be a one hit affair (except in the most extreme of cases where the person hasn't played EVER) but I do expect it to be possible without the expenditure of tens of thousands of Attack Turns. I like the fact that, if you play the game, it will still be hard to descend you, but if you don't, it gets much easier.
4.) Vacation modes: Ascension and main vacation modes HAVE to be linked. If you are on vacation, you are on vacation. There is no two ways about it. And, this question goes out to Forum: how exactly is it that an ascended being on vacation is able to grant an ascended blessing or bonuses of any kind to its associated main realm? Also, if you are on vacation mode in ascension, your ascended weaponry should lose some of its potency daily until they reach the status of normal weapons. When you come off vacation mode in ascension, the weaponry returns to normal at the same rate. Too many people for too long have ignored/flaunted the fact that, even though main and ascension are linked, there is no penalty for not playing the one with the other. I would like to see that changed.
5.) If you are going to make wholesale changes to the server, allow everyone a 24-48 hour period to make "adjustments" to their account, ie redistribute levels and such. I mean, it is only fair. It would give those of us to whom you are probably going to give a royal screwing to at least some measure of control how BADLY we get screwed. And it would give some of the smaller accounts who perhaps invested "unwisely" at the beginning to "rework" their accounts. In effect, we would be able to sell back our levels in some stats to redistribute them to other stats. Otherwise, you are going to have a full-scale mutiny on your hands, no matter what you do.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:04 am
by Mojo Rising
Raven wrote:so now not only descension is a joke but the smaller players get a handicap on people who are already way bigger.......jeez....obvious...
Descension is already a joke, Raven. We are trying to fix it so that is NOT a joke but something to be taken seriously. Sorry if for, two years, you and your alliance have been taking advantage of the fact that you didn't have to play ascension and still received full bonuses to your main account. I don't EVER recall you saying squat about that, asking for it to be changed. Why not? It was unfair to other accounts, and you are all about fairness. So take up the banner. Fairness to all accounts. Playing ascension should give you extra bonuses in main then. If you get bonuses for not playing, you should get extra bonuses FOR playing. And, the better you play, the more bonuses you get. I mean, it's only fair to compensate for the lousy quick ascenders who have had a year or more to build their accounts over mine. I should be able to catch up.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 12:09 pm
by Hensenshi
Mojo Rising wrote:DMU-LF conversion rate should not change, especially not based on the Max LF stat. It is akin to the increasing of the fleets cost. You are punishing those that invested in LF. The suggestion that I made to you several months ago (when no one was above level 500 in anything) was to exponentially increase the costs of levels above 500. Now you have levels close to 700. Increasing the DMU - LF conversion rate is just punishing the larger players (and believe me, we have been punished enough.)
The increase to fleet cost I can consider fair. The way it works is just to slow growth. It does that, quite well too. Although I believe it unnecessary, I don't mind it.
Mojo Rising wrote:1.) Not sure how possible this is but, find the highest level in each stat currently in the game. Choose a nice round number slightly above that. Above that level in that particular stat, the costs increase exponentially (a factor of ten will probably do). If that is too "code-heavy", stats above 700 get increased exponentially. It affects EVERYONE equally and fairly (imagine an update that does that?)
The problem with that is that you then have different limits for each level. A straight up 700 on all levels is far better.
Mojo Rising wrote:2.) Resource planets: the overwhelming majority (read: the quick ascenders) want them protected. Remember, it works both ways: if yours are protected, so are mine. I will abstain from further discussion on this issue until Forum definitively states that he is going to change the way it is now.
I believe the concept they think is that you and I are invincible and will never fall. They figure that since we're invincible they just want to protect themselves.
Mojo Rising wrote:3.) Descension: a lot of folks are now complaining that descension will become easier if the LF stats are raised. Well, considering that descension is IMPOSSIBLE currently, I would say that that is a GOOD thing. I don't expect descension to be a one hit affair (except in the most extreme of cases where the person hasn't played EVER) but I do expect it to be possible without the expenditure of tens of thousands of Attack Turns. I like the fact that, if you play the game, it will still be hard to descend you, but if you don't, it gets much easier.
Mojo just reiterated my point. If you're going to play, I think descending you should be hard, but if you refuse to play, it should be a rather easy ordeal.
Mojo Rising wrote:4.) Vacation modes: Ascension and main vacation modes HAVE to be linked. If you are on vacation, you are on vacation. There is no two ways about it. And, this question goes out to Forum: how exactly is it that an ascended being on vacation is able to grant an ascended blessing or bonuses of any kind to its associated main realm? Also, if you are on vacation mode in ascension, your ascended weaponry should lose some of its potency daily until they reach the status of normal weapons. When you come off vacation mode in ascension, the weaponry returns to normal at the same rate. Too many people for too long have ignored/flaunted the fact that, even though main and ascension are linked, there is no penalty for not playing the one with the other. I would like to see that changed.
At least remove full bonuses when you go on vacation mode.
Mojo Rising wrote:5.) If you are going to make wholesale changes to the server, allow everyone a 24-48 hour period to make "adjustments" to their account, ie redistribute levels and such. I mean, it is only fair. It would give those of us to whom you are probably going to give a royal screwing to at least some measure of control how BADLY we get screwed. And it would give some of the smaller accounts who perhaps invested "unwisely" at the beginning to "rework" their accounts. In effect, we would be able to sell back our levels in some stats to redistribute them to other stats. Otherwise, you are going to have a full-scale mutiny on your hands, no matter what you do.
I'm not so sure about this. If that was to happen, I could take most of what I have into other levels and throw it directly into charisma or production and race ahead. Granted everyone around me could do that too, but I don't think it's fair to those who don't have as much in levels to allow people like me to get even more of a head start.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 12:17 pm
by TheRook
Hensenshi wrote:Mojo Rising wrote:3.) Descension: a lot of folks are now complaining that descension will become easier if the LF stats are raised. Well, considering that descension is IMPOSSIBLE currently, I would say that that is a GOOD thing. I don't expect descension to be a one hit affair (except in the most extreme of cases where the person hasn't played EVER) but I do expect it to be possible without the expenditure of tens of thousands of Attack Turns. I like the fact that, if you play the game, it will still be hard to descend you, but if you don't, it gets much easier.
Mojo just reiterated my point. If you're going to play, I think descending you should be hard, but if you refuse to play, it should be a rather easy ordeal.
Mojo Rising wrote:4.) Vacation modes: Ascension and main vacation modes HAVE to be linked. If you are on vacation, you are on vacation. There is no two ways about it. And, this question goes out to Forum: how exactly is it that an ascended being on vacation is able to grant an ascended blessing or bonuses of any kind to its associated main realm? Also, if you are on vacation mode in ascension, your ascended weaponry should lose some of its potency daily until they reach the status of normal weapons. When you come off vacation mode in ascension, the weaponry returns to normal at the same rate. Too many people for too long have ignored/flaunted the fact that, even though main and ascension are linked, there is no penalty for not playing the one with the other. I would like to see that changed.
At least remove full bonuses when you go on vacation mode.
3) I agree those who dont put the effort will suffer and suffer badly...
4) I agree more losses should be incurred otherwise Vac mode is the same as being descended... Vac should remove 3/4 of the main bonus remove Ascended Blessing - Where as descension only costs 1/2 of main bonuses and still get ascended blessing this will stop people hiding on vac as they are losing more than if they get descended... and anyone with common sense will realise that being descended still works out better than sitting on vac forever!
TheRook
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:27 pm
by High Empty
Ok frist off, i found that the max damage i can do is 8.5Mil LF. it doesn't really matter what his stats are cause in STI case, he had around 10Mil.
No what happens right now is that no ones reserve is full so anyone if they are low in LF can be descended.
As for the DMU- Conversion.
Take it out, period, do the same thing you did to fleets. that's works fine.
Start it at a level that is higher then all the current levels. Otherwise it's not fair to anyone else.
Really and truely, whatever updates you do, we will figure out how to work with them. Or we will just leave.
@ Raven, takes mojo suggestion to heart, and be a SOLUTION, not the problem.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:35 pm
by Raven
Mojo Rising wrote:Raven wrote:so now not only descension is a joke but the smaller players get a handicap on people who are already way bigger.......jeez....obvious...
Descension is already a joke, Raven. We are trying to fix it so that is NOT a joke but something to be taken seriously. Sorry if for, two years, you and your alliance have been taking advantage of the fact that you didn't have to play ascension and still received full bonuses to your main account. I don't EVER recall you saying squat about that, asking for it to be changed. Why not? It was unfair to other accounts, and you are all about fairness. So take up the banner. Fairness to all accounts. Playing ascension should give you extra bonuses in main then. If you get bonuses for not playing, you should get extra bonuses FOR playing. And, the better you play, the more bonuses you get. I mean, it's only fair to compensate for the lousy quick ascenders who have had a year or more to build their accounts over mine. I should be able to catch up.
The problem is you only see people who are up to your lvl as playing......some of us just didnt want to go insane on ascension or just couldnt......[i quitted 6months......i know that what i did but it shouldnt mean i have to be punished forever for it.....]
your reward is already here you can sell Dmu like HE and Hen are doing and just build your main account with that.....one having build his whole main account from it and the other bought insane planet def and lvls for his main account......that should be enough......
Asc right now is not a joke maybe for you cause you can reach anyone......atleast no non allies.....you can hit people but you chose to ally with them thats your choice......You want asc to work how it does currently only keeping the benefits of these kind of play and wanna get rid of the bad side......it should be you cant hit anyone in your range and planets can be destroyable or you can hit everyone but your capped at descension and planets are safe......you want the good of both sides......thats gonna destroy this game i hope admin will see that 10 people wnat it like this [and some asskissers] and 2k people want to see some protection against to big accounts made IN TIME not by big ascension....the server should have been capped ages ago but you all just kept your mouth shut cause it was in your street......now dont whine if admin makes changes wich will give others a chance to catch up......
Asc was ment to get better in Asc now its nothing more then 1h income from the top guys ......dont tell me how i should have played cause right now there is no even remotely chance of coming close using ascensions cause the server has been to fast for to long......
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:19 pm
by blahh
Raven wrote:Mojo Rising wrote:Raven wrote:so now not only descension is a joke but the smaller players get a handicap on people who are already way bigger.......jeez....obvious...
Descension is already a joke, Raven. We are trying to fix it so that is NOT a joke but something to be taken seriously. Sorry if for, two years, you and your alliance have been taking advantage of the fact that you didn't have to play ascension and still received full bonuses to your main account. I don't EVER recall you saying squat about that, asking for it to be changed. Why not? It was unfair to other accounts, and you are all about fairness. So take up the banner. Fairness to all accounts. Playing ascension should give you extra bonuses in main then. If you get bonuses for not playing, you should get extra bonuses FOR playing. And, the better you play, the more bonuses you get. I mean, it's only fair to compensate for the lousy quick ascenders who have had a year or more to build their accounts over mine. I should be able to catch up.
The problem is you only see people who are up to your lvl as playing......some of us just didnt want to go insane on ascension or just couldnt......[i quitted 6months......i know that what i did but it shouldnt mean i have to be punished forever for it.....]
your reward is already here you can sell Dmu like HE and Hen are doing and just build your main account with that.....one having build his whole main account from it and the other bought insane planet def and lvls for his main account......that should be enough......
Asc right now is not a joke maybe for you cause you can reach anyone......atleast no non allies.....you can hit people but you chose to ally with them thats your choice......You want asc to work how it does currently only keeping the benefits of these kind of play and wanna get rid of the bad side......it should be you cant hit anyone in your range and planets can be destroyable or you can hit everyone but your capped at descension and planets are safe......you want the good of both sides......thats gonna destroy this game i hope admin will see that 10 people wnat it like this [and some asskissers] and 2k people want to see some protection against to big accounts made IN TIME not by big ascension....the server should have been capped ages ago but you all just kept your mouth shut cause it was in your street......now dont whine if admin makes changes wich will give others a chance to catch up......
Asc was ment to get better in Asc now its nothing more then 1h income from the top guys ......dont tell me how i should have played cause right now there is no even remotely chance of coming close using ascensions cause the server has been to fast for to long......
I couldnt put it any better mate!
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 3:03 pm
by Robe
Mojo Rising wrote:My suggestions:
1.) Not sure how possible this is but, find the highest level in each stat currently in the game. Choose a nice round number slightly above that. Above that level in that particular stat, the costs increase exponentially (a factor of ten will probably do). If that is too "code-heavy", stats above 700 get increased exponentially. It affects EVERYONE equally and fairly (imagine an update that does that?)
Probably the fairest way to proceed
2.) Resource planets: the overwhelming majority (read: the quick ascenders) want them protected. Remember, it works both ways: if yours are protected, so are mine. I will abstain from further discussion on this issue until Forum definitively states that he is going to change the way it is now.
Not true.
Many, many active players gave up on this server over the past year because they were sick and tired of being extorted, massed or raided every week by the two power houses who help each other maintain control in this server.
3.) Descension: a lot of folks are now complaining that descension will become easier if the LF stats are raised. Well, considering that descension is IMPOSSIBLE currently, I would say that that is a GOOD thing. I don't expect descension to be a one hit affair (except in the most extreme of cases where the person hasn't played EVER) but I do expect it to be possible without the expenditure of tens of thousands of Attack Turns. I like the fact that, if you play the game, it will still be hard to descend you, but if you don't, it gets much easier.
If it is "impossible" to descend someone, how come so many players have been descended over the past 6 months in war?
4.) Vacation modes: Ascension and main vacation modes HAVE to be linked. If you are on vacation, you are on vacation. There is no two ways about it. And, this question goes out to Forum: how exactly is it that an ascended being on vacation is able to grant an ascended blessing or bonuses of any kind to its associated main realm? Also, if you are on vacation mode in ascension, your ascended weaponry should lose some of its potency daily until they reach the status of normal weapons. When you come off vacation mode in ascension, the weaponry returns to normal at the same rate. Too many people for too long have ignored/flaunted the fact that, even though main and ascension are linked, there is no penalty for not playing the one with the other. I would like to see that changed.
Vacation mod can not be linked because the top 20 players, who are all in the two power houses work together to control the server - Treaties, Naps, resources, preferential trading etc....
Not a complaint - just a statement of fact.
It is not possible to play Ascended server in war because the Two Power Houses completely and utterly control the Server.
Prime example is the current AE and DDE war...
A top ten power house (external to the war) massed the leader of AE and she had to set vacation to prevent her account from being decimated.
5.) If you are going to make wholesale changes to the server, allow everyone a 24-48 hour period to make "adjustments" to their account, ie redistribute levels and such. I mean, it is only fair. It would give those of us to whom you are probably going to give a royal screwing to at least some measure of control how BADLY we get screwed. And it would give some of the smaller accounts who perhaps invested "unwisely" at the beginning to "rework" their accounts. In effect, we would be able to sell back our levels in some stats to redistribute them to other stats. Otherwise, you are going to have a full-scale mutiny on your hands, no matter what you do.
Agreed
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:43 pm
by Hensenshi
@Raven: I stopped selling DMU when I reached 50m army. That was ages ago.
Robe wrote:If it is "impossible" to descend someone, how come so many players have been descended over the past 6 months in war?
And how many have been sat on constantly and not descended strictly because they had about 5 for max life force?
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:18 pm
by Robe
Hensenshi wrote:@Raven: I stopped selling DMU when I reached 50m army. That was ages ago.
Robe wrote:If it is "impossible" to descend someone, how come so many players have been descended over the past 6 months in war?
And how many have been sat on constantly and not descended strictly because they had about 5 for max life force?
I agree Hensenshi. Its not perfect as it is.
Its just not Impossible. Many players have been descended.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:37 pm
by Mojo Rising
as far as someone from the top ten massing the leader of the AE, I personally see it as protecting whatever alliance it is that the masser represents. Currently AE is harboring an enemy of both DD and Omega and they have been asked to boot this person on a number of occasions or suffer the consequences (this person, by the way, is undescendable because of his pathetic LF score and the way descension is set up now). I am surprised it has taken this long for the leader of AE to be massed in ascension.
I don't see what the problem is. I am suggesting updates that are fair to EVERYONE. You are only suggesting updates that benefit YOU. You want to be able to catch up to the top accounts without doing the work, much like you can in main anymore. Well that's tough noogies, Jack. You need to put some effort in. You can't just say "Well I didn't know what I was doing when I first ascended; I call a mulligan". We all went into ascension with absolutely no clue as to what to expect (and with far less APP than you guys can ascend with now, that's for sure.). Some of us took ascension seriously while the rest of you scoffed and just scooped up your main bonuses and abused those of us who were priors and prophets for a long while. Now, when we can use and abuse you in ascension the same way you used and abused us in main, all of a sudden it is no longer "fair". Well, let me tell you, despite my fervent protestations, nothing was changed in main when I was getting my ass handed to me, and frankly, I will be very put out if things are majorly changed now just because people can get their asses handed to them now in ascension. You've had your run, now it is time that I had my run.
And believe me, if you guys succeed in stopping us from growing, you better believe that we aren't going to be doing much but stopping the rest of you from growing either. If you feel persecuted now, you ain't seen nothing yet. I will use my 2000 AT liberally and frequently to utterly destroy accounts that, up until now, I have let alone because I have had a GOAL in mind. If that GOAL is taken away, I need to find another one. And believe me, I have a lot of secondary GOALS already chosen. So either you and I can grow at different rates. Or we both stop growing together. The one way gives you a slim hope of reaching the top; the other merely insures your destruction. It is really your choice.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:00 pm
by Forum
Page 20 of 22
--am still reading through. the goal of the update is not to make descension easier -just to make 'actions' more equal...
ok -this update may take longer than i thought... but - i will do it best i can and not rush any one decision. i will give all comments thought....
also - today i found out i am having another son... (we knew we were having a kid, just not male/female till today)...
all is healthy, and looking good... early 2008 i will be a father of 2...
why i mention? well 1) any father would. and 2) explains where i was today

chat as usual tomorrow - we can talk ascension if anyone wants. coding goes on, but i will be using the feedback very actively and do not assume what is put in dev is final --based on YOUR comments....
cheers
jason.
(ps - any good original boy names anyone?? wife & I are having constant arguments now

)
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:27 pm
by Mojo Rising
How about Mojo Rising?

Or maybe you could name him Joseph (Joe King) or Nicholas (Nick King). But seriously, congratulations! I have always liked the name Mark as well (Mark King). Oh and I most definitely will be on chat tomorrow. You can guarantee it.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:36 pm
by Forum
personally, i'd choose 'Rising' as a name over Joe or mark or Nick... (original

)) --plus MojoJojo already got veto'd

in the world of email&global communications, a name unlike others is a must for remembering who you are talking to-and spelling it phoenetically is a must for no return to senders
and go easy on me tomorrow

i am trying to make this work to your, and everyone else's, view of fair and fun

and thank you.
Mojo Rising wrote:How about Mojo Rising?

Or maybe you could name him Joseph (Joe King) or Nicholas (Nick King). But seriously, congratulations! I have always liked the name Mark as well (Mark King). Oh and I most definitely will be on chat tomorrow. You can guarantee it.
Re: changes to ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:43 pm
by SWÅT
I will be just as happy with whatever changes you will be making and not whine about fair and unfair changes. The Point is you are trying to make the game better and more fair across the board. I am just happy to have the privalage to be able to Play such a great game. Thank You Jason, Good Luck!!!!!!
Boy Names: my sons name is Carter Thomas, have a cousin named Bryce McCay, and another named Tolan Rule oh wait that last one isn't a name it is the TRUTH lol

"Tolan Rule" LMAO