Page 37 of 55

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:32 pm
by Mojo Rising
OK, here is a different tack I am going to take. Forum, if you raise the APP - LF conversion rate and raise the amount of LF you get from Max LF, you do not need to lower the cost of levels below the 500/700 soft cap to make ascension competitive once again. It is already going to be pathetically easy for someone to make a half way decent ascension and get significant levels in stats.

As far as Psicolix's numbers go, I would trust him with the figures that he has come up with. The man has figured out the formulas for everyone of the ascension stats and has them in an Excel spreadsheet. I am fairly certain that his math is golden on this particular calculation. Which is another reason why I don't want to see the cost of levels lowered. It should remain the same to be fair to all. The insane increase in the APP-LF conversion rate and the increase in LF from your Max LF stat should be enough to allow the smaller accounts to grow faster. But that's just me. As far as raiding goes, I for one am ambivalent about whether it goes or stays. If it goes, my resource planets are safe from predation; if it stays, I can possibly raid someone for about 1/100th of my daily UP using 450 AT. Woohoo! Yeah! Go me!

So in the interest of perhaps pulling the two sides closer together on this update, if the costs of levels remain the same (except for the 500/700 soft cap levels) then I, for one, would be willing to accept the latest update proposed by Forum.

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:50 pm
by Brdavs
@STI *sigh* I never said I did`t ascend only for the bonuses lol... Many did. The question should be *why* they did that, in addition to pointing fingers. Personally I never touched ascended cos it just doesnt tickle my fancy and it never will, even with these updats (as I`ll most likely quit be4 they finally come out lol). Many many others however tell you other stories...
But if your main means of rebuttle to my point that there are 2 interlinked sides to this problem and it is a)ridicolous and b)pointless to just blame one(!) is to go after my (lack of) account then well... you`re scraping the bottom of the barrel arent ya heh... I can delete today but my point would still be a valid one... It`s a magic circle... big/enforced gap causes less to play and that in term causes the gap to rise wich causes enven less ppl play etc. etc. What came first, the egg or the chicken? Who cares, we have a frozen duck and as long as the chef(forum) gets the bird cooked(ascended updated so ppl starty playing it en masse).

Like I said, it doesnt matter what caused the situation of inballance... what matters is that by taking steps to rectify it smaller guys will get the benefits bigger/older did not. Thats the whole point of the concept lol. The blame game is completley irrelevant and should be ommited as it is only counterproductive. But if you absolutly must have these gross generalisations of who is to "blame" so you can better come with the "injustice" of an ascended shakeup: yes I take full blame for the state of affairs on aascended. Delete me, I`m one leg in my sgw grave allready anyways heh. Blame me, but give the up and commers and those that genuinly tried and are willing to still do so a valid shot (or atleast an appearance of one). ;) If I were out here to cover my own arse I`d be oppoising any updates whatsoever that much should be obviuos to you. For all intents and purposes I`ll get shafted waaaay deeper than lets say you. Heck, I mistekenly believed that focusing on personal attributes would mean something but I muscalculated as to the inferiority of LF as opposed to DMU so I`m one of the few who prolly "deserve" it. I`m not complaining that a prior will blow me out of the water. But somehow I`m capable of looking past that and you`re not heh...

Edit: meh over and ou from me lol... I have enough faith in admin that he`ll look after "his" game and wont completley give into partial interests...

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:58 pm
by Hells__Angel
LEVELS ARE SO CHEAP!

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 12:11 am
by Ergon
yay

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:03 am
by Mato
Admin I like the new updates , especially APP -> LF growth(Around 74 LF more per month).

increased cost at powerup level 500 .. a brilliant idea

I hope these updates will convince ppl that is actaully worth playing ascension.

To those poor guys above 100 mil planets: you will still be on page 1, only that this time others wont be so weak as they are at the moment.

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:04 am
by chargin
Yeah psi's figures are correct. it costs 94.67 trillion naq (not taking into account cost of training the units) to send up that 300k up. So the main account will be devastated and will be around the top techs, but not planets or fleets of the already ascended players. From that you can tell the top players are still way better off.

my thoughts (if u care).

1. the levels should NOT be cheaper than they are now BUT after level 600 they should become more expensive. The increase in cost should double (not the prices, the rate at which the prices increase). Then from 700-799 the rate at which the prices increase double again. Maybe it shouldn't be as much as double but there needs to be some of cap like this which will slow the top accounts down and then everyone who catches them! the sooner it is implemented the better. If u wish you had them 2 years ago, in another 2 u'll wish you put them in now.

2. APP>Life force rate is decent (i'd still like it to be 2-4 times this rate to hit the bare minimum of ascension vs main incomes when wanting LF, but the top players will scream their heads off). a top ascension account with these updates is still worth several top main accounts but it is a drastic improvement. :)

The rate at which it increases should be based on incomes in main vs ascension and could be updated daily or even once a week, i know it'd be a pain to code but at least please try it. The rate should never decrease to prevent the top players in ascension from untraining their income planets to try to effect the rate before a big ascension.

3. you should be able to raid but not untrain other players income planets. You should not be able to raid inactive accounts for income planets because they are DMU targets!

4. there should be a weapon that can break any defence still, even if it just removes the defence, all the money should go to the rest of the server. The person getting hit by it should have no positive effect to their account.

5. The compromise between linked vacation in main and ascention should be, only able to descend 1 person per week, 2 weeks descended time, when u are back in ascension you should only be descend-able again after 2 weeks. Not sure how it is now, but that's how it should be! Or double the time periods, or half, what ever as long as they are kept in proportion. This is so when they are linked they can have full bonus in main for around half the time, and no bonus for the rest.

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:34 am
by ~Krys~
Mojo Rising wrote:OK, here is a different tack I am going to take. Forum, if you raise the APP - LF conversion rate and raise the amount of LF you get from Max LF, you do not need to lower the cost of levels below the 500/700 soft cap to make ascension competitive once again. It is already going to be pathetically easy for someone to make a half way decent ascension and get significant levels in stats.

As far as Psicolix's numbers go, I would trust him with the figures that he has come up with. The man has figured out the formulas for everyone of the ascension stats and has them in an Excel spreadsheet. I am fairly certain that his math is golden on this particular calculation. Which is another reason why I don't want to see the cost of levels lowered. It should remain the same to be fair to all. The insane increase in the APP-LF conversion rate and the increase in LF from your Max LF stat should be enough to allow the smaller accounts to grow faster. But that's just me. As far as raiding goes, I for one am ambivalent about whether it goes or stays. If it goes, my resource planets are safe from predation; if it stays, I can possibly raid someone for about 1/100th of my daily UP using 450 AT. Woohoo! Yeah! Go me!

So in the interest of perhaps pulling the two sides closer together on this update, if the costs of levels remain the same (except for the 500/700 soft cap levels) then I, for one, would be willing to accept the latest update proposed by Forum.


im with him
if u make them as cheap as they are its makes it ridiculous

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:33 am
by S T I
Brdavs wrote:@STI *sigh* I never said I did`t ascend only for the bonuses lol... Many did. The question should be *why* they did that, in addition to pointing fingers. Personally I never touched ascended cos it just doesnt tickle my fancy and it never will, even with these updats (as I`ll most likely quit be4 they finally come out lol). Many many others however tell you other stories...
But if your main means of rebuttle to my point that there are 2 interlinked sides to this problem and it is a)ridicolous and b)pointless to just blame one(!) is to go after my (lack of) account then well... you`re scraping the bottom of the barrel arent ya heh... I can delete today but my point would still be a valid one... It`s a magic circle... big/enforced gap causes less to play and that in term causes the gap to rise wich causes enven less ppl play etc. etc. What came first, the egg or the chicken? Who cares, we have a frozen duck and as long as the chef(forum) gets the bird cooked(ascended updated so ppl starty playing it en masse).

Like I said, it doesnt matter what caused the situation of inballance... what matters is that by taking steps to rectify it smaller guys will get the benefits bigger/older did not. Thats the whole point of the concept lol. The blame game is completley irrelevant and should be ommited as it is only counterproductive. But if you absolutly must have these gross generalisations of who is to "blame" so you can better come with the "injustice" of an ascended shakeup: yes I take full blame for the state of affairs on aascended. Delete me, I`m one leg in my sgw grave allready anyways heh. Blame me, but give the up and commers and those that genuinly tried and are willing to still do so a valid shot (or atleast an appearance of one). ;) If I were out here to cover my own arse I`d be oppoising any updates whatsoever that much should be obviuos to you. For all intents and purposes I`ll get shafted waaaay deeper than lets say you. Heck, I mistekenly believed that focusing on personal attributes would mean something but I muscalculated as to the inferiority of LF as opposed to DMU so I`m one of the few who prolly "deserve" it. I`m not complaining that a prior will blow me out of the water. But somehow I`m capable of looking past that and you`re not heh...

Edit: meh over and ou from me lol... I have enough faith in admin that he`ll look after "his" game and wont completley give into partial interests...



you really didn't read what you said b4, you have now made almost a compleate uturn.

I will yet again state that i have called for something to be done to kick start the server loads of times.

because of te facks i have stated

your answer to this now is "Personally I never touched ascended cos it just doesnt tickle my fancy and it never will"

:lol: how many more times have we got to here this kind of thing said.

It belittles all the people who did try but got caught in the mess.

see i have been honest with my self, you are meant to be in the respect group, to gain respect you need to be honest.

hiding in great big paragraths don't do it for me.

saying what really happened & saying yeah i did that, i can, i can tell you that i raided differant accounts, i even hit friends (mistake) :lol: but it became a feeding frenzy.

so why bring these faacks up

well it relates why we are here now.

te gap grew between certain lvls in game because of these facts

so to understand all sides you have to understand the whole story.

no finger pointing just facks that cann't be changed now.

so you can carry on try to shout me down or what ever but thats what spoilt childen do or bullies.

many have come on here & had discussions which have carried on, onto msn. we may carry on disagreeing but we enjoy the discusion & always learn more, it opens our eyes.

we do not go forward blindly.

i am not in the least worried about my own account, but the middle accounts that have stuck it out & worked for the last 18 months building theres & have had their main accounts hit so hard because they have tried.

to belittle their actions is very low

my concern is the amount/size of the increase (which many have voiced0

"Honesty"
That word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the 15 september (could not think of anything else), and you will once again be fighting for our freedom... Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution... but from annihilation. :lol:

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 2:46 am
by RobinInDaHood
I, um, *cough* only ascended (one time) for the bonus in main. Imagine my surprise...

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:04 am
by S T I
Robe wrote:
generaloneill wrote:I think that as well as these changes, currently ascended players should get 48 hrs ppt and have an amount of life force placed in the cache, related to their army size to allow the server to balance out, otherwise there is gonna be inbalance when all these tauri, repli, asgard and goauld start ascending their 20 times.



This makes a lot of sense.


=D>

very positive idea, i am not saying it's right & should go to all ( & b4 any one says it i meant the massive accounts) :lol:

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:14 am
by Richâ„¢
S T I wrote:
Robe wrote:
generaloneill wrote:I think that as well as these changes, currently ascended players should get 48 hrs ppt and have an amount of life force placed in the cache, related to their army size to allow the server to balance out, otherwise there is gonna be inbalance when all these tauri, repli, asgard and goauld start ascending their 20 times.



This makes a lot of sense.


=D>

very positive idea, i am not saying it's right & should go to all ( & b4 any one says it i meant the massive accounts) :lol:


one of the best suggestions i've seen on this thread, would make me happier about the updates, would be easier to give APP, since that's 'safe' and you convert it when you want :)

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:36 am
by TheRook
why not give it to everyone? even if it isnt going to give a single upgrade to a big guy its going to be better than nothing

free app for 1 is free app for all

TheRook

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:39 am
by Richâ„¢
TheRook wrote:why not give it to everyone? even if it isnt going to give a single upgrade to a big guy its going to be better than nothing

free app for 1 is free app for all

TheRook


i think that's what he meant mate, at least that's how i understood it and agreed too :P

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:25 am
by q3utom
Has forum given a date that we can expect these updates to come into effect yet?

Re: changes to ascension

Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:32 am
by Corsair
q3 wrote:Has forum given a date that we can expect these updates to come into effect yet?


Probably once the debate has calmed down and he has finished coding it if his inlaws let him lol