Page 1 of 5

New Planet Conquer Update

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:28 am
by RobinInDaHood
Posting to the Game Suggestions section instead of the Enhancements Already Released per the game administration instructions.


Planet Conquer Update
The final (for now) adjustment to planet conquering has been added.
In addition to the changes below, a planet now takes 12 hours to travel far enough to benefit from the 'attackers' (one who conquered the planet) realm PPT.
This means that after your planet has been conquered, you have 24 hours EXCLUSIVELY to attack to get it back, the first 12 of those hours where the planet cannot be protected by PPT.


Forum, I respect the fact that you're trying (in vain) to keep everyone happy and admittedly the whining and crying about planets has reached an all time high recently but this update was a bunch of vomit.

With this update, you have single-handedly hampered the black market sale of planets from active players and further imbalanced the game by allowing the top-heavy players to maintain a nearly exclusive ownership of planets they acquire regardless of the amount of defense they purchase. You've made it so that planets will infrequently change hands because anyone taking a planet will have to immediately put huge amounts of resources into defense to prevent the recapture by the previous owner. This further cements the "power players" in their lofty positions and makes it so that newer players will never be able to hold and defend planets. More powerful players can be even less concerned about the amount of defense on their planets now because they know that if the planet is taken they can simply take it back because they have huge financial resources to do so.

I rarely speak up about updates and have, for the most part, accepted the changes you've implemented to date without complaint but this one went too far.

Shame on you for caving in to the vocal minority and putting an update in place which makes it even more difficult for newer players to compete.

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 8:33 am
by Hermes
I agree with you, it was fine in the begging

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:56 am
by World Dead
yup stupid isnt it they do something like this but they wont get rid of multies.....

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:25 pm
by Ero`Sore
I personally love this idea...

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:37 pm
by KKatastrophe
Yeah, I thought the problem was with multi accounts that steal planets, not with the very act of stealing planets...

Case in point:
Eros wrote:I personally love this idea...
Eros seems to be doing fine all by himself without getting 'government handouts' in this game. What is to be done for all the heretofore LEGITIMATE out of work planet brokers now? Their games have been spoiled by this update. Eros (and other highly developed accounts like his) would not have been spoiled without it. This is UNbalancing, no?

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:38 pm
by Bazsy
Hmmm
The point is that u cannot come up with the planet trading... why?
Because planets didnt made for trade. Admin stated that when he released them, as i remember. Dont make me find that quote....

BTW why did u posted this here exactly?

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:07 pm
by Munchy
Admin also said that planets were not meant to be kept for long, and to expect to loose them often. Now, with all of these updates, they are merely another part of ones account, rather than additions that can easily be lost.

If that is what the community wants though, I guess it is for the best. Can every other 'anti-planet theft' thread be locked now? Unless the next step is to give everyone 10 unconquerable planets :roll:

Also, Bazsy is right, this should have been posted in the "Discussion on Enhancements (ones already released)" section :wink:

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:18 pm
by Bazsy
Munchy wrote:Admin also said that planets were not meant to be kept for long, and to expect to loose them often. Now, with all of these updates, they are merely another part of ones account, rather than additions that can easily be lost.


But he didnt think that ppls will find ways they found.... So he can be understanded well.

Munchy wrote:If that is what the community wants though, I guess it is for the best. Can every other 'anti-planet theft' thread be locked now? Unless the next step is to give everyone 10 unconquerable planets :roll:


Give it a few days... and if this remains this way all necroed threads on that will be locked i guess:)


Munchy wrote:Also, Bazsy is right, this should have been posted in the "Discussion on Enhancements (ones already released)" section :wink:


And im moving it there right now!

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:42 pm
by RobinInDaHood
Munchy wrote:Also, Bazsy is right, this should have been posted in the "Discussion on Enhancements (ones already released)" section :wink:


The admins instructions in-game were very clear at at the top of the announcement document. This was a comment to a change of rebalancing an existing feature. Here they are again, for your reference:


Game Updates
Comments?
Use the Forum, 'Game Suggestions' catagory, to suggest new features, changes to current features, or even rebalancing of existing features if you feel they are too strong/weak/etc....

Thank you. Admin & co.

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:46 pm
by High Empty
lets keep this simple, that those ( 24 hours should infact be made so that the planet can be taken then can be taken back and then taken back so no limit is imposed on the player between fighting for the planet only if 24 hours have passed and no one has attacked then the planet is up for graps from the rest of the game.

Small expoilt on this is that 2 players can keep 1 planet frozen so that they don't need a defence on it.

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:49 pm
by Bazsy
high empty wrote:lets keep this simple, that those ( 24 hours should infact be made so that the planet can be taken then can be taken back and then taken back so no limit is imposed on the player between fighting for the planet only if 24 hours have passed and no one has attacked then the planet is up for graps from the rest of the game.

Small expoilt on this is that 2 players can keep 1 planet frozen so that they don't need a defence on it.


And they only get half a day bonus... dont worth it i think... uses 1 planet slot at each player, and they only get 1/4 of planet bonuses / day

because in the first 12hrs noone will get the bonus as i read...

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 1:50 pm
by Bazsy
RobinInDaHood wrote:
Munchy wrote:Also, Bazsy is right, this should have been posted in the "Discussion on Enhancements (ones already released)" section :wink:


The admins instructions in-game were very clear at at the top of the announcement document. This was a comment to a change of rebalancing an existing feature. Here they are again, for your reference:


Game Updates
Comments?
Use the Forum, 'Game Suggestions' catagory, to suggest new features, changes to current features, or even rebalancing of existing features if you feel they are too strong/weak/etc....

Thank you. Admin & co.


So What do you think what is the "Released enchancements" section for?

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 2:10 pm
by Acronon
Actually one would think that this would stablize the planet trade market as the trades will be more secure in transit now. If you promise someone a planet for certain resources it will be easier for you to hold onto that planet.

This will allow people to build on planets and begin trading alot of very strong planets for very solid resources.

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 2:39 pm
by [sarevok]
Sorry, but RobinInDaHood is right. I could have 10 planets, all with zero defence on them. Say they were all "Above Average" planets. and i was going to put 1500 defences on it (4.5billion defence). Now, 10planets * 50MillNaq/defence * 1500 defences = 10*50*1500 = 750 billion Naq, which equates to 10000 hangers (about 500 billion) with 10000 fleets (about 122 billion) a total of 622 billion (less then 750).

Now, that number of fleets is about 5.7 billion fleet power, so the person taking it would need a defence greater then that. But lets not forget the massing of planets, so, you can be at 1/5 of the planets strength to mass and take eventually, so the attacker would need to put about 25billion defence on thr planet to make sure it's not taken.

Now, forgive me if i'm wrong, but i think that any user with a army under 10million, would have no chance of sucessfully holding onto that planet, hence the planets always being in the hands of powerful players

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2006 3:27 pm
by KKatastrophe
Acronon wrote:Actually one would think that this would stablize the planet trade market as the trades will be more secure in transit now. If you promise someone a planet for certain resources it will be easier for you to hold onto that planet.

This will allow people to build on planets and begin trading alot of very strong planets for very solid resources.
Trades were the most secure before both of these last rule changes - you exchanged resources, and got your planet immediately, to do what you wanted with (including reselling for the purpose of anonymity, for third party deals).

The new rules basically ensure that powerful players can retaliate and keep their planets (if they're not spaced first), while weak players can still have planets taken at will, because they still can't retaliate against the more powerful players. Third party planet trading is effectively dead now, so anybody who devoted their account to that are SOL. I don't see that as 'balancing' to the game. One game element which finally gave the little guy an opportunity to go toe-to-toe with the bigger players in the game has been strangled, only to benefit the bigger players.