Cosmic Supremacy Forum » Suggestions » Inactive Players in a game! » Hello Guest [Login|Register]
Last Post | First Unread Post Print Page | Recommend to a Friend | Add Thread to Favorites
Pages (3): « previous 1 [2] 3 next » Post New Thread Post Reply
Poll: Should inactives be removed ?
no 16 64.00%
yes 6 24.00%
Dont care 3 12.00%
Total: 25 Votes 100%
 
Go to the bottom of this page Inactive Players in a game!
Author
Post « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
banem Player-Rank: 2 banem is a male
Scouts his own Systems


Registration Date: 29.12.2007
Posts: 56
Location: Serbia

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

My only suggestion to this problem is that after they reach certain period of unactivity, they be removed completely, together with all their planets.
11.02.2008 23:47 banem is offline Send an Email to banem Search for Posts by banem Add banem to your Buddy List
stabby Player-Rank: 2 stabby is a male
Wins even when not in your Galaxy


images/avatars/avatar-437.jpg

Registration Date: 12.12.2007
Posts: 2,516
Location: The Netherlands

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

quote:
Originally posted by banem
My only suggestion to this problem is that after they reach certain period of unactivity, they be removed completely, together with all their planets.


has been suggested before and it sucks. The current system in place is fine. However i think if an Inactie (how i call them) is more than 50% inactive, there will be no rep loss.

However this could varry from galaxies

__________________

12.02.2008 16:08 stabby is offline Send an Email to stabby Homepage of stabby Search for Posts by stabby Add stabby to your Buddy List
Progressor Player-Rank: 1 Progressor is a male
Has Speed 5 Frigates


images/avatars/avatar-245.jpg

Registration Date: 18.01.2008
Posts: 25
Location: Netherlands

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

I wonder how fast the inactivity % rises...

I agree that the decrease should be more noticable, or a bit exponential, since its highly unlikely that a player with 90% (or 50 for theat matter) would return.

(Edit: Or what Stabby said ;-))

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by Progressor: 12.02.2008 23:25.

12.02.2008 23:24 Progressor is offline Send an Email to Progressor Search for Posts by Progressor Add Progressor to your Buddy List
krisvek Player-Rank: 2
Scouts his own Systems


Registration Date: 04.01.2008
Posts: 66

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

I agree, some sort of non-linear penalty decline might be nice. But things aren't too bad as is. I've only played a few galaxies now, so I may change my mind as time goes by.

I do wish there was SOMETHING to be done about the inactives though...I have no problem with the freebie planets mid to late game, but just the fact that it means that much less competition. But, that's what the ranked galaxies will hopefully rectify Smile
13.02.2008 05:15 krisvek is offline Send an Email to krisvek Search for Posts by krisvek Add krisvek to your Buddy List
stabby Player-Rank: 2 stabby is a male
Wins even when not in your Galaxy


images/avatars/avatar-437.jpg

Registration Date: 12.12.2007
Posts: 2,516
Location: The Netherlands

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

yes lets hope so. But why does no one call them inacties i thaught that was a nice name for inactive players

__________________

13.02.2008 08:21 stabby is offline Send an Email to stabby Homepage of stabby Search for Posts by stabby Add stabby to your Buddy List
banem Player-Rank: 2 banem is a male
Scouts his own Systems


Registration Date: 29.12.2007
Posts: 56
Location: Serbia

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

stabby, I would really like to hear from you a little bit more of an argument than just "it sucks". (its childish) When inactives start showing up, 10 best players do nothing else but building large amount of troop ships (since they are by that moment by far cheaper that colony ones) and start sending them to those systems. Hence, up to turn 400 game really does not start. Everybody is collecting those defenceless systems, not fighting with each other. BORING. Or if you like THAT sucks.

Erwin just please, please take a look at gal beta 76. Me, being second at tuesday morning, having in my judgement, most powerful fleet then, started a war against 4th (jaysan) in that moment. One hour later, I find out that I will be offline for till friday. (almost 100 turns). I said byebye to my empire thinking that it will be ripped apart by both my allies and enemies together (allies knew that I will be offline). I come back after more that 80 turns, just to find out that I am still in 2nd place, with my allies not takin down my enemies, but taking down inactives!! Even 1st, riverreaper, my ally, has not started battling yet just because he has not finished taking ALL (!!!) of the inactives in the gal. I came back from my trip, burning with desire to play, I set and get bored instantly! ALL GAME SO FAR HAS BEEN TAKING THOSE DEFENCELESS PLANETS, YET REAL GAME HAS NOT STARTED YET. THAT SUCKS. Now, my empire is intact, yet I am so dissapointed witH EVERYONE IN THIS GALAXY, THEIR PASIONATE PASSIVITY killed my entertainment. You guys can say whatever you like, but I DO HATE SPENDING 200 TURNS JUST COLLECTING SYSTEMS.

If that is what every galaxy is going to look like, I must have mistyped the site. I was looking for MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER ONLINE SPACE STRATEGY GAME.

This post has been edited 1 time(s), it was last edited by banem: 15.02.2008 18:59.

15.02.2008 18:57 banem is offline Send an Email to banem Search for Posts by banem Add banem to your Buddy List
neuronurse74 Player-Rank: 1 neuronurse74 is a male
Has Speed 5 Frigates


Registration Date: 20.11.2007
Posts: 35
Location: Sheffield, England

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

I totally agree with you banem. I play this game because i want to try to beat other players who are trying to do the same. Although the game is score based, being in 1st doesn't make you the best player ( well not when you go round collecting inactive planets)
15.02.2008 19:50 neuronurse74 is offline Send an Email to neuronurse74 Search for Posts by neuronurse74 Add neuronurse74 to your Buddy List
stabby Player-Rank: 2 stabby is a male
Wins even when not in your Galaxy


images/avatars/avatar-437.jpg

Registration Date: 12.12.2007
Posts: 2,516
Location: The Netherlands

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

Here comes a reply:

1st i used that word to get a clear point at the subject.

2nd galaxy 76 is an unranked galaxy (right?) It means the new players are in those. And if you`re new to something you take it easy right? Loads of people think the beginning starts off way to slow (wich it does) So they go and do something else. So the actives are then left to collect all of their dead bodies ... I mean planets. So thats basicly the reason. But still the system in place could be more flexible.

not 1 time the word "sucks", a reply copyrighted by Stabby ©

__________________

15.02.2008 20:27 stabby is offline Send an Email to stabby Homepage of stabby Search for Posts by stabby Add stabby to your Buddy List
banem Player-Rank: 2 banem is a male
Scouts his own Systems


Registration Date: 29.12.2007
Posts: 56
Location: Serbia

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

Am I the only one to see that you did not address my comments, or you just misunderstood me?

My point is why to waste so much time in THE MOST BORING PART OF A GAME: collecting inactive players. Just remove them, you did not say a single reason about why should they not be removed? I see none.

Yes, 76 is unranked, so what?! You want to say that I joined unranked gal in order to later pick inactives, for that to be my tactics in the game? Or anyone's ranked who joins unranked galaxy? That is no less than an insult.
15.02.2008 20:59 banem is offline Send an Email to banem Search for Posts by banem Add banem to your Buddy List
banem Player-Rank: 2 banem is a male
Scouts his own Systems


Registration Date: 29.12.2007
Posts: 56
Location: Serbia

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

quote:
Originally posted by stabby
... So the actives are then left to collect all of their dead bodies ... I mean planets. So thats basicly the reason. But still the system in place could be more flexible. ....



THIS is an argument?! This is a reason?! "they are left to collect..."

We do speak english?
15.02.2008 21:04 banem is offline Send an Email to banem Search for Posts by banem Add banem to your Buddy List
Erwin [CS] Player-Rank: 2 Erwin [CS] is a male
Admiral Moo


images/avatars/avatar-124.gif

Registration Date: 26.12.2004
Posts: 8,568
Location: Vienna, Austria

The inactivity issue... Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

Well, that's a very serious issue you raise there, banem: people getting bored because all they do is taking down inactives. Needless to say, that's not the intention of the game. This is caused by actually indicating that players have gone inactive, so you KNOW there is no resistance, hence they are easier to take down then fighting an active player...

Why do we even show that players went inactive? Because before this system was in place we did have inactives too, but you could not take them down because you would lose too much reputation for someone that has only a handful of planets left. Players were getting annoyed with that situation, so we introduced the "Inactivity Reputation Modifier", which I thought was a good idea.

Now that seems to be the cause for another problem, the one that you address. Back then I refused to take out inactive players (and their planets) as a whole, because technically it's not entirely trivial, plus you may get ticked off if your fleet arrives at a planet just one tick after that planet was "reset". Another reason is, some people might come back (like you), and they want to continue playing after a certain amount of inactivity. So removing inactive players is my least favorite option to solve that problem.

Also, if we removed those players, you would just end up with the active players having to colonize those vacant spots - not a lot of fun either...

I think we agree that what we want is that active players fight against each other, and preferably a bunch of weaker players try to take down a strong player (that's what the reputation system tries to achieve at least). I think the main issue is that you lose absolutely no rep for taking down an inactive player, plus you have the added bonus that there will be no resistance.

So, how about the Inactivity value never goes above 50%? So you would still lose rep, just not quite as much, but at least it would make you think twice before going after the next inactive... Or the IRM could climb considerably slower? Or, there would be a chance that a planet of an inactive turned into a heavily fortified fortress?

Any other ideas to make active players fight against each other, instead of sweeping up inactives?
15.02.2008 22:10 Erwin [CS] is offline Search for Posts by Erwin [CS] Add Erwin [CS] to your Buddy List
Erwin [CS] Player-Rank: 2 Erwin [CS] is a male
Admiral Moo


images/avatars/avatar-124.gif

Registration Date: 26.12.2004
Posts: 8,568
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: The inactivity issue... Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

One more word... if we had a constantly running Sandbox Galaxy, which people can use to get accustomed to the game (and find out if it is suited for them or not), instead of having to play in an unranked galaxy (and often having to wait several days before it actually starts), I think that would minimize the number of inactive players in unranked galaxies too.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that inactivity is much less of a problem in the ranked galaxies?
15.02.2008 22:14 Erwin [CS] is offline Search for Posts by Erwin [CS] Add Erwin [CS] to your Buddy List
neuronurse74 Player-Rank: 1 neuronurse74 is a male
Has Speed 5 Frigates


Registration Date: 20.11.2007
Posts: 35
Location: Sheffield, England

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

Just an idea but what about if a player goes inactive and their IRM stops at 50% to maybe stop players taking a rep loss, but also when the IRM stops increasing the inactive starts losing 1% of their score to a maximum of say 50%. This might stop players from going inactive towards the end of the game.
15.02.2008 22:17 neuronurse74 is offline Send an Email to neuronurse74 Search for Posts by neuronurse74 Add neuronurse74 to your Buddy List
Trantor Player-Rank: 3
Hurries Production on Hotdog Stands


Registration Date: 16.08.2007
Posts: 665

The solution Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

I have a solution..........the begining of AI in spaceciv which will form the bedrock for Space civ 2.0

--------------------------------------

3 Governors / 1 admiral

A1/G1 kick in at 25% inactivity. G1 builds only PD and fighters if there is no space to build PD. A1 places all fighters in defence position i.e. you have manned fighters in defence

G2 kick in at 50% inactivity: G2 converts all citizens to workers in addition to G1 (+ enough farmers to sustain population). A1 continues to man ships and place them in defence

G3 kicks in at 100% inactivity: IT focuses to build only fighters with 0 engine and only shields and guns basically turning the planet into a fort


--------------------------------------------------------

Issues:

1. some player go for 1-2 days with their own custom admiral and governor which are more complex and better then this. I personally went for 3 days and my admirals/ governors fought the war and actually won more planets than I lost. I would not want them to be replaced by bots which are far weaker

2. too predictable

3. ship designs

but yes a basic governor if the player is inactive from turn 1 would help prevent the "inbalance" caused by having 2-3 inactive neighbour
15.02.2008 22:38 Trantor is offline Send an Email to Trantor Search for Posts by Trantor Add Trantor to your Buddy List
stabby Player-Rank: 2 stabby is a male
Wins even when not in your Galaxy


images/avatars/avatar-437.jpg

Registration Date: 12.12.2007
Posts: 2,516
Location: The Netherlands

RE: The inactivity issue... Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

quote:
Originally posted by Erwin [SC]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that inactivity is much less of a problem in the ranked galaxies?


You`re right Erwin, because people who finished their first unranked galaxy know that inactivety is`nt good ( nope not the word "suck")

and for Banem ( right? ) sorry for not quoting your post Tongue But the best player is the one whom wins fairly right?

__________________

15.02.2008 22:59 stabby is offline Send an Email to stabby Homepage of stabby Search for Posts by stabby Add stabby to your Buddy List
banem Player-Rank: 2 banem is a male
Scouts his own Systems


Registration Date: 29.12.2007
Posts: 56
Location: Serbia

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

I do like the idea of IRM stopping at 50%, thus reducing rep loss, but still forcing better player to think twice weither it will pay to lose rep (increrase corruption) on all his planets, for a few new ones.

Stabby, that's right. But that is not the point here. Just to tell a story. I had an chance recently to sit and play chess with International Master. I enjoyed every single game, no matter losing all of them (we played 4). Question is: Out of two players who was having fun, me (losing) or him (kicking my ass even in last blindfold game, he played entire game without having seen the table!)?? Of course, it was me, because game is interesting only if it's challenging (I did make him sweat in that last one). So, I don't care if I win or lose as long as I am having fun playing, which I am not in g76, so I just quit.

I will jump in next ranked gal, hope it will be better there.
16.02.2008 05:42 banem is offline Send an Email to banem Search for Posts by banem Add banem to your Buddy List
stabby Player-Rank: 2 stabby is a male
Wins even when not in your Galaxy


images/avatars/avatar-437.jpg

Registration Date: 12.12.2007
Posts: 2,516
Location: The Netherlands

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

probably Wink

__________________

16.02.2008 11:15 stabby is offline Send an Email to stabby Homepage of stabby Search for Posts by stabby Add stabby to your Buddy List
Erwin [CS] Player-Rank: 2 Erwin [CS] is a male
Admiral Moo


images/avatars/avatar-124.gif

Registration Date: 26.12.2004
Posts: 8,568
Location: Vienna, Austria

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

WOW, playing chess without seeing the table? I thought that was a myth... heheh

Well, I am still very open and interested in ideas how to how we can get players to attack active players, instead of inactive ones. I think the idea should be that a player should have a chance to attack inactive players that are stuck somewhere in the middle of your empire since turn one, without too much reputation loss, but not encouraging them to attack an active one on the other side of the galaxy, just because they are "free" to attack...

Maybe some sort of "empire influence factor", that makes small (inactive) empires that are totally surrounded by your empire, lean towards your empire, and when you finally "attack" them, they see it more of a "liberation", than an aggressive attack... that influence factor could grow the more inactive an empire has gone.
16.02.2008 11:27 Erwin [CS] is offline Search for Posts by Erwin [CS] Add Erwin [CS] to your Buddy List
stabby Player-Rank: 2 stabby is a male
Wins even when not in your Galaxy


images/avatars/avatar-437.jpg

Registration Date: 12.12.2007
Posts: 2,516
Location: The Netherlands

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

what about gaining some reputation if you clear out inacties?

__________________

16.02.2008 11:49 stabby is offline Send an Email to stabby Homepage of stabby Search for Posts by stabby Add stabby to your Buddy List
Erwin [CS] Player-Rank: 2 Erwin [CS] is a male
Admiral Moo


images/avatars/avatar-124.gif

Registration Date: 26.12.2004
Posts: 8,568
Location: Vienna, Austria

Reply to this Post Post Reply with Quote Edit/Delete Posts Report Post to a Moderator       Go to the top of this page

quote:
Originally posted by stabby
what about gaining some reputation if you clear out inacties?

Ummm, wouldn't that worsen the problem? Then everyone is just fighting against inactives - the opposite of what we want to achieve...
16.02.2008 12:37 Erwin [CS] is offline Search for Posts by Erwin [CS] Add Erwin [CS] to your Buddy List
Pages (3): « previous 1 [2] 3 next » Tree Structure | Board Structure
Jump to:
Post New Thread Post Reply
Cosmic Supremacy Forum » Suggestions » Inactive Players in a game!

Forum Software: Burning Board 2.3.6, Developed by WoltLab GmbH