sleep

[tobapopalos]

I do agree with this gripe. Sleep mode has become waaaaay over-used, in my opinion.

 

[aGit]

I think most people would hit sleep and deal with the SHAME of appearing cowardly, rather than die pointlessly, though.

I wouldn't.

Problem with that is then you are in sleepmode for however long, then die pointlessly when you come out of it. So you're merely delaying the inevitable lol.

It worked for me.

hiting sleep usually doesnt entail jumping ships tho

 

[Alcibiades]

I would request an increase in the minimum timeframe you can use sleepmode for. Starting at perhaps 24 hours, then 36, then 48, 72, 168 (one week), 336 (two weeks).

Of course people will now start objecting that it leaves solos without anything to protect themselves with at night. yes, that's the idea. And with the potential improvements in AR and the speed with which AR drops this should be fine. AR exists to protect you, as do your Pnaps (if you have them); you don't need sleepmode either.

IMO sleepmode should be used for extraordinary circumstances, not as an everyday thing as aGit said.

 

[Twigley]

One to talk on Ship Jumping Agit.

 

[DarkSider]

While i'm abusing sleepmode like hell this round since acre income doesn't mean much to me i've always been against sleepmode for other than going in shorter or longer vacantions. I'm very much against those opinions that want to improve sleepmode and make it an even better option with reduced periods of time or increased income for this very reason - it stagnates the game.
The right way imho is to increase minimum sleep time to at least 1 day or even 3 so attacks can be done easyer while offering more protection to those in need with increased insurances. Make attacking more fun and getting killed less dissapointing

 

[aGit]

One to talk on Ship Jumping Agit.

if you are referring to OF -> RRAR transfer, i left OF on good terms and (to my knowledge) made no enemies due to my decision, also, i wasnt in sleepmode ^_^

 

[Polo]

I think most people would hit sleep and deal with the SHAME of appearing cowardly, rather than die pointlessly, though.

I wouldn't.

Problem with that is then you are in sleepmode for however long, then die pointlessly when you come out of it. So you're merely delaying the inevitable lol.

It worked for me.

Well there are certain advantages to shipjumping.

I was sat in RRR whilst Kuda and FB were in sleep with nobody big enough to defend me for quite a while before I joined STN...

 

[Alcibiades]

I think most people would hit sleep and deal with the SHAME of appearing cowardly, rather than die pointlessly, though.

I wouldn't.

Problem with that is then you are in sleepmode for however long, then die pointlessly when you come out of it. So you're merely delaying the inevitable lol.

It worked for me.

Well there are certain advantages to shipjumping.

I was sat in RRR whilst Kuda and FB were in sleep with nobody big enough to defend me for quite a while before I joined STN...

Fair enough, I wasn't really paying attention. I just logged on after being dead and saw you in sleepmode, then the next time i logged in you were in S2N.

 

[Shadow]

for times when you know you cannot be online for extended period of time, exams, study periods, nightout with friends, vacations, holidays, bar mitzvah etc etc.

but not as a tactic in game imo.

Oi OF's had a valid reason for hitting sleepmode, nearly half the allie were away for an extended period of time with no internet and there was no point leaving the other half to try adn defend against 40 people attacking them on there own as its quite obvious OF's would have been teh first to be killed once a few of the LET rushes got through on us from teh other 2 as they would have relised half of us were not actually about

 

[Matt]

I think most people would hit sleep and deal with the SHAME of appearing cowardly, rather than die pointlessly, though.

I wouldn't.

Problem with that is then you are in sleepmode for however long, then die pointlessly when you come out of it. So you're merely delaying the inevitable lol.

then again u might be more active when u get out of sleep:<

Idd.

Also, not if you delete during sleep

That said delete is just another word for death - Only at your own hands, not at others

Deletion is like Bush Suicide, lol..

aGit this game is not built on fair game tactics so you'll just have to deal with people using sleep mode in the way they do, as im sure you bash with 4 other people on the same tick And your all probably twice the size of the person your hitting. =]

 

[aGit]

Deletion is like Bush Suicide, lol..

aGit this game is not built on fair game tactics so you'll just have to deal with people using sleep mode in the way they do, as im sure you bash with 4 other people on the same tick And your all probably twice the size of the person your hitting. =]

actually, i only attack 70%+ ^_^

 

[Matt]

Deletion is like Bush Suicide, lol..

aGit this game is not built on fair game tactics so you'll just have to deal with people using sleep mode in the way they do, as im sure you bash with 4 other people on the same tick And your all probably twice the size of the person your hitting. =]

actually, i only attack 70%+ ^_^

Haha lies ive seen this personally

 

[aGit]

Deletion is like Bush Suicide, lol..

aGit this game is not built on fair game tactics so you'll just have to deal with people using sleep mode in the way they do, as im sure you bash with 4 other people on the same tick And your all probably twice the size of the person your hitting. =]

actually, i only attack 70%+ ^_^

Haha lies ive seen this personally

maybe in the past, sure.

 

[Matt]

Deletion is like Bush Suicide, lol..

aGit this game is not built on fair game tactics so you'll just have to deal with people using sleep mode in the way they do, as im sure you bash with 4 other people on the same tick And your all probably twice the size of the person your hitting. =]

actually, i only attack 70%+ ^_^

Haha lies ive seen this personally

maybe in the past, sure.

the past as in thsi round ye!

but really back onto topic!

Sleep mode is being used however someone believes they need to use it.

 

[aGit]

the past as in thsi round ye!

when? 30% and 40% sure, but dont remember the 4 on a tick part.

 

[Enrico]

I would request an increase in the minimum timeframe you can use sleepmode for. Starting at perhaps 24 hours, then 36, then 48, 72, 168 (one week), 336 (two weeks).

Of course people will now start objecting that it leaves solos without anything to protect themselves with at night. yes, that's the idea. And with the potential improvements in AR and the speed with which AR drops this should be fine. AR exists to protect you, as do your Pnaps (if you have them); you don't need sleepmode either.

IMO sleepmode should be used for extraordinary circumstances, not as an everyday thing as aGit said.

Why make it harder for solos to survive? Just the fact that they need to hit sleep pretty regularly means they are usually out of the running for the top spots anyway. And I much prefer a solo to use sleep to keep him/her safe, than using Pnaps, solo means solo...

And a nerfing of sleep would probably mean an increase in 9acres-untouchables...

 

[Alcibiades]

I would request an increase in the minimum timeframe you can use sleepmode for. Starting at perhaps 24 hours, then 36, then 48, 72, 168 (one week), 336 (two weeks).

Of course people will now start objecting that it leaves solos without anything to protect themselves with at night. yes, that's the idea. And with the potential improvements in AR and the speed with which AR drops this should be fine. AR exists to protect you, as do your Pnaps (if you have them); you don't need sleepmode either.

IMO sleepmode should be used for extraordinary circumstances, not as an everyday thing as aGit said.

Why make it harder for solos to survive? Just the fact that they need to hit sleep pretty regularly means they are usually out of the running for the top spots anyway. And I much prefer a solo to use sleep to keep him/her safe, than using Pnaps, solo means solo...

And a nerfing of sleep would probably mean an increase in 9acres-untouchables...

It's to prevent the abuse of the sleepmode option, which is currently being used to make solos invulnerable. Something to which i am adamantly opposed. You would prefer to make them invulnerable? Cool.

Alternatively, have some sort of lower hour sleepmode option in which they can still be attacked to lose land but get large amounts Insurance/Injuries so that while they might lose land they won't lose all their troops.

I don't like the idea of sleepmode being abused; and apparently you don't like loophole abuse either given your statement regarding 9 acre abusers.

hopefully that loophole will be filled in shortly too.

 

[DarkSider]

It's to prevent the abuse of the sleepmode option, which is currently being used to make solos invulnerable. Something to which i am adamantly opposed. You would prefer to make them invulnerable? Cool.

You only look at it from one side. Majority of the allied players in good allies are called online when they get an inc that would kill them and they have at 19 ppl to do it. THEY ARE CURRENTLY the imbalanced and invulnerable players. Yes they do get killed when they decide to put up a fight, but unlike offline solo's they get to choose if they want to fight or not.
Many of the solo haters dislike when they can't catch an active solo offline because he is active & uses sleep mode and yell OMG IMBA SOLOS, needs nerf !!! , but you forget that the effort he needs to put into his account to get that self protection it's much bigger than an allied player who only needs to have a phone nearby and he is pretty much invulnerable.
At a quick thought i think i got zeroed each of my solo rounds or majority of them, in some of them several times. I can't honestly remember when i got caught offline and killed while playing allied except my first round in round 10. ( i might have but not more than once or twice i guess when my internet conection was working ). Same can be said about many of the top active players, and the activity and effort needed in order to get this 'invulnerability' it's it's nowhere close from a nonbunker solo.

Btw, i also see lots of allied players using sleepmode but that happens mainly in alliances outside top 5 because they don't really do the mass wake up calls to defend at odd hours or wake up to send out etc. Don't confuse intensive usage of sleepmode by higher ranked solo's and call that invulnerability when it's actually a desperate attempt to survive .. a way of extreme survival that's not needed in top allies.

Edit: A funny thing that i just remembered from this round: Beasteh playing allied and offline for a week having fun with his gf. A great target if he was solo but alas wasn't meant to be After a full week of beeing offline he gets massed by RRR, gets a call, logins sends out and back to gf.
Solo's invulnerable, imba ezzmode .. yeah right.

 

[Alcibiades]

It's to prevent the abuse of the sleepmode option, which is currently being used to make solos invulnerable. Something to which i am adamantly opposed. You would prefer to make them invulnerable? Cool.

You only look at it from one side. Majority of the allied players in good allies are called online when they get an inc that would kill them and they have at 19 ppl to do it. THEY ARE CURRENTLY the imbalanced and invulnerable players. Yes they do get killed when they decide to put up a fight, but unlike offline solo's they get to choose if they want to fight or not.
Many of the solo haters dislike when they can't catch an active solo offline because he is active & uses sleep mode and yell OMG IMBA SOLOS, needs nerf !!! , but you forget that the effort he needs to put into his account to get that self protection it's much bigger than an allied player who only needs to have a phone nearby and he is pretty much invulnerable.

Btw, i also see lots of allied players using sleepmode but that happens mainly in alliances outside top 5 because they don't really do the mass wake up calls to defend at odd hours or wake up to send out etc. Don't confuse intensive usage of sleepmode by higher ranked solo's and call that invulnerability when it's actually a desperate attempt to survive .. a way of extreme survival that's not needed in top allies.

The equivalent of 19 other players is surely AR, or am i getting things wrong again? Which is a 24 hour government operated protection service against overwhelming attacks. Sure you're more likely to be woken up/protected in top alliances because you're in an alliance. In my opinion that's one of the benefits of being in a good alliance, you get your troops protected well. even better if they protect you without having to wake you I wasn't just talking about 'high ranked solos using it' but all manner of players, from lowbie solos/allied players, to the highest ranked solos. It is, in my opinion, being used in a manner to which it was not originally intended.

I do agree that AR has it's flaws and it's not a rock solid system that is just one of the downsides to being Solo and i'm sure i recently saw you mention some corrections which would make a 'sliding scale' drop rate for AR so that protection was more equalized and available for those who needed it. I'd happily support that.

While i'm abusing sleepmode like hell this round since acre income doesn't mean much to me i've always been against sleepmode for other than going in shorter or longer vacantions. I'm very much against those opinions that want to improve sleepmode and make it an even better option with reduced periods of time or increased income for this very reason - it stagnates the game.
The right way imho is to increase minimum sleep time to at least 1 day or even 3 so attacks can be done easyer while offering more protection to those in need with increased insurances. Make attacking more fun and getting killed less dissapointing

You freely admit to abusing sleepmode this round which comes back to my point in the above post that it can, and is, frequently over used and abused. As i wrote elsewhere I wished to have the minimum timeframe extended to be longer so that it would be harder to simply send a few attacks, log off and be invulnerable until you came back online to rush a few people, then log off again and be untouchable. That's equally unfair to the rest of the players imo.

 

[DarkSider]

"The equivalent of 19 other players is surely AR, or am i getting things wrong again? Which is a 24 hour government operated protection service against overwhelming attacks.
"

That's the whole point. AR system provides "so much" protection that a large chunk of the solo's need to go into sleepmode every night or wake up to alot of zero's and no land.


" Sure you're more likely to be woken up/protected in top alliances because you're in an alliance. In my opinion that's one of the benefits of being in a good alliance, you get your troops protected well. even better if they protect you without having to wake you
"



Ofc, an allied player in a top alliance it's very hard/unlikely to get killed because he can get a solid defence or just called to send out. A solo doesn't get the luxury of getting called to send out so AT LEAST he needs a decent defence and a larger interval of time between zeroings. The current defence is rubbish is the whole point i'm arguing.


"I wasn't just talking about 'high ranked solos using it' but all manner of players, from lowbie solos/allied players, to the highest ranked solos."

Well you said : "which is currently being used to make solos invulnerable" so that's a bit misleading."



"I do agree that AR has it's flaws and it's not a rock solid system that is just one of the downsides to being Solo"


You're saying AR it's a flawed/bad system but that's exactly what solo's should be getting or it's just my poor english again ?




"You freely admit to abusing sleepmode this round which comes back to my point in the above post that it can, and is, frequently over used and abused. As i wrote elsewhere I wished to have the minimum timeframe extended to be longer so that it would be harder to simply send a few attacks, log off and be invulnerable until you came back online to rush a few people, then log off again and be untouchable. That's equally unfair to the rest of the players imo."


I meant abusing sleepmode as in over using it. While as i said i'm against sleepmode beeing used as "afk time" or "nn" but just for shorter or longer vacantions the problem that we have here is with AR not providing enough help, so unless you've just hit 90 ar mod or something close to that you need to start doing calcs if you have chances to make it through the night. If you consider your chances are low, then sleepmode is a sensitive option. Again, problem is that chances are low most of the time and that makes sleepmode beeing over used atm. Just suggesting to send them to death by removing that option it's not a good idea imo, first there needs to be a decent protection for solo's aswell and later imho methods to decrease the negative effects of beeing attacked (for example high insurance) and also nerfing of sleepmode to make those that want to attack happier than now and those that are beeing attacked less stressed or demoralised after they get killed.