Possible minor changes - Consultation

[edd]

There is a rather large difference between the honour and fame you receive defending when offline and online. Should there be a difference just because in one situation the person has chosen not to run and in the other the person has had no choice in the matter?

I'd be interested to know his reasoning behind the disparity.


Also, the whole arson/hooligan eff spamming thing needs to be put to rest by seriously decreasing the eff you get for repeat attacking within a short time period, to negative amounts preferably

I don't really know about the last few rounds but you only need to go back to round 43 to see Quitus surpassing 200mil eff, a feat which is pretty much impossible with the playerbase the way it is now. I'm not challenging anybody to do it, nor am i saying it should be an easy task; quite the opposite in fact. But to obtain an effectiveness of that size so easily is ridiculous and makes all the hard work that people put into their attacks worth nothing .

 

[Toast]

I would like to see Azzer post in this thread before I believe even the smallest change will occur. I don't understand his line of thinking for small changes. Do we only get a couple of small changes, then have to wait another 15 rounds before we get some more smaller changes? Azzer needs to man up and take charge of this game again. Please don't send your boytoy to fill us with hope. Your rightful responsibility of this game is to be the leader, so please lead us Azzer. Get back into checking in at the very least once a week. Don't appoint anyone as a spokesperson for yourself because no one has done a good job.

In my opinion, the game does need small changes, but it needs a bunch of them. and I'm sure Azzer has rough ideas of what they are. The single most important change that needs to happen is having Azzer get back in touch with this game.

 

[tobapopalos]

Well in the likely event that that isn't going to happen, I'd rather see admin duties passed on to someone who gives a crap.

 

[Ogluk]

Gunna agree with what i believe to be the majority and say we really need someone to administer the game, ie, catch multies/cheaters and inject some occasional fun to the game (make havoc interesting again by having the Gov account actually play rather than just die, etc) Additional responsibility of marketing the game if willing.

+ some balancing tweeks,
-price cut on stunbot dev, duration increase on nanobot (won't be a major impact overall but will make it slightly more forgiving, 23bil on a tier 2 tech is harsh to say the least)
-Nutters, either cheaper (down to 7.5k-8k), or fire a little bit earlier, either would work, atm they're pointless as they fire after harriers
-Arsonists, price increase to 22k a unit, i feel they're a bit too cheap, and a bit too good for their price (yes they can be virtually nullified by mass hippies/flak, but you get my drift)
-Cyborg Gardeners, controversial as this may be, price hike, from 4.2k to 5.5k, minor but enough i feel to make an impact, and due to their profligacy early round it'll make enough of a difference that they won't feel overpowered.
-Crazed Droids, either give them a purpose or delete them! atm they're just a £107.5 bil tax if you want scrap bots.


Shorten the round to 55 days, shaves 3 weeks off at the end, we all seem to agree that at the moment the round is too long.

 

[Dill]

A number of small changes I think to start with:
1) get an admin, as is the general consensus, to monitor and stop any cheating and multi's etc
2) *edit post 2 made in error*
3) round length shortened, I like the sound of 55-60 day length.
4)not sure on smaller alliances, I wouldn't like to see it below 15 ever! The main thing that makes me play this game is the social side either in pols or by mail, hence being the biggest spammer in mada with mails sent and received, having only say 10 people in an alliance would mean its less likely people are on at the same times as you.

Just my opinions and I'm sure there'll be people who don't agree

 

[Ogluk]

2) stop naps being able to attack each other. Either completely or by some form of punishment, like cannot defend the nap you attacked for a certain length of time.

Unless a change has been made in the last 5-6 rounds, naps can't attack each other, I tested it when my pnap became useless and had to remove them as a pnap before being able to attack them.

 

[Dill]

Ah yes that's my bad Ogluk, thought is noticed p-naps attacking each other this round, instead I was just seeing 2 solo groups land trading

 

[alwaysnumb]

people cant join an allie unless they at least 5% total score of allie they want to join.

 

[Toast]

people cant join an allie unless they at least 5% total score of allie they want to join.

I dont necessarily agree with this. For instance, if a top 5 player wanted to leave his alliance and start a brand new one with a friend that just started, it would hinder him from getting any new/small players into his alliance. Alliances should be open to any player.

* However, kickrape/restarts should be looked Into. It is a very basic form of mutual attacks. now I know that a lot of allied players do it, and that it has been going on for a very long time, but, maybe add a button for Instant delete or possibly a timer for deleting after you leave an alliance. Or maybe even automatic Sleepmode if you leave/get kicked from an alliance.

* I also would like to see more developments for AHQ (and serious other changes to HQ), possible additional developments for: bounty, insurance, h/f, seed production, additional land grabs for stealing.

* Reduced cost for money launderers and plant thieves. And the ability to develop all three.

* If the round stays long, then the development modifier should be raised making flak wars, and warring in general, last longer into the round).

* All hidden bonuses revealed.

* The ability to send multiple attacks in one tick on one page. Also the ability to send certain troops out at once easily (I. e. The option to send only INN or only Lethals or all troops out by the touch of a button).

* More quirky news and update headlines from Admin.

* getting rid of news that someone intel scanned you, but couldn't catch it.

* Different Havok themed governments each round.

* Getting rid of number system that governs alliance members. Newly created threads should have a checkbox for who can read it.

* although the bounty from negative h/f is an incentive to attack up, too few players take advantage of this. Possibly, more negative consequences for red-titles players, not to exceed the benefits of having ww and wk, which isn't much.

* Two to three main worlds at once with different set-ups. This would be an easy way to see what changes between worlds would become the most popular after a handful of rounds. Possible additional worlds could have longer/shorter ticks, longer/shorter rounds, more/less alliance member limits, etc, etc. This could also generate more revenue for the game if people are buying p-units or game cash.

* An alliance chat room that is easily accessible that takes you directly to a private chat room for your alliance. I'd really like to see an automatic alliance chat box which gets everyone involved or signed in as soon as they log on. If you happen to play from a smartphone like me, the live chat link will open another web page for the chat and constantly signs me out when I switch between pages. This Inconvenience keeps me from chatting with my alliance. Napped solos should receive a chat box as well.

* Random units like the Hamster from Hell, that give a small bonus/penalty while in occupation. Random units can be associated with H/F as well. Having a high H/f may make it more likely to receive the random unit.

* Alliances that declare wars should be spread thru the playerbase using news.

* turn effectiveness scoring system into a money system. All score/money earned through effectiveness can be used towards special bonuses to be named.Effectiveness would obviously have to be re-worked.

 

[Max]

There are some portal profile awards that can no longer be achieved (such as rank 1 h/f "friends of the earth" and "unlucky for some" Friday 13th full moon that never occurs). I'd like to see these changed so they become achievable again

 

[Chris_]

typical max only wants changes so he can get more profile points!

 

[Gazzy]

There are some portal profile awards that can no longer be achieved (such as rank 1 h/f "friends of the earth" and "unlucky for some" Friday 13th full moon that never occurs). I'd like to see these changed so they become achievable again

Me and Spike have tried a few times for this one, thinking we must have somehow messed up before trying again ... before we finally conceded that it must be broken =[

Would be nice to achieve the Devilish award too, if that can be fixed :s

 

[Max]

Since today is the fifth of April, and DA is going to take these ideas forward to Azzer, any idea how long it will be before we get a reply on the suggestions from Azzer?

 

[Chris_]

Probably 3-4 years?

 

[Garrett2]

obviously by DA's last post, he's unhappy by what we've posted so he's not going to do anything. oh woe is us

 

['Tiger']

obviously by DA's last post, he's unhappy by what we've posted so he's not going to do anything. oh woe is us

Looks like everyone wasted their time, yet again.

 

[Ogluk]

Just give me locking powers and be done with it!

 

[Asmodeous]

just give me locking powers and be done with it!

i haz t3h pow-uh!

 

[Dark_Angel]

obviously by DA's last post, he's unhappy by what we've posted so he's not going to do anything. oh woe is us

Not at all - The number of suggestions and interest has been encouraging. More than I'd expected, truth be told.

I think I made fairly clear in my prior post that I was just a little worried I'd stunted the scope of suggestions by formatting a few possible ideas in the way that I did in my first post. (As a lot of the discussion thereafter was based largely around the handful of ideas I threw out at first).

-

Since today is the fifth of April, and DA is going to take these ideas forward to Azzer, any idea how long it will be before we get a reply on the suggestions from Azzer?

Hey Max. The date I originally gave was probably a bit ambitious. I have a lot of work on at the moment and need to put aside some time to work through these suggestions and work out a reasonably straightforward way of getting some agreement from the community. (I don't actually play Bush anymore - But I'm involved enough in the community to still want to try and push for some change to improve the game).

I'm thinking the best way forward is for us to hold an IRC debate/chat on the suggestions made thus far - I'll have to look at when this might be possible and will ensure the date is well publicized so people have an opportunity to get on and speak up.

Making the suggestions is the easy bit - Sorting through what will work and won't is the difficult bit (mainly because I need to show Azzer that there's enough agreement on the changes I ask him to look at implementing).

In any case, changes are likely to come over the next few months (rather than weeks) But that is hopefully better than nothing.

With regard to the biggest issue people have picked up, multis/cheats, I have already asked Azzer to look at implementing some "deputy admin" type controls. He's already told me that this is something he knows we need so he'll hopefully look to work on that whilst we consider some of the suggestions in this thread.

 

[atsanjose]

With regard to the biggest issue people have picked up, multis/cheats, I have already asked Azzer to look at implementing some "deputy admin" type controls. He's already told me that this is something he knows we need so he'll hopefully look to work on that whilst we consider some of the suggestions in this thread.

:multi: