the570z wrote:I dunno about TDZK but even the league of legends chars are quite capable of defending themselves they wont get many kills but they are not useless without another hero around.
They can run away, but for the most part they can't do a huge amount by themselves, with another champion they are without a doubt great and my point was they cannot take the glory for themselves, so I fail to see how you have disputed that? :P
the570z wrote:This is wrong, for the simple reason that building cannot be done without trading, but trading can be done without building. If you encourage people to do things that require team based strategies, then perhaps those selfish players might learn how to be part of a team, if only to enrich themselves further.
Selfish players are not likely to learn how to play as a team just because you have given them a selfish reason to do something else. After all it's still just fueled by selfishness
If they cannot complete said activity without the help of teammates, they would have to be at least sort of a team player. Motive doesn't matter when the outcome is good. Does it really matter that these folks are just in it for themselves, they are still helping others unintentionally and that in and of itself is a good thing. Capitalism is all about trying to make 3 billion selfish people work together for the common good.
Page wrote:Selfish players are not likely to learn how to play as a team just because you have given them a selfish reason to do something else. After all it's still just fueled by selfishness
Why does it matter if its a selfish thing or not? Its an activity that requires using turns and taking risks. It should be rewarded with a fair amount of experience gain.
May I ask why 20k experience is too much to your reasoning, but 10k is good?
Page wrote:Selfish players are not likely to learn how to play as a team just because you have given them a selfish reason to do something else. After all it's still just fueled by selfishness
Why does it matter if its a selfish thing or not? Its an activity that requires using turns and taking risks. It should be rewarded with a fair amount of experience gain.
May I ask why 20k experience is too much to your reasoning, but 10k is good?
Beau how do the goods get to planets? The builders put them there, thus they trade and gain exp that way, and you are looking at 8-10 planets per builder which is an average of 80-100 if done sololy, 100k is level 28. Just from building and this is at 10k per planet, if we did 20k you are talking 200k for max for building. I just can not justify giving that much exp to building which takes at most 40 turns round trip to build cycle. Meaning most builders if efficient have plenty of turns to trade or op. Builders don't just build only. That is why it shouldn't be more than 10k.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad
Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5
Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds
Builders cannot build without traders backing them up, they cannot switch ships back and forth either. JJ lots of people trade and op as well. Should we limit traders to a max of 120k per game. How many turns and hours does it take in total? Considering your argument JJ it takes 8400 turns to build a galaxy of level 70 planets. How much xp would 8400 turns get you trading? Id bet its a lot more then 200k on a even halfway decent route. How many other people have to trade and give up cash to build and stock planets? Why should a solo activity that takes no coordination be so much more rewarding then one that takes at least a modicum of teamwork? Again it wont matter to most players, all it will do is make planet building a lot easier for smaller alliance leaders.
the570z wrote:Builders cannot build without traders backing them up, they cannot switch ships back and forth either. JJ lots of people trade and op as well. Should we limit traders to a max of 120k per game. How many turns and hours does it take in total? Considering your argument JJ it takes 8400 turns to build a galaxy of level 70 planets. How much xp would 8400 turns get you trading? Id bet its a lot more then 200k on a even halfway decent route. How many other people have to trade and give up cash to build and stock planets? Why should a solo activity that takes no coordination be so much more rewarding then one that takes at least a modicum of teamwork? Again it wont matter to most players, all it will do is make planet building a lot easier for smaller alliance leaders.
Sure it might be 200K although I don't think its that high unless you are on an unreal route. But the point is Planet Building is a secondary source of experience not a primary source. Like Page stated recently it was 0 exp for building and now 10k is not enough? I mean greed is unbecoming in this thread. Also how many people trade and op at the same time? No one does because its impossible.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad
Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5
Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds
the570z wrote:Builders cannot build without traders backing them up, they cannot switch ships back and forth either. JJ lots of people trade and op as well. Should we limit traders to a max of 120k per game. How many turns and hours does it take in total? Considering your argument JJ it takes 8400 turns to build a galaxy of level 70 planets. How much xp would 8400 turns get you trading? Id bet its a lot more then 200k on a even halfway decent route. How many other people have to trade and give up cash to build and stock planets? Why should a solo activity that takes no coordination be so much more rewarding then one that takes at least a modicum of teamwork? Again it wont matter to most players, all it will do is make planet building a lot easier for smaller alliance leaders.
Have you never been in an alliance with Hugh??? He builds without traders backing him up every game.
Beau, 20k is not to much, but he suggested 100k in his first post.
And this would really only benefit Hugh. I'd like to hear what he has to say about it.
the570z wrote:Hugh cant build planets without cash, nor could he stock them. Building unstocked planets would be the best way to get yourself blown up ever.
Read the post above yours it should answer this again.
Lead: Sesame Street, Rogue Squad
Co-Lead: Suckas, Black Sun Ascending, Wraith Squadron, Fool's Errend, Team Poker, The Phantom Order, Toxic #5
Member of: Team Pup and Suds, Nintendo Power, System Failure, Crusaders, new dawn, Cereal Killers, Armory, Armory V2, _-=`Perfection`=-_, The Guild, Ragnarok, Heimdall, United Rebels, ilLegitimate Basterds
the570z wrote:Hugh cant build planets without cash, nor could he stock them. Building unstocked planets would be the best way to get yourself blown up ever.
Read the post above yours it should answer this again.
No, it doesnt, Hugh does not trade for the money, build the planets, trade for goods, and stock the planets by himself. He does a crap load of work and incredibly selflessly but he still cant do it on his own. Its just not possible to build a galaxy solo, one planet maybe but it would be an incredible amount of work and most of the game to reach a SINGLE fully stocked 70. Thats assuming nobody ever attacked it or podded the owner.
