Next game

[Infinity]

Planets in racials are going to bring vast amounts of mines in racial galaxy, even with CAs being in neutrals. Imo bad idea.

Map size however is something different... we have now Alskant that's 17x17 and other racials 15x15... Should be 12x12 at most, and better routes for Skants should be made with lower sector connectivity in Alskant galaxy and not by increasing it's size. So there's the first mistake.

Purify mentioned all the others. So, downscale racials, neutrals to 18x18, keep same number of planet galaxies (you never know if you might need them, and it doesn't affect interaction, planet galaxies that are not used, are simply not used, no big deal) but make them 7x7 and voila. And for God's sake, neutrals can't have just one warp connecting them.

[Page]

Planets in racials are going to bring vast amounts of mines in racial galaxy, even with CAs being in neutrals. Imo bad idea.

Only if the planets in racials are worth claiming, put plenty of planets elsewhere that are easier to defend as well and I expect it will help the racial planets left alone except by newbies/small alliances that want to have some fun trying planets.
On top of this if the 1.6 map with racial planets things can be done to discourage mining racials even more

[Purify]

I know i wouldn't play if there were planets in racials....... its like you have no target... so when you sign on you don't know where to go to find the bad guy.... yawn...

The middleground game had one big galaxy with planets and racial feds blah blah blah..... and I found it so boring. There's no point especially since planet builders can just sit in Fed to build the planets and mine.

[Infinity]

I just gotta say I fully agree with what Purify just said.

[JettJackson]

I find it funny that some players are so against planets in racials, but they forget ( or maybe they just weren't here ) that it has not only been done, it has been done succesfully. SM started with planets/racials mixed together and had a playerbase a bit bigger then our, and kept that galaxy format in vet/newbie games until there was thousands of active players in a game, it promotes a less competitive style of play in my opinion which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I agree with Jett though, you could also accomplish this by making planet gals/racials smaller, and adding more warps between neutrals. I am not sure it would be quite as effective but maybe less of a risk.

How hard is it actually (I'm asking I'm not insinuating that it isn't difficult) to cap alliance sizes and force stack sizes? I think 25/25/5 would be the best thing. With alliances of say 20 or 25..not that big of a change, and still use the 1.5 speed. Put more neutral ports in the neutral gals.

you want to know why planets worked in racials back then, its cus there were 1000s of players, its something you do with a big playerbase, not something you do to build a playerbase

[Blade]

I find it funny that some players are so against planets in racials, but they forget ( or maybe they just weren't here ) that it has not only been done, it has been done succesfully. SM started with planets/racials mixed together and had a playerbase a bit bigger then our, and kept that galaxy format in vet/newbie games until there was thousands of active players in a game, it promotes a less competitive style of play in my opinion which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I agree with Jett though, you could also accomplish this by making planet gals/racials smaller, and adding more warps between neutrals. I am not sure it would be quite as effective but maybe less of a risk.

How hard is it actually (I'm asking I'm not insinuating that it isn't difficult) to cap alliance sizes and force stack sizes? I think 25/25/5 would be the best thing. With alliances of say 20 or 25..not that big of a change, and still use the 1.5 speed. Put more neutral ports in the neutral gals.

you want to know why planets worked in racials back then, its cus there were 1000s of players, its something you do with a big playerbase, not something you do to build a playerbase

SM had far from 1000's of players, it had 200 vets and about 300 newbies a peak of just under 1000 active platers in any 2 or 3 games.

Just seemed more back then cause we could kill the server to a stand still when we opp'd.

Nothing wrong with planets in racials it was not just MG that housed racial planets and became interesting a few of the newbie games also had racial planets

[JettJackson]

I find it funny that some players are so against planets in racials, but they forget ( or maybe they just weren't here ) that it has not only been done, it has been done succesfully. SM started with planets/racials mixed together and had a playerbase a bit bigger then our, and kept that galaxy format in vet/newbie games until there was thousands of active players in a game, it promotes a less competitive style of play in my opinion which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I agree with Jett though, you could also accomplish this by making planet gals/racials smaller, and adding more warps between neutrals. I am not sure it would be quite as effective but maybe less of a risk.

How hard is it actually (I'm asking I'm not insinuating that it isn't difficult) to cap alliance sizes and force stack sizes? I think 25/25/5 would be the best thing. With alliances of say 20 or 25..not that big of a change, and still use the 1.5 speed. Put more neutral ports in the neutral gals.

you want to know why planets worked in racials back then, its cus there were 1000s of players, its something you do with a big playerbase, not something you do to build a playerbase

SM had far from 1000's of players, it had 200 vets and about 300 newbies a peak of just under 1000 active platers in any 2 or 3 games.

Just seemed more back then cause we could kill the server to a stand still when we opp'd.

Nothing wrong with planets in racials it was not just MG that housed racial planets and became interesting a few of the newbie games also had racial planets

alot is wrong with racial planets with this current playerbase, lets stop fooling ourselves here and realize we are asking for a nightmare in mines

[Blade]

Matters not where the planets are, it's the mentality of this game now to mine to hell and back now and most people (people meaning vets) are used to it, but it does nothing for keeping new players. That is something that should not be coded to control, that bit is down to the players who play the game to do themselves.

No one can tell me people wont do it because it can be "done" thats crap.

A game many SM players played called Diaspora back in 2000 had a general rule of thumb that no players will attack or be attacked at planets unless it was to defend the satellite and that was followed by 95% of the population the other 5% are the everyday lamers you get in every game. But if you did attack at the planet you where hunted down and killed by the player base. So no one tell me we as players can not change the way we play to suit the playerbase.

[Siege]

Blade your numbers are a little skewed. Imperial Dreams had over 200 members, HoA had over 60, PoD had over 120, Ragnarok had over 60, White Warriors over 60, Heimdall, Pale Riders, etc, etc, etc, etc. plus solo players and small alliances. That was in My1 ( a vet only game ) and it only grew from there. NG's were also more popular.

The planets in racials was done with a small playerbase to start, and the reason planet gals were invented was because the playerbase grew to a bigger size, alliances with 60 people warring against other alliances of the same size needed to mine their planets and the mines were getting in the way of racials, so planet gals were born.

Who is designing the universe anyways?

[Purify]

Wth...............

How can a playerbase agree not to 'mine to hell' and back???? If they don't do that... they become more vulnerable to be opped and killed.

If mining is really a problem people want to address than the way to lower it is to create some other kind of encouragement that takes turns/money but allows an alliance to defend a galaxy.

And who is designing the universe?... I vote not Baalzamon.