An Open Letter to the SMR Community

[Grey Death]

Again you are incorrect when you think that I have changed my stance to pro hunter because I am playing with serg, when in reality I was one of the firsts to want the PSF nerfed about 10 games ago and I am constantly against weakening hunter ships (note the ITAC discussion), I am sure I can go on with more things but those 2 speak on behalf of themselves. As for this activity discussion you can't tell people to just dial back how they play the game because you can't keep up, Hell the SF mantra is to keep going no matter what. What has changed from previous instances? Why is it that people have to dial it back, Why can't people dial it up? Before you go on about we are on all day again it is really just one or 2 people who are on all the time, If you need logs of who comes on when in chat I will be more than willing to supply them to further cement my point. No this isn't a job but it is a hobby that some people devote more time than others to. I mean are we looking to limit how long someone can play per day because that is a ludicrous notion.

Just an fyi: saying you are not Pro Hunter and then stating that you nerfed the PSF and are against weakening hunter ships makes about as much sense as saying the French are sucessful modern day warriors. If you were not Pro hunter then you would not be against weakening hunter ships or you would at least be making suggestions of ways in which to improve the trading experience that wasn't detrimental to the traders. You have also stated that you don't like the xp loss decrease which is also a Pro Hunter stance.

IMHO we need to make things easier for the casual player otherwise this game won't last more than a couple of more years.

Sportsmanship: JJ, you claim that it was never present in the past. I disagree, you ask anyone that was present during SM days and/or the beginning of the SMR days and they will tell you that good sportsmanship was always around and your teammates called you out if you didn't practice it. I look at the game today and in some aspects it is far superior to SM days, but sadly in others such as sportsmanship, newbie training, and competitive play the game is but a shadow of its former self.

The purpose of a lower game speed is to specifically force people to be turn efficient, higher speeds negate that and also imbalance the game towards a highly active vet heavy alliance. Also, think back to the first time you had your favorite candy as a kid. Did your parents then turn around and give you another 3 bags to eat? No, and because you didn't get them, you started getting the occaisional craving for the candy. The same philosophy applies to turns, the slower the game and thus the less turns, the more addicting it tends to be. Players start to calculate when they are able to move again, they linger online in chat rooms to talk while waiting for those 10 more turns, allainces become more communicative and work as a team.

[RCK]

Well said.

[JettJackson]

Again you are incorrect when you think that I have changed my stance to pro hunter because I am playing with serg, when in reality I was one of the firsts to want the PSF nerfed about 10 games ago and I am constantly against weakening hunter ships (note the ITAC discussion), I am sure I can go on with more things but those 2 speak on behalf of themselves. As for this activity discussion you can't tell people to just dial back how they play the game because you can't keep up, Hell the SF mantra is to keep going no matter what. What has changed from previous instances? Why is it that people have to dial it back, Why can't people dial it up? Before you go on about we are on all day again it is really just one or 2 people who are on all the time, If you need logs of who comes on when in chat I will be more than willing to supply them to further cement my point. No this isn't a job but it is a hobby that some people devote more time than others to. I mean are we looking to limit how long someone can play per day because that is a ludicrous notion.

Just an fyi: saying you are not Pro Hunter and then stating that you nerfed the PSF and are against weakening hunter ships makes about as much sense as saying the French are sucessful modern day warriors. If you were not Pro hunter then you would not be against weakening hunter ships or you would at least be making suggestions of ways in which to improve the trading experience that wasn't detrimental to the traders. You have also stated that you don't like the xp loss decrease which is also a Pro Hunter stance.

IMHO we need to make things easier for the casual player otherwise this game won't last more than a couple of more years.

Sportsmanship: JJ, you claim that it was never present in the past. I disagree, you ask anyone that was present during SM days and/or the beginning of the SMR days and they will tell you that good sportsmanship was always around and your teammates called you out if you didn't practice it. I look at the game today and in some aspects it is far superior to SM days, but sadly in others such as sportsmanship, newbie training, and competitive play the game is but a shadow of its former self.

The purpose of a lower game speed is to specifically force people to be turn efficient, higher speeds negate that and also imbalance the game towards a highly active vet heavy alliance. Also, think back to the first time you had your favorite candy as a kid. Did your parents then turn around and give you another 3 bags to eat? No, and because you didn't get them, you started getting the occaisional craving for the candy. The same philosophy applies to turns, the slower the game and thus the less turns, the more addicting it tends to be. Players start to calculate when they are able to move again, they linger online in chat rooms to talk while waiting for those 10 more turns, allainces become more communicative and work as a team.

I am saying I am pro hunter GD, because I know that with how things are with connection speeds now it is harder to hunt than ever before, outside of one player. As for the sportsmanship I have played for nearly 7 years and I have seen only small instances of it occurring and mostly those were the Crusaders when they played. Honestly I played the nice guy for a long time in this game congratulating people on their fights and so forth. But after a while it gets old especially when you never got a thank you or a congrats back. As for the lower speed argument I totally disagree and I have played with many different alliances and different players who would also resoundingly disagree with your slower speed promotes more activity assertion.

[Page]

Shall I put a game up with unlimited turns and see how well that promotes activity?

[JettJackson]

Shall I put a game up with unlimited turns and see how well that promotes activity?

Page why does everything have to be an extreme value, you just mentioned compromise in the other thread... I mean 1.0 speed is clearly extreme value just like a 2.0 speed game would be. The answer lies somewhere in the middle.

[Page]

You're the one who often makes the blanket statement of more turns means more activity, when it is simply not true. Too many turns and most people cannot actually spend them and hence give up trying and so have turns but do not/can not use them, there needs to be few enough that people crave just a extra few more turns and will wait impatiently for them, the moment people think they have enough then that's too many - you need to leave them always wanting a little bit more to keep them hooked.

[Harry Krishna]

It is time it admit that smaller maps and unlimited turns has not proven to be effective in improving player interaction.

True interaction between players springs directly from playing style and strategy. I'm talking about traders vs. hunters, ship vs ship combat, builders, miners, port raiders, planet busters, alliances establishing territory and holding it against invaders, small alliances forming treaties for mutual protection against bigger enemies, teamwork. These are the interactions that make the game great. The game code, speed, and maps should support all of them in a balanced way, not favoring one over the other.

Players will nearly always play the strategies they most enjoy, regardless of the size/shape of the map. The map can be as big as possible with routes and galaxies spread dozens of sectors apart, or small as what we have seen lately and that basic player tendency won't change. Traders will still trade for cash/exp. Hunters will still find them and kill them. Alliances will try to build planets and defend the territory, attacking other alliances who are doing the same.

The biggest obstacle to player interaction in SMR is the low number of players. 100 devoted players will not give you the kind of fun you want, no matter the map or the speed. The recent push to advertise and promote the game to new players is encouraging to see, and I applaud the admins for it. Inviting new players into your team, teaching them, showing them the fun that SMR can be, and keeping them coming back is what everyone should be focused on. That is the only path forward.

[JettJackson]

You're the one who often makes the blanket statement of more turns means more activity, when it is simply not true. Too many turns and most people cannot actually spend them and hence give up trying and so have turns but do not/can not use them, there needs to be few enough that people crave just a extra few more turns and will wait impatiently for them, the moment people think they have enough then that's too many - you need to leave them always wanting a little bit more to keep them hooked.

The key then is to lower the turn cap and never have it go above 600 turns, which means that people would have to use it or lose it when it comes to turns.

[Page]

You're the one who often makes the blanket statement of more turns means more activity, when it is simply not true. Too many turns and most people cannot actually spend them and hence give up trying and so have turns but do not/can not use them, there needs to be few enough that people crave just a extra few more turns and will wait impatiently for them, the moment people think they have enough then that's too many - you need to leave them always wanting a little bit more to keep them hooked.

The key then is to lower the turn cap and never have it go above 600 turns, which means that people would have to use it or lose it when it comes to turns.

Can you at least read my post before you reply, I said people already have difficulties using up the turns they have with the current cap, keeping the speed the same whilst lowering the cap would just exacerbate the problem. Sure, people in your alliance may well be able to use up all their turns, but I'm sure we can all agree they do not represent most players and certainly not most newbies.

[Freon22]

Sure, people in your alliance may well be able to use up all their turns, but I'm sure we can all agree they do not represent most players and certainly not most newbies.

Hear here, hear here.