Round Length

[Cody]

I know there is always talk about how long the round is and lately how it seems the round is won within the first couple weeks and then after there is usually some sort of backstabbing that takes place and pisses people off, and I'm sure there has been a discussion on this at one point or another, but wouldn't it make a bit of sense to shorten the rounds a bit? I'm not talking about anything drastic, but maybe at least a couple weeks or so. I mean how much could it hurt? If anything it might keep the player base up at least a tad bit...

But like i said I'm sure there has been discussions about it in the past and I'm not exactly the most experienced player around so i might be thinking very out of place

 

[Alcibiades]

The rounds just drag ON AND ON AND ON. Cut 'em down.

 

[Souls]

Pretty sure Azzer keeps rounds at this length because it's optimal for income, or something. It's a business first, after all. (I think)

 

[Melnibone]

Any less time and the sale of PU's would drop as many players start a week or 2 into the round also the longer the round continues the larger the top players get increasing the amount of game cash available to buy

Both of these factors are the reasons why previous suggestions like this have failed unfortuantely

 

[timtadams]

P-units come around bout two weeks into round. Round goes for ten weeks

So halve the round, and halve the cost of the P-units.

Ive for a long time considered shorter rounds, but dont know why i never suggested it

Maybe 6 week round and P-units 3 credits (or whateva theyre called)

Just my 2c

 

[Dax]

P-units come around bout two weeks into round. Round goes for ten weeks

So halve the round, and halve the cost of the P-units.

Ive for a long time considered shorter rounds, but dont know why i never suggested it

Maybe 6 week round and P-units 3 credits (or whateva theyre called)

Just my 2c

It's up to the playerbase to make rounds more exciting, not Azzer. He can implement a plethora of wondrous ideas, but ultimately it requires the playerbase to make the most of them. It would obviously be nice to see more FTW style alliances, and I always hold my breath that the next round may see that happening.
You can't tell people that enjoy FTW style play are to blame, because they aren't. There simply is not a good enough spread of both types of player anymore to make it work.
I've seen alot more returning rather than leaving recently, which may prove to be a big positive step. Fingers crossed.

 

[Iamsmart]

Sadly I have the exact opposite feeling. It's up to Azzer to make rounds more exciting, not us. We only play with the tools handed to us, he determines what we have, and he has to infer what we'll do with them and plan accordingly.

 

[Zaheen]

That's really wrong Iamsmart, it's up to the players.

It always has been.

 

[Iamsmart]

I have a feeling it would be quite difficult to find a game that's like that and actually works. Players play to have fun. Generally having fun is winning. I do whatever is best for myself and my friends/alliance in terms of how I play. I repeat attack, I attack at 30%, I bash alliances for land, I attack the same target 1000x until I kill them. If the game mechanics say I can do it, I don't think there is anything wrong with it (except a few distinct exceptions such as AR triggering, spying, shipjumping etc.)

If Azzer doesn't want us to do something he needs to implement game mechanics to counter it. If he wants us to do something he needs to do something to encourage doing it or discourage not doing it. It's our job to play, it's his job to design.

 

[Zaheen]

I don't see a problem with AR triggering, if it's not mutual.

If I know my solo friend is sleeping, and I can save his ass by triggering someone's attack, I would? Or if I've been waiting 2 days for a solo's AR Mod to lower, and somebody keeps sending a few LET at him to mod him to 90% again I'll trigger it so I can properly do the job...

The abuse got out of hand, and a mechanic is in place to TRY and prevent it, but it won't ever prevent it. That's just to prevent solo groups forming, what's stopping an allied member triggering on a soloist?

It's just different views and beliefs, and playstyles. You obviously would go out on a limb to win this game, but winning isn't about being rank 1 for me.

If I found myself up there by doing what I do, then I'd probably find a way to bash myself from there, and not give somebody else the satisfaction, that's my fun.

 

[webvictim]

I don't see a problem with AR triggering, if it's not mutual.

If I know my solo friend is sleeping, and I can save his ass by triggering someone's attack, I would?

So that'd be, uh, mutual AR triggering then. Good one.

 

[Iamsmart]

No it's not. Nor is it explicitly illegal as long as he doesn't ask for it. But it's lame in my (and many others) opinion. It's one of the few things you can specifically pinpoint that it's not supposed to be allowed but it's near impossible to code a fix to it, and it's either leave it flawed, completely rework solo's, or remove solo's.

(not that AR triggering was at all important to the point in my previous post)

 

[Ranzou]

I agree with Iamsmart. You can't blame the existing players. The problem is a lack of new players.

How appropriate the length of rounds and alliance sizes are depend on the number of players in the game. More players = problem sorted.

Only way to get more players would be to redesign completely the whole game. That probably ain't gonna happen.

Having variable alliance sizes and round length wrt to the number of players is the next best thing.

 

[Zaheen]

So that'd be, uh, mutual AR triggering then. Good one.

It's only mutual if he asks for it, how can it be mutual if he's sleeping?

It's something I would have done without blinking an eye lid in the past, but it's probably not something I would do now with all the changes implement to prevent such things.

Depends how much I hated the person attacking, heh.

-----

People have even triggered on my ID to save me a few units after I've taken a massive hit first tick, I didn't ask for it? Does that mean it's mutual? It's just people using game mechanics to save a friend, I don't see anything wrong with it. I think waking someone up in their sleep is much worse.

 

[atsanjose]

Any less time and the sale of PU's would drop as many players start a week or 2 into the round also the longer the round continues the larger the top players get increasing the amount of game cash available to buy

Both of these factors are the reasons why previous suggestions like this have failed unfortuantely

this

 

[Dark_Angel]

The rounds just drag ON AND ON AND ON. Cut 'em down.

This.


We don't have enough players to sustain the amount of "action" required for the current round length.

Long, drawn out rounds do nothing for the game imo, in fact if anything its having a really negative impact.

 

[willymchilybily]

this is an unprovable argument. saying shorter rounds make it more interesting increases the player base increasing azzer revenue.

or you could say lenghty round increases credits that can be bought and put to funds as gamecash. so more money from fewer customers.
in terms of business. if something isnt doing well you dont lower the price to expect more sales. because you have that delay period and increased sales wont kick in infact you should increase the price. so keeping it how it is imo will be more profitable for azzer.

shortening it may improve gameplay to some extent for some people that argue the round is decided too quickly. but thats only at the top. ranks 10 -5 was fought for tooth and nail until round end. so its not a problem except at higher levels. if you want to win and play for the win. then you do win. and want more action.... then id say maybe the fault is actually yours for picking the best of the best and bandding together.

the funnest round in the history of bush iirc. and may need correcting on these points happened about the time angela/sordes or what ever bunch it was split from thier alligance too eachother, i was informed sordes did the first divide to add more fun and it worked, and you had competititon and fighting among them for the following 5 rounds irc, viruse disease pathosis, core, many more joined to the point where black wolf had a 5winged allaince? it keeps people interested. or so im lead to believe. also the most growth in bushtarion was seen in this time.

i agree its not on the player base to make the game fun. but it is on them not to ruin other peoples fun. and not complain if they win the round after the first week because there is a lack of competition. if u want more competition fight eachother. you mainly get better at something by going against a better opponent. i think the reason for the growth was new people joined black wolf and won then another new set whilst he had a wing or two. and more and more people joined and could actually win. not many new people play for anythign but to win. and that environment allowed it. its not like azzer can do that unless he makes people play in random allainces and not with friends. so by giving you the choice. you also have the power and responsibility too. not azzer. so catch 22 imo

 

[Alcibiades]

Any less time and the sale of PU's would drop as many players start a week or 2 into the round also the longer the round continues the larger the top players get increasing the amount of game cash available to buy

Both of these factors are the reasons why previous suggestions like this have failed unfortuantely

this

This is true; however I think it's time for a re-evaluation. Previously the state of the game has not been as dire as this. We're down to a couple hundred players and the playerbase has shrunk to such a small core that they cannot support the length of a 76 day round. It's simply not doable any longer. There are evidently less players around than there have been in the past and they are probably not taking up all the slack for the players that are gone. I can't see how maintaining this length of round is a good thing either for the game's players or the game's revenues. You're either losing players to round burnout/boredom/repeated bashing etc; or you have the possibility of generating more interest and availability in the game since people will hopefully be able to commit to a shorter length of time. I know that I have had to back out of alliance offers and whatnot before simply because i couldn't commit to 76 days of activity. That's a long time. Too long.

And we're not saying hack the round time in half or anything that drastic. But lopping off a week or two might be a good thing to consider doing. We obviously don't want to make it too short, but at this stage it is most definitely still too long.

Since the evolution of game mechanics or player attitude is unlikely to happen anytime soon to make rounds more competitive and and thus more interesting, despite their length, I feel like the only option now is to have an admin induced shortening of the round. I am of the opinion that staying this course will prove tragic in the long run and that at least trying something new, and shorter rounds could have positive consequences. It certainly can't make anything worse.

Edit: As for gamecash, surely a little tweaking of the system to make the ratio to the top ranks still profitable shouldn't be terribly difficult imo. Although I do admit ignorance in the area.

shortening it may improve gameplay to some extent for some people that argue the round is decided too quickly. but thats only at the top. ranks 10 -5 was fought for tooth and nail until round end. so its not a problem except at higher levels. if you want to win and play for the win. then you do win. and want more action.... then id say maybe the fault is actually yours for picking the best of the best and bandding together.

I fundamentally disagree with what you have to say here. In my opinion, shortening the round will improve gameplay for everyone, from the highest ranked alliance, to the very lowest. I don't think shortening the round is likely to change the speed with which a round is decided; since that requires a lot more changes than a shorter round. However, what is important about shorter rounds is that they reduce the length of time that the entire round is mostly stagnated.

Sure, ranks 5-10 might still be jockeying for some position as they tend to do all round long, but this isn't something that they necessarily need to be doing imo. You can do this just as easily in a next round; which has the advantages of a new group, a new route, and new units. I don't see negatives here. Long rounds is a definite problem for all ranks. As you pointed out rank 1 gets bored, rank 2 gets bashed, as does rank 3. Then ranks 2 and 3 bash everyone below them, which triggers the well known phenomenon of "**** runs downhill". The longer the rounds go on, the longer the pointless bashing can continue, when instead we could be congratulating each other on a good round, then go into another one to fight it all over again!

I'm not disagreeing with your assessment that the boredom is rank 1 is solely the responsibility of rank 1, but I don't think that is relevant at all to the discussion of round length.

 

[Dimitar]

It's just people using game mechanics to save a friend, I don't see anything wrong with it.

Solos have AR mode and pnaps to help them survive, if the attacker didn't trigger and managed to kill the target - fair play to him. Why abuse the AR mode and trigger on purpose? I know I haven't done it in my many solo rounds, nor will I ever do it. The abuse of the AR can mean that you gain a huge amount of AR mode (after dying first tick) but not losing any acres because someone sent one hippy for the middle tick. This allows you to landwhore your way into the top 20 or so. Doesn't seem very fair, does it?

You're right in saying that it's a part of the mechanics, but it only is because Azzer can't find a way to stop it for good. He did try to do fix it (you now lose AR mode/honour/fame if you constantly trigger on other's ticks) but I don't think that's good enough.

Anyway, back on topic... I have no idea what the topic is. Carry on.

 

[Zaheen]

I think I'm being misunderstood here. I was just trying to explain to you guys that's it's not cheating, it's not breaking rules - thus, there is nothing wrong with it.

I admit that's it's not ethical and moral to do that, but if I'm tucked away in bed, and someone else I know does it on me without me asking or knowing, it's not my fault is it?

Back on topic, there is a possible solution to make the rounds more fun for everybody - but I've said it 100 times, and once again you're all going to start flaming and spamming and comparing your **** sizes with each other now.

This game isn't about winning, with the minority bunch of no life contactable prats who ruin the round every single round, similar players suggesting that the rounds need to be shortened...why? So that you can just do it over and over again even more times per year? They have already KILLED the playerbase with their bullshit gaming skills, there is no need to let them kill it even faster.

[enter flames here, but to be honest I don't really give a damn]

In order to make the game more fun, all that needs is more rank 1 alliance splits (as shown this round). If every alliance played for fun like in the early rounds, people wouldn't take desperate measures to become rank 1. They would continue to have fun themselves without caring who is rank 1, knowing that they had fun getting there without CHEATING/CALLING UP OFFLINERS YOU NOOBS, and continue playing for fun. But seriously, what is with you people? This is a bloody game, it's not real life. You guys seriously need to get a life, and if it was a good life you would not be playing this way.

This round wasn't a very good example, although there were lots of splits making it more fun than usual - too bad about the scorequeening, but that's purely down the leadership.

Who was it? IceOfFire? Don't join him this round, just kick/rape him endlessly this round until he quits the game, and any other leader who plays this way.

Problem solved. Goodbye, thank you come again. LOVE YOU LONG TIME.

Quickly close the thread now! [just in case you MISSED it, that was in fact a joke] nfire: