Topic: Is it just me or are we supposed to have more alliance pilots?

[FPF-DieHard]

First...it was anology...

Second...when people SAY they will play...and then dont show up...a promise IS broken....whatever the game...

Nobody said they would play and didn't show up.  Most have simply politely walked away in sillence.

[Kroma BaSyl]

It's like having 4 of your friends promise to play B-ball with you against 5 other guys...

Only 2 of those guys drive in the parking lot....see who your playing...and bail out on you...

In game terms ,we would call that a forfiet....in war terms we call it desertion.


In your anology...

You should address you friends inablity to keep a promise to play B-ball ,rather than berate the other guys for showing up with 5 players like they said they would...

You seem to be under the impression that some promise was broken. I know of no promises having ever been been made.

I personnelly care less about whether my team wins or loses but I know that if there isn't at least the semblance of a fair and balanced game then everyone loses in the quest to have a little fun. Forfiets suck, for all that enjoy the game play more than the bragging rights.

First...it was anology...

Second...when people SAY they will play...and then dont show up...a promise IS broken....whatever the game...

I understand it was an analogy, just not one that is pertinent to this situation, as I am unaware of anyone having said they were going to play that hasn't.

[KAT J'inn]

This is quickly become purely academic.

There are two questions here.

1)   Should something be done to address a player number imbalance on a server or not?

My answer:   Yes.  A ciompetitive server is more fun for all.

2)  If answer to question #2 is yes, what is the solution . . .


My Answer:

Several types of approaches:

1)    Player number balance enforcement method

This means sign ups; or server side account restrictions; or limits on player numbers; etc.   Personally I don't like it because it requires forcing players to play a certain race or at time not to play at all.

2)     Player transfer.

The Wild Geese for example.     I'm not a fan of this becuase it ruins the feeling of a team.   That kinda takes the fun out of it for me.

3)     Post server adjustment.

I like the idea of using the difference in missions run to adjust the VCs points.   A simple way would be to adjust the non PvP VC points earned at the end of the game on an equal ratio with the difference in missions run.

This also has the effect of helping out races that run slower missions BTW.

[KBFLordKrueg]

You know for the past 2-3 days and nights, the Alliance numbers have VASTLY improved. In fact the Coalition has ususally been outnumbered heavily. Last night it was 2 to 1 in favor of the Alliance for the entire 5-6 hrs I was on. The Alliance has also been steadily making gains on the map.
I just don't see the numbers thing as still being an issue. Obviously, the distress calls have been heard and responded to. I'm quite surprised it's even still being griped about.
A little organization and motivation goes a long way, doesn't it?

[KAT J'inn]

You know for the past 2-3 days and nights, the Alliance numbers have VASTLY improved. In fact the Coalition has ususally been outnumbered heavily. Last night it was 2 to 1 in favor of the Alliance for the entire 5-6 hrs I was on. The Alliance has also been steadily making gains on the map.
I just don't see the numbers thing as still being an issue. Obviously, the distress calls have been heard and responded to. I'm quite surprised it's even still being griped about.
A little organization and motivation goes a long way, doesn't it?

Yeah.  people tend to see a few days of imbalance and panic prematurely.  Or worse, quit, which just aggravates the issue.

The mission run balancing idea (which won't be done for GW3) is still a good idea because if the numbers are balanced the the adjustment factor will be negligible.  Plus, I really like the idea of helping out the plasma races with this idea.

[FPF-DieHard]

You know for the past 2-3 days and nights, the Alliance numbers have VASTLY improved. In fact the Coalition has ususally been outnumbered heavily. Last night it was 2 to 1 in favor of the Alliance for the entire 5-6 hrs I was on. The Alliance has also been steadily making gains on the map.
I just don't see the numbers thing as still being an issue. Obviously, the distress calls have been heard and responded to. I'm quite surprised it's even still being griped about.
A little organization and motivation goes a long way, doesn't it?

We're speaking for future servers so those issue goes away.  GW3 will should not have ANY changes to it's VC structure.

[Kroma BaSyl]

You know for the past 2-3 days and nights, the Alliance numbers have VASTLY improved. In fact the Coalition has ususally been outnumbered heavily. Last night it was 2 to 1 in favor of the Alliance for the entire 5-6 hrs I was on. The Alliance has also been steadily making gains on the map.
I just don't see the numbers thing as still being an issue. Obviously, the distress calls have been heard and responded to. I'm quite surprised it's even still being griped about.
A little organization and motivation goes a long way, doesn't it?

While this is true, it still doesn't account for the fact that when the total missions run is analysed post server it always seems to come down to the team that ran the most missions won, and in most analysts I have seen the mission imbalance was not negligable. No one is suggesting that a VC balancing method be introduced mid server, that would be utter fauly. We are simply trying to find a way to make numbers issues a thing of the past and never have to have servers effectively end prematurely just because circumstances and the desire to fly the race you enjoy lead to an imbalanced server. That way a fair and level playing field can be maintained regardless of those circumstances allowing more fun to be had as by all. I have played on both sides of this issue, and have personnelly found that it sucks just as much when my team is the one with the numbers as it does when they are the ones at a disadvantage. In fact, I would argue that it is even worse to be on the "advantaged" side as it makes it so much hard to get in a good fight. On SGO I actually switch to Coalition when it became to hard to locate Coalition pilots to mix it up with and had a blast hunting the hoards of Alliance targets, even though my switching sides had luittle to no effect on the greater campaign outcome, other than giving all those Alliance pilots something to shoot at. ;-)

[Mazeppa]

This is quickly become purely academic.

There are two questions here.

1)   Should something be done to address a player number imbalance on a server or not?

My answer:   Yes.  A ciompetitive server is more fun for all.

2)  If answer to question #2 is yes, what is the solution . . .

Look, have you seen the game play the last few days?  The current situation is competitive.  The Alliance and the Coalition are deeply involved in an ebb and flow.  

It looks like the Alliance has fixed their numbers problem, and there is a lot of action going on at the front lines.

The major gameplay problem is that the first few days the Coalition had a really good. focused plan, a really strong turnout, and the Alliance was either unable or unwilling to react to what we were doing.  And their turnout was less than usual.  So we took the Mirak planets.  I presume that action had a major and long-term effect on the Mirak shipyard.  Many of us have wondered what the Alliance was doing down by 18, 18 as we took the Mirak planets, since we saw no real purpose in that.  Keep in mind that we had to take planet assaults and a Federation Frigate could run several  quick patrols under us, so it would have been easy to keep those planets.  

Also, we have been very, very alert to any attempts by Alliance pilots try and win cheap hexes by signing on to play AI instead of us during the wee hours.  Many Coalition Pilots were quite peeved at the "Father's Day Stunt", and "Remember Father's Day" is now something of a Coalition mantra.  

So I would argue that the Alliance is in the position they are in right now due to a failure to respond to our rather brutal move against the Mirak in the first few days, and our response to Alliance tactics we have seen on previous servers.   We cannot help turnout.  Based on current Alliance numbers, the server looks competitive.  Maybe the SSFC absence is a factor, but the Alliance can still field a major force.  

In RDSL, when we were being out-missioned, our leaders started beating the bushes and trying to get our player base energized.  Maybe the Alliance has done the same thing for this server.  Based on the current situation, can they win?  I dunno.  But they can sure have a blast trying, and if they at least draw a line and hold fast, they can claim a moral victory.  There is a LOT of good gameplay lest in GW3.

The real question is do we have a long term problem with our player base?  I think so, and intend to open a thread to discuss possible solutions after the server.  I've been playing this game since 1999.  I don't play any other game to any real extent.  I cannot imagine playing any other game right now.  If this game goes away, I cannot imagine a game exciting me like this one does.  

The long-term solution---that is, being in a position where we play this game for the next few years-- is something we need to work toward as a community.  In order to do that, we will need to put away egos and realize that there will be no Dynaverse unless we get rid of all our little agendas, learn to trust each other, and find ways to keep this game going.  I think there is a real solution out there, but we have some hard work ahead of us.  

[FPF-DieHard]

The real question is do we have a long term problem with our player base?  I think so, and intend to open a thread to discuss possible solutions after the server.  I've been playing this game since 1999.  I don't play any other game to any real extent.  I cannot imagine playing any other game right now.  If this game goes away, I cannot imagine a game exciting me like this one does.  

The long-term solution---that is, being in a position where we play this game for the next few years-- is something we need to work toward as a community.  In order to do that, we will need to put away egos and realize that there will be no Dynaverse unless we get rid of all our little agendas, learn to trust each other, and find ways to keep this game going.  I think there is a real solution out there, but we have some hard work ahead of us.  

  + karma for you

[Kroma BaSyl]

Look, have you seen the game play the last few days?  The current situation is competitive.  The Alliance and the Coalition are deeply involved in an ebb and flow. 

It looks like the Alliance has fixed their numbers problem, and there is a lot of action going on at the front lines.

I agree. It has been fun and I am not really worried anymore about this one having the fun taken out of it anymore do to numbers imbalances.

The major gameplay problem is that the first few days the Coalition had a really good. focused plan, a really strong turnout, and the Alliance was either unable or unwilling to react to what we were doing.  And their turnout was less than usual.  So we took the Mirak planets.

Very well executed too.

I presume that action had a major and long-term effect on the Mirak shipyard. 

Not in the least as far as I can tell. Have never had to wait more than a cycle to get the ship I wanted to fly, and I have tried to fly them all.

Many of us have wondered what the Alliance was doing down by 18, 18 as we took the Mirak planets, since we saw no real purpose in that.  Keep in mind that we had to take planet assaults and a Federation Frigate could run several  quick patrols under us, so it would have been easy to keep those planets. 

A decision was made (and a bit of a gamble) that it would serve us better to go after the uncontested neutral VCs while the getting was good, when it appeared that defending the Mirak space was a losing effort. The gamble was and is that the Mirak could always reclaim it later if the numbers balanced out later. Personnelly I was against leaving it undefended, but was willing to go along with the collective decision.

Also, we have been very, very alert to any attempts by Alliance pilots try and win cheap hexes by signing on to play AI instead of us during the wee hours. 
 

This is were you completely lose me Zeppa. I fail to see why you think it necessary to demean and ascribe to sinister motives every action that your opponents take. No one that I know of has attempted to deliberately signs in at odd hours so that they can  "win cheap hexes by signing on to play the AI".  The guys that I know are playing during the odd hours do so because that is when there schedule dictates they can play, and for no other nefarious reasons. Sad that you continue to harbor such misconstrued and ill feeling to the folks you play this game with though.

Many Coalition Pilots were quite peeved at the "Father's Day Stunt", and "Remember Father's Day" is now something of a Coalition mantra. 

So let me get this straight, you think it is good planning and organization when the Coalition has their act together and makes a big push with numbers and a plan of attack during the opening move a server, but is a cheap "stunt" when the Allaince did the same thing durning the closing moves of a server. Clearly you are letting your one sided prespective color your impressions of these two largely identical planning and organizational achievements. How unfortunate that you must always ascribe your opponents accomplishments as cheap and unfair while your own are always noble and inspired. It is no wonder there are so many miscommunications and so much bad blood when people act like this. I don't mean to just pick on you Zeppa either, as I have seen the same types of rationalization come from the Alliance camp as well, it's just sad.

 Maybe the Alliance has done the same thing for this server.  Based on the current situation, can they win?  I dunno.

And I don't care, it is balanced enough for me that it is fun to play and that is all that really matters. But it could have very easily gone the other way, leaving you with nothing to do but take cheap hexes against the AI, which you seem to have a great deal of distain for. Maybe you should be thanking the Alliance players that stuck it out and helped bring the numbers back to a more even balance as opposed to demeaning their tactics, pointing out their failures, and patting yourself on the back. It's a lot harder to keep up moral and get players to show up to play after the imbalance is established than it is to do the initial recruiting pre-server. Thus I would suggest you take a more positive and supportive tone, and maybe even thank the folks that have given you a more competitive server to play on, as opposed to deriding them. I think all our collective fun would be greatly enhanced if more people from both sides practiced a little more of that.

 But they can sure have a blast trying, and if they at least draw a line and hold fast, they can claim a moral victory.  There is a LOT of good gameplay lest in GW3.

I for one intend to.

The real question is do we have a long term problem with our player base?  I think so, and intend to open a thread to discuss possible solutions after the server.  I've been playing this game since 1999.  I don't play any other game to any real extent.  I cannot imagine playing any other game right now.  If this game goes away, I cannot imagine a game exciting me like this one does. 

The long-term solution---that is, being in a position where we play this game for the next few years-- is something we need to work toward as a community.  In order to do that, we will need to put away egos and realize that there will be no Dynaverse unless we get rid of all our little agendas, learn to trust each other, and find ways to keep this game going.  I think there is a real solution out there, but we have some hard work ahead of us. 

I am in complete agreement here, and feel much the same about the game as you do. But would point out that is all we are doing here. No one is suggesting a change mid server. We are just discussing it now because the issues are fresh in our minds and some of us are stuck at work and can't get on the server.

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

You know for the past 2-3 days and nights, the Alliance numbers have VASTLY improved. In fact the Coalition has ususally been outnumbered heavily. Last night it was 2 to 1 in favor of the Alliance for the entire 5-6 hrs I was on. The Alliance has also been steadily making gains on the map.
I just don't see the numbers thing as still being an issue. Obviously, the distress calls have been heard and responded to. I'm quite surprised it's even still being griped about.
A little organization and motivation goes a long way, doesn't it?

Which just means my post had the desired effect.

Getting some people off their arses and back on the server.

[Mazeppa]

Kroma, I do not see how you can keep all those quotes in order on this wee little message screen.  I will try and do the same, but no promises. 

Also, we have been very, very alert to any attempts by Alliance pilots try and win cheap hexes by signing on to play AI instead of us during the wee hours. 
 

This is were you completely lose me Zeppa. I fail to see why you think it necessary to demean and ascribe to sinister motives every action that your opponents take. No one that I know of has attempted to deliberately signs in at odd hours so that they can  "win cheap hexes by signing on to play the AI".  The guys that I know are playing during the odd hours do so because that is when there schedule dictates they can play, and for no other nefarious reasons. Sad that you continue to harbor such misconstrued and ill feeling to the folks you play this game with though.

Well, I am certainly not trying to demean anybody, I was just addressing what I thought was a standard Federation/Alliance tactic.  Kroma, did you play RDSL?  Do not remember.  During RDSL, I observed that during odd hours, a large group of players would log on, accomplish an objective, and log off.  I even commented on this at the time in a post (probably on the old Taldren Forums) in which I called this tactic "The Surge".  I do not remember ANYBODY denying that they were doing this, so I filed it away as something we would have to be alert for in the future.  (I suppose you could say that it is hard to deny you are NOT doing something, but I would have expected somebody to say they were not doing this.  Or maybe at the time they wanted to encourage our paranoia )
I saw this more in GW2, especially the Father's Day thing.  Maybe you are not seeing this tactic on this server, but it sure looked like it was something the Alliance did in the past, so I do not want to see us nailed with a similar tactic again.  Maybe we should cancel our planned 3AM operation Wednesday morning. 

Many Coalition Pilots were quite peeved at the "Father's Day Stunt", and "Remember Father's Day" is now something of a Coalition mantra. 

So let me get this straight, you think it is good planning and organization when the Coalition has their act together and makes a big push with numbers and a plan of attack during the opening move a server, but is a cheap "stunt" when the Allaince did the same thing durning the closing moves of a server. Clearly you are letting your one sided prespective color your impressions of these two largely identical planning and organizational achievements. How unfortunate that you must always ascribe your opponents accomplishments as cheap and unfair while your own are always noble and inspired. It is no wonder there are so many miscommunications and so much bad blood when people act like this. I don't mean to just pick on you Zeppa either, as I have seen the same types of rationalization come from the Alliance camp as well, it's just sad.

Kroma, I am surprised you do not see a distinction between the two.  Here is the distinction.  The Coalition made their move at the BEGINNING of the server, when traditionally there are a lot of players on.  Our operation was going to take place no matter what kind of opposition we faced.  It was in the open, and we were ready to take on all comers to accomplish our mission.  Also, there was PLENTY of time for the Alliance to stop us, even when we took those planets.  There was no automatic score when we took those planets.

The Father's Day Operation was a different matter.  A LOT of the frustration of that operation was due to the server going down RIGHT BEFORE THE OPERATION WAS TO TAKE PLACE, and most of the Coalition went to bed, not knowing when the server was going to come up.  When the server came up, the alliance came on in great number, and began hitting hexes where there was no human opposition. 

Some of us suspected skullduggery in the timing of the server outage right before the operation was to kick off.  I have since come to the conclusion that it was not a sinister act, just one of those Fateful Things That Happen at a Critical Moment in Dynaverse History. I actually regret my suspicions.  But understand that that outage did indeed contribute to the success of the operation. 

Keep in mind that the Alliance only had to make CONTACT with the Federation and screencap it.  They did this after a bitter fight with the few pilots online.  They received a whole kit and kaboodle of VP's for the deed.  Even though the server end was quite a while away, and there was no remedy, even if a hundred Coalition pilots logged on and retook each and every hex.  In retrospect, we should have guarded for this possibility, but I am not sure what we could have done to defend against it, except prepare a phone tree.

 So, yes, we are now mindful of these kind of tactics. 

[FPF-DieHard]

Keep in mind that the Alliance only had to make CONTACT with the Federation and screencap it.  They did this after a bitter fight with the few pilots online.  They received a whole kit and kaboodle of VP's for the deed.  Even though the server end was quite a while away, and there was no remedy, even if a hundred Coalition pilots logged on and retook each and every hex.  In retrospect, we should have guarded for this possibility, but I am not sure what we could have done to defend against it, except prepare a phone tree.

 So, yes, we are now mindful of these kind of tactics. 

yeah, you are right.  These 76 VCs were bullsh*t.  Blame J'inn   

We are all guilty of thinking the worst of each other.  99% of the time, nothing is sinister on either side. 

I just need to learn to control my temper and not fly off the handle right away.

[KAT J'inn]

Et Tu?  Die Hard!!??



HEY!!!   Whadday expect!!   Perfection??   Here I am working my little bitty fingers to the bone making a D2 for you guys.  <sniff>  I basically quit working, eating, getting manicures, EVERYTHING IMPORTANT!!  Just so my fellow D2ers could have a happy time.  <sniff>

And what do I get.   PICK PICK PICK!!!!

Did anyone say "Gosh J'inn that looks stupid"  BEFORE IT STARTED.

BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE!!!!


Oh no!!  It's just Monday morning quarterback city here.  <sniff> 

I have feelings <sniff>   Don't you people care?  <sniff>

<looks up to see if anyone is buying it>


WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!   I got stress.

Pick pick pick!  That's all I get!    It's just like that time when I was in law school and I got caught cheating.  Bitch bitch bitch.

Where is the love??

<sniff>

[Mazeppa]

Keep in mind that the Alliance only had to make CONTACT with the Federation and screencap it.  They did this after a bitter fight with the few pilots online.  They received a whole kit and kaboodle of VP's for the deed.  Even though the server end was quite a while away, and there was no remedy, even if a hundred Coalition pilots logged on and retook each and every hex.  In retrospect, we should have guarded for this possibility, but I am not sure what we could have done to defend against it, except prepare a phone tree.

 So, yes, we are now mindful of these kind of tactics. 

yeah, you are right.  These 76 VCs were bullsh*t.  Blame J'inn   

We are all guilty of thinking the worst of each other.  99% of the time, nothing is sinister on either side. 

I just need to learn to control my temper and not fly off the handle right away.

I find it hard to Blame J'inn on this one.  I think he saw this kind of scenario in in some Starfleet Battles or Federation and Empire book or magazine, and thought it would be cool to add.  Nobody (Except some inspired wag with the Alliance/Hydrans) thought that condition would be attempted.  The fateful error with the addition was that in SFB or F&E you have all the players at the game shop while the Hydrans try and make their run, and here you have a situation where some players went back to the game shop after hours.

[FPF-DieHard]

Et Tu?  Die Hard!!??



HEY!!!   Whadday expect!!   Perfection??   Here I am working my little bitty fingers to the bone making a D2 for you guys.  <sniff>  I basically quit working, eating, getting manicures, EVERYTHING IMPORTANT!!  Just so my fellow D2ers could have a happy time.  <sniff>

And what do I get.   PICK PICK PICK!!!!

Did anyone say "Gosh J'inn that looks stupid"  BEFORE IT STARTED.

BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE!!!!


Oh no!!  It's just Monday morning quarterback city here.  <sniff> 

I have feelings <sniff>   Don't you people care?  <sniff>

<looks up to see if anyone is buying it>


WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!   I got stress.

Pick pick pick!  That's all I get!    It's just like that time when I was in law school and I got caught cheating.  Bitch bitch bitch.

Where is the love??

<sniff>

you had to tell them about the baby-sitting . . .   

[KAT J'inn]

I find it hard to Blame J'inn on this one.

<runs up to Mazeppa and licks him right on the face>

SLURP!!!

Excuse the tuna breath.  I had a snack.

<sticks tongue out at Die Hard>


Thhhpth!

[Mazeppa]

Et Tu?  Die Hard!!??



HEY!!!   Whadday expect!!   Perfection??   Here I am working my little bitty fingers to the bone making a D2 for you guys.  <sniff>  I basically quit working, eating, getting manicures, EVERYTHING IMPORTANT!!  Just so my fellow D2ers could have a happy time.  <sniff>

And what do I get.   PICK PICK PICK!!!!

Did anyone say "Gosh J'inn that looks stupid"  BEFORE IT STARTED.

BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE!!!!


Oh no!!  It's just Monday morning quarterback city here.  <sniff> 

I have feelings <sniff>   Don't you people care?  <sniff>

<looks up to see if anyone is buying it>


WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!   I got stress.

Pick pick pick!  That's all I get!    It's just like that time when I was in law school and I got caught cheating.  Bitch bitch bitch.

Where is the love??

<sniff>

See my post above if you are looking for positive thought directed at you.  

Now...

Recently I posted a question about my monthly fees for playing on the GW series.  I have since received several PM's  asking "What Fees?".

So Who else is paying to play?  Just me?  The web site SAID "A Play For Pay Server"!

I need an answer from you on this issue, buddy.

[FPF-DieHard]

I find it hard to Blame J'inn on this one.  I think he saw this kind of scenario in in some Starfleet Battles or Federation and Empire book or magazine, and thought it would be cool to add.  Nobody (Except some inspired wag with the Alliance/Hydrans) thought that condition would be attempted.  The fateful error with the addition was that in SFB or F&E you have all the players at the game shop while the Hydrans try and make their run, and here you have a situation where some players went back to the game shop after hours.

yup, the point is there was nothing malicious involved in it, just a mistake made in planning.

Hindsight being 20/20, the Alliance should have had to have held LOS for a certain amount of time for that to count.

[KBF-WillWeasel]

A decision was made (and a bit of a gamble) that it would serve us better to go after the uncontested neutral VCs while the getting was good, when it appeared that defending the Mirak space was a losing effort.

Neutral VC's? I am not aware of any neutral planets having VC's, Build points yes. VC's no.