Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Universal News → Morale Option sucks major
oh trust they aint the only one. Northern army, Clover, me and a few others are gone too.. not like they care tho they dont even play lol..
Coolspin wrote:I returned to ic this round to play and have fun, all i can say is that im still waiting for the fun part. and sadly these new changes really takes ALL the fun out of it, there's no doubt what is the problem..
I dont have to think it trough, its an easy decision and im not going to "deal whit it", ill let undeath deal whit it while im going to leave it for some other online game..and im not alone. Its just sad.
Atm im only sticking around beeing semi-active cuz i dont want to abandon my family mid round but as soon as round is over then im out unless mods can get their finger out and make miracles happen, but whit their activity i really doubt that..bye!
hell yeah thats the spirit to our mods!! 
Guys, like KT said it will just take some time to figure out.
Yes by all means harp on all you like about how certain mods don't play any more, but sure I do trust KT's word, that actually thinking back KT has never told me anything that hasn't turned out true in the long run. Also like KT said it wasn't the mods idea and by all accounts it will just take some time to work out so I'm not sure leaving the game is the answer.
I personally encourage any vet / returning player to stay, and whilst I think Undeath could check his attitude at times people do forget for about a decade people have been complaining about farming and bigger players hitting smaller ones all the time. I foresee Undeath been nagged at from all directions no matter what is chosen.
I just think players / even some mods are frustrated by it all, but like chill your beans guys it doesn't mean it can't change in the future. I have made it perfectly clear if my new store works / does well we will run various crowd funding campaigns aimed at totally rebuilding this game, like from scratch, brand new all singing all dancing game we just need permission, and yeah if we got that permission we will try our best to make it a reality, a brand new version of IC then all of this frustration would be history.
Squirrel and other influential people have offered their support and if we did manage to rebuild this game I'd hope the vets from this version tuck places of honour in the next. Its a crazy dream, it might not work, but in my opinion its worth a try for free? We also have http://www.silenz.org/news.php back now so sure things can change, things can be fixed it just needs time.
Well I don't think leaving is the answer, try and pick a race / empire next round better suited to the conditions, try and plan your family strat a bit different and wait for change.
I've made it clear from the start that my personal opinion is that we're better off without players that have a bad attitude (if you look back they tend to be the same players that complained about the old system). I put a lot of work into this, take the time to research and post explanations of how to work with the new system, and each time am ignored. I do try to check my attitude, but the frustration has set in
Sidenote...can't express how amusing it is to have players complain about what they're losing...only to pop it into spreadsheets and find out that they're exaggerating ridiculously. My favorite was a family complaining it was costing 50% morale for each attack it's attacker was doing...when it was costing them 9% and he just wanted to complain.
Who signed up for the hc round with no moral?
None of you plugs who are bitching
Who signed up for the hc round with no moral?
None of you plugs who are bitching
Last HC round not enough people signed up, but also most of the players were inactive. If we could find a way to get everyone active in an hc round, I think that would be fun. But I'm not sure how to get that to happen. With the small player base we have, we need almost everyone to sign up and be active. And a lot of players don't seem to be interested in hc.
LG wrote:Who signed up for the hc round with no moral?
None of you plugs who are bitching
Last HC round not enough people signed up, but also most of the players were inactive. If we could find a way to get everyone active in an hc round, I think that would be fun. But I'm not sure how to get that to happen. With the small player base we have, we need almost everyone to sign up and be active. And a lot of players don't seem to be interested in hc.
They complain about not having enough morale to accomplish anything, complain about fighting people being difficult, and then don't want to play HC rounds. People don't know what they want 
Same struggle since the beginning of time. Someone will always complain. You will make one person happy but then someone else will complain. It's just a never-ending cycle of complaining about everything. Someone will always be unhappy.
Like KT said on the previous page, mods did not introduce this morale thing. Mods cannot make it disappear. What they are doing is trying to make it work for the better of the game as a whole. This current change did not work out so good, try again next round and maybe it will be better. Maybe next round will be worse. You guys who are complaining so much are leaving anyway, so what does it matter to you anymore?
I remember when players would beg and beg for a simple change and mods would have to wait weeks for Stefan to log in and ignore them. It took forever to get anything done at all, players complained. Now, developers are actively making changes to *hopefully* improve the game for the players and people are still complaining. This war is impossible to win.
Same struggle since the beginning of time. Someone will always complain. You will make one person happy but then someone else will complain. It's just a never-ending cycle of complaining about everything. Someone will always be unhappy.
Like KT said on the previous page, mods did not introduce this morale thing. Mods cannot make it disappear. What they are doing is trying to make it work for the better of the game as a whole. This current change did not work out so good, try again next round and maybe it will be better. Maybe next round will be worse. You guys who are complaining so much are leaving anyway, so what does it matter to you anymore?
I remember when players would beg and beg for a simple change and mods would have to wait weeks for Stefan to log in and ignore them. It took forever to get anything done at all, players complained. Now, developers are actively making changes to *hopefully* improve the game for the players and people are still complaining. This war is impossible to win.
You're my favorite
Are you have storm troopers at the wedding?
Least people have cheered up a bit.
Personally i think the current Supernova round is working fairly nicely with reduced planet count per system, before i was having serious issues breaking 20+ portals with full morale in a system share to be left(even when they were bigger) with a few portals left and waiting for morale while they rebuilt their fleet and pushed out my only portal out of the system. With the smaller systems i can no longer see this as being an issue. It also means you can fill your cores quicker.
I do still have one issue and thats when i am forced to fig run people, it burns morale so fast that i will be left with small amounts of morale again or being forced to make the decision to take heavy ground losses. I think a simple change of changing the morale costs to a failed and successful attack would be beneficial. Remember, especially in Supernova even if you are equal NW, once you have managed to destroy someones figs the NW gap between you can suddenly become quite large..
In regards to people not signing up to HC but complaining about morale...I am a fairly active attacker, but i am not really interested in HC with no morale costs(i know i would end up online every tick to maximise my attacks, which i do not really want to do) but i think morale existing does limit the amount of power that activity brings and is a good thing. So i dont really think the argument of just do HC is a valid response tbh.
Also i think that non aggressive ops like PI, Infilitrate, Spy on target etc should go back to the old 7 ops method. Spending morale for a simple PI is just a kick in the teeth with the additional costs for attacking.
IC death sucks =p
but seriously, I understand the issue of smaller fams or lack of players, and limited allies, so in response to that issue, why not perhaps, oh i dont know, have no allies anymore? Half the time allies break away and fight each other anyways so it isnt like the whole ally thing works perfectly
IC death sucks =p
but seriously, I understand the issue of smaller fams or lack of players, and limited allies, so in response to that issue, why not perhaps, oh i dont know, have no allies anymore? Half the time allies break away and fight each other anyways so it isnt like the whole ally thing works perfectly
Allies are not allowed this round......
Lone Tiger wrote:LG wrote:Who signed up for the hc round with no moral?
None of you plugs who are bitching
Last HC round not enough people signed up, but also most of the players were inactive. If we could find a way to get everyone active in an hc round, I think that would be fun. But I'm not sure how to get that to happen. With the small player base we have, we need almost everyone to sign up and be active. And a lot of players don't seem to be interested in hc.
They complain about not having enough morale to accomplish anything, complain about fighting people being difficult, and then don't want to play HC rounds. People don't know what they want
HC round did happen if you backed out because you were too impatient / sudden realisation your fam would get pwned so backed out of the second request for submissions then that's your own fault.
Happy Camping!
If the answer is.....
We're working on the problem, please be patient.
If that's the answer. Then I'm very very happy. I'm willing to wait. I'm ok with that.
But up until now, every single time I said that the moral system wasn't working, the response I go back was that the moral system is working, and that I'm just not playing the game correctly.
Which is it???????
Because I really think that if the answer is .... The moral system is working, and your not playing correctly. If that's the answer, then I have a right to say, No, wait. I've tried playing this new system and it isn't working. And I really think my saying that isn't some kind of bash against the mods. And it's not because I can't wait for improvement. It's because I'm being told that there isn't even a problem, when I know for a fact that there is a problem.
Not too many days ago I asked what I could do or say to convince someone that the system isn't working correctly, and the response I got back was "show us were it's not working". But now the response has changed to "why are you complaining, it's going to take time".
Have you finally acknowledged that there is a problem?
It's because I'm being told that there isn't even a problem, when I know for a fact that there is a problem.
I think the main point is that......
YES - The system does work.
NO - The system doesn't work with this many players / families.
That sure the system works, is a great idea, am really happy IC are trying new things (its about time) but that sadly at the moment we just don't have the player or family numbers to handle such a system.
I remind people that there is a huge difference between:
A) System to "Attract" new players.
B) System to "Keep" a player base that is already there.
This morale system in my opinion is more aimed at keeping a player base, that we haven't got. I mean this system would have been awesome years ago when we had loads of families, but now we don't.
In my opinion the answer is yes the system does work, bit no we don't have anywhere near the players to handle that system.
Either way I'm not sure arguing about it / getting upset / leaving the game is the answer, I don't think that is the answer.
Listos wrote:IC death sucks =p
but seriously, I understand the issue of smaller fams or lack of players, and limited allies, so in response to that issue, why not perhaps, oh i dont know, have no allies anymore? Half the time allies break away and fight each other anyways so it isnt like the whole ally thing works perfectly
Allies are not allowed this round......
See? Already putting my ideas into practice hahaha =p
"Sit down and shut up"
I'm being asked to play one boring round after another. And when I say there's a problem, I don't get... "yea, we know".... What I get told is "sit down and shut up".
I think that might be because changes are actually made but you complain about every single one... Mods are human and are trying to change the game for the better, but constantly getting bitched at for everything they do. That kind of thing eventually gets a hostile reply. Maybe try voicing your opinion but without the multiple whine posts after it? They are not going to put this round on hold to make the change that YOU want. Maybe they will try it next round. Wait and see, or don't, your choice.
I posted this explanation in another thread already, but to clarify...we know there are issues (although some of the things people complain about are functioning exactly as intended, we're just trying to find a balance) The biggest obstacles we face are that due to our low player count we can't justify having a galaxy strictly for testing, and due to the way the game was designed even if we could set up a testing galaxy with players involved there aren't many changes we can make that will only effect one galaxy. Basically what we have to do is test stuff with 3 mods to make sure it won't make the game crash...then send it live...and only then can we see what effect it will have.
Examples: This round in Starburst we added the cores & in Supernova we reduced the # of planets per system.
Making 3-4 changes at once isn't an option, since if something went wrong it would be difficult to determine exactly what change caused the issue.
The outright hostility of some of the players is a huge drain on our own morale, as we volunteer a decent amount of our time to bang our heads against a wall. Getting yelled at for not banging your head in the right place doesn't make you want to spend more time banging your head.
I think before you worry about the moral issue( which is busted) you should first fix the aesthetics of the game. I have been playing since about 2001. The lay out of the game has barely changed since then. Also the mobile version is pure crap. Its almost impossible to do anything on it. If I were a new player looking for a tick based game and saw this and tried the mobile, i would leave immediately, farming or no farming.
As for the moral issue, the current system punishes fams that grow in expo phase, no matter the activity. IF you have a good fast expo phase, and another fam doesn't, you get punished for growing to much. Its not about infra whoring its about being competitive. If I put my time and effort into growing a big and strong empire, why do i get punished for growing to fast or to good/?
Il try an analogy for this. Lets say we have two wrestlers. They both start out the same size and weight. Wrestler one goes to the gym everyday, watches his diet, works out and is soon big enough to be in the heavy weight division. Wrestler 2 works on his mechanics, puts on a little weight, but doesn't ever get as big as wrestler one. Now it is decided that they will have a match. Now wrestler two looks to not have a chance, so to make it more "fair" we tie wrestler 1s arms behind his back. Who do you think will win?
I think before you worry about the moral issue( which is busted) you should first fix the aesthetics of the game. I have been playing since about 2001. The lay out of the game has barely changed since then. Also the mobile version is pure crap. Its almost impossible to do anything on it. If I were a new player looking for a tick based game and saw this and tried the mobile, i would leave immediately, farming or no farming.
As for the moral issue, the current system punishes fams that grow in expo phase, no matter the activity. IF you have a good fast expo phase, and another fam doesn't, you get punished for growing to much. Its not about infra whoring its about being competitive. If I put my time and effort into growing a big and strong empire, why do i get punished for growing to fast or to good/?
Il try an analogy for this. Lets say we have two wrestlers. They both start out the same size and weight. Wrestler one goes to the gym everyday, watches his diet, works out and is soon big enough to be in the heavy weight division. Wrestler 2 works on his mechanics, puts on a little weight, but doesn't ever get as big as wrestler one. Now it is decided that they will have a match. Now wrestler two looks to not have a chance, so to make it more "fair" we tie wrestler 1s arms behind his back. Who do you think will win?
Just gonna leave this here
So you basically just ignored the analogy with a you tube video? Yes i know of the guy, hes still at a disadvantage, which is the entire point.
He's not at a disadvantage though! At first glance it seems he is, but in reality he's able to have the upper body strength of someone 3+ weight classes above where he wrestles and opponents are losing some pretty important points of contact for grappling. Also it amuses me to bust analogies.
Anyway! I still hold to the point that each attack by the larger family should be worth more than attacks made by the smaller family...unless you're like 1966 and have a CF banker who obviously has no defense. (9.5mil+ income and 2.5mil nw? How have you not been raided?)
One idea I'm toying with to try and even out morale issues in larger families is to increase the max morale gain per tick & increase the number of morale planets (and possibly make them visible on the map). Theoretically that would mean while families with higher planet counts would still be losing more morale, they should be gaining more morale per tick. So it should still be difficult to farm someone that's significantly smaller than you, but if you're being attacked by an active attacker in a smaller family hopefully your attackers would be able to fight them off better.
Other possibilities:
- If family A attacks family B, family B loses less morale to attack family A for X amount of ticks. (this has been tossed around a lot but is difficult to implement)
- If a planet was taken within X number of ticks, it costs reduced morale to retake it.
- We could try to adjust values so that individual morale is more important, which would theoretically increase morale lost by attackers in small families while not causing a big difference in morale lost by attackers in larger families... This might actually be a good solution...we'd have to play with the figures a bit but...hrm...
Imperial Forum → Universal News → Morale Option sucks major
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.