View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon May 27, 2019 4:27 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 planets 
Author Message

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:19 am
Posts: 846
Post planets
i would like to suggest those planets that have 4 mawks used on them be allowed to invade by players. if player has been banned. as it is already cloak and defense is reduced when player is inactive.only making this suggestion since allot of players have been banned and they had a bunch of planets that are being scanned by many people but they can not invade the planet since it has 4 mawks on it that prevents them from invading


Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:58 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:09 am
Posts: 3253
Post Re: planets
invincible means invincible.

_________________
Rank 2734 Mylarai Explorer 100% DCR r385-r2200 GL Marauder #26
_____________Image
PvP leaderboards: 61353 raids: #1; 61683 hacks: #1; 32649 kills: #2;


Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:02 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:36 pm
Posts: 267
Post Re: planets
senatorhung wrote:
invincible means invincible.


Get a rope.


Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:11 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:42 am
Posts: 1070
Post Re: planets
Yeah I agree with this. I sent a ticket/suggestion in about this as well. The invincibility should cease to function along with cloak and defense.


Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:15 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 271
Post Re: planets
This conversation crops up every now and then. The idea that most people seem to agree with is that the Morphogenic Inhibitor's invincibility will just cease to work after a player has been inactive for a few months.

Cloak already ceases to function when a player goes inactive, but I don't see why that should be extended to defense. That's making it too easy to gain from the misfortune of others.


Sun Jan 20, 2019 4:49 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:42 am
Posts: 1070
Post Re: planets
Defense DOES cease to function. It's how I've seen trainees be able to take planets with over 100k defense.


Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:04 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 10:36 pm
Posts: 267
Post Re: planets
My personal feeling is, if a player gets banned, their "stuff" is set free in the universe. Its not, but it seems fitting.


Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:18 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 271
Post Re: planets
DarthNefarious wrote:
My personal feeling is, if a player gets banned, their "stuff" is set free in the universe. Its not, but it seems fitting.

I hold the opinion that if someone gets banned from the game then everything they ever did should be wiped from existence. Their planets should be removed from the game, their contribution to their base's next level should be undone, and their ship should be deleted. They were quite obviously banned for breaking rules, rules that are there to keep things fair. If they gained things unfairly then those things are tainted and should not exist.

But I don't see why we're discussing banned players specifically - that's not even allowed. It's inactivity in general that is causing issues with other players and Morphogenic Inhibitors. I for one would rather see changes made to bring players back, and have newer ones stay.


Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:22 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 5:19 am
Posts: 846
Post Re: planets
my suggestion is for the banned players planets to be come open the 1'd that are just inactive i'd say leave them be as you never know if they may return of course i only speak about the mawks though do not want all those mission dysons,exotics,rifts be open


Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:15 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 3:49 pm
Posts: 519
Post Re: planets
Please review this topic: How to create a useful subject line...


Mon Jan 21, 2019 3:38 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2015 9:56 am
Posts: 19
Post Re: planets
I agree the 4 inhibitor invincibility effect should be reliant on the owner having logged on within the past 6 months, would make things interesting maybe especially if it keeps immunity to artifacts and alerting


Wed Jan 23, 2019 3:54 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 271
Post Re: planets
JDoe01 wrote:
I agree the 4 inhibitor invincibility effect should be reliant on the owner having logged on within the past 6 months, would make things interesting maybe especially if it keeps immunity to artifacts and alerting

All or nothing. Partial immunity is too complicated and confusing.


Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:27 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2015 9:56 am
Posts: 19
Post Re: planets
Actually overriding one thing may be easier than overriding three things from a coding standpoint, however, I wouldn't be against it if it was a total override. I was just looking at it from a standpoint of several people may have the same one scanned, or even a few scanned meaning you have to keep checking every so often to be the first to notice it's now invadable. Once you invade it becomes invincible again, the other fun part is when finding one that's still invincible is do you purge it, keep it on scan in the hope whoever has it now is going to quit, or has already quit, or was banned and that one day it becomes available to take again.

I think a massive part of the frustration here is that for me in about the last 30 scan runs or so I've only found 2 planets worth taking, QSE's are too rare when it comes to finding them, the 2% drop rate for me meant I only found 2 before I ranked past seeing troop carriers, there needs to be a replacement ship as well as improving the drop rate too, sure Dan needs to earn a crust but I do actually already drop tons of money on the game on other things, it's not like QSE's are his only form of revenue either.

There may well be a handful of Dysons left to find but nobody seems to have found one in a very long time now, this could be solved by adding 10 new ones to the pool weekly, maybe it'll offset the "lost QSE revenue" if people have something worth rifting again, maybe some people can upgrade their prismatic planet with CTP from selling one, if they're lucky enough to find one that is.

I'm lucky enough to be able to do a scan run maybe three times a month, or once a week at a push, sure there are some who can scan every Wednesday and Saturday, or more frequently than that, but for those starting out, the low ranks what hope do they have?, when I started out there were still plenty of findable half decent planets and that's when I could only do a scan run every few months. Scanning was fun back then, now it feels like is it really worth it anymore?


Thu Jan 24, 2019 1:27 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:09 am
Posts: 3253
Post Re: planets
JDoe01 wrote:
Actually overriding one thing may be easier than overriding three things from a coding standpoint, however, I wouldn't be against it if it was a total override. I was just looking at it from a standpoint of several people may have the same one scanned, or even a few scanned meaning you have to keep checking every so often to be the first to notice it's now invadable. Once you invade it becomes invincible again, the other fun part is when finding one that's still invincible is do you purge it, keep it on scan in the hope whoever has it now is going to quit, or has already quit, or was banned and that one day it becomes available to take again.

while i think this might be a fun game (i have kept 1 enemy invincible on scan just in case) .. i still think it would be tough to make certain 'invincible' planets invadeable without opening up the rest of the 'invincible' planets to exploits. having a rift that i paid good money for get taken thanks to a 'feature' to nerf MPIs ? it's just not worth the risk to me.


JDoe01 wrote:
... QSE's are too rare when it comes to finding them, the 2% drop rate for me meant I only found 2 before I ranked past seeing troop carriers, there needs to be a replacement ship as well as improving the drop rate too, sure Dan needs to earn a crust but I do actually already drop tons of money on the game on other things, it's not like QSE's are his only form of revenue either.

the QSE replacement is in the 8.year rewards. so if you last 8 years under rank 2200 .. you will never go without. but even i, the longest running SSB, was not that patient. so when i found an unoccupied dyson last summer, i went ahead and bought the QSEs to rift it.

JDoe01 wrote:
I think a massive part of the frustration here is that for me in about the last 30 scan runs or so I've only found 2 planets worth taking ... There may well be a handful of Dysons left to find but nobody seems to have found one in a very long time now, this could be solved by adding 10 new ones to the pool weekly, maybe it'll offset the "lost QSE revenue" if people have something worth rifting again, maybe some people can upgrade their prismatic planet with CTP from selling one, if they're lucky enough to find one that is.

I'm lucky enough to be able to do a scan run maybe three times a month, or once a week at a push, sure there are some who can scan every Wednesday and Saturday, or more frequently than that, but for those starting out, the low ranks what hope do they have?, when I started out there were still plenty of findable half decent planets and that's when I could only do a scan run every few months. Scanning was fun back then, now it feels like is it really worth it anymore?


regarding the quality of scan runs .. you have to keep in mind that when the game started there were less than 400,000 planets. dysons were probably just as rare, but there were more players actively scanning.

http://galaxylegion.com/wiki/index.php/ ... the_Galaxy

the galactic planet tally went up to 2 million in sep2011, went to 5 million in apr2013, and up to the current displayed value of 8.9 million in nov2014. even keeping the same dyson rate, there are many more 'garbage' unoccupied planets, and fewer active scanners. with fewer scanners, the incidences of dyson reports are obviously going to diminish.

enemy planets worth taking have been cloaked by active players, so you're left to find the lesser quality ones that are not worth cloaking to 25k. when i return to mylarai explorer when the qpedds arrive .. i will definitely be able to scan twice a week .. but that is more dependent on my purger replenishment rate. at Zentzu, we don't encourage low ranks to bother to scan for themselves .. higher ranks alert decent 'starter' planets for low ranks to use. i personally alert a planet every time my alert timer comes open and i've supplied HUNDREDS of planets, both unoccupied and enemy occupied, to my legion mates.

is a bad scan run frustrating ? sure it is. but a scan run of 200 planets in 2011 was 200/2,000,000 = 1/10,0000 of the galactic database. you would have to scan 900 planets in 2018 to retrieve the same quantity of quality planets as 2011. that's just the nature of the game now. if you used up all your planet transformers early on .. well .. you just have to build up those colossal plasmas and colossal demons. me, i still have a seed and a melter, all but 2 crystallizers, and all but 1 irradiator, so i just have to hold out until october for my 8.year and i will have a dozen more C 22x planets.

_________________
Rank 2734 Mylarai Explorer 100% DCR r385-r2200 GL Marauder #26
_____________Image
PvP leaderboards: 61353 raids: #1; 61683 hacks: #1; 32649 kills: #2;


Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:14 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2015 9:56 am
Posts: 19
Post Re: planets
senatorhung wrote:
while i think this might be a fun game (i have kept 1 enemy invincible on scan just in case) .. i still think it would be tough to make certain 'invincible' planets invadeable without opening up the rest of the 'invincible' planets to exploits. having a rift that i paid good money for get taken thanks to a 'feature' to nerf MPIs ? it's just not worth the risk to me.

I was referring to planets made invincible by 4 inhibitors, there shouldn't be that sort of bug from modifying the correct portion of code already responsible for that, for example: (not going to be the actual code but a representation of and a hopefully understandable form of it)

If $Morphogenic_Inhibitor_Total = "4" Then
$Planet_Invincible_Status = "True"
$Prevent_Planet_Artis = "True"
$Prevent_Alert = "True"
End If

Changed to:

If $Morphogenic_Inhibitor_Total = "4" Then
$Planet_Invincible_Status = "True"
$Prevent_Planet_Artis = "True"
$Prevent_Alert = "True"
If $Owner_Last_Login_Time < $Six_Months_Ago_Date_Time Then
$Planet_Invincible_Status = "False"
End If
End If

This would have no effect on naturally made invincible planets.
Quote:
the QSE replacement is in the 8.year rewards. so if you last 8 years under rank 2200 .. you will never go without. but even i, the longest running SSB, was not that patient. so when i found an unoccupied dyson last summer, i went ahead and bought the QSEs to rift it.

Actually, I would do this too, I'm still a year and a half away from my 8-year award.
Quote:
regarding the quality of scan runs .. you have to keep in mind that when the game started there were less than 400,000 planets. dysons were probably just as rare, but there were more players actively scanning.

http://galaxylegion.com/wiki/index.php/ ... the_Galaxy

the galactic planet tally went up to 2 million in sep2011, went to 5 million in apr2013, and up to the current displayed value of 8.9 million in nov2014. even keeping the same dyson rate, there are many more 'garbage' unoccupied planets, and fewer active scanners. with fewer scanners, the incidences of dyson reports are obviously going to diminish.

enemy planets worth taking have been cloaked by active players, so you're left to find the lesser quality ones that are not worth cloaking to 25k. when i return to mylarai explorer when the qpedds arrive .. i will definitely be able to scan twice a week .. but that is more dependent on my purger replenishment rate. at Zentzu, we don't encourage low ranks to bother to scan for themselves .. higher ranks alert decent 'starter' planets for low ranks to use. i personally alert a planet every time my alert timer comes open and i've supplied HUNDREDS of planets, both unoccupied and enemy occupied, to my legion mates.

is a bad scan run frustrating ? sure it is. but a scan run of 200 planets in 2011 was 200/2,000,000 = 1/10,0000 of the galactic database. you would have to scan 900 planets in 2018 to retrieve the same quantity of quality planets as 2011. that's just the nature of the game now. if you used up all your planet transformers early on .. well .. you just have to build up those colossal plasmas and colossal demons. me, i still have a seed and a melter, all but 2 crystallizers, and all but 1 irradiator, so i just have to hold out until october for my 8.year and i will have a dozen more C 22x planets.

Exactly, nearly all the best planets have been found, most have been taken and cloaked to 20k+ and are now virtually unfindable, all that's left are from a previously increased number of planets is 99.9% crap planets you or I and many others up here would not bother with, sure there are a few starters left to alert and we do alert them in our legion too, but what happens when those run out as well?

I'm not asking for more planets to be added like before where we probably got a few good ones and tons of bad added, I'm saying to keep scan runs worth doing at our level we need to be able to find good ones more frequently than they're popping up, adding 10 worthwhile planets a week to the pool isn't that big of an ask, heck I'd even welcome a random cull of 50% of the remaining undiscovered planet pool before doing so as it would make it much easier to find the worthwhile ones anyway. Scanning is a big part of the game, right now it feels like a worthless task to me anyway. I will keep scanning but for a long time now it has felt like playing a lottery where the odds of winning the jackpot are reducing each week while the cost of the ticket is increasing too.


Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:54 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 2:23 pm
Posts: 106
Post Re: planets
A couple of you referred to the 8 year award and the QSE-like arti, n-Dimensional Compressor. Yes, we get them, but they seem to be the rare artifact in the bunch. I've gotten about one per month since getting my 8 year award. Also note they are subject to the same rules as regular QSEs, and can only be used on Massive or smaller.

_________________
Image


Sat Jan 26, 2019 7:01 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 271
Post Re: planets
JDoe01 wrote:
I was referring to planets made invincible by 4 inhibitors, there shouldn't be that sort of bug from modifying the correct portion of code already responsible for that, for example: (not going to be the actual code but a representation of and a hopefully understandable form of it)

The implementation isn't really any of our concern, nor should it be. As long as what we're suggesting makes sense, how it happens is none of our business. That's the job of the developers.


Sat Jan 26, 2019 8:45 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:09 am
Posts: 3253
Post Re: planets
Guide wrote:
JDoe01 wrote:
I was referring to planets made invincible by 4 inhibitors, there shouldn't be that sort of bug from modifying the correct portion of code already responsible for that, for example: (not going to be the actual code but a representation of and a hopefully understandable form of it)

The implementation isn't really any of our concern, nor should it be. As long as what we're suggesting makes sense, how it happens is none of our business. That's the job of the developers.

have to disagree. anyone with a hint of programming knowledge knows that some changes are easier to implement than others. we don't know how invincibility is implemented.

JDoe is providing a suggestion based on his assumption that the MPI has a separate coding scheme from the actual invincibility (which is a pretty solid assumption given the trigger from MPI x3 to MPI x4) but assumes that the invincibility trigger can be reversed by adding another condition.

however, my assumption (and the basis of my opposition) is that once a planet gains invincibility, the planet is marked off limits within the planet database, and that there is no easy way to trigger a re.check of the MPI condition based on a subsequent event such as a player being banned. and i assume that any attempt to mess around with such a check might make the invincible status unstable.

it's fine to make a suggestion, but if we assume that Dan is a one.man shop .. i would rather he work on developing new content than working on a 'fix' that might trigger dire consequences for those who have paid GP for their mission planets.

_________________
Rank 2734 Mylarai Explorer 100% DCR r385-r2200 GL Marauder #26
_____________Image
PvP leaderboards: 61353 raids: #1; 61683 hacks: #1; 32649 kills: #2;


Sat Jan 26, 2019 9:04 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 2:52 pm
Posts: 271
Post Re: planets
senatorhung wrote:
it's fine to make a suggestion, but if we assume that Dan is a one.man shop .. i would rather he work on developing new content than working on a 'fix' that might trigger dire consequences for those who have paid GP for their mission planets.

Senator, I shared this link in Discord. I don't think the "just one man" excuse really holds up. I'm more inclined to believe that it's just a lack of care.


senatorhung wrote:
however, my assumption (and the basis of my opposition) is that once a planet gains invincibility, the planet is marked off limits within the planet database, and that there is no easy way to trigger a re.check of the MPI condition based on a subsequent event such as a player being banned.

It's checked every single time you or anyone looks at or performs an action on the planet, because it's when any of these actions occur that a planets stats are recalculated. That's why, sometimes, after applying a production buff you'll have to make sure you look at the planet before it'll actually "count". The effect is there, it was just never factored into the cached stats of the planet.

It's why you can scan max cloaked planets from inactive players, because when you're about to scan a planet, the game has to recalculate the stats for that planet if the old ones are expired. It's here that the game checks whether or not the player is active and decides whether or not it should negate the cloak entirely.

There's no reason that the same can't be done when it comes to attacking or invading planets with MIs.


Sun Jan 27, 2019 5:38 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 5:09 am
Posts: 3253
Post Re: planets
Guide wrote:
senatorhung wrote:
it's fine to make a suggestion, but if we assume that Dan is a one.man shop .. i would rather he work on developing new content than working on a 'fix' that might trigger dire consequences for those who have paid GP for their mission planets.

Senator, I shared this link in Discord. I don't think the "just one man" excuse really holds up. I'm more inclined to believe that it's just a lack of care.

you're assuming that GL is his day job. i'm assuming that it's not.

Guide wrote:
senatorhung wrote:
however, my assumption (and the basis of my opposition) is that once a planet gains invincibility, the planet is marked off limits within the planet database, and that there is no easy way to trigger a re.check of the MPI condition based on a subsequent event such as a player being banned.

It's checked every single time you or anyone looks at or performs an action on the planet, because it's when any of these actions occur that a planets stats are recalculated. That's why, sometimes, after applying a production buff you'll have to make sure you look at the planet before it'll actually "count". The effect is there, it was just never factored into the cached stats of the planet.

It's why you can scan max cloaked planets from inactive players, because when you're about to scan a planet, the game has to recalculate the stats for that planet if the old ones are expired. It's here that the game checks whether or not the player is active and decides whether or not it should negate the cloak entirely.

There's no reason that the same can't be done when it comes to attacking or invading planets with MIs.

the inactive cloak debuff works because there is a tally in the database for active status. but i doubt that the planet database is where Dan tracks the banned players (i assume that's on the facebook side). so Dan would have to add another column in the planet database to track banned status and somehow cross.reference that to the banned fb profiles. you assume that this would be easy .. i'm assuming that given fb server crap, that this would be hard.

_________________
Rank 2734 Mylarai Explorer 100% DCR r385-r2200 GL Marauder #26
_____________Image
PvP leaderboards: 61353 raids: #1; 61683 hacks: #1; 32649 kills: #2;


Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:38 pm
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: