Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 25MAY14 - Broken Lands update
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

25MAY14 - Broken Lands update

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 789
Author
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GM Stormcrow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2014 at 05:04
Originally posted by ubluntu ubluntu wrote:

Why not keep it simple?
If an account holder has not logged in for 60 days(maybe 90 for prestige buyers) remove all sitters from the account so the existing enforced account removal can work as intended.

Yes, the account holder can login and appoint a sitter again, but how many permasat accounts see the real account holder?

I think it strikes a nice balance between minimizing development time and impact on gameplay while maximizing effectiveness.

It's certainly simple to implement.  

My worry is that it doesn't address the issue that under that system someone could genuinely log in 4 times a year and be regarded as an active player vs a permasat alt.  

I do think there's an issue with sitting that fundamentlly revolves around "actually playing the game" - and I don't want any change we make to bestow further "legitimacy" on the current state.

SC
Back to Top
Ancient Nightowl View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jan 2012
Location: NZ
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ancient Nightowl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2014 at 05:08
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:

Originally posted by ICEKat ICEKat wrote:

not if you limited the amount of time allowed for a sat account
say 50% of actual time logged by the owner  (not sat)
so they log on for 3 months straight they can be sat for 45 days

then once the account was no longer used by the real owner it would become abandoned surely ?

I think that's what we're looking at: a time-limited period for sitting in a calendar year, beyond which further sitting is forbidden.  We'd much rather do that than a combination system.

SC



Exactly the sort of thing I was thinking about for these accounts.
Back to Top
LadyLifeGrows View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 06 May 2014
Location: Denver Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LadyLifeGrows Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2014 at 22:10
Originally posted by Korben Dallas Korben Dallas wrote:

If you want to keep the idea of 'equal footing' for new players and veterans alike in Broken Lands I suggest making BL settler only. No tenariling or exodusing please. I know my suggestion means really planning your settlements and no terraforming. I'd also put in for a city destruction research (with a rules list like exodus) and faster moving settlers please? Wink


I think this is excellent.

The Devs solution is superb for newer players.

But the Big ones have reason to be big-time disappointed. They matter, too. I suggest you copy one of LoU's good points and allow account-sitting for only half the number of days the account was actively played by its original owner. Just after that is implemented, you give the Big guys their sweetie: any player with 16 cities (in two accounts) may have a third account in their own name, which is automatically spawned in the B.L.
Back to Top
LadyLifeGrows View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 06 May 2014
Location: Denver Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LadyLifeGrows Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2014 at 22:34
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:

I'd also add that players could/would also use thieves/troops as a way of taking (rather than sending) resources from a sat account, which would bypass the "no sending" implementation.

In Illy, it's never quite as simple as it looks on first glance! Smile

SC


Yes, StormCrow; that is how it was done in LoU.
Back to Top
LadyLifeGrows View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 06 May 2014
Location: Denver Colorado
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LadyLifeGrows Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Jun 2014 at 22:39
Originally posted by ubluntu ubluntu wrote:

Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:

Originally posted by ICEKat ICEKat wrote:

not if you limited the amount of time allowed for a sat account
say 50% of actual time logged by the owner  (not sat)
so they log on for 3 months straight they can be sat for 45 days

then once the account was no longer used by the real owner it would become abandoned surely ?

I think that's what we're looking at: a time-limited period for sitting in a calendar year, beyond which further sitting is forbidden.  We'd much rather do that than a combination system.

SC



Why not keep it simple?
If an account holder has not logged in for 60 days(maybe 90 for prestige buyers) remove all sitters from the account so the existing enforced account removal can work as intended.

Yes, the account holder can login and appoint a sitter again, but how many permasat accounts see the real account holder?

I think it strikes a nice balance between minimizing development time and impact on gameplay while maximizing effectiveness.


Another excellent one. The enforced account removal timer would begin the day the account sitters were kicked.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 789
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.