6/30/2017
Topic:
Piracy research/mode
Steffstoff
|
Thanks for quoting me and bring this into the forum Aywanez!
@Doctor Dread My initial though was more the stealth function under the research name piracy. It's about false flag or battle flag during a specific combat. There are a lot of possibilities to implement this, also with special abilities of units. Even the artifacts could bring this feature in. With that we'd create a complete new role in this game, the pirates.
Key points:
- Add ability to activate piracy mode
- Defenders see only a signature of the attacker.
The signature is a code which changes with every tens attack under piracy mode. This is important to identify pirates later on. Because this open a market for pirate bounty hunters with the help of the signatures. - Attacks under piracy mode causes less preparation costs. Perhaps 10 – 20% less?
- If you kill fleets or groups in piracy mode you will get bonus credits from the pirates account.
- Aywanez wrote:
...Another interesting idea is for each player present (not attacked, present in square) to have a separate chance to recognize the attacker. That way there's an extra reason for players to talk to each other. Sounds cool too!
Of course that’s not a final concept but more an rough idea.
Greetings Steffstoff |
7/2/2017
Topic:
Community Support German (Deutsch)
Steffstoff
|
Deutsch: Hey,
Sollte es noch andere deutschsprachige Spieler geben, biete ich gern meine Unterstützung bei Fragen zum Spiel an. Kontaktiert mich einfach im Spiel direkt.
EN Translation: Hey,
If there are more German speaking players out there feel free to contact me. I will try to support you as good as possible with any game related questions.
Greetings Steffstoff (All2Market Inc.) |
7/11/2017
Topic:
Cairo politics
Steffstoff
|
Valid since turn: 6000
Dear industries of Cairo, dear citizen of the world,
This is the current Cairo report with recommendations and directives.
Population: We are still struggling to full-fill the demand our citizen. The biggest needs are in the “Civilian services” sector, as far as I can see. So we need industries, even in other categories. So feel free to settle down and make some easy money with selling your production directly on our market.
My steps as ruler: Expand Cairo care program, with the target to full-fill a part of the Cairo demand. Importing goods, especially in the raw materiel market. Additionally I started the “Civilian service program” with the target to push civilian services projects forward. Finally I am constantly researching and deploying Gaia booster for Cairo. Most of this costs are privately financed by me.
So, if any CEO is interested in investing industries in Cairo feel free to contact me. I will try to support as good as I can! BTW: Currently the Ocrowd rates are very low.
Military: In order to support the above named programs and increase the industries in Cairo I announce this decree. - All industries, structures and military units are now under the protection of the ruler of Cairo (All2Market Inc.). - The All2Market Inc. military will take place in every battle on the Cairo location and fights on the site of every Cairo people. - Every attack on an Cairo located industries or military unit is an attack against the authority. Be careful!
Charter: To all citizen of Cairo, even without an HQ here!
Please…. 1. Serve the demand as best as possible and help to let Cairo grow faster! Sell your stuff directly to our city. 2. Serve some military units and defend our beloved Cairo if necessary! Even if it is only a small amount, every help is welcome. 3. Life in peace and freedom!
Safe fly & peace for everyone on Earth Steffstoff (All2Market Inc) |
7/18/2017
Topic:
Community Support German (Deutsch)
Steffstoff
|
lolarennt wrote:
Hier ist z.B. einer ;-) Brauchst du Unterstützung? Sag mir einfach Bescheid.
Rekkles wrote:
Bin ich nicht einer, aber ich muss mein deutsch einueben :p Schreib mich gerne an, bin immer offen für einen kleinen plausch. |
7/18/2017
Topic:
Multi-Accounts (Alts)
Steffstoff
|
Hey Barons,
Felt like every week we are talking about the alt situation. There are a lot of opinions, pros & cons about the current regulation. I think it makes sense to find finally a solution for the majority of all players and the game itself.
To keep it clear and consistent we should talk about it here, in the forum. It is laborious to repeat the arguments again and again on a disappearing game board. At the end we are debating and wasting time with no progress. So, what to do to find a solution?
- Analysis: First of all we have to Know what exactly the reason is to create an alt. It's important to understand from where the drive comes to handle multiple accounts. Perhaps it's an game mechanic or game play issue. So any player with an alt can give us a lot of input here.
- Pros & Cons: We should collect the pros and cons, objective as possible.
- Process: With the information we got we have to talk about it as open as possible. The goal: Find consensus. The questions could be: Should we change the alt system? If yes, in which way?
- Solution: Presenting our wishes and suggestions as concept paper to Serendipity. Asking if it's feasible or not.
Hopefully we are able to create a nice, calm and target oriented debate.
Greetings Steffstoff edited by Steffstoff on 7/18/2017 edited by Steffstoff on 9/2/2017 |
7/18/2017
Topic:
Multi-Accounts (Alts)
Steffstoff
|
Reason for creating alts:
Pros:
- It does create more product.
- It 'fills' the universe up more.
- Its also fun.
- It can be used to help self/others.
Cons:
- Unseen abuse factor:
- Attack another player which your main not like. If you didnt interact before, no one will realize it. In best case the alt is your guild member. - dropping demand on the public market and buying in cheap with the main - destroy demand in cities from other player with placing industries and OC the location - installing an alt in cities to manipulating the elections - even parking of military units in an alt account is critical. Why? If I fought an main and he can easily stock up his military with alt units its a great advantage. Even if hes paying the regularly market price for the units! Hes is ready to fight me again, Iam not. - Over power: An player with multiple accounts has more units, credits and economy.
- Evasion of the logistics caps which allow for a player to be larger than the intended size.
- Frustrating of new players and "nomal one account" players.
I'll update this thread with your feedback. edited by Steffstoff on 7/18/2017 edited by Steffstoff on 9/2/2017 edited by Steffstoff on 9/2/2017 |
7/18/2017
Topic:
Multi-Accounts (Alts)
Steffstoff
|
My personal point of view (from the game board) Any Multi-Accounting (used by one single person) is bad for a browser game and his community. There is a reason why the browser game industries forbid multi-accounting in general and take several actions to identify such players. At a specific point "normal" players will notice that in some kind multi-accounts are responsable for personal disadvantage or damage. At this point the normal player becomes frustrated and will leave the game. Thats it. Im 100% sure, there are more normal players out there which just like play a cool game in the their meantime. Only a few people have the time and energy to maintain more than one account. That means we gave much more power to the hands of few people, to dominate the regular player base by allowing multi-accounting (used by one single person). In my opinion such "grey areas" and over power are destroying a community, on long-term. And in BofG its almost more critical because of the caps! With more than one account you can bypass these caps easily. In additional every multi-account is damaging the community feeling and trade behavior. With multi-accounts I dont need any other players for my supplier line, because I make it by my own. But we are in a multiplayer trading game, so actually we should interact with other players instead with ourselves. The caps are made for this idea, that we have to interact with each other. I think its a kind of important dependence from others in this game, which makes it interesting.
I still suggest: - Forbid multi-accounting (used by one single person) - create some technical checks in background (I know its not easy but there are possibilities) - in addition let the community still check other players for inappropriate behavior - If there are two persons in a household, wife, children, what ever, they can leave a note in the forum with account names and that their accept the ToS. With this information the community self is able to check for any violations. - max. 2 accounts per household
And even if you cant catch all, it feels so much better for a "normal player" that this topic is addressed and multi-account players know that the possibility is high to get caught and lost all. |
8/31/2017
Topic:
Multi-Accounts (Alts)
Steffstoff
|
So the discussion cam back to the ingame board. So...
Okay let us imagine, just for a short moment, we can go with multi-acconts. Even if the negative impact is much bigger than the positive, in my opinion.
From my board post:
The point is: We have strict multi-account rules and arent really able to find easy abusive behaviors. So in fact every person with multi-accounts can really easy take advantage of those. That circumstance makes the rules set completely obsolete! Thats the truth about your fantastic world and Im pretty sure that the multi-account users are knowing this fact very well.
A serious proposal from my side: How about an automatic multi-account overview on every corp overview? This overview shows who is hardlinked with whom. Hardlinked is: IP, Cookie, Flashcookie and/or Browserfingerprint for example. In addition a tab with the last 100 contracts with that specific corp would be really helpful! Those tools would gave the community much more power to take care of the multi-account rules. Perhaps its possible to convince "normal" players that fair play multi accounting is possible. Somehow. But as long as we are not able to track this down Im absolutely and 100% sure that there are dozens of abusive mutl-accounts are out there. Because? Nobody cares, nobody can proof.
@DrDread Would that be feasible? edited by Steffstoff on 8/31/2017 |
9/2/2017
Topic:
Multi-Accounts (Alts)
Steffstoff
|
So true. All those tools may at best lead to more speculation. Sorry, but you're absolute wrong with this.With that requested hard data is much less place for speculation. What you're doing right now is speculation at it's fines. And now you're talking about tools to declare people guilty without proper evidence. I can't understand this wishy-washy proceed. One hand the developers are saying:"Yeah, that should be solved from the community". On the other hand better tools, for much more transparency, are the wrong way? Erm, sorry sounds very wrong to me. From my site, there is not much understanding left for this whole situation. It feels like, hey the situation is great for abusive multi-accounts, but that's cool. So don't touch the perfect multi system...
Just to make it clear. I made the subscription with some kind of expectations. This game is awesome because it trigger what I really like and it has a great potential. But, I'm not willing to compete with out of control multi-accounts. That's time wasting, because I can't win this unbalanced battle! We've rules and their are okay. So it's by nature that we need monitoring to keep them straight. If we haven't proper monitoring tools, the multi rules are just bla bla bla.
And please refrain from being EVE like and multis are in EVE okay, so. No, that's a poor comparison. The multi-accounts in EVE have much less impact for the game itself than in our browsergame. In Barons you can start dozens of multis and there are constantly present. They make an impact in every single round with only a few clicks. Big fleets can take part in a battle with just 4 clicks and less than 2 minutes. In EVE it's still more an exception that all multis take action at the same time, Even the impact of a multi in Eve is negligible. How many players have Eve? How big is the universe? In my opinion it's comparing apples and oranges even if the setting is similar.
@DrDread I'm talking about linked accounts by IP, Cookie, Flashcookie and/or Browserfingerprint for example. The other stuff is interesting to but gives us no proof of multi-accounting in any kind. |
9/5/2017
Topic:
Multi-Accounts (Alts)
Steffstoff
|
Top story. Honestly, I like the idea to put more power into community hands but with which proof of evidence exactly will be people punished? :rolling eyes: |
9/5/2017
Topic:
Optimizing the Demand.Industry screens
Steffstoff
|
Sounds great, thanks for taking care! |
8/26/2018
Topic:
Payment methods not available
Steffstoff
|
Hey Djitam,
Please choose paypal as payment method because ,,, On the next screen you can choose between pay with paypal login or with credit card.
Greetings Steffstoff |
8/26/2018
Topic:
Rough Idea About Competition And Challanges
Steffstoff
|
Hello Dr. Dread & community,
I'am a player since the official start of the game as (All2Market Inc) in 2017. After a break I'am fully back since some days and see that we have a real lack of active players. That brought me to some deeper toughs about the game. For some new players it's seems to be a problem to not have a real goal, even as guild. Even older players are in some kind lost in the endgame (Where Do We Go Now?: http://forum.baronsofthegalaxy.com/topic2963-where-do-we-go-now.aspx).
Sure we could ask for more features which makes the game more attractive. But we could also think about what we can do in the current development state. Stuff what can be implemented in short time with less effort for the developer. So here is my idea...
How about a new "server", "instance" or "Universe", name it like you want, which is round base and timely limited. I know, I know... some of you will now say... no damn round base games I don't like to build up all new on regular bases. But honestly... we're often doing this right know in the current endless version. I see a lot of advantages in a round base version of BoTG and an enormous potential for a lot of fun, with the right settings! A possible setting could be...
- Round (session) period: 3 or 6 months (tbd)
- ... or until a given guild goal is reached. For example: Take over a planet full of NPC (as guild)!! Who can build the first industries on that planet... there a plenty of possibilities. Even a simple which guild has the highest net worth at the end would be pretty nice.
- Speed: 2x (tbd)
- Systems: just Sol / depents on the registered players in a round (tbd)
- Cost: 50% paid accounts and 50% free accounts or just only paid accounts (tbd)
- Punishment for PVP: deactivated
I see the following advantages...
- Round base would more entourage players to play as guild for fame (like a football league). Who will be the best guild in economics, diplomacy or in military?
- More strategy...
- Real battles and action
- A kind of goal and competition: Who will know the game best and lead the ranking in the given time? All players are starting with the same...
- PVP forced: Doesn't matter if you lost all in a hard battle about resources because in the next round I learned from it and can choose another strategy.
- Less development costs and effort (time) as completely new features which would makes the endless game more attractive.
- Both versions could be run at the same time. So there would be still gaming fun for every one.
Please give that idea a chance and think about it for at least 5 minutes. Don't forget it's just a rough idea, a kind of brainstorming. Feel free to contribute!
I'am really interested what Dr. Dread will say about the feasibility and what you will say, the last active players in the universe...
Greetings Steffstoff |
8/28/2018
Topic:
Rough Idea About Competition And Challanges
Steffstoff
|
Just a second instance @jim ... you could play both at the same time or just the endless one. I'am still convinced that we would gather some more players with such a kind of BotG instance. Because everyone, especially new players. will have the same chances to compete with "older" players on regular bases. I personally see it more as a good chees game version with the extra sport competition factor for guilds.
I've currently no incentive to play further. We have just to less player for enjoying the full facets of this beautiful game. My last straw was to gather new and / or old player to play as a team. But even this is currently not possible because everyone of the small player base will do his own thing. Understandable! But for me it's currently very hard to stick with. That's the reason why I'm looking for new / more possibilities which we can realize with as less as possible development effort.
I like endless too, but sometimes we should step out of our own box and check what other gamers could like too. As I said, I stopped counting how often I rebuilt my own company in the current universe and see no difference to a competitive round bases version. |
8/29/2018
Topic:
Rough Idea About Competition And Challanges
Steffstoff
|
Test Server is not fully about what I'am though, but absolutely nice and important for the development. So yeah, I'd be in as well. @Vulpex I can fully understand that but at some point the reset has to come. We both now that. But that's something for later, in another thread. |
8/29/2018
Topic:
Payment methods not available
Steffstoff
|
@Dread Actually you could remove the drop down for now and leave just the "buy now" button for a easier purchase procedure, With more payment service providers you have to rethink about it, of course.
*Please delete the previous post. My session was expired. Sorry. |
8/29/2018
Topic:
How Guild Bank should work
Steffstoff
|
I like the Guild bank idea very much. Thanks for working on this Dread!
My thoughts... Please let the Guild bank be a megastructure which the guild leader has to settle down first! With such structure every guild would have a kind of guild money base. Later on we could think about cyber- or physical attacks to steal the guild money. With such a concept we could even implement guild storage, which could have very less or no storage cost, but can be plundered by others.... if undefended.
Two important things, which we should have to keep in mind generally.
- When a guild member can put all his money into the guild bank before he do a sneaky attack, he can avoid the punishment cost for that.
- Logistics bonus sounds nice too. May you can shift the logistic points to the guild bank too? Or we create a new mega structure which gives guild logistic points. If the guild bank has enough money, the upkeep costs and logistic points will handled by the guild bank / guild logistic center. There we have a nice guild bonus for members. Is't it?
edited by Steffstoff on 8/29/2018 |
9/1/2018
Topic:
Order management
Steffstoff
|
Dear Dr.Dread,
It seems that some new players quit the game after just few days playing. I think it is important to investigate what the reason could be for discontinue playing. One think which I have in mind when I'am thinking about this is the order management system. So I'd like to drop my thoughts about it. What do you and all others are thinking about these suggestions to make the management a bit easier? Or where do you see usability issues or perhaps just space for improvement?
- Drag & drop
Move single orders via drag & drop into another position in the order list.
- Simple change order
Changing the input by clicking (double click) directly in the cell (for order number, amount, move to location, product, and so on...).
- Check boxes
With check boxes it would be possible to implement multi delete for specific orders in a list. Or... mark them grey what means "no action" but keep it for later (re-activating) which is useful too. "No action" / grey is more in a larger purchase plans. I need some stuff on regular base for the city and it would be nice to have a big order list were I could blend out some buy orders including move to location stuff. 300 turns later I need this buy orders again.... so just clicking for re-activating those. "
I think that would makes changes in an existing order list much easier.
On the other hand we should re-check the tutorial. Is anything in the tutorial what a new player really needs to enjoy? I know the community (we) are extremely helpful. But often new players like to explore a game first by their own. That would mean we are losing players before they are ready to get in touch with us. A good UI and game design should be kind of self-explanatory. May I'll open another thread regarding this.
Greetings Steffstoff edited by Steffstoff on 9/1/2018 |
9/1/2018
Topic:
How Guild Bank should work
Steffstoff
|
Im not sure if a guild megastructure is a good idea, you're putting the guild features behind a paywall of sorts. Perhaps and depends on the price. But I think there is a positive aspect too and it would lead fresh player to established guilds and / or brings more team play. And I think it's a challenge and a goal for new payers too. It's fun and a kind of mid-term target to gather enough money for an own guild bank or for leveling this structure up. As a said a bonus with each level makes it more interesting and let the members stick together for a mutual goal.
However it seems really easy to dump your bank an the last round of combat I can "freeze" banks when they are in combat but that get a little tricky also. (this is why it never got implemented) you would need to declare "In combat" as being there are still units in attack mode at the end of the turn after combat so people cant suicide single level 1 infantry units to force "In Combat" Yeah that's an issue. How about a fee - to the system - for the money transfers out of the guild bank??
- If Guild bank megastructure hp >1 the attacker will get 10% (tbd) from the guild bank account automatically transferred. Probably you can use the monster bounty screen / mechanic.
I DO want to make a capture mechanic, as in I take all your standing product and ITEMS from a location, if attack you at a location and wipe you out, all the product and items at that location immediately switch ownership to the highest military power corp. That would be a full blown version of the "Raid" mechanic in place now and it would allow item grabs
I saw your thread but didn't read it by now. I'll do it later on when I have more time. Sounds very interesting. edited by Steffstoff on 9/1/2018 |
9/7/2018
Topic:
Moon Charter III Discussion Thread
Steffstoff
|
The charter is expected to address these following issues: - The appointment of a moon manager (Someone other than the emperor) I'd like to see the Exordium Inc. in this position. I believe in the best intentions for Earth and Sol. Another Plus is of course the military strength of this great corporation!
- Max 1 research facility per corporation with HQ on Sol I can go with.
- Max lv.5 research facility Okay.
- Limitations on military presence at the artifact site The only corp with military on moon should be the moon manager. He's responsible for the safety of all structures on Moon. For that reason the Moon manager should get the warp gate on moon handed over.
- Limitations on production of dangerous artifacts Not required. Who knows if we have to produce such Artefact for Earth defense. I see no reason to regulate this.
Other possible additions to the charter, based on community feedback: - May not own any other research facilities (possible exception to earth mayors) I like this part, because it gives the mayor some kind of mini reward for the hard job.
- Corp must own a certain % of industry on earth I like this too, because with this we would encourage corps to support Earth, somehow. |