PlanetsCentral

Hello!

I wanted to let everyone know that I am leaving this game. I am new on this site. I joined the two games to get the experience of playing the plist2 and plist3, which I had not.

However, I did not know about the existing system of "alliance with the first turn", when the "old" players are united at the beginning of the game in the mega-alliance.

I congratulate april76, kobrov and their friends with a great game and I wish them to continue to enjoy the game but without me. I do not have any fun. I will not play with them in new games, if Stefan does not create a new kind of game - "without alliances."

Thanks for your attention.

Hello!

I wanted to let everyone know that I am leaving this game. I am new on this site. I joined the two games to get the experience of playing the plist2 and plist3, which I had not.

However, I did not know about the existing system of "alliance with the first turn", when the "old" players are united at the beginning of the game in the mega-alliance.

I congratulate april76, kobrov and their friends with a great game and I wish them to continue to enjoy the game but without me. I do not have any fun. I will not play with them in new games, if Stefan does not create a new kind of game - "without alliances."

Thanks for your attention.

A good post,

I follow you here. maybe in the other games, too.

Same for me: well done Kobrov, april76 and their mates. You better stop that ruinous behaviour in the games or you will play alone, soon.

If stefan refuses to regulate in some way, I cannot longer recommend this server to player from third side. In the spirit of fair play, something MUST happen.

I understand your frustration

however, if we turn to the experience of the "old" players, I must say that the experience is produced when hard. I play since 1993 and had a break from the game for over 10 years and started to play again a year ago. and joining a new game on that server (it was the Pleiades 7) I was also a beginner. I knew nothing about Phost about the ship experience system.

in addition I have no friends or acquaintances. and I was forced to learn and get my experience through sweat and blood )) I fought with my current friends Kobrov, darkclaw, Sherkhan and others.

And only after I gained experience and earned the respect of my game, met with other players I can expect to enjoy the game in full, no discounts on my experience. I accept the current rules of the game and if there is alissy then I use them as it is in the game. When I want to play a wolf game without the diplomacy I do it on those hosts where possible.

(I wrote to Kite where I play where this is possible)

so I would not be so upset about the fact that someone uses all the available features offered by the game. as this game according to the rules and when the server will be a game without alliances I will gladly take part in it.

I understand your frustration

however, if we turn to the experience of the "old" players, I must say that the experience is produced when hard. I play since 1993 and had a break from the game for over 10 years and started to play again a year ago. and joining a new game on that server (it was the Pleiades 7) I was also a beginner. I knew nothing about Phost about the ship experience system.

in addition I have no friends or acquaintances. and I was forced to learn and get my experience through sweat and blood )) I fought with my current friends Kobrov, darkclaw, Sherkhan and others.

And only after I gained experience and earned the respect of my game, met with other players I can expect to enjoy the game in full, no discounts on my experience. I accept the current rules of the game and if there is alissy then I use them as it is in the game. When I want to play a wolf game without the diplomacy I do it on those hosts where possible.

(I wrote to Kite where I play where this is possible)

so I would not be so upset about the fact that someone uses all the available features offered by the game. as this game according to the rules and when the server will be a game without alliances I will gladly take part in it.

The difference is between "acting within the rules" and overstress them as an exploit that ruins the game dynamics. Your "soft" prescription irritates about the fact, that 4 guys of you always start as de facto premade alliance.

You do not compete for the first place - you make the others "pay through the nose" by intensively disbalaning shiplist and racial abilies in the early phase of the game.

I understanhd you Kite. I told about it in another post few days ago. In all games there is always a mega alliance of 4 o 5 players changing skills and habilities.

If Stefan doesn't cut this I won't play here anymore.

The difference is between "acting within the rules" and overstress them as an exploit that ruins the game dynamics. Your "soft" prescription irritates about the fact, that 4 guys of you always start as de facto premade alliance.

You do not compete for the first place - you make the others "pay through the nose" by intensively disbalaning shiplist and racial abilies in the early phase of the game.

I'll reply to this post, but not to make excuses but in order to convey my understanding of the rules. maybe I'm wrong and Stefan correct me.

When I enter the game I start with learning the rules, configs and etc. I think that gives me a good opportunity to play using all the features. For example, if I play chess I use all the pieces and I strange if someone can tell me what I should not play the Queen because It's too strong. Yes it is strong but it's part of the game and you also have the same Queen. The fact that you don't use it doesn't make me dishonest.

I could listen to your complaints and do not play with Queen, but then I have to admit that give you a head start and you're weaker than me. It seems to me the lack of respect for the strength of my opponent. I used to respect my opponents and assume that they are better than me.

And when I manage to beat a strong player who has struggled is a special treat.

If I'm wrong, correct me.

and again. I never make alliances in the first turn. it's really not too interesting, because it is not based on the game and out of game factors. If I enter into alliances only in the case if for example my neighbour and I is more profitable to cooperate than to fight, why weaken each other, give the neighbors a head start for development. It's stupid and does not reflect the spirit of the game.

So if my neighbor is a player with whom is it more profitable to work, I propose an Alliance, and if he refuses, I'll accept it with respect.

But I understand that the subject is quite controversial and there you can exchange ideas ad infinitum. So I will not bore you end up with all my respect.

S. S. And Yes, to play in the ally needs more time and efforts to participate in joint operations planning, coordination, and it is much more difficult than to play at a wolfparty , but it's part of the game and I accept it as it is

AllanOfDale:

The difference is between "acting within the rules" and overstress them as an exploit that ruins the game dynamics. Your "soft" prescription irritates about the fact, that 4 guys of you always start as de facto premade alliance.

You do not compete for the first place - you make the others "pay through the nose" by intensively disbalaning shiplist and racial abilies in the early phase of the game.

I'll reply to this post, but not to make excuses but in order to convey my understanding of the rules. maybe I'm wrong and Stefan correct me.

When I enter the game I start with learning the rules, configs and etc. I think that gives me a good opportunity to play using all the features. For example, if I play chess I use all the pieces and I strange if someone can tell me what I should not play the Queen because It's too strong. Yes it is strong but it's part of the game and you also have the same Queen. The fact that you don't use it doesn't make me dishonest.

I could listen to your complaints and do not play with Queen, but then I have to admit that give you a head start and you're weaker than me. It seems to me the lack of respect for the strength of my opponent. I used to respect my opponents and assume that they are better than me.

And when I manage to beat a strong player who has struggled is a special treat.

If I'm wrong, correct me.

and again. I never make alliances in the first turn. it's really not too interesting, because it is not based on the game and out of game factors. If I enter into alliances only in the case if for example my neighbour and I is more profitable to cooperate than to fight, why weaken each other, give the neighbors a head start for development. It's stupid and does not reflect the spirit of the game.

So if my neighbor is a player with whom is it more profitable to work, I propose an Alliance, and if he refuses, I'll accept it with respect.

But I understand that the subject is quite controversial and there you can exchange ideas ad infinitum. So I will not bore you end up with all my respect.

S. S. And Yes, to play in the ally needs more time and efforts to participate in joint operations planning, coordination, and it is much more difficult than to play at a wolfparty , but it's part of the game and I accept it as it is

Sorry, but this sounds like foul excuses. And - no you DO ally so fast, that it doesn't matter, if it is turn 1 or 5. And your mates are always the same guys.

You and your mates disbalance the game, while the exploration and early phase of game. That is the true and only fact. It is in Pleiades 9, 10, Phoenix 4 Minimum as far as I may observe it maybe more.

And finally you are wrong. The spirit of the game is the competetive character, which you pervert with your extreme hull and ability exchange.

You and your mates disbalance the game, while the exploration and early phase of game. That is the true and only fact. It is in Pleiades 9, 10, Phoenix 4 Minimum as far as I may observe it maybe more.

indeed, this is the blitz style. I love this style because it gives me the momentum and tension from the first minute. when I open the game with the first turn I am already planning where and how I will attack. And then for the first 5-7 moves I lead an active research neighborhoods and find the neighbors. and if I don't see that we can cooperate then I plan the attack.

this is the game and this is a military strategy and not SIM city. in all strategies there are different styles that players prefer.

there are those who like a quick rush and there are those who want to develop and accumulate military power

and these two styles are in antagonism. For me as a blitz style player unprofitable to allow to develop and to grow force those neighbors who are not my allies, so I'm going to try to destroy it at the first opportunity.

this is not SIM city. I'm sorry

And finally you are wrong. The spirit of the game is the competetive character, which you pervert with your extreme hull and ability exchange.

I don't agree with this statement. otherwise, Stefan is not provided such comfortable gameplay with the transfer of ships/bases and remote control. it is because of this feature I am very fond of phost.

and it says that you are wrong, phost involve active alliances.

this is part and the spirit of the game. the game teaches you to communicate, coordinate and compromise.

and if you're not cool just don't play games with diplomacy, but it is silly playing a game with diplomacy to complain that the players are using diplomacy.

I think I have nothing more to add

april76 in Re: I am leaving this game.:

....

Sorry, but this sounds like foul excuses. And - no you DO ally so fast, that it doesn't matter, if it is turn 1 or 5. And your mates are always the same guys.

You and your mates disbalance the game, while the exploration and early phase of game. That is the true and only fact. It is in Pleiades 9, 10, Phoenix 4 Minimum as far as I may observe it maybe more.

And finally you are wrong. The spirit of the game is the competetive character, which you pervert with your extreme hull and ability exchange.

Calm down a little, please (both of you).

I also got PM complaints about being in an unfair huge alliance in Pleiades 7 citing singular scans as evidence for an alliance (outpost in lizard land? must be allied.) -- from one of the guys who is in the huge alliance that is currently stripping my pants. In any case, Pleiades 7 was quite a different experience than previous games for me.

The message I heard is that some of you want a no-alliance game. I will do that. Give me a few days to propose a setup. And then let's see how it turns out.

But in any case, please everyone remember that it's not just 10 players that play to entertain you, it's also you helping entertain 10 others. Dropping if the game isn't perfect and effortless always makes you a spoilsport of sorts, but so is repeatedly making identical unbeatable alliances to drive out others.

--Stefan

Wtf is this? You are leaving turn 19 cause some guys make alliances? Why? I don't see a point. You really believe they can't be beaten? And to make it clear I'm not a part of any alliance in this game.

Ygg

I totally agree with kite, promano and Allan. I am playing Pleiades 9. Same history. If I have to fight Colonies with webmines, anticloak and more.. It could be better to play a game by teams from the begining. It seems it is always the same. It is not interesting to me. I understand we have to entertain too.. but in this case we are only boxing sparrings. They are not playing to end at first position! They are playing to destroy few races that they realize too late what is happening. In pleiades 9 everybody have webmines!! Can you imagine the situation in some sports? "We dont want to win.. we only want to win the teams with low scores"

By the way I think Privateers left Pleiades 9 for the same reason some turns ago.. now the big alliance will get easily their ships because the webs. That game is ridiculous.

but in this case we are only boxing sparrings. They are not playing to end at first position! They are playing to destroy few races that they realize too late what is happening.

... in the silent backyard....

Directly to the point.

Sorry Streu, at the moment I don't see an ease comming to the feelings around. Leaving the games is meanwhile the only answer to the poison (chain alliances) that came to the running games.

Some benefits ingame are without compare - like (Tachyon device, webmines, refit and gravitonic) and when most of them become accumulated in only a few hands and this happens in right a couple of games in a row, the refusal to continue playing is the only option we players have to call attention to the grievances.

Unfortunately that actually points only to a hand full of players.

Ymir in Re: I am leaving this game.:

but in this case we are only boxing sparrings. They are not playing to end at first position! They are playing to destroy few races that they realize too late what is happening.

... in the silent backyard....

Directly to the point.

Sorry Streu, at the moment I don't see an ease comming to the feelings around. Leaving the games is meanwhile the only answer to the poison (chain alliances) that came to the running games.

Some benefits ingame are without compare - like (Tachyon device, webmines, refit and gravitonic) and when most of them become accumulated in only a few hands and this happens in right a couple of games in a row, the refusal to continue playing is the only option we players have to call attention to the grievances.

Well, you've been the Klingon with Gravitonics and Webmines as well, and the complaint I got by PM read alike: "why are you playing unfair by giving them Webs?" There is some point where "well-played diplomacy" turns into "frustrating wall of allies", and that point seems to be a little different for everyone. But a predetermined alliance surely is over the line.

But that all will not change the past. I'll prepare a no-allies game and we'll see how that turns out. (Anonymous no-communication games will take a little longer.)

--Stefan

Stefan, thank you for your such balanced opinion.

I like to think that I am not the only one ))

and I really like your idea with the game without diplomacy.

let's do it ))

and look at that then our opponents will complain ))

regards max

AllanOfDale in Re: I am leaving this game.:

Ymir in Re: I am leaving this game.:

but in this case we are only boxing sparrings. They are not playing to end at first position! They are playing to destroy few races that they realize too late what is happening.

... in the silent backyard....

Directly to the point.

Sorry Streu, at the moment I don't see an ease comming to the feelings around. Leaving the games is meanwhile the only answer to the poison (chain alliances) that came to the running games.

Some benefits ingame are without compare - like (Tachyon device, webmines, refit and gravitonic) and when most of them become accumulated in only a few hands and this happens in right a couple of games in a row, the refusal to continue playing is the only option we players have to call attention to the grievances.

Well, you've been the Klingon with Gravitonics and Webmines as well, and the complaint I got by PM read alike: "why are you playing unfair by giving them Webs?" There is some point where "well-played diplomacy" turns into "frustrating wall of allies", and that point seems to be a little different for everyone. But a predetermined alliance surely is over the line.

But that all will not change the past. I'll prepare a no-allies game and we'll see how that turns out. (Anonymous no-communication games will take a little longer.)

--Stefan

AllanOfDale in Re: I am leaving this game.:

Ymir in Re: I am leaving this game.:

but in this case we are only boxing sparrings. They are not playing to end at first position! They are playing to destroy few races that they realize too late what is happening.

... in the silent backyard....

Directly to the point.

Sorry Streu, at the moment I don't see an ease comming to the feelings around. Leaving the games is meanwhile the only answer to the poison (chain alliances) that came to the running games.

Some benefits ingame are without compare - like (Tachyon device, webmines, refit and gravitonic) and when most of them become accumulated in only a few hands and this happens in right a couple of games in a row, the refusal to continue playing is the only option we players have to call attention to the grievances.

Well, you've been the Klingon with Gravitonics and Webmines as well, and the complaint I got by PM read alike: "why are you playing unfair by giving them Webs?" There is some point where "well-played diplomacy" turns into "frustrating wall of allies", and that point seems to be a little different for everyone. But a predetermined alliance surely is over the line.

But that all will not change the past. I'll prepare a no-allies game and we'll see how that turns out. (Anonymous no-communication games will take a little longer.)

--Stefan

Stefan, the comparison isn't legit and you know that.

I never use my neighbours traits or tech to found the complete game strategy on it, other than some certain persons here. Some traits must be kept minimalistic and at least I interacted with YOU nearly alone.

I understand that you need to be diplomatic, but you won't succeed in it with counter-critic.

I fight the majority of my battle myself and don't leave it to my partner, nor do I play federalistic.

But nevertheless, the argument is about balancing and disbalancing. Every disbalanced game will soon come to it's end - it has no future.

And with a lack of program mechanics we need some temperance in the exploit of disbalancing effects. Everyone should reflect that on it's own. But the main directive ought to be: Win with your own race - not with a foreign one.

... in the silent backyard....

Directly to the point.

Sorry Streu, at the moment I don't see an ease comming to the feelings around. Leaving the games is meanwhile the only answer to the poison (chain alliances) that came to the running games.

Some benefits ingame are without compare - like (Tachyon device, webmines, refit and gravitonic) and when most of them become accumulated in only a few hands and this happens in right a couple of games in a row, the refusal to continue playing is the only option we players have to call attention to the grievances.

Unfortunately that actually points only to a hand full of players.

But thinking back maybe about Pleiades 5 Kobrov, Siba and Darkclow ended up in a quite similar situation. The path of actions aside they ended up in a 3 vs 6 - crystal, robot, lizzy vs everybody besides the birds who were kicked out early on and the privs which somehow got in between factions.

Maybe you can argue that we didn't combine forces in a manner like some described here, still it was 6 vs 3 and I as FED got my hands on big carriers from the Colonies (my allies) and a quite useful fleetlogistic tool named Bridgekeeper (merely from a trading partner). And showing up when you called for help was by no means a nice turn of mine. It was just damn useful for me and the meaning was of course getting rid of a dangerous enemy and thus winning the game.

So far I tend to follow april76's arguments all along. Apart from the premade alliances which I detest - nevertheless april denied using them and since I never played a game with him, I've got no reason to doubt him.

I never use my neighbours traits or tech to found the complete game strategy on it, other than some certain persons here. Some traits must be kept minimalistic and at least I interacted with YOU nearly alone.

I never use the Queen in chess, I always want to win some pawns. and when I lose I think with me playing a dirty game

But nevertheless, the argument is about balancing and disbalancing. Every disbalanced game will soon come to it's end - it has no future.

and since the 90s of the last century regularly see discussions about the fact that the VGAPlanets is not balanced. this is complete nonsense. planet buried for the past 20 years, and will bury the same.

all in VGAPlanets is balanced

you just have to try to play better instead of complaining

But the main directive ought to be: Win with your own race - not with a foreign one.

for the first time in my life I see such a rule for playing game with alliances. honestly. shoked

regards max

AllanOfDale in Re: I am leaving this game.:

I never use my neighbours traits or tech to found the complete game strategy on it, other than some certain persons here. Some traits must be kept minimalistic and at least I interacted with YOU nearly alone.

I never use the Queen in chess, I always want to win some pawns. and when I lose I think with me playing a dirty game

AllanOfDale in Re: I am leaving this game.:

But nevertheless, the argument is about balancing and disbalancing. Every disbalanced game will soon come to it's end - it has no future.

and since the 90s of the last century regularly see discussions about the fact that the VGAPlanets is not balanced. this is complete nonsense. planet buried for the past 20 years, and will bury the same.

all in VGAPlanets is balanced

you just have to try to play better instead of complaining

AllanOfDale in Re: I am leaving this game.:

But the main directive ought to be: Win with your own race - not with a foreign one.

for the first time in my life I see such a rule for playing game with alliances. honestly. shoked

regards max

Completely wrong. Planets is all but not balanced. Everyone tried, but never succeeded. One single merging of abilities or parts of the shiplist ruins everything. The balancing is based on the fact that everyone tries to win with his own ressources. This discussion was never buried, dude.

And shuffle your provocations, where no sun shines in

But thinking back maybe about Pleiades 5 Kobrov, Siba and Darkclow ended up in a quite similar situation. The path of actions aside they ended up in a 3 vs 6 - crystal, robot, lizzy vs everybody

No, you're wrong. it was 1 vs 6 - through the most of that game i had neither benefits, nor ships from Kobrov & Darkclow, just NAP with them.

At the end of the game I've asked them to make an active alliance vs all of you, but they were passive and just wait for the end. So I leave.

No, you're wrong. it was 1 vs 6 - through the most of that game i had neither benefits, nor ships from Kobrov & Darkclow, just NAP with them.

At the end of the game I've asked them to make an active alliance vs all of you, but they were passive and just wait for the end. So I leave.

You may count it that way. But then you've got to count it 1 and 2 vs 2 and 2 and 2. You can't count us as a 6 player alliance - we simply got NAPped.

streu in Re: I am leaving this game.:

Well, you've been the Klingon with Gravitonics and Webmines as well, and the complaint I got by PM read alike: "why are you playing unfair by giving them Webs?" There is some point where "well-played diplomacy" turns into "frustrating wall of allies", and that point seems to be a little different for everyone. But a predetermined alliance surely is over the line.

Stefan, the comparison isn't legit and you know that.

Is it?

My point being: the receiving end of an attack can never know how the alliance formed. And if they see a Buccaneer spewing webs arriving together with a K'Vort, that *must* have been a huge predetermined alliance ("Was ich denk und tu, trau ich andern zu."), no matter what it actually is.

The only block seems to be blocking alliances. I'm not sure how that will play out, so let's try.

A thought experiment (for everyone): by turn 3, you discover an enemy homeworld. Using a convenient wormhole, you can have a ship there by turn 8. Will you (a) push your economy to have that ship be a Draklor/SSD, or will you (b) leave them develop first and invade by turn 25? Doubtlessly there are players who choose (a), which makes it very frustrating for those who play less than perfect ("oh, an enemy probe, I better have my Death Star ready by turn 7").

--Stefan

If 6 races pressed one enemy, and nobody helps him, no matter they are allies or "just napped". If it was near turn 80, i could just wait for the end, but if it is turn 50, and most of "napped" players want to play till turn 80, it takes too much time for senseless continuing. I think, leaving the game is more fair then empty trns sending.

Siba in Re: I am leaving this game.:

No, you're wrong. it was 1 vs 6 - through the most of that game i had neither benefits, nor ships from Kobrov & Darkclow, just NAP with them.

At the end of the game I've asked them to make an active alliance vs all of you, but they were passive and just wait for the end. So I leave.

You may count it that way. But then you've got to count it 1 and 2 vs 2 and 2 and 2. You can't count us as a 6 player alliance - we simply got NAPped.