Ars, I made tons of counters to your suggestion, but here, let me tear it appart for you again. The person who leaves gets jipped because they fall far behind. Even a week without growth can finish the round for you, as you'll never catch up. The attackers get jipped because they cannot use that person to grow on. It's not fair to either player. My idea is close, though still slanted in favor of the vacationer, which it should be, but the attacker should still be given a fair chance to hit the person, wither they're able to play or not.
And shadows, I'm saying as for the whole of SO it would be a bad idea. I always look at suggestion for the effects on the whole game, not just me. So please, don't try to act like you know how I'm viewing this. I'd like to see this game improve, not diminish, and to do so, it has to be as fair as possible to all players. Would you want to play if someone could just freeze their account with 10 trillion, like ricu, and wait until the end of the round then come out of nowhere and win because of it, all because you couldn't hit them while they were frozen? I'd quit if that happened, and with ars's/most everyone elses suggestions, something like that would be easy to do.
ok... breaking this again down to points, I will show you right here how NONE, not a single one, is actually legit.
1: The person who leaves gets jipped because they fall far behind. Even a week without growth can finish the round for you, as you'll never catch up.
as opposed to what? coming back from the vacation that will happen sooner or later anyway, finding that instead of falling behind week or 2 in interest, is instead back pretty much where they started MONTHS ago?
nice point there seither, really makes sense
sorry, but no go here.
2: The attackers get jipped because they cannot use that person to grow on.
while you may have a point to an extent of someone losing a potential victim to attack, it ends right there. what are they going to take? if it is just workers and credits in secret base, fine. if that was just it, I would have no problem with it. however, if they take segments, that means eventually in so many attacks they will run out of segments to take ANYWAY, and because the person who plays the account can't get back on and correct the situation, the only thing that can be taken will quickly diminish, totally jipping the person who left, AND jipping the attacker in the long run, as now he has lost that 'potential' victim 'potentially' for the rest of the round, instead of for just a couple weeks. and even then, most of the time, it is MUCH MUCH more profitable to go ahead and launch a volley of attacks ona bunch of MISSIONS, as they grow in profit with you, not like someone who consistently yields less and less rewards every time you hit them. sorry seither, but I think that's a no go here to, in more then one way.
3: Would you want to play if someone could just freeze their account with 10 trillion, like ricu, and wait until the end of the round then come out of nowhere and win because of it, all because you couldn't hit them while they were frozen?
(and quite possibly the EASIEST out of the 3) Seither, let me give you a hypothetical situation, if EVERYONE around you, I mean everyone, from the lowest point that could attack you, all the way to number 1, all of a sudden froze their accounts attempting to do this, and remained so for months, do you:
a: sit there and do nothing waiting for them to come out
or
b: grow stronger then them thanks to the fact that NO ONE can even attack you, let alone hurt you.
of course the answer is B, who wouldn't, unless they SERIOUSLY wasn't actually interested in playing. by the time they come back with those 10 trillion, the other people around them may end up be using QUADrillions. hence, in their attempt for a shortcut to #1, they instead doomed themselves to anything but #1, as anything they build then would be matched and overwhelmed, especially when would only have 24 hours to make their comeback, with everyone else being able to freely attack them. so once again (and for the 3rd and final time) still a no go with those counterpoints.
so I say again, WHAT reason could you still possibly have to be so adamant about being against a vacation mode? and besides, even if they COULD do 3, all sir e would need to do is to disable re-supplying of ships for the last 1-2 minutes of play, where then anyone trying to build that last minute powership fleet would just get shot down. I simply do not see how any of your points are in all reality of the game, able to happen.
in short: Seither, for the love of all that is good, STOP comparing someone in vacation mode to someone who normally plays. the disadvantages of someone trying to abuse the vacation mode CAN be extreme, but IF they are truly simply wishing to be gone for a long time, they will be gone anyway, so instead compare someone in vacation mode to someone inactive for that time, because if they are going to just be inactive for a while, they will more then likely be gone for a couple weeks max, then be back plenty of time to re-strengthen themselves.
and even if the penalties WERE extreme, to the vacationeer, SO WHAT? then that would simply give people 1 less reason to abuse it, and leave it for only those who truly are using it for what it was intended to be.
oh, and FTP, I basically said what you just did.
which leads me to a second point, about your 'proposed' vacation mode idea, which can be shot down with this REAL situation.
If the #1 person did it, with even a 2 day wait, that is right there with the max turns you are able to have. so he goes into your vacation mode, comes back every 2 days to use all his credits and everything, and it will almost be like he played like normal. even with longer times, say 5 days, he comes back every 5 days, throws ALL his credits on hand, uses all his mission turns, and goes back in.
this could never happen with my version of it, because he leaves with 10 turns, he will come back, with 10 turns.
and even without it, the interest would still allow you to do it, just not as much, and without interest, you may as well go with my idea, as it will pretty much be the same.
oh, if he is allowed to attack every 24 hours, every 24 hours for a couple weeks, the person will lose up to 2/3 of 10% of all his segments. you do the math.
