Discussion About Likely Upcoming Merger

  • note that in malicious idea he would be number one in his rnew merged universe and gain a ton of targets. yet the 3 "bigger" unis (in which only the number 1's are that much bigger) get 0 new targets. jap has 12 active players all in which have an account in either merk or peg already, and merk has like 5 players where all of them have an account in jap or peg. so basically they are just losing their secondary account. your 700bn point account would be in the top 8 if u merged every universe together. only 3 accounts (1 player owns 2 of them) would be able to solo u. are you scared of competition? im just not seeing that there is that much of a gap and tbh in a few months there wont be a gap.

    I'm far from the only player to consider in my uni, or any other. THATS exactly why I state any uni should be able to merge up. Perhaps I DO want to go play in Pegasus where I can have fleets my size or larger.. but It would be incredibly selfish and stupid of me to suggest my ENTIRE uni be forced to go with me just because I might be up for that challenge. Most of Oberon is MUCH smaller than I, despite me not farming any of them...

    In my suggestion, players have the option to join my uni or another, so i'm not asking anyone to come be my target (I don't even farm players, to my other posts its not worth it anymore lol). I'm suggesting options that benefit the most players possible regardless of where I stand my suggestion would be the same. I'd love it if you could help me form a data-based alternative? Go run the numbers (like I did), is there a more optimum merge that successfully reduces the uni count with minimal settings changes and with minimal adding super small players to super large ones?

    You come to defend other uni's who might be below me on a baord.. but YOU are talking of my 700B to their 600B? Suggesting I should go take my 700B to a uni with multiple players running 2 trillion+. I'm missing the logic where thats more equitable? But I think I should absolutely have that option if i'm so inclined, without forcing the other 20+ active Oberon players of taking an even bigger challenge than I.

    @silverwind, I actually have alot of love and respect for you too, i'm sure you know, which is why you might feel disappointed or shocked. I know my comments are a little directed, I truly mean no disrespect, just want to pull you back to your own comments of being interested in hearing what people think, when I just read you responding only to suggest people listen to what you think. You've always been one of the people in this community I've felt to be most reasonable and tireless in your efforts to improve any situation. I appreciate your responses and initiations of the dialog. I don't mean for you or anyone to feel otherwise. I won't edit my comments and muddy the waters here, as I hate that behavior, but I hope we both move forward knowing where we stand toward one another :D

    XOs7XMZ.png

  • I'm no more scared of Volke than he might be of me. Everyone makes mistakes, and aside from either of us deciding to go out of our way to brute force the others account (likely just into vmode typically), it would just be a war of consistency, who makes the mistake first by falling alseep on the couch or forgetting to check a fleet save during a night out.

    I've personally been working VERY hard the last few months to catch up to Nusakan / Virgo / and Kallisto, all of which were ahead of me... as I've put in the effort and time to make sure I can compete with them in this merge, I would be very sad to just get slammed against someone much farther ahead of me, for no reason other than those players and corresponding community.. DONT Want the fight they are specially accusing me of avoiding lol. Go back in history.. i've been working hard to fight the skilled players of those unis.. and if i'm around for the merge to come after this one, logically Volke will be that next big target.. for me, its not the fight i'm looking forward to, and i'm sure hes not looking forward to the weak competition of my fleet vs his. I'm sure Worldofpain and many others that are similar in size are eager to have some fevered fleeting with me and the other uni's whos accounts have all but become expo farms the last year. I'm sure all of us would rather fight eachother than just wait around for a 2T account to get bored. Like i've posted even Volke and others might not be interested in flying for 500B (which they likely can't even harvest at this point, much like ourselves), when they coudl just keep flying expos safely and grow to set more .us records. I'm afraid of nothing other than small casual players trying to dictate the game for those with experience and effort and years of it behind them...

    My suggestion is based of data and gameplay experience.. not some personal fear of another player. No one wants to merge into a uni where they literally can't scratch their opponent, my option tries to consider that for everyone. ANY of the top players In my merge group could ACS vs me... the same can't be said for ANY G2 uni looking into the G1 unis I listed. You can try to make 'notes' about what my personal motivations are, but i'd be eager to see you solve the issue for even the top 10 ACTUAL players in each uni.. we all know just counting the #1 score isn't the only metric.

    XOs7XMZ.png

  • I think there Is alot of focus on top score when considering merges, but whats failed to be looked at is play style. Think that maybe my ENTIRE score is economy and EVERYONE is virgo is running fleet.. its not a 'fair' matchup at that point, and thats what you are trying to measure with score isn't it? Get more data to form a stronger arguement imo.

    further, lets talk about speed. Every merge candidate is voted more than once on their current settings. They are as such, VERY happy with their speed.. lets not reset that effort and throw it away? Virgo WANTS 6x fleet speed. Oberon WANTS 3x fleet speed (so far). Regardless of who plays where or what their score is... I think respecting those two preferences is important for EVERYONE in this merge. We should ensure we have fast and slow uni's available for all players, if you fail to do this you will see many players just go isntantly vmode.. and your merge just never happened... I've seen that first hand and found it VERY disappointing to basically only pick up 1-2 players in a merge because everyone else wasn't happy with a setting or two.

    I don't want virgo to be forced down to my slow speed if they don't want it. I don't want anyone in my uni or similar ones to have to fly at 6x if they don't want it. Give us options, let us pick what we think is appropriate. THATS WHY I MADE SECONDARY TARGETS. I don't want ANYONE joining my uni if they don't want to fly with me and I don't want to join any uni with speed/galaxy/deut settings that I dont' enjoy flying in.

    I like the pace of the game at 3x, thats why I play oberon and not the other unis, lets keep that kind of diversity. Merge is nice, but not if it just makes everyone "quit until the next [insert setting here] uni comes out". I've seen countless people post this following a merge, lets give them more options!

    XOs7XMZ.png

  • I feel for Volke and many others who play in multiple universes during a merge. Its tough to be faced with the idea of having to just perma vmode years of your hard work and lose the top spot of 10 uni's because they are too big and now are just 1.. I know its bittersweet to be 'able to just give it away to a buddy'

    I'm sure he, and many others of his tenure understand however, thats how it goes with the state of the game today. You play and dominate in multiple uni's and you are bound to merge into urself at some point. Even the last 6 months, i'm sure him and others saw it comming. I appreciate them not cluttering the boards with moans and complains for what MUST be a painful thing...

    Lets respect that spirit and focus not on yours or my individual hardship, but whats TRULY the best result for the MOST players.

    XOs7XMZ.png

  • And as far as Volke goes, who honestly wants to fight Volke?

    I heard Malicious isn't afraid? :pump:

    I think there Is alot of focus on top score when considering merges, but whats failed to be looked at is play style.


    I guess maybe the next project is redefining what score means so it can be used as a fair gauge?


    IDK how we can look at play style as a consideration for mergers.


    Someone loses out and it sucks but it's part of the merger, not everyone is going to be top ten anymore.


    I'm not against sliding the targets/exodus around, but you might mentally prepare yourself that if it's not the boogey man you have to deal with, it might be someone else whose also very good.

    ESeB8X4.png

  • I think there Is alot of focus on top score when considering merges, but whats failed to be looked at is play style. Think that maybe my ENTIRE score is economy and EVERYONE is virgo is running fleet.. its not a 'fair' matchup at that point, and thats what you are trying to measure with score isn't it? Get more data to form a stronger arguement imo.

    Now here I disagree. Total points should be the primary thing looked at. It doesn't matter if its mines, fleet, defenses, or laser tech 60. There is always different play styles, you chose the heavy economy likely because that's what you thought was the best route to go. Should we isolate all heavy fleets in one Uni? Should we have a Uni with pure miners? Segregate all play styles? No. Total points, while not a perfect representation, is the best you can go on to match accounts that would make a good merge.

    Have faith in direction you have taken the account, or if you for some reason did not foresee a merge with possible competition, then modify your account to meet the challenge. With a heavy economy and extra production it is not impossible to convert that into a sizable fleet to contend with others.

  • I haven't followed all the merge possiblities. But I will say that my nekkar.us account has basically been in perma vmode since it was merged to uni1. and the main reason for that was the completely unbalanced nature of that merge. At first it seemed like just the x1 verses were going to be part of that merge but then they allowed some x2 to choose to go there. and you had accounts that were 4x and 5x as big that merged into a x1. Virtually uncrashable, and virtually impossible to catch them to be competitive.. even if we had farmed 24/7 for 5years....


    The ultimate point of the merges should be to breath life into semi-dead servers by pitting all the active players together. However, if the active players are too far apart in terms of actual competition, you will just create an ultra dead merge. It's already tough enough to encourage inter active game play when the most profitable strategy is to expo farm or to try to snipe someone else's expo farm. and the competition becomes completely complacent and dull. Its so easy to wipe out players that are just focused on expo'ing all the time. Himalia is a really good example of what happens when a hunter shows up to an expo party and you dont have merchant or marketplace to inflate your account.


    There is just a lot to be said about merging out of balanced universes, in the end though, we all know its not going to be for the players enjoyment or for their competitive objectives. So it almost feels like a complete waste of time to talk about it from a high level of play.

    daKspu0.jpg


    Made by DISASTER

    Edited once, last by Worldofpain ().

  • merge all to peg

    Nope.... UNI 1 is a single speed server and no one here that I know of would want to merge with a faster fleet speed.
    Really the Final 2 mergers should be choice of UNI1 and PEG.
    I have offered my thoughts a number of times as to how new servers should be played out to.... 1 make profit, Keep people playing. These thoughts are as listed.
    New servers should have time 2 time limits and always have a lower setting than the final merge. New servers last full active for about 6 months and then die off except loyal or high ranking players. So 6 months after a new server opens it should allow players who want to merge to established servers and then at the 18 month mark force all players to merge somewhere. Thus removing said server.
    New servers are like testing grounds for new and old players to test out restarting and playing styles while trying to take top rank. Those that make it stick it out most times till there is almost no one left and are forced to merge or Vmode for a long time. Not having the option to merge after a set time limit pretty much stalls their account and they move on. Older players who have been playing for the better part of a decade and are now much older have the funds to pay up more often. Young players tend to get board after a set time and tend to move on and find another game to play.
    These thoughts can be seen in players coming back years later to play again. This can be seen in post and chats where people talking about coming back after 1 year, 5 years or even 10 years. I myself have been playing since 2006 and non stop on UNI1 for the better part of almost 9 years.

    Forced to merge Fall of 2020 to Spica
    Universe 1 US Since Nov 2011
    Playing since April 2006
    Cmltoe-Jow.gif

  • Now here I disagree. Total points should be the primary thing looked at.

    You know I read this and really thought for a second. Taking a step back from the topic that inspired it. Isn't the main benefit of this merge item (vs the previous structure of merges) that it gives more control / choice to the player?

    I think we should be working away from GF 'looking at' anything. Let the players decide where they want to go. It's clear that having primary and secondary options for merges are doable? Does that mean we can have 3 or 4? I love the diverse opinions and desires of players like myself and Worldofpain that would rather fly hard at eachother and flex our mastery of complex game mechanics rather than hope I can clock more hours on Expo-Simulator per day for a year solid and somehow negotiate marketplace trade to catch up to Volke or someone else who really feels strongly about their uni settings or working to X position soon.

    Let players have the control to continue to work toward whats important and engaging to them, lets not force entire communities of players into something just because pf some arbitrary number.

    That being said Volke, I still disagree. If your #1 account had 2Trillion in economy and 100M fleet, I'd happily go toe to toe with you with a fleet of 600M. Even with ur econ, I could outfarm you with expeditions, so the point gap means nothing, if anything I'd have an advantage for a while until you could build a fleet to fly with. TOTAL POINTS, has alot behind it that greatly effects how the game is played some of it is easy to view like military score board, or research points etc. Some of it is MUCH harder like Alliance size, activity, and consistency in strength. Build power, in terms of other players supplying ships or Deut, etc. There are so many metrics that get overlooked that play a BIG role in 'fairness' of a fight. I'd agree with you more if the uni had no-acs, no market, no DM, etc, but even then my first example kinda breaks down a simple total vs total comparison into disfunction.

    XOs7XMZ.png

  • My only issue with the groups you put up Malicious is the lack of slower options.


    Any uni that is currently 1x or 2x fleet speed should have a target option with either of those speeds.


    Wezn has some decently built up accounts now, but I think most of us here want a slower and more peaceful option. We still have quite a few collectors that just want to play the game like it was pre-V7.


    ------------


    I'd have no issue merging with more players of similar points to myself at the same fleet speed or slower, but I don't want to be dumped into a higher fleet speed alongside people familiar with playing at that speed, who also have much stronger militiaries. Especially coming from a non-ACS uni where most have focused on eco instead of fleet.


    -----------


    Overall, I like Midnight's idea the most. It would give us fast pace and slow pace options, but I understand that it would put Malicious and Oberon in the same situation Malicious's proposal would put me in. Forced into a higher speed uni.


    To me, after thinking about it a bit more, it seems like the most ideal option would be to keep the group 1 both of you proposed where the 3 big uni's get merged, but for everything else, have targets servers with mostly similar settings for everything but fleet speed.


    Just have 4 target uni's for everything other than Peg/Jap/Merk with:


    Target 1 (Uni 1): 7x Eco, 1x Fleet, .5 Deut, 50% DF, 9 Galaxies

    Target 2 (Yildun or Wezn w/ ACS enabled): 7x Eco, 2x Fleet, .5 Deut, 80% DF, 9 Galaxies

    Target 3 (Oberon): 7x Eco, 3x Fleet, .5 Deut, 80% DF, 9 Galaxies

    Target 4 (Virgo): 7x Eco, 6x Fleet, .5 Deut, 80% DF, 9 Galaxies


    5x Fleet excluded as no .US servers have it. As for 4x Fleet, 2 of the 3 servers that have it are too small to merge. As for Dorado, maybe just leave them out of it for now also? They're small enough that they could use merge item to move out to any of the target uni's post-merge if they desired.


    The newer Uni's still need time to develop, so I'd leave them out of the process. If people really want to leave them, then as with Dorado, merge item will be a thing.



    ------


    Edit:


    And even with that idea, I realize that there would be large gap between some players on some of the targets. But no matter what any of us can think of, there will always be a gap. There simply is no perfect solution.


    But myself and I imagine most others would prefer to see a comparable gap to what they already have on their servers, with a choice of settings that will let them handle it the way they prefer.


    Dumping most of the .US servers into the target servers I put there would also allow for smaller-medium sized players to easily move around to a different speed if they find the initial one they choose doesn't work for them.


    --------


    And as for merging and doing a vote change afterwards, I don't think that's a viable option at all. The 80% requirement to pass a vote would simply lead to a large amount of people being stuck on settings they don't want to play on.

    Edited once, last by CasualSAB: Added some reasoning behind my thoughts. ().

  • Its going to be impossible to line everyone up alphabetically by height.

    Maybe create a few new unis without "names" and offer players options.


    For example, a few new unis 7x-2x, a couple of them 7x-5x, each with a point maximum to join.

    I realize that is similar to what many have spent half a page saying, but no system will satisfy all the players. One thing they could start with is in-game messages with a link to polls with a variety of options, so players actually come and provide input, because 15 people isnt much of a quorum, its kind of hard to say what is more popular without a lot more input.

  • The only things that matter to me are the fleet speed and ACS on..

    currently playing 6x and i wouldnt go under 5x for sure i would probably loose the will to play and vmode the acc

  • Merge all active players in one uni delete pts start from 0 erase classes

    game on .... best choice ;)

    The last transmission we received from the expedition fleet was this magnificent picture of the opening of a black hole.


    We All GoT Left Behind !