getting back planets

[Assisi]

I want to talk a bit about the situation between former house Walhalla and Darkflame.

Mikito (Walhalla) integrates Darkflame and get 25% of his planets. Soon after ... Mikito quits the game taking away Darkflame's planets for good. This is not so realistic ( even Kosmor is a game ).

Would be better if there would be a period of time ( let's say 3 months ) in which the planets would return to the former owner if the actual one quit.
This will allow the former owner to do something to get them back.

Regards !
Assisi
_________________
Member of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis

[Aurion]

Well, the ruler disappeared, the whole empire collapsed. Not only the government, but the military too. All vanished in a single day. It's not that unlikely that there would be a big chaos, so it's nut unrealistic that they are neutral again. It's not like the planets themselves do not exist anymore.

Also, auto-return would probably not be fair, too. What if someone quits after 3 months and a day? What if person A gets conquered by person B, who gets conquered by person C? Person B quits right away, person C waits a day longer.

The planets can not return to the previous owner in this case, should they return to person A? What if there are where (all quit) several people between person A and the one quitting?

Also, what if the one who conquered you just flies away some months, relocates his wp and sits there doing nothing? You'll have to conquer the planets one by one, even if the other players is doing nothing for months, just because he didn't quit.

What about if person A conquers the neutral planet X and holds it for a year until person B gets his hands on the planet, person A gets it back by coonquering B or the planet itself on the next day, and after a month, he quits. Should the planet return to B? He only hold it for a day.

People could, and surely will, abuse this, in every possible way. Conquering someone despite wanting to quit, and only waiting 3 months to ensure the planets are gone, even though they are not actively playing.

On the other hand it does make planet saving even easier, just ensure peopel conquer each other now and then. Like, you conquer me, alpha conquers you, i conquer alpha. If any of us quits, the planets stay "in the family" so to say.

Not sure if it's really a good idea. It's annoying if peopel conquer you and quit right after, but at least thats it.

If it gets implemented, it should and probably will be for Kosmor 2 anyways.

[Paul_Atreides]

Ok, perhaps planets automatically changing ownership when their owner quits cannot be implemented. Instead, have then enter a neutral but colonized state in which they can be recovered without expending house members. The planets need trade and law brought to them and will willingly join the empire of anyone with a warplanet who visits within 3 months.

Otherwise the galactic population will face steep declines when people quit, and when people are defeated and start losing planets they often quit, removing those planets from play. The people attacking them have usually used up all house members and can't re-colonize them even if they were the original owner.

Perhaps the system that only lets small, young imperators colonize neutral planets needs to be changed to prevent large sections of the galaxy from going black and empty when a large defeated or bored player quits.

[Maelstroem]

Hola,

while I can totally understand the urge to keep and hold planetary ownership, I can also tell you, that those vanishing emperors are the only way to desettle the galaxy again - it is an important game mechanics, otherwise the galaxy would be full of "unusued" stars.

Aurion´s explanation (chaos and turmoil) is a good one .

If we get more players in K2, the fear from black areas in the galaxy will be lifted, I am most sure. Enjoy the silence, for now .

Best regards,
Maelstroem
_________________
Commander Maelstroem in the house BG

[Aurion]

I agree that it is a problem when big players quit and all that remains are huge empty areas of space, but it's also a problem if people gather more and more planet. If every planet would be saved, we would end with 10 people having 1000+ planets, with over 900 basically just sitting around, as nearly every goes to the SRT.

Of course, we would remove the SRT again, to support huge empires and fleets, but Kosmor is supposed to be about the houses, with 1000 planets and a fleet of 1 million cp or more, you don't need a house. Unless other people got that much, too. Nevertheless, without the SRT, it would be better to keep everything for yourself.

The main problem is the amount of players. Kosmor was supposed to be played with more players, especially with more players joining all the time.

For every big player who quits, there should be ten new players starting in the hole he left. Some would leave, others would grow, starting the cycle anew. And all the while, there would be new people starting at the rim, too, to expand the borders of the colonized galaxy.

Currently, this is not happening, leading either to big holes, or to the centralization of power into the hands of less and less people. One day, we could have one player holding 10.000 planets, but him being all alone in the night.

As this will not change before Kosmor 2 (lets assume it does change with Kosmor 2..), it might be a good idea to change what happens to planets when people quit. Your idea might be a better way than the initial suggestion, as there are less question left to be answered i'd say, though it's not like i could foresee all consequences, maybe i'm totally blind for the advantages it would bring.

As i said before, it's most likely for Kosmor 2 anyways, unless it's only a real small change, like setting the owner upon deletion not to neutral, but to himself or so, which could be a matter of minutes, if not only seconds.

Implementing a full fledged auto-retransfers system, with multiple previous owners, time limit etc. would probably take more time, unless he already has this in place, and only needs to switch it on.

Maybe Maelstroem could comment on this, as i assume he is aware of this problem.

[Ancient]

as to Walhalla quiting, when he first quit a few days into quiting he canceled it then there was a few days until he quit again so there was 31 days for players to save as many of those built up planets as they could.
I sent a message to Aurion about saving those planets.
note the game date and the game date today
Date: 62/3507 to Date: 93/3507 that was 31 days for players to get together and save the built up planets that where lost.
=========================================
Aurion#kosmor.com
Date: 62/3507
Subject: planets lost from kosmor

Hi Aurion

Seems a shame to lose even more planets
The imperator 'Mikito', house 'Fuego-Walhalla', proclaims that he will retire in 13 day(s)!

The imperator '-', house 'Walhalla', proclaims that he will retire in 13 day(s)!

2. Walhalla Councilor of the House - 541,475 millions

Thats a lot of planets to lose in the game.
Any chance of saving them with players in that area?

=========================================
As to Mikito there was 13 days for players to get together to try to save planets he had.


Galactic news of the day 62/3507
Retirements of Imperators
The imperator '-', house 'Walhalla', proclaims that he will retire in 13 day(s)!
The imperator 'Mikito', house 'Fuego-Walhalla', proclaims that he will retire in 13 day(s)!

Anyone that uses the delete account system that shows up in the forum Galactic News.
Then players have 13 days to get together and try to get and save as many built up planets as they can.
If the players can not get together to save the built up planets or if a lot of players are not very active or just lack of communication that where able to work with each others in the area to save those planets.
Then it is our fault if we lose those built up planets for not working it out together with good communication to save the built up planets.

And I am not talking about saving a neutral planet that become nuetral after a player quits, but about planets that where built up in population and saving these built up population planets.

As to players that just go fully inactive and then deleted without a 13 days warning in the forum Galactic News, then it is up the the exisiting players in the game to keep track if a player is inactive and to get these planets from fully inactive players before he is deleted.
Terms of use and game rules
5. Accounts that are inactive for more than 3 weeks (21 days), will be deleted automatically from the system.
New accounts will be in a probation period, where they will be deleted after 4 days of inactivity.

I think the system is fine as it, you get at lest 13 days to act or we should know when a player is fully inactive prior to 21 days.
It is up to the existing players to communicate and sort out saving built up planets that can be lost by players quitting one way or another.

Slight changes that could be made are increase the period from 13 days to 21 days for those that use the delete system which shows up in the forum Galactic News.
And for those that just go inactive that does NOT show up in the forum Galactic News, change from 21 days to 28 days and it would be nice if it showed up in the forum Galactic News, that a player has been inactive when his been inactive for 14 days then a count down in Galactic News.

if a player wants time out they have 30 days with a temporary replacement, and after that then they can always leave a message on the forum if they are going tro be inactive for a couple of weeks or so.
but with 14 days left to go of inactivity exsisting players should be thinking of saving the built up planets by taking them,

[Assisi]

Well ... the discussion got complicated.
I will write only about 2 aspects:

1. SRT must remain active or the new players/houses will never stand any chance. Think only about Nikoy that has alone 800 ... maybe 900 planets. Or if The Order gather all his subs that now are more or less independent. There are also other examples ...

2. When I wrote about getting back planets ... I meant only those planets that were recently conquered by a player that suddenly decides to quit.

Let's think about a possible real situation ( in a distant future). Those planets will maintain their allegiance to the old house now that the oppressor has gone. The oppressor that decides to go to another realm ... can take with him only their own people but cannot force or persuade the others in such short time (let's say 3 months) to leave their homes.
Maybe even some of the oppressor people might decide to remain ... but this will complicate the discussion and I will drop it.

The debate can continue about the period of time or whether all the planets to return or not but in rest ... everything is clear and realistic.
And easy to implement ... I guess even if it will start just with K2.

Also ... in no way this will not lead to huge houses or whatever was discussed above.

Best regards !
Assisi
_________________
Member of the House Assisi in the house Nemesis

[Maelstroem]

Aurion,

I fear the change would be rather big and it would not help too much as more players are needed desparately. I am totally aware of the situation with few players and really am pushing K2 as much as possible even to a point where rl friends wander off with their head shaking and say "Maelstroem is nuts"

Have a great day, y´all,
Maelstroem
_________________
Commander Maelstroem in the house BG

[Aurion]

Do you have anything in mind to avoid situations like this in K2, or do you just hope there will be enough players, especially a constant influx of new ones who stay(a while and listen)?

[Maelstroem]

While K2s hearts still are the ever-running, daily turn based galaxies (one for .de, one for .com, the same games we play now), the central idea is to have shorter-running, dynamic galaxies (more action and equality for newbies with the hope for a constant influx, ofc). These "high-speed-games" are at some point connected to the core. At this connection time, I expect way more dynamics in the game, because whole galaxies will "clash together", hoping for fights of a higher magnitude, not houses vs houses but rather galaxies vs galaxies. Of course, it all depends on the acceptance by players. There will always be "lost terroriries" and there will always be "gained territories", this is imho substantial for long-term motivation.

Best regards,
Maelstroem
_________________
Commander Maelstroem in the house BG

[Paul_Atreides]

A short term improvement: Add a warning that an inactive account will be deleted that will run for 21 or 30 days after 2 weeks of inactivity. A large player with hundreds of planets cannot have many saved in just 2 weeks. Also, extend the existing warning of retirement to a longer duration to allow sufficient time for travel and planet salvage. It is a big galaxy and 2 weeks to save several hundred planets is unrealistic. If you wanted to make a formula, you could allow swifter account deletion for small players and slower deletion with more warning for those with many planets.