mightyoz wrote: Perhaps a raising of the safety margin of points for newer players. Alongside that, their ability to attack others, 1/5th points ratio would have to increased to.

Sorry; OZ,
won't work
0-Crack tried that; even up to 500,000 points,
as I scan the universe there are only approx. 20-30 players that are not --"Green"-- too me
-- New-Bee protection to me ---
and half of those are in long term Vacation
in other words;
my potential targets in an entire universe is maybe 10-15 players

--"WoW--
now that really creates a lot of Action

all these Space battle games have the same problems,
retaining old as well as new sign ins / accts / players
and they have all tried the same fixes --
if it didn't work for them, why do we think it will work for Zorg

when you keep doing the same things
Why should you not expect to get the same results

Players you are assuming that there will always be an Alliance member online to ACS Defend

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

Its not easy to ACS Defend,
1st, an Alliance Member / Buddy needs to have a fleet available,
be close enough to your buddy that the fleet time is faster than the attacking fleet,
and have enough Deut. available and is willing to spend that Fuel to defend an Alliance mate,
also willing to risk his / her fleet to a possible reverse Ninja as the defending Fleet return to its home Planet / MooN

But it does add to the "risk" of attacking a player even if he is offline
when there is a good chance you will run into an ACS Fleet,
or the possibility of a Ninja on your fleet as it returns home

as it stands now,
the only way you know a Mate is under attack is if they PM you or post it in the Alliance Chat,

#2:
One of the complaints now is,
its almost impossible to crash the larger players fleets,

this gives you and your alliance chance to PoP some of his fleet


Having played on a site where this was active,
I can say from experience,
it adds a new dimension to the game and created a lot of Player - vs - Player action

Buzz

Nuada wrote:Take fleetsaving out of the game entirely?

No. This is not a notion I could embrace.

Fuches wrote:

Do you really think that being able to go offline without fleetsaving is so important that it's absence will remove our player base?

.

Now Nuada, Fuches,
do you really think players will cease to Fleet Save on the Hope and a prayer

that their Alliance will be online and capeable of defending them in case of an attack

do you honestly believe that ???
would you ??
so if Zorg implemented this
you would just cease to FS, is that correct
and say your prayers and go beddy-Bye

then they won't either

Look it will not work it will be to easy to be abused the balance of defense/attacking is fine as it now this would tip in favor of defense

Fuches wrote:
Also, you claim

Buzzard wrote:
Zorg must implement into the game play the things that create the activity amongst the player base
that makes the game worth playing;
else things are going to stay the same as the are now,
and Zorg might as well close up shop and we all go somewhere else

Do you really think that being able to go offline without fleetsaving is so important that it's absence will remove our player base? That being unable to attack other players is the best way to create activity? If you enjoy this game, play it. If you need to feel safe at all times and still want to build, you can always buy some LEGO.

I believe you have good intentions, and that is why you insist in this discussion. Still, you started it proposing an increased PVP. After my argument, you changed to retaining players. If that is what this is about, there is an active discussion on the subject in the forums.

.
No, I didn't change the subject
Player Participation and Retention of the player base are all one and the same
No Player Participation = No retention of the existing players nor new players that join staying active