Sprog wrote:

Glitch wrote:Well it's only the BIG players that complain about the " newb" protection because somebody outsmarted them and can grow without much fear ( kind of like all the top players in the same alliance issue. However, if there were a thought of changing the "newb" protection , maybe it should be a time frame base, like 30/days. And add a 10 Ruby option to buy a 3 day "protection"

Most have agreed that a time period (3 months seems about right to majority) is by far the fairest way of dealing with this matter. As already stated above in rules, there is protection for new players....this has been abused imo by certain players. Ftr I disagree with 10 rubies for 3 day protection....we already know certain players buy most of their fleet...they will just spend a little more and stay in ruby protection.

I agree with the first. There should be a limited TIME for new players. The Ruby side of things I also do not agree with. Not all players have the ability to buy rubies, whether that be because of the restrictive use of PAYPAL or the fact that they just cannot afford it.

However, none of this has any real bearing on what will NOT happen. Zorg has spoken. Contradicted himself
Again, but he has spoken. This is not unusual. Whilst we have the FAQ, the statements that are there and have been since I have been playing, incidentally 5 years, the references that we make to these things, only to be told that as of yesterday, because it suddenly suits them, we are told that it's not "newer player protection".

So Zorg, about time you changed this little snippet in the FAQ's just to stop confusing the matter. For your reference again.

" Z O R G FAQ's

"*Is there any kind of protection for new players ?
-Yes. The protection intends to protect new players till they learn the very basics. However you really need to learn how to fleet save as fast as possible.""

Oz, why is this super noob thig such a big issue for you? Haven't seen a supernoob in standard

It's called a discussion.

mightyoz wrote:

Sprog wrote:

Glitch wrote:Well it's only the BIG players that complain about the " newb" protection because somebody outsmarted them and can grow without much fear ( kind of like all the top players in the same alliance issue. However, if there were a thought of changing the "newb" protection , maybe it should be a time frame base, like 30/days. And add a 10 Ruby option to buy a 3 day "protection"

Most have agreed that a time period (3 months seems about right to majority) is by far the fairest way of dealing with this matter. As already stated above in rules, there is protection for new players....this has been abused imo by certain players. Ftr I disagree with 10 rubies for 3 day protection....we already know certain players buy most of their fleet...they will just spend a little more and stay in ruby protection.

I agree with the first. There should be a limited TIME for new players. The Ruby side of things I also do not agree with. Not all players have the ability to buy rubies, whether that be because of the restrictive use of PAYPAL or the fact that they just cannot afford it.

However, none of this has any real bearing on what will NOT happen. Zorg has spoken. Contradicted himself
Again, but he has spoken. This is not unusual. Whilst we have the FAQ, the statements that are there and have been since I have been playing, incidentally 5 years, the references that we make to these things, only to be told that as of yesterday, because it suddenly suits them, we are told that it's not "newer player protection".

So Zorg, about time you changed this little snippet in the FAQ's just to stop confusing the matter. For your reference again.

" Z O R G FAQ's

"*Is there any kind of protection for new players ?
-Yes. The protection intends to protect new players till they learn the very basics. However you really need to learn how to fleet save as fast as possible.""

I really have to laugh at the notion of not doing something because some players can't afford rubies. Like it or not, they are a part of this game and, as such, drive the profitability and " flexibility_ of game changes. If you want something changes, it needs to benefit both gamers AND the game owners.. Which is what I was attempting to do. There could also be a 30 day timer on it so you can not permanently stay immune.

Temporary paid ruby protection is a terrible idea. Not because not all players can buy rubies, but rather because it would decrease PvP and be incredibly disruptive of game dynamics. Paying for safety is a bad idea.

Glitch wrote:Well it's only the BIG players that complain about the " newb" protection because somebody outsmarted them and can grow without much fear ( kind of like all the top players in the same alliance issue. However, if there were a thought of changing the "newb" protection , maybe it should be a time frame base, like 30/days. And add a 10 Ruby option to buy a 3 day "protection"

Knowing that Zorg has players from many different countries, many with primary languages other than English, I'll give this guy the benefit of the doubt and assume he's unfamiliar with the term "outsmart". Let me clarify this, young friend. to outsmart someone is to "defeat or get the better of (someone) by being clever or cunning".

As Death said, supernoobs are in a very tough position with a serious lack of basic structures that would allow them to be good fleeters. They're also not the best raiders around, due to the lack of researches that would unlock faster ships, more fleet slots, etc. Not to mention the resources they can't get from the mines they can't upgrade. Therefore, such players will never outgrow the ones you call "BIG" players, nor will they have enough to defeat them in battle. Hard to think someone who choose to be weaker outsmarted the other players.

In fact, what I said before was

Fuches wrote:Using a biggish fleet to hit only newbs defeats the point of such test, not to mention how it delays growth and keeps new players from staying.

About this being exclusively a complaint from "BIG" players, as I also stated before: I see many complaints from new players in standard. The fact that they don't use the forums doesn't mean they don't care about the problem. And as long as one decent player ask me to, I'll defend his/her interest here.

I agree that a time limit would fix the problem, and Pulsar couldn't be more eloquent when she says

Pulsar wrote:would decrease PvP and be incredibly disruptive of game dynamics

As for Death's question, look around. There are players close to 1 million points with fleets too big for a noob. They only attack new, weaker players. If you happen to find a coward like that, perhaps you could hit him with your own fleet.

If I am not mistaken, this complain derives from a X-TREME player who border lined the protection rules to keep his fleet out of reach from bigger players. I am mostly guessing that the most irritating part is that through fleet control, a player can define when he will be out and when he will be in the protection, which gives him an advantage. This is though the perspective of view from those who complain.

In my perspective, I somewhat fail to see what kind of advantage this is that merely protects you from a guy with 100x more points than you or 200x or 1000x. The enemy is still larger, bigger and continues to grow as well.

In my perspective, looking Standard example, I find player protection to be working well for our game. Standard server, which has been the least populated server is constantly gaining ground.

In my perspective, it is not even a big issue. If you look at the number of posters complaining, my words can be proven.

Complaining is one thing. Providing working solutions is another. I want to give credit to Gozar who said that we should maintain it but also put a time limit. It is a solution yes, coming from the player who first suggested we increase this protection (beyond the initial 100k). A solution that is not really necessary, as I see facts.

I am open to be proved that I am wrong though. With the right arguments though; specific and to the point. Not with the cheap arguments that are used everywhere else. I am here to help after all.

As has been suggested previously, a re-wording of things, like the FAQ's. This is where confusion first starts.

The other point that you have raised. "In my perspective, looking Standard example, I find player protection to be working well for our game. Standard server, which has been the least populated server is constantly gaining ground. "

Yes, Standard has improved because of this. But, you have stated that this is a complaint with respect to Xtreme. It is becoming an issue in Standard as well now, without mentioning player names. There is the problem with newbs in my own alliance, they are increasingly hit by these so called "super newbs". Over and over. Because of their own protection, we are unable to offer them moonshots!

Zorg stated "In my perspective, it is not even a big issue. If you look at the number of posters complaining, my words can be proven."

This really proves nothing. A lot of new players have not become accustomed to the forums as yet, they have better things to deal with rather than posting, for example, using their time to dodge Super Newbs! lol.
I am asked by new players in my alliance to raise the issue for them, so, you see the same players complaining because, once again, they have been asked to by their own players.


As Gozar said, among other players who have also stated, make the "New Player Protection" as stated in the FAQ's a time limited thing. What that time is, that's up to you in your infinite wisdom. Whether it be three months, six months, a year??

Whether we can hit these "Super newbs" or not is not the question and not the reason behind the complaints. The reason is because, firstly, as we see it, these players are turning other real new players away. Secondly, we get these complaints ourselves, as leaders of alliances that have REAL new players in our ranks. We adhere to the milking rules, we cannot send our newer members an overly abundant supply of resources. What we can send is not enough for them to deter these "super newbs". In effect, that stuff is taken off them.

The time limit on player protection should be the ONLY real way around this.

Based on your response, I see two issues:
1)You cannot give to your alliance mates moonshots
2)You cannot defend them against stronger players within their reach.

I can see two easy solutions.

1)A way to allow moonshots. Perhaps this can be done by temporarily allowing other players of your alliance to attack your planets.

2)Send ACS Defends to your mates in need.

Here is a solution fresh newbie gets 10 day protection no active player can spy or attack same to them they can not attack any active player once the ten days are up it protection will 1/5 up down till u reach 100k point then 1/4 up 300k points then 1m points 1\3 bottom tier player still have protection from middle and top tier players and like add a new system for all players once you been attcked a automatically protection kicks in a small time period were u can not be attacked ie 5% loss of ships defense 6hours 10% loss 12hours 15% 18hours and so on. Under this we can get rid of the bashing rule I think this to the point