NationStates Jolt Archive


Gameplay and random update times

Crazy girl
14-07-2004, 10:49
Since I know a lot of invaders and defenders read this forum..

I want to start a discussion on random update times, and their effect on the invasions/defending game.

These random times means no timed invasions or liberations anymore.
You'd have to sit in the region for hours, because you don't know when it will update..

And does anyone have any idea on when the cycle starts or ends?
It seems to begin earlier than on the old server...

Anyway...
thoughts, anyone?
Arnarchotopia
14-07-2004, 12:17
Given that for a lot of people defending and invading is the most fun you can have in this game I think they should sort it out so that the update time is not random. Sitting around waiting for the defence to finish is not fun (also you lose the real buzz of multi regional defences!) and its practically impossible for invaders to take a region if they cant plan properly (not that I have much sympathy for them).

Whether or not it should be spread over a period of time like before or all regions update at the same time is another matter though…
Unfree People
14-07-2004, 12:57
I hate the random update times. Not only does it ruin invading and defending, it makes it next to impossible to refound a region with hawkers around. I'd have to sit in front of the computer the entire day refreshing the page while hoping someone isn't refreshing faster.
Micgmac
14-07-2004, 12:58
the update time (somewhere around 12pm GMT) clearly favors Euros and Aussies - its not a stretch for them to get up at this time but it's a strain putting together something for Americans who need to get up at 3-5am.
Juxtapositions
14-07-2004, 14:38
I didn't think I'd like it at first. (It invalidates a lot of data I've collected over the last year). So far it's turned out to be a big advantage from the invasion standpoint. Since invaders typically strike without warning, those regions that are targets don't know to be on the lookout so they aren't watching.
However Invaders always watch though so the defenders can't just pop in at update time, they have to arrrive before the 2AM EST start of update (There's your answer CG). So all we have to do is pop in at 2AM EST, check, and then go to bed where as before there was a 20 minute window due to the flux in update times.

I still say as soon as a nations endorsements are greater than the current delegate the switch should happen right then. Aren't triggers supported in the DB nationstates uses? Would be a lot more effective, then they wouldn't have to poll for Delegate changes it would just happen.
Unistrut
14-07-2004, 15:53
The randomness of the updates has caused me no small amount of frustration. Why was this changed? :confused: It has taken what was a pretty level playing field and tilted it toward the aggressors.
White Lotus Eaters
15-07-2004, 00:33
To my mind, both the new random update and mod rules have definitely tilted the balance here back in favour of invaders.

There's a point here: the rules shouldn't favour either invader or defender organisations, they should favour natives of regions who want to live in peace.

My hope is that after a few more regions are invaded and/or griefed, with the resulting flurry of accusations and counter-accusations and appeals to the mods for intervention, they will become heartily sick of this and petition the Powers That Be to restore fixed update times.


White Lotus Eaters
UN Delegate, Urbanites (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_region/region=urbanites)
1 Infinite Loop
15-07-2004, 05:45
I think this is kinda funny considering how many Defenders were whining and crying for update times to be randomized. And now seem to be singing a different story.
Myrdinn
15-07-2004, 05:48
Exactly! You have to admit, though, that the randomized update times have added some more drama in the game.
Ballotonia
15-07-2004, 12:06
I think this is kinda funny considering how many Defenders were whining and crying for update times to be randomized. And now seem to be singing a different story.

How many were there? I never heard one defender even asking for that.

Ballotonia
Defaultia
18-07-2004, 19:13
How many were there? I never heard one defender even asking for that.

Ballotonia
I've only asked for random update times in the Warzones.
Nolaerie
20-07-2004, 06:37
I was wondering whether the UN update times being randomized have different effects on the refounding of regions.

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

My opinion on randomization is still being formed with regards to non-Warzone regions. In Warzones however the randomization process defeats the very purpose of the Warzones -- making conquering them next to impossible.

And I understand that Warzones were intended to deflect invaders (or for this defender nation who gets an itch for Warzone play ;) from regular regions.

I think this kind of update will ultimately kill off the Warzones if not dropped within them.
Myrdinn
20-07-2004, 07:49
Does anyone know if there has been an official explanation about the random update times?
Great Bight
21-07-2004, 04:45
I'll support them. In my case it puts the advantage squarely where it belongs, out of the hands of invaders.
Pope Hope
21-07-2004, 09:58
How many were there? I never heard one defender even asking for that.

Ballotonia

Me neither, not-a-one. I don't know who would have even thought of that before now.

It does seem to interfere with refounding, as the strongest point against it.
Crazy girl
21-07-2004, 12:03
these random update times seriously mess with the invasion/defending/liberating game.

and GB......i'm not even going to respond to that ;)
Myrth
21-07-2004, 13:16
The update time remains the same. It's the order of the update that is random. e.g. you can't always be sure that The Pacific will update after Lazarus.
Attitude 910
22-07-2004, 03:06
I think this hurts both invaders and defenders but it really hurts defenders more because they are a lot more organized then invaders. As an Inavder I could careless about the update time because I was never up or never home at like 3:00AM PST.


My Two Cents
1 Infinite Loop
22-07-2004, 04:54
right before this forum came on line when we were sill on old Creaky there were about three or four topics about randomizind the update times, all initiated by decenders.
White Lotus Eaters
22-07-2004, 10:39
right before this forum came on line when we were sill on old Creaky there were about three or four topics about randomizind the update times, all initiated by decenders.
By "defenders", do you mean:

• members of large multi-regional defending groups, who enjoy yomping in mob-handed to battle the evil invaders?

or

• delegates of peaceful regions who want to keep a wary eye on their homes?

I think we should be told ...
Attitude 910
23-07-2004, 03:33
Ten bucks that Loop means the first one cause thats what defenders means to me
Goobergunchia
23-07-2004, 06:39
right before this forum came on line when we were sill on old Creaky there were about three or four topics about randomizind the update times, all initiated by decenders.

Since all of the topics are still here, I believe that I am within my rights in requesting a link or links.
Spoffin
23-07-2004, 12:17
Since all of the topics are still here, I believe that I am within my rights in requesting a link or links.
They're here.... not easy to find though.
Arnarchotopia
23-07-2004, 16:32
To my mind, both the new random update and mod rules have definitely tilted the balance here back in favour of invaders.

There's a point here: the rules shouldn't favour either invader or defender organisations, they should favour natives of regions who want to live in peace.

My hope is that after a few more regions are invaded and/or griefed, with the resulting flurry of accusations and counter-accusations and appeals to the mods for intervention, they will become heartily sick of this and petition the Powers That Be to restore fixed update times.


White Lotus Eaters
UN Delegate, Urbanites (http://www.nationstates.net/cgi-bin/index.cgi/target=display_region/region=urbanites)

I disagree I think they should always favour the defender because all a defender wants is to not defend, for there to be no invasions so that we can get on with enjoying the game...its because of us that so many regions who bother not to help or hinder can sit back and indulge in things like RPing.
Spoffin
24-07-2004, 00:55
I disagree I think they should always favour the defender because all a defender wants is to not defend, for there to be no invasions so that we can get on with enjoying the game...its because of us that so many regions who bother not to help or hinder can sit back and indulge in things like RPing.
Well, thats a big can of bovine excrement.

You might as well say laws should always favour white people, or black people, or liberal people, or happy people. All people want to enjoy things. All NS players want to enjoy the game, why else would they play it? What makes your (or any defenders) enjoyment of the game more worthy than any other persons?

Some defenders would like to see an end to invasions I'm sure, but most sensible ones see it as a legitimate and interesting facet of the game. If there were no invaders, you'd have a lot of bored defenders. Thats about the only circumstances where I'd consider invading somewhere myself.

Defenders= good.
Moralistic, holier-than-thou defenders = bad.
Arnarchotopia
24-07-2004, 19:06
My dear Spoffin when you finally decide which side of the fence you sit on we will all take you a bit more seriously! This game wasn't invented to let people swipe the Delegacy and empty out a region (that natives put alot of efforts into building) so my idea would favour those who actually want to enjoy the game; the neutral natives.

You analogy of favouring white people over others from another background is trite and foolish (speaking as someone who actualy works very hard in the anti racist movement); if there was to be a biase it would be for very good reasons (eg affirmative action etc).
Spoffin
25-07-2004, 03:45
My dear Spoffin when you finally decide which side of the fence you sit on we will all take you a bit more seriously! This game wasn't invented to let people swipe the Delegacy and empty out a region (that natives put alot of efforts into building) so my idea would favour those who actually want to enjoy the game; the neutral natives.

You analogy of favouring white people over others from another background is trite and foolish (speaking as someone who actualy works very hard in the anti racist movement); if there was to be a biase it would be for very good reasons (eg affirmative action etc).Appeal to nature/design is a fallacy in itself. Also Max has affirmed that region crashing is legit, and this game has always been an evolutionary process. There was no roadmap. And the game already does favour natives to a stunningly high degree: active founders render any region 100% secure.

Having a few black friends doesn't make you an anti-racist any more than knowing crashers makes me an invader Atopia. There is little question about which side of the fence I fall on. However, as trite analogies go, your affirmitave action example is appalling. What you propose in NationStates would be as if in real life, all college oppertunities, medical schools and law acadamies were barred to all but black and minority students. There has to exist, in a pluralistic society, a way to cater for all peoples. I suppose I'm just more liberal on this than you.
Arnarchotopia
25-07-2004, 19:12
Dear me, I think i've just witnessed the cultural divide. I've more than a "few black friends"; i'm black myself! Also my work is considerably more valuable than your pseudo rationality supposes.

Back to the point, the random updates do not serve any real purpose other than to make defending and invading rather tedious, of course as a defender i'd prefer not to have to do these things and as a defender i'd like it that the game was balanced my way; show me a person who never wants things to their liking!

Even though it would not be ideal going back to the way the game updated before it would probably be best but with one small change; make the update later in the day (or night depending on timezone) so that US players are not at a disadvantage (although invaders tend to be so incompetent and stupid that this may not even help them). This way the game would be balanced more to liking of these people you claim prefer things this way.
Spoffin
25-07-2004, 19:21
Dear me, I think i've just witnessed the cultural divide. I've more than a "few black friends"; i'm black myself! Also my work is considerably more valuable than your pseudo rationality supposes. What a coincidence, so am I! Of course, I don't look it in photographs... in fact, one might almost think I was bullshitting in a desperate attempt to prove a point...

Back to the point, the random updates do not serve any real purpose other than to make defending and invading rather tedious, of course as a defender i'd prefer not to have to do these things and as a defender i'd like it that the game was balanced my way; show me a person who never wants things to their liking!Thats fair enough, but my liking is that the game remains as interesting as possible. At the moment, that means a slightly larger advantage to invaders.

Even though it would not be ideal going back to the way the game updated before it would probably be best but with one small change; make the update later in the day (or night depending on timezone) so that US players are not at a disadvantage (although invaders tend to be so incompetent and stupid that this may not even help them). This way the game would be balanced more to liking of these people you claim prefer things this way.Can you explain how that would help invaders and not defenders?
Dred Pirate Roberts
25-07-2004, 19:44
the way it is now, european defenders are at an advantage. they are awake and at their computers *at the update* 12 pm GMT! at 12 pm GMT it is 3 or 4am EST (american). Maybe a few invaders are awake then but to organize and mobilize an invasion from America when they are asleep is next to impossible.

let's say an invasion gets started at 11pm American when Euros are asleep. but american defenders find out. so one round of defenders follows in at around 11pm American. Then, a second wave of defenders follows when the Euros wake up and Americans are still asleep. that means in such a scenario there are two chances to defend vs. an American invasion, only one chance for the american invasion to succeed.

Plus, more updates means more opportunities to invade. it's a pretty slow game play with only one update per 24 hrs.
Spoffin
25-07-2004, 21:16
the way it is now, european defenders are at an advantage. they are awake and at their computers *at the update* 12 pm GMT! at 12 pm GMT it is 3 or 4am EST (american). Maybe a few invaders are awake then but to organize and mobilize an invasion from America when they are asleep is next to impossible.
Your numbers are a little off. At 12pm GMT its more like 7am Eastern. But the update isn't at 12pm GMT anyway. I'm not certain exactly when it is but I've seen regions update at 9:45 London, which is 8:45 GMT. But I do understand that its an inconvieniant time for most people.

However, it strikes me that if more invaders are online, more defenders are likely to be online too, therefore I don't really see how adjusting the time would seriously favour either invaders over defenders or defenders over invaders.
Dred Pirate Roberts
25-07-2004, 22:03
I'm not complaining. you said you wanted suggestions though. I'm actually quite happy with the update the way they are now, now that they are updating in random order.

The early the update the worse off Americans are. If the update falls regularly between is 7am-12pm GMT, those same hours are 2am-7am EST. Euros are blocking invasions from school and work while American invaders are fast asleep!

it may not be a fair assumption to make that invaders and defenders are on at the same times because like I said, per any invasion, you might have one invasion team and *two* defending teams, one American and one european. the euros would come on *later* than the Americans.

the update time factor as-is may or may not be a significant factor in the game play. Having multiple updates would definitely dampen any possible effect it could have.
Tuesday Heights
27-07-2004, 02:57
Updates are updates to me. With the recent string of griefings, random update times are set up - in my view - to perhaps cut down in that number of griefings, plus, it does add another dimension to the game's development.
Myrdinn
27-07-2004, 03:04
the way it is now, european defenders are at an advantage. they are awake and at their computers *at the update* 12 pm GMT! at 12 pm GMT it is 3 or 4am EST (american). Maybe a few invaders are awake then but to organize and mobilize an invasion from America when they are asleep is next to impossible.

let's say an invasion gets started at 11pm American when Euros are asleep. but american defenders find out. so one round of defenders follows in at around 11pm American. Then, a second wave of defenders follows when the Euros wake up and Americans are still asleep. that means in such a scenario there are two chances to defend vs. an American invasion, only one chance for the american invasion to succeed.

Plus, more updates means more opportunities to invade. it's a pretty slow game play with only one update per 24 hrs.

Yuck! All I see is a big mess here. Regions would become so unstable that many players would just get upset and quit. I can't see the viability of this at all!

Even if the Europeans have an advantage, that same advantage passes along to those in Hawaii and Australia, as well as Japan and China if you think about it.
Spoffin
27-07-2004, 03:49
With the recent string of griefings, random update times are set up - in my view - to perhaps cut down in that number of griefings
I don't follow the logic of that one bit
Arnarchotopia
02-08-2004, 11:41
I remember for a short while last year the update moved to around 2-4pm (GMT) and the game became a lot fairer for both sides in that the US and European players were generally both online at the same time, it meant that invasion and defences became very interesting because invaders actually had more of there side awake. I know this is not true for all American’s (aint the West Coast something like 12 hours behind London) but is did up the antae for this part of the game.

As I’ve said I’d like things my own way but realistically a compromise would have to be found and I’d prefer that compromise to balance invading/defending on a knifes edge! This way we’d all get what we’d like but the game would not favour either side. Further to this the update time would mean having to resort to better tactics to win and not blaming it when we don’t

(On another note, I’ve never seen your pic Spoffin so couldn’t comment but if you say you’re black I’ll take you on your word)