Server for old-school gamers or p2p model

    • General

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Server for old-school gamers or p2p model

      My suggestion is to create a International server in pay to play model.

      The kind of changes to game process:

      1) Free game up to know amount of game points.
      2) Functionality of the DM are only: Officers and transfer of planets.
      3) Game became in monthly subscription after "know amount of game points" .
      4) No DM in the expeditions.
      5) Increased effect of the ships dock (to keep players in the project after big battles)
      6) Paid vacation mode (for activation).
      7) All rules of the game and restrictions remain unchanged.
      8 ) Fair rates (increase economy rates, x1 fleets)

      Why?
      Ogame in most of countries swiftly lost his popularity, but in my opinion game until today is one of the best massive online strategy games in world.

      Goal:
      Make Ogame great again, Create a fair game process that should be affected only from player skill and tactic.

      Why it could work?
      Most of young Ogame funs already about 30 years old mans and womens, they consciously never agree to play against next kind of "top 1" players.

      But if you could offer to Us a fair game processes, we will seriously think about "paying for our feeling of nostalgia".

      P.S.
      English is my fourth language that I doin't use in every day, excuse me if wording of suggestion is not ideal.
    • StackOverflow wrote:

      8 ) Fair rates (increase economy rates, x1 fleets)
      I mean a new, dynamic, rates system, in next common lines:
      (The goal is make reasonable to start play in this universe even after a year and continue to play after big lost)

      1) Basic rates are x1 of/for all
      2) For active subscription every player get commanders.
      3) Boosters (10/20/30% for Metal, Cristal, Deuterium) and another paid staff in use to fix (1)*median power of players and new/after VM player get access to "newbie" subscription with boosters.

      *This is one of the most important parts, balance economy in way to help any player feel and be important part of game process.
      (1) median of top active players score, lets look in next case:
      (in real server we off course take a more players, a few top hundreds)
      top 1 - 30000
      top 2 - 15000
      top 3 - 14000
      top 4 - 13900
      top 5 - 13500
      top 6 - 13400

      As anyone could see median is: 16633.
      In next subscription period all players under 16633 score could buy a "balance subscription" - they getting a very little boost bonus to make for top 1 player "not so easy life" and keep them on game.

      Here is your work to think, calculate and analyze right way to balance game over game in fair way.

      Every half year-year, basic economy rates of server should be boosted to keep game process dynamic. - game team should follow game balance and keep developers attention to every anomaly.
      This part is more important then in free p2w servers, because players could one day just don't order next subscription packet and server will die in this day. At this kind of server team couldn't (as few teams doing for years) give to players feeling that they don't care.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by StackOverflow: add idea about rates ().

    • StackOverflow wrote:

      1) Free game up to know amount of game points.
      2) Functionality of the DM are only: Officers and transfer of planets.
      3) Game became in monthly subscription after "know amount of game points" .
      Uhm ...........
      1) why do you want also relocation ? Game was better when using mobile planet
      2) what will happen if few players want to pay to play ?
      3) the question, of question .......... did you thought about if this kind of universe will give and advantage for GameForge or at least few problems ? In other words, if a normal universe give X money, new universe need to offer something near same income, or GameForge will tell you "I open universe to do money, not for your fun"

      StackOverflow wrote:

      8 ) Fair rates (increase economy rates, x1 fleets)
      interesting idea

      StackOverflow wrote:

      game team should follow game balance and keep developers attention to every anomaly.
      This part is more important then in free p2w servers, because players could one day just don't order next subscription packet and server will die in this day. At this kind of server team couldn't (as few teams doing for years) give to players feeling that they don't care.
      Remember that team game is make by volunteers, therefore excluding the cases of those who intentionally work badly, the others do their best ....... it's not that if I have 2 hours of time, in that universe they become 6. Doing the GO, it's not a job ......... and in fact in my opinion one of the reasons why GameForge is happy to continue only with freetoplay is that it involves fewer problems and less costs, compared to having to guarantee more services, if there is a subscription ( more so then the subscription should be able to guarantee more revenue than freetoplay ......... we are sure that this is the case?)

    • TGWo wrote:

      1) why do you want also relocation ? Game was better when using mobile planet
      It's must expensive premium option that could change gameplay for players with miner style game, also it is not a pay to win option.
      No one prevent you from using mobile planets, or I am don't know something?
      Why you think it could be wrong to leave this option?

      TWGo wrote:

      2) what will happen if few players want to pay to play ?
      No one prevent gameforge from announces this server, make a hype and lunch server only if enough people interesting in it.

      TWGo wrote:

      3) the question, of question .......... did you thought about if this kind of universe will give and advantage for GameForge or at least few problems ? In other words, if a normal universe give X money, new universe need to offer something near same income, or GameForge will tell you "I open universe to do money, not for your fun"
      We are in right and very fast way to "Ogame don't give any money to us, thanks you for staying with us for so long time until today".
      GF opacity for years bring us to this days, even when I was administrator of all projects in my country, my COMA reject any suggestion in seconds.

      TWGo wrote:

      Remember that team game is make by volunteers, therefore excluding the cases of those who intentionally work badly, the others do their best ....... it's not that if I have 2 hours of time, in that universe they become 6. Doing the GO, it's not a job ......... and in fact in my opinion one of the reasons why GameForge is happy to continue only with freetoplay is that it involves fewer problems and less costs, compared to having to guarantee more services, if there is a subscription ( more so then the subscription should be able to guarantee more revenue than freetoplay ......... we are sure that this is the case?)
      It's wrong to think that team in free-to-play you could work as *****(feel free to fill any bad word you know), while in pay-to-pay don't.
      Reputation of company is it must expansive part of business, "those who intentionally work badly" is wrong point, the point is those who work badly spoil GF reputation.
    • StackOverflow wrote:

      TWGo wrote:

      3) the question, of question .......... did you thought about if this kind of universe will give and advantage for GameForge or at least few problems ? In other words, if a normal universe give X money, new universe need to offer something near same income, or GameForge will tell you "I open universe to do money, not for your fun"
      We are in right and very fast way to "Ogame don't give any money to us, thanks you for staying with us for so long time until today".GF opacity for years bring us to this days, even when I was administrator of all projects in my country, my COMA reject any suggestion in seconds.

      Most still active players played for a long time or at least used to play.. not all suggestions are good, but some ought to be gold. Why the hell is GameForge hanging on to Ogame if it does not generate a lot of revenue and if they don't intend to do anything with it ?

      They should just sell the rights to InnoGames GmbH, or even Lilith Games. They will know what to do with it

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Guritchi ().

    • Guritchi wrote:

      Most still active players played for a long time or at least used to play.
      More people still active play or much more leave the game in years Ogame transformed to more and more money dependent and less social-economy?


      Guritchi wrote:

      not all suggestions are good, but some ought to be gold.
      We here to talk about ideas, you welcome to say exactly with what and why you can't agree.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by StackOverflow ().

    • StackOverflow wrote:

      Guritchi wrote:

      Most still active players played for a long time or at least used to play.
      More people still active play or much more leave the game in years Ogame transformed to more and more money dependent and less social-economy?

      Meaning that a lot of the remaining players that still play today have a lot of experience in the game.

      StackOverflow wrote:


      Guritchi wrote:

      not all suggestions are good, but some ought to be gold.
      We here to talk about ideas, you welcome to say exactly with what and why you can't agree.

      And I do, most of the time; but I don't think there are enough active people on this forum to identify/build up/reveal this golden ideas.

      Concerning yours, I disagree about most of them except 5). A more efficient shipdock (at least in some universe) could help players to rebuild their fleet quicker. A system to defend debris field against enemy recyclers could also go a long way. For example, sending a fleet to debris field for a short duration (with the same mechanisms as for expedition).
    • Guritchi wrote:

      5). A more efficient shipdock (at least in some universe) could help players to rebuild their fleet quicker.
      5 can't exist in p2w model, now if someone destroy your fleet you spend DM to buy resource and fast creating of recyclers and after that fast building of fleet again.
      In this case, we play a strategy or wallets fight?
      In same situation at p2p model, after that player lost his fleet he get automatic massage from company:

      NoNe wrote:

      Dear Commander,

      Our special agent in your system saw a huge fight, He informed us that your fleet in distress.
      We what to give you this Detroid's, to help you punish pirates that did it with your fleet....
      Base on algorithm that help players to stay in game...

      For me most interesting part is strategy in MMO world.

      About money,
      Gameforge need to make a choice in new world, between some countries that already look as "10 servers for 25 paying people" or few international servers when each player buy a small amount each month, for example:
      100*300$=30000$
      4000*10$=40000$
      and for this amount player will get a full game, with no p2w options.

      You believe that in each server GF have 100 players that pay each month 300$?
      Much better to create a p2p servers, with subscription and option to gift subscriptions to another players, after all 10$ isn't so huge price even for students.

      As player I refuse to play in Ogame when top 1 player have x100 more "power" points then top 101 player.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by StackOverflow ().

    • You are sure that these superpowerful top 1 players you are referring to indeed pay to win ? they may have just started right at the beginning of the universe and managed their empire well ?

      In anycase, I get your point. But even for 5-10$ per month, I don't know if it will attract a lot of players.. for my part, I will be willing to pay only provided that the game is remastered with (for instance) facilities and fleet visualization/animation, improved and more balanced mechanisms, flawless mobile version/app and facilitated players interactions (trade, research agreement, ...)

      Right now, It would feel like paying for a 15 year-old game
    • Guritchi wrote:

      You are sure that these superpowerful top 1 players you are referring to indeed pay to win ? they may have just started right at the beginning of the universe and managed their empire well ?
      Yes, this player bought lot of resources in last event "100 MIO Resources" when someone forgot to exclude new universe.
      piink know this case.


      Guritchi wrote:

      In anycase, I get your point. But even for 5-10$ per month, I don't know if it will attract a lot of players
      Before make this change/server COMA should talk to players, explain why company believe that the right way to give players a best gaming platform and to guarantee future developing of the game, and really do that, after re-mastering the game from p2w to p2p - next step is as you say: improve all aspects of game.



      Guritchi wrote:

      for my part, I will be willing to pay only provided that the game is remastered with (for instance) facilities and fleet visualization/animation, improved and more balanced mechanisms, flawless mobile version/app and facilitated players interactions (trade, research agreement, ...)
      I will read your topics.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by StackOverflow ().

    • Nice to read your ideas, but did you thought that any part wrote is an increase in cost of production ?

      So if you increase cost, you have to be sure to increase incoming more more that actual incoming.

      1) if i have to pay to play, i want to be sure that support is h24 ........... but this want to say to pay someone to work in support
      2) if i pay, i want to see fast resolve of bug and often upgrade ............ but this want to say to hire more developers (that want to be paid)
      etc

    • TGWo wrote:

      Nice to read your ideas, but did you thought that any part wrote is an increase in cost of production ?

      So if you increase cost, you have to be sure to increase incoming more more that actual incoming.

      1) if i have to pay to play, i want to be sure that support is h24 ........... but this want to say to pay someone to work in support
      2) if i pay, i want to see fast resolve of bug and often upgrade ............ but this want to say to hire more developers (that want to be paid)
      etc
      To dramatically improve project company should make innovation, with analyze and really think about any step they take.

      First why anyway Ogame need international servers with multilingual teams?


      All these servers already don't bring money and give to players wrong game experience - why second is important? company reputation.

      Ogame need international multilingual servers with mechanical changes to keep game as a really premium strategy game for smart people, we already have enough mobile games for a few hours of pleasure.
      Ogame is a game in very interesting category, somewhere between EVE online where you need a ingame first (or even second) degree to understand game processes and game where you could play a few hours a day and stay in top. Ogame is a simple mechanical game with huge potential to be legendary as chess of 20-21 centuries, but donate in every game aspect make Ogame lost his charm.

      And here we back to innovation, the choice is between make same innovation in game or leave it at "free space trip". until this moment We don't heard any word from Origin team, no reaction, maybe Ogame already in "free space trip" and we spend here our time.
      Images
      • gr marked.jpg

        91.97 kB, 871×276, viewed 9 times
    • The real question should be ............ around how any games are freetoplay and how many paytoplay ?

      I'm not a very espert of sector, but personally i know or see banner about many freetoplay and i know perhaps one paytoplay.

      That i wrote is correct, or the situation is different ?
      This is important, because if market have a focus in freetoplay , nobody will decide to go in an other direction only because you hate who is top1 by money.

      And there is a lot of improve possible in Ogame without need to create a different game (for mechanism) or to have a game always more easy (one motive because I think mobile planet is strategicy, relocation is easy game).

      You cannot ask a server old-school and ask relocation ........... in relocation there is nothing of old ...........

      PS: and i don't like that DM give so many advantage if you use too much .............. but I'm happy to play for free, and continue to play for free.
      And I have read in 13 years a lot of good ideas, and very few heared by GameForge and i'm sad about it .......... because should be possible to update game and give more fun, strategy, difficult or easy with different universes

    • TGWo wrote:

      around how any games are freetoplay and how many paytoplay ?
      Wrong question that born from idea that "it's better to be part of herd".

      TGWo wrote:

      I'm not a very espert of sector, but personally i know or see banner about many freetoplay and i know perhaps one paytoplay.
      Lets name p2p project:
      GUILD WARS 1 and 2 (one time pay)
      FINAL FANTASY XIV
      Eve online
      WORLD OF WARCRAFT
      TESO

      All this games are from MMORPG category, client base games, that require top hardware PC and game process take a lot of monitor time and here is the strong point for Ogame - say "This game is for every place you walk, just in your hand and in active servers we giving you a lot of ingame intrigues".

      Ogame:
      1) Don't affected by your ping
      2) Don't require more then student notebook or smartphone for good game experience.
      (mobile firefox could run antigamereborn and must of add-ons for game),

      In p2p model where every player can became top player only if he use his brain and make tactical moves with alliance, this may keep in game more loyal and sanity community, the next step that good community will make a game process even more attractive for new players.


      TGWo wrote:

      And there is a lot of improve possible in Ogame without need to create a different game (for mechanism) or to have a game always more easy (one motive because I think mobile planet is strategicy, relocation is easy game).

      You cannot ask a server old-school and ask relocation ........... in relocation there is nothing of old ...........
      Planet relocation isn't pay to win future, buy resource and fast building any thing is pay to win.

      Welcome to Suggestions forum, here I can ask even for cosmic unicorn for each player if I thing that it's not a fully idiotic idea. Seriously, there is good ideas in game and same mechanics are may be better balanced if player allowed to use them in game depending situation and not base on his wallet.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by StackOverflow: add TESO to games example. ().

    • TGWo wrote:

      StackOverflow wrote:

      Planet relocation isn't pay to win future, buy resource and fast building any thing is pay to win.
      that it is what you think ........... for me also relocation is pay to win, or pay to have an easy game.
      Could you explain exactly why and how it make an easy game?

      Dear Team and Developers,
      Our idea interesting for you? there is a lot of balance moments inside this broadly speaking, if we what bake this idea to next stage we should hear your opinion.
    • StackOverflow wrote:

      Could you explain exactly why and how it make an easy game?
      1) with relocation you don't lose resources, don't lose time, don't lose production, don't lose moon .............. I hope I don't have to explain where is lose of resources, time and production
      2) with relocation you can create a planet in a position where max size and then move in a position where max is production of energy or deuterium (where normally if you created planet you had less place)

      Ogame should be a game where you need to make decisions that have effects that could be positive or negative in the short or long term.
      It should highlight your organizational, strategic skills ......... relocation simplifies the game, and I don't like anything that simplifies the game.

    • TGWo wrote:

      StackOverflow wrote:

      Could you explain exactly why and how it make an easy game?
      1) with relocation you don't lose resources, don't lose time, don't lose production, don't lose moon .............. I hope I don't have to explain where is lose of resources, time and production2) with relocation you can create a planet in a position where max size and then move in a position where max is production of energy or deuterium (where normally if you created planet you had less place)

      Ogame should be a game where you need to make decisions that have effects that could be positive or negative in the short or long term.
      It should highlight your organizational, strategic skills ......... relocation simplifies the game, and I don't like anything that simplifies the game.
      Totally delete relocation function is wrong, as less for server merge case.

      About (2) easy to reduce this case with next fixes:
      a) Set a maximum size of planet at position as a limit for planet size that player can relocate to there.
      b) Add to offer of year subscription a bonus item: fields for planet.
      or
      As solution for (1+2):
      c) Add planet relocation only to year subscription packaged.

      Subscription system may look as:
      1 month for 10$ with all commanders
      6 months for 54$ with all commanders and bonus fields for planet
      12 months for 100$ with all commanders, bonus fields for planet and 1 planet relocation

      In case there is no anymore DM on game and nothing that players could buy more, players get fair game process and if server successful, in first few month of server GF getting enough money for active work on game developing for next year.
      And GF should to stop opening every 2 months zombie servers for merge them a year after that, it's not work.

      Team
      Tell to Alexander Rösner "The Goose That Laid the Golden Eggs" story:
      (say that I force you to do that).




      Ogame is your Goose, and company for years force it to bring golden eggs but forgot about second side of deal - players that look for good strategy game.



      All these countries can merged to 1 big international community with less then 10 servers... Statistics of these servers is the best proof for that something don't work well here.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by StackOverflow ().