Idle In Game...

Often when Im in a game, my dad calls me downstairs to do something. I of coarse want to help my dad,but I dont want to get killed for it. So my idea is, if somebody were to go afk, they could click a button and all their land would go black as if the countries were disabled. In this time, you, and your land, are not in the game. In the time being, you dont get SP, money or the ability to see enemy or allied units. In this time, you cannot get attacked either.

What do you guys think?

Lol its retarded so you pick Germany and by turn 5 you have Europe so you decide to troll everybody in the game and go afk so no one gets Europe and youll have your nice little empire in 20 turns and youll have a large sum of money summed up great idea good sir

Written by B3ast, 07.01.2012 at 22:04

Lol its retarded so you pick Germany and by turn 5 you have Europe so you decide to troll everybody in the game and go afk so no one gets Europe and youll have your nice little empire in 20 turns and youll have a large sum of money summed up great idea good sir

May I ask how much you bothered reading? I said taht you dont make any money while AFK. Also, you could have a set max amount of turns you can go AFK for. Lets say 5.

I read up till the disabled part

No, that would just be complete trolling and would severely abused. Imagine the alliances! Imagine if it's a world game, you are about to be defeated and you turn this fucking thing on and get billions of SP when your ally comes in and saves your arse! Hell, even I would abuse that I don't think such things should be allowed at all, maybe you should stop being 13 years of age son.

All that should be put in is an idle flag. Maybe if the player is nice they won't attack but your recommendation is completely off-the-wall ridiculous.

Written by YOBA, 08.01.2012 at 07:29

No, that would just be complete trolling and would severely abused. Imagine the alliances! Imagine if it's a world game, you are about to be defeated and you turn this fucking thing on and get billions of SP when your ally comes in and saves your arse! Hell, even I would abuse that I don't think such things should be allowed at all, maybe you should stop being 13 years of age son.

All that should be put in is an idle flag. Maybe if the player is nice they won't attack but your recommendation is completely off-the-wall ridiculous.

Did any of you read the whole thing? He said you dont gain SP. Maybe you a suggestion would be to reduce your SP by 5% for each turn you're gone.

Written by Runway1R, 10.01.2012 at 08:31

Did any of you read the whole thing? He said you dont gain SP. Maybe you a suggestion would be to reduce your SP by 5% for each turn you're gone.

Pull your head out of my arsehole!

I quote:

Quote:

In the time being, you dont get SP, money or the ability to see enemy or allied units.

Quote:

In the time being, you dont get SP

Quote:

In the time being

This means the limitation only applies while you're inactive. You just don't gain SP, nor do you lose any. Hence, you gain a hefty amount of SP at the end when you can turn the little shield off. Enough said.

Written by KYBL, 07.01.2012 at 22:01

if somebody were to go afk, they could click a button and all their land would go black as if the countries were disabled. In this time, you, and your land, are not in the game.

What do you guys think?

This is a terrible idea. If you remove the land that the idle player has "temporarily" it gives that player a huge advantage of having uncontested land. While every other player has to fight for their land you just could click "afk" waiting for an appropriate moment when your neighbors are vulnerable to "come back". This could be abused way too easily this way, on top of what YOBA is saying. If you don't have time to play a full game, don't start one.

Written by Houdini, 10.01.2012 at 13:09

This is a terrible idea. If you remove the land that the idle player has "temporarily" it gives that player a huge advantage of having uncontested land. While every other player has to fight for their land you just could click "afk" waiting for an appropriate moment when your neighbors are vulnerable to "come back". This could be abused way too easily this way, on top of what YOBA is saying. If you don't have time to play a full game, don't start one.

Which is why I suggested a 5% reduction in SP per turn that you're AFK. Or maybe being afk too long will cause you to be kicked.

Written by YOBA, 10.01.2012 at 12:51

Hence, you gain a hefty amount of SP at the end when you can turn the little shield off. Enough said.

How the hell do you figure that?

The idea is good but needs twitching, a vote to pause the game should be held by participating players.

Written by Aristosseur, 10.01.2012 at 13:50

The idea is good but needs twitching, a vote to pause the game should be held by participating players.

I would think you wouldnt want to pause the game for 20 people so you can go clean your room.

Written by Runway1R, 10.01.2012 at 13:51

Written by Aristosseur, 10.01.2012 at 13:50

The idea is good but needs twitching, a vote to pause the game should be held by participating players.

I would think you wouldnt want to pause the game for 20 people so you can go clean your room.

keyword: vote

Written by Aristosseur, 10.01.2012 at 14:01

Written by Runway1R, 10.01.2012 at 13:51

Written by Aristosseur, 10.01.2012 at 13:50

The idea is good but needs twitching, a vote to pause the game should be held by participating players.

I would think you wouldnt want to pause the game for 20 people so you can go clean your room.

keyword: vote

Im saying that, unless by some miracle, 10 people have to go clean their room, I doubt a game of 20 people will vote to pause the game, making that option pointless.

Written by Runway1R, 10.01.2012 at 13:49

Written by Houdini, 10.01.2012 at 13:09

This is a terrible idea. If you remove the land that the idle player has "temporarily" it gives that player a huge advantage of having uncontested land. While every other player has to fight for their land you just could click "afk" waiting for an appropriate moment when your neighbors are vulnerable to "come back". This could be abused way too easily this way, on top of what YOBA is saying. If you don't have time to play a full game, don't start one.

Which is why I suggested a 5% reduction in SP per turn that you're AFK. Or maybe being afk too long will cause you to be kicked.

A reduction in SP would not fix having land that cannot be taken away from you while you're AFK. Maybe a reduction in money would work, so the land you get to have uncontested when you're AFK becomes useless when you have no money to come back with if you take too long. But overall I still think this is a bad idea and should not be implemented. It would be too easy to take the capitals of rich countries and go AFK, leaving everyone to fight it out in the poor countries unable to take the rich ones because you blacked out the land and went AFK. Horribly unbalancing any game that someone would use this feature in and much too easy to abuse.

Aristos idea for pausing the game under a vote is a great alternative solution though. Sure you're fucked in 20 player games where nobody cares about you; but those games shouldn't have to bend to a single players needs. In a 1v1 or lower player game with friends they would probably be willing to give you a minute or two to come back.