Jump to content

Photo

Borrowing Alliance Survivors

Alliance Survivors Borrowing

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1
Prokinetik

Prokinetik
  • 4 posts

It would be beneficially useful to be able to allow Survivors to be sent on Missions by other Alliance Members during War Rounds, where same could (only) be able to contribute to War Tasks.

If one Alliance Member knows of timed incapability to attend Dead Zone, the option of borrowing Survivors to other trusted Alliance Member would both make Member to keep (sometimes hard-earned) position in Alliance as well as to contribute to Alliance whilst being away, whatever the reasons may be.

All items scavenged by borrowed Survivors are to be automatically recycled and donated to Alliance War Tasks (borrower's Food and Water Capacities should be kept on minimum of one day), therefore this action could not, in any way, influence neither borrowing Member's Compound and Inventory status, nor Compound and Inventory status of Member to who Survivors got borrowed.

 

All Survivors borrowed would use Offensive Loadouts given by their own Leader.

All Survivors borrowed would be in same heatlh condition as when borrowed.

If borrowed survivors get hurt (Home Compound Raid) same could be both healed by Member to who they were given or left to recover.

If borrowed survivors get hurt or downed (Mission), same will be healed by Medical Items automatically taken from Inventory of Member to who Survivors were given.
 

Main reason to make this option available would be the point where every Alliance gets amount of donating goods to War Tasks per Member, but if one Member gets kicked out (for inactivity) from Alliance during War Round- amount of goods that were to be donated by that same Member will stay, therefore making War Tasks harder to all remaining Alliance Members.

Graphic solution: There is more then enough space on Members list from our names to gear icon- it would be enough to add an arrow icon by all Alliance Members listed- one click would borrow Survivors to Member chosen, all until the borrower appears online again, where borrower's Survivors must return back from (eventually concurrent to borrower's login) Missions before continuing contributing to Member's Compund.

Thanks for considering this;)


Edited by Prokinetik, 15 February 2014 - 04:43 PM.

  • 0

#2
LLiquid

LLiquid
  • 2,533 posts

I can't see this ever being put in.

 

Each player has a maximum of 10 survivors with no plans for this to be increased

http://forum.conarti...07-general-faq/

 

This could lead to players coming online to play the game to find that some of their own survivors are unavailable because someone else has borrowed them. Is that what you were trying to explain by;

 

one click would borrow Survivors to Member chosen, all until the borrower appears online again, where borrower's Survivors must return back from (eventually concurrent to borrower's login) Missions before continuing contributing to Member's Compund.

 

 

If so, by your explanation, the player who had their survivors borrowed would get them back instantly if they logged in. Something I can't see ever happening


  • 0

#3
Dallas

Dallas
  • 1,454 posts

If so, by your explanation, the player who had their survivors borrowed would get them back instantly if they logged in. Something I can't see ever happening

I also don't get how it would work.


  • -1

#4
oldgamster

oldgamster
  • 1,018 posts

the only thing i have seen similar and actually wished it could be implemented here is what a game called tribal wars has which is called account sitting.

 

if i know i am going to be away there is an account sitting function that allows me to assign a sitter. i put in LLiquids name and then i log out.

LLiquid logs in and gets a notice i have set him as sitter. he manages his account then hits the sitting function and enters my account just like he is in his own account. at the point he enters in the two accounts in tribal wars are locked from any further interaction between the two such as attacking the same enemy player. this way LLiquid could work my account doing as you're suggesting, mission, donate and even raid. and if i am attacked he can initiate repairs. but again no interaction such as trading items or supplies.

once i get back and start logging in the game tells me i am being sat by LLiquid do i want to end the sitting and log in.

 

now i would like to see something like this especially for alliance wars. if i need a couple days to deal with personal issues i can set a sitter and not worry about becoming an all you can farm banner buffet.


  • 1

#5
TheRyderShotgun

TheRyderShotgun
  • 966 posts

i suggested this once. ill edit in the link.

 

thats wierd. i swear i suggested it. i cant find it anywhere.


Edited by TheRyderShotgun, 16 February 2014 - 09:42 AM.

  • 0

#6
Prokinetik

Prokinetik
  • 4 posts

@LLiquid: It seems you didn't quite catch all what I've said, for example, you explain idea on '..maximum of 1o survivors..'- we would still have 1o survivors, because those borrowed are- well, borrowed? Then about 'This could lead to players coming online to play the game to find that some of their own survivors are unavailable because someone else has borrowed them' is wrong again, because we wouldn't be able to borrow someone's Survivors unless that someone makes decision to do it, and that is to be done only if Player knows he will be absent for a timed period, again as explained above. Next, on '..the player who had their survivors borrowed would get them back instantly if they logged in'- wrong again- because player who login must wait for borrowed Survivors to return from Mission, one more time, as explained in my post. Please be kind and read it again, I promise it will make more sense once when you actually pay attention to what it says, thanks:)

 

@ThatOneGuy: As said to LLiquid.


@oldgamster: Exactly, all except sending borrowed Survivors to Raid. Raids are an expression of extreme intentional agression, having the goal to disable and kill, steal and destruct (all if possible) someone's efforts to create safe environment for ~Survivors~ of global biohazard infection, therefore sending them to Raid, specially if they belong to someone else would be spreading (more then) 'wrong message' to society, and that is easily transferred from virtual to real world. As we know, Dead Zone carries magnificent note, where Survivors work together from very beginning, clean, build, scavenge and contribute to Home Compound- Raids and Raiders are what we call 'the dark side' of what's called ~Survivor~. Not to forget, all Bioliberation Front Members are non-raiding players. I will try to get the Raiders issue clear in one of my next posts. Thank you for accepting this idea as worthy:)

@TheRyderShotgun: I have had few posts before, one on Arranging Inventory (about us being able to rearrange our inventory manually) and one on Wind Direction (where the idea was to send smaller groups of survivors to more dangerous missions by being able to hide inside of smoke and by following it stay hidden while scavenging) but I am unable to find them now- I've even had to open new account here because old one (through Facebook) is not active any more. What I've found out is that this forum is not 'the old one' and all what we did before stays- there somewhere:)


Edited by Prokinetik, 16 February 2014 - 12:13 PM.

  • 0

#7
LLiquid

LLiquid
  • 2,533 posts

@LLiquid: It seems you didn't quite catch all what I've said, for example, you explain idea on '..maximum of 1o survivors..'- we would still have 1o survivors, because those borrowed are- well, borrowed? Then about 'This could lead to players coming online to play the game to find that some of their own survivors are unavailable because someone else has borrowed them' is wrong again, because we wouldn't be able to borrow someone's Survivors unless that someone makes decision to do it, and that is to be done only if Player knows he will be absent for a timed period, again as explained above. Next, on '..the player who had their survivors borrowed would get them back instantly if they logged in'- wrong again- because player who login must wait for borrowed Survivors to return from Mission, one more time, as explained in my post. Please be kind and read it again, I promise it will make more sense once when you actually pay attention to what it says, thanks:)

 

If you had explained the idea properly and more clearly, I would have understood it. The example Oldgamster gave makes sense. Your was all over the place.

 

As for this part;

 



If borrowed survivors get hurt (Home Compound Raid) same could be both healed by Member to who they were given or left to recover.

If borrowed survivors get hurt or downed (Mission), same will be healed by Medical Items automatically taken from Inventory of Member to who Survivors were given.

 

Why have a difference between being attacked and getting injured on a mission? If one player borrows anothers survivors, surely they should have an obligation to return them in the same condition as when they were borrowed?


  • 0

#8
oldgamster

oldgamster
  • 1,018 posts


@oldgamster: Exactly, all except sending borrowed Survivors to Raid. Raids are an expression of extreme intentional agression, having the goal to disable and kill, steal and destruct (all if possible) someone's efforts to create safe environment for ~Survivors~ of global biohazard infection, therefore sending them to Raid, specially if they belong to someone else would be spreading (more then) 'wrong message' to society, and that is easily transferred from virtual to real world. As we know, Dead Zone carries magnificent note, where Survivors work together from very beginning, clean, build, scavenge and contribute to Home Compound- Raids and Raiders are what we call 'the dark side' of what's called ~Survivor~. Not to forget, all Bioliberation Front Members are non-raiding players. I will try to get the Raiders issue clear in one of my next posts. Thank you for accepting this idea as worthy:)
 

 

i think you misunderstand me. this game is billed as a raiders game on all aspects of advertisement. i raid for points and supplies and i only destroy structures between me and my goal. if you note the survivors are not killed but only wounded and incapacitated. if this account sitting were to come into play it should never be restrictive to prevent my account sitter from using my survivors to put our alliance on top. i would not support any kind of restrictive account sitting where the sitter could only tend my tomatoes. that would defeat the purpose of having something like this in the first place from a raiders perspective. also if you think a video game contributes to real world issues then you're highly mistaken. if a person that plays a game and ends up perpetrating a crime the crime potential was in them and would come out no matter if they play a game or spend all their time in a lazy-boy sleeping. anything that you call the dark side type forces would come from the core of the individual. inert and inanimate objects do not harbor any inherent good or evil qualities. Mankind does good or evil by choice. not objects. any adds to the game should be beneficial to all players not one type as this game is very unlikely to ever devolve into a warm fuzzy pve only game. if you want that you can go play the sims on one of the CIV games.

 

If you had explained the idea properly and more clearly, I would have understood it. The example Oldgamster gave makes sense. Your was all over the place.

 

As for this part;

 

 

Why have a difference between being attacked and getting injured on a mission? If one player borrows anothers survivors, surely they should have an obligation to return them in the same condition as when they were borrowed?

 

he's trying to emulate some character from Dr. Seuss.


Edited by oldgamster, 16 February 2014 - 12:28 PM.

  • 0

#9
Prokinetik

Prokinetik
  • 4 posts

@oldgamter: What I've said is that it would be wrong to send borrowed Survivors to Raids, because it would then be having 2o survivors which is not the point, there would be many fake accounts created just for personal benefit- by being able to send them to Missions having as goal contribution to Alliance is the actual idea here, not complicity. Again, there are people who think stealing other people's goods (life too?) is normal, and us who are asured it isn't. There are plenty of children, starting from 7 yers old (if you are interested as I am, as father of two, you would notice) who grow without proper adult supervision, and those are exact ones I was thinking about when I've said there is possibility to grasp theft and violence as a way to gain goods. I hope you can see the bigger picture now?
 

@LLiquid: Is my writing style the problem, or you just have problem with your eyes? Please tell me if I can help there?


  • 0

#10
LLiquid

LLiquid
  • 2,533 posts

@LLiquid: Is my writing style the problem, or you just have problem with your eyes? Please tell me if I can help there?

 

My eyes are fine.

 

Your writing style is not clear at all. Would I be right in assuming that English is not your first language?

 

Can you explain;

 

@oldgamter: What I've said is that it would be wrong to send borrowed Survivors to Raids, because it would then be having 2o survivors which is not the point, there would be many fake accounts created just for personal benefit- by being able to send them to Missions having as goal contribution to Alliance is the actual idea here, not complicity.

 

When raiding, only 5 attackers can be sent. It looks like you are agreeing with my earlier point about this being a way to get more survivors above the 10 you are allowed in game. "Borrowing" survivors could (as you say) lead to players creating lots of accounts they can control from a single login, effectively giving them an army of survivors at different levels that could be used to exploit aspects of the game including Alliance Wars.

 

As for the rest of your reply to Oldgamster, real life does not need to apply here, it is a game. Children growing up has nothing at all to do with the game. Playing RPG's like the Final Fantasy series doesn't make children go out on quests learning magic and collecting weapons so why would raiding on this game do anything?

 

In summary, I can't see enough of a benefit for this to be needed to be added to the game.


  • 0

#11
oldgamster

oldgamster
  • 1,018 posts

@oldgamter: What I've said is that it would be wrong to send borrowed Survivors to Raids, because it would then be having 2o survivors which is not the point, there would be many fake accounts created just for personal benefit- by being able to send them to Missions having as goal contribution to Alliance is the actual idea here, not complicity. Again, there are people who think stealing other people's goods (life too?) is normal, and us who are asured it isn't. There are plenty of children, starting from 7 yers old (if you are interested as I am, as father of two, you would notice) who grow without proper adult supervision, and those are exact ones I was thinking about when I've said there is possibility to grasp theft and violence as a way to gain goods. I hope you can see the bigger picture now?
 

@LLiquid: Is my writing style the problem, or you just have problem with your eyes? Please tell me if I can help there?

 

 

ok again you missed the main parts in my first response. if LLiquid is sitting my account he can run my account sending my raiders on raids. this will only benefit me in that i gain whatever he loots with my survivors. the only benefit LLiquid would get from sitting my account is he gates to have the 'fun' of playing. but what i can tell you is sitting another persons account gets to be a drag simply because any advances he makes with my account is for me, not him. so there is no advantage there. as for as having 20 survivors and fake accounts people have alt accounts now. remember your thinking borrow as in you get to use my survivors for your benefit. that is not what i have said. what i have said is account sitting and that is just what the sitter does. they take care of and watch that account. making sure when it gets raided any damage is repaired. if it needs the beds raised a level that can be clicked to upgrade. this does not benefit the account sitter in anyway except by helping this account they are helping their own alliance. my scenario never allows for me to loan you survivors that i agree would be exploited horribly.

 

concerning children issues that you brought up. that sounds like a parenting problem not a game problem. why try to punish and restrict me for someone else failing and shortcoming? that's the same kind of policies the left is trying to shove down out throats with a ram rod today in the U.S. considering i have played games since i was a young child with cap guns in the '60's running around playing like we were having shoot outs and robbing banks did not make me into a bank robber nor a cold blooded killer. we watched all the Hanna Barbera cartoons that had acme safes falling on willie e coyote around every corner and i have yet to drop a vault on anyone. the onus is on the parent to know and learn their child. to do right or do wrong comes from within. not without. neither this game nor any other game teaches children theft and murder. if a parent sees their child exhibiting behavioral patterns that gives them concerns they may need to seek professional help. then again a good switch, belt and paddle to the ass convinced me and my friends that doing wrong things exacted punishment. oh but wait. can't punish children today. it mentally warps them. i guess the reason we see such an upswing in crime today has all to do with gaming rather than lack of punishment which teaches responsibility. no we have that very bad joke Dr Spock to thank for saying it's wrong to punish a child. you should love their hate away. human nature is negative due to survival of the fittest which is hard wired in us. it is more important for me and my offspring to survive than all others. due to that once civilization started forming there had to be new rules discovered and put in place. if you do something wrong you must be punished. it established a deterrent to these crimes. without that deterrent there is no incentive nor reason to not do them.

 

so no i do not have children but i was one. i had my ass beat many times till i finally figured out i didn't like getting those whippings so i decided doing the things that earned the whippings were not worth it. i have grown into a person that loves and respects my fellow brother and sister... until they give me a reason to not. I have a one most simple basic law I follow, and I'd like to think that my praying for a most simple and basic understanding of what is good was given to me. that tenet is simply 'do no harm, help all i can'. seven words i bounce everything in my life off of. "Is this going to cause harm?" and "Will this help?" that's me rolled up into 7 words after playing bank robbers, having shootouts with cap guns and yes... playing many FPS's even later in life.

 

this game is a pvp game. stop trying to neuter it. it wont happen.


  • 0



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Alliance, Survivors, Borrowing