Rules change poll

[Bob De Quatre]

Again we'd like to have your opinion regarding the timing of the game.

[WickNole]

The main problem with "double weeks" is, imo, a significant increase of total game time (doubled, basically). It is +33% if every third week is "long", and +100% if every week is. Maybe, the solution here is to increase the resource mining volumes for "long" weeks (and to keep DP on the same level). But just increasing the week's length could do more harm than good.

Occasional "long" week seems like an interesting idea, but I don't think this will make a big difference. Maybe, a different schedule for "long" week can be found (for example, no week during "challenge deadline" weeks; but, again, if we apply this to ch.2 - in August we will see 14-7-14-14...).

Having said that, no vote option here for me.

Edited July 23, 2015 by WickNole

[Commander Turtle]

I like the optimism of a 3 day week - now that would make judging tough!

With a 14 day schedule, I hope the resource gains would be increased by a factor of 1.5 or 2. The game is already long-term, no need to double that.

But really, I think 7 days is excellent. Frantic, and no big deal if someone has to skip one. Koro is one of our best and he's skipped a couple, it's really not an issue. And you know what? As someone with a relatively smaller collection, I'm building about as big as I can each week already, given the diversity of colours needed for exploration. Mine would only get 20% bigger for twice the time, while people with big collections could happily make something twice the size without a problem. The fast timeframe is a great equalizer there.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Commander Turtle

[Aliencat]

Personally I don't really mind if a 14 day week means the game lasts longer, time flies when you're having fun right? ;)

[Kai NRG]

I like the 7 day week, for one thing, it's not super horrible if you miss one, but it's nice to give those who can build every week - but don't have enough bricks to do something huge given a longer amount of time - a chance to keep up that way. Also the increase in game time is a valid point I think. Plus, it's nicer to have weekly story options, rather than bi-weekly.

[robuko]

I like the 7 day week and the one build per week limit. The experience from GoH is that if the weeks are longer, it encourages grandiose builds that reward LUGbulk buyers and people who live near PaB walls. Building 3 a week for the recent GoH challenge really burned me out and is much too much. I'm pretty happy playing around with 3-4 point little builds of a small scale here.

[MKJoshA]

I understand people wanting a breather thus asking for either a longer week or a break once a month, but I think what really needs to happen is we just need to be okay with skipping a week. So many of us are super competitive (I'm in that category), that we don't want to miss even one chance to add some points to our team. I think the 7 day week works well. We just need to take some deep breaths and not allow ourselves to get burned out because of our competitiveness.

[rodiziorobs]

I think 14-day weeks would be easier, but after reading some of the above comments, I see how short weeks can make it more fair for builders with smaller collections, and it keeps the pace up.

At the same time, I think having a long 'week' occasionally would be a nice breathing space without seriously slowing the game down or penalizing teams if a builder misses a week.

So, I think I'm on board for 2 regular weeks, followed by a long one. That seems to satisfy both arguments pretty well IMO.

[Bob De Quatre]

Guys (and the girl), the "3 days" option was a joke

[LittleJohn]

I personally would like a 14 day schedule.

The whole thing about people with larger collections doing bigger builds in 14 days, is a little strange to me; we already see people do big builds with 7 days, so what's all the fuss about? How many of the builders that participate in AG would use all 14 days to build specifically for this?

I would like to do some other builds, but with only 7 days to build for AG, there's not much time. Now, I know you don't have to build every week, but when you're team only has 11 builds a week, and you're able to build, you feel pressured to put one in, even if it's small. As is, many builders barely have time to put together a build in the allotted seven days, and if they ever decide to build for something outside AG, they quite possibly won't be able to get their weekly build in. Also, even with the incredibly quick judging turnaround, if you wait to see results from the previous week, you only have 4-5 days to build for the current week.

I think with a 14 day schedule, it would allow participants to both make a good build for AG, and something else if they desire to do so: rather than having to choose between helping your corp, or building something else for fun.

Anyway, that's my two cents

[NuckElBerg]

Guys (and the girl), the "3 days" option was a joke

Well, interestingly enough, the "3 days" option would actually probably create a situation more similar to the 7-day week with a break or so, since it makes the game more "build at your own pace" rather than "build once every week" (by which I mean that more people would accept that they don't have to build every time it is judging time).

That being said, I actually voted for the 14-day option. I very much agree with John's post above. I know I can keep up this high pace now when it's summer (I don't really want to imagine the fall when I have both work and will be going back to school), but it's still exhausing, and kinda takes the energy out of doing other Lego things I would like. With a longer "week", I could probably divide my Lego time better between AG and other projects, but as of now, it really feels like you "have" to build for your team every week, and I just don't want AG to end up feeling like a chore.

Plus, with a 14-day week, you actually have longer time to come up with great ideas for what to build (instead of just "churning" them out).

Although, I do agree with previous posts, if the week was to get longer, the points would have to get higher (0-14 scale perhaps, in order to make judging more nuanced? ) to compensate.

[Mike S]

I think the element of choosing whether or not you build for for AG is important. You can't build for every project you want to. I strongly disagree with any changes with the build week unless the judges need more time to judge.

[aeralure]

I was already having trouble meeting one build a week, but was pushing myself to get it done by cutting some corners IRL (not a good long term plan). I was considering having to move myself to a build every two weeks due both to the amount of time I have and how long it takes (I'm really slow when building apparently, compared to how long others say similar builds take them). I haven't yet been able to match story elements others include yet, either. I really did not and do not like the idea because I wish to contribute every build cycle, but I also really do not wish to rush builds just to get some sort of points in (but I admit I feel obligated and that's hard). Bring on a 3-part Challenge on top of that (and the Challenge is awesome - I wish to participate in all three parts) and I'm not sure what to do. Start planning builds for those or try to get caught back up weekly? Add to that the fact that the next few weeks I have even less time than I did before and I'm truly stuck.

I hesitated even voting because much of it revolves around each builder's personal free time - how much they have - as well as how fast they build. If someone can build pretty easily on a weekly basis than they should be able to. The fact that I seem not to be able to shouldn't matter. The game allows for that. I have to admit that I like the idea of one build every two weeks. The weekly pace is a bit too frantic for me, but maybe it is not for others. It's good to have a poll, but keeping the game weekly may be best since some have no problems with it and the game does allow for missing a week as needed.

Edited July 23, 2015 by aeralure

[Umbra-Manis]

When i started this discussion over in Rules and FAQ, i didn't mean for there to be any talk of changing the weeks length, I quite like the 7 day week. I was thinking more along the lines of there occasionally being a week or two where we can delve into the civilization and development of planets , as well as personal stories without having to worry about losing territory because you're not building on the front lines.

[shmails]

One of the main reasons I joined this game was the one build per week rule. It forces me to finish ideas quickly and make decisions I used to put off for weeks looking for a better solution. It also keeps my interest level up near the top of the meter, which I think would fall if I had an extra week between builds.

From what I have seen in the messages so far and around the forum, it seems like the main problem is people not wanting to skip a week out of loyalty to their corporation and the thrill of competition. At the same time, the phrase "you do not have to build every week" is posted all over the place, telling those people not to worry, the game will be here and there will not be any issue with your team if you need a week off. We are past the land grab portion of this game, so weekly domination points is no longer as valuable as they were a few weeks ago, however people who have been here since the beginning are still in the frenetic mentality we began with. I am in the same boat, I think we need to just tell ourselves to slow down a bit, not change the game to fit our levels of intensity.

I believe we should keep the pace as it is, weekly builds are the essence of this game. I also agree that a break should be given every once in a while. My suggestion is a week off after the challenges end, and the same would occur after every challenge.

[MKJoshA]

I appreciate all you 14-day-week advocates and your explanation. I'm still glad I voted the way I did, but I understand and appreciate your take on the subject now.

[Big Sal]

First of all, if the judges want more time for judging then I'm very happy for the week to be made longer - they're doing an admirable and probably very time-consuming job on top of the building that the rest of us are doing, so if they want some more time to take the pressure off, that's fine by me! I'm sure it would be fine by everyone else too, so I'd urge the judges to make it known if that's the case (or if it ever becomes the case).

A 14 day week is initially appealing to me, as I'm one of those who hates to miss out a week. You can already see that this feeling is a bit stronger in M.A.N.T.I.S. because we're smaller and under more pressure currently. But ultimately it really is no big deal to miss out a week - as others have said, some of us just need to be a little less competitive if we can And I can see a longer week introducing its own pressure to make builds really good, and increased disappointment if the build you spent 14 days on only gets a low score.

So I haven't voted yet - I'll keep thinking it over and reading everyone's thoughts.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Big Sal

[Kodan Black]

One thing that came up in some internal discussions about the 14 day week is that DP would likely also double to compensate. So on a 2-14 scale if you include DP bonus for land vehicle and DP bonus for space ship and DP bonus for Dom for Dummies you could have one builder putting down 16-20 DP (5-7 score on current scale). Meaning 2 builders could theoretically dominate a planet. That seems ... absurd. So then you say that we need to up the DP required to take a planet but what other impact does that have. Before you know it we need to re-evaluate the entire game and the rules.

Or if we keep the DP the same and just up the time allowed you likely cull people at the lower end. I'm not sure I want to spend 2 weeks and get a 3. That would be pretty discouraging.

[pombe]

In the past three months of AG, I have built more MOCs than I have in the past 20 years.

I signed up for AG because I needed motivation and incentive to build. The muse does not strike for me often, and when she does, I fall into the trap of getting stuck because I need my MOC to be "perfect" (which results in nothing being built). I imagine this must be what writer's block is like, except it's a MOC block.

Thus, I bought LEGOs, but never did anything with them; and they sat around fueling the imaginary builds I would never get done. I still have several sets from those years that are unopened, because I can't find the time to sort the bricks.

The way AG is currently structured, I get over my MOC block. If the muse doesn't strike, too bad, I need to build something regardless if she's around or not. If the MOC is not perfect, well...too bad, it gets posted by the deadline, anyway.

So I am voting to keep the game as is.

[Lady K]

I have not voted yet either, but I would like to add my thoughts in as well. As for those who need or want to build every week for story development or creative outlet or motivation factor, please don't forget about the weekly freebuilds. If we did move to a 14 day week, those who wish could still build every week using this option and those who can't build each week can get a break. As for changing domination points, I don't see any benefit to doing so. The week would be longer to give those who need to a chance to take a break without their corporation suffering because of it.

I too have been motivated to build now more than ever and I do feel pressured to build each week because we need to just to stay competitive and active in the game. However, I also have other things I want to build and there is no time. I have a larger seaside town I was working on in the months prior to the launch of AG, I would like to finish parts of it that were started and put aside for AG.

So I see both sides of the issue. But the 14 day week may prolong the fun of the game and not rush it to the end.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Lady K

[mccoyed]

I like the optimism of a 3 day week - now that would make judging tough!

With a 14 day schedule, I hope the resource gains would be increased by a factor of 1.5 or 2. The game is already long-term, no need to double that.

But really, I think 7 days is excellent. Frantic, and no big deal if someone has to skip one. Koro is one of our best and he's skipped a couple, it's really not an issue. And you know what? As someone with a relatively smaller collection, I'm building about as big as I can each week already, given the diversity of colours needed for exploration. Mine would only get 20% bigger for twice the time, while people with big collections could happily make something twice the size without a problem. The fast timeframe is a great equalizer there.

I've skipped one! One week only! Well, I did skip the challenge.

I think a week is best too, for what it's worth.

[mediumsnowman]

I voted for the 7 day option. It's very good as it gets me to actually finish and share my MOCs when I might not otherwise. After all, it is a game, and if you miss a week it's not the end of the world. Just come back next week with something bigger and better

[Kai NRG]

I have not voted yet either, but I would like to add my thoughts in as well. As for those who need or want to build every week for story development or creative outlet or motivation factor, please don't forget about the weekly freebuilds. If we did move to a 14 day week, those who wish could still build every week using this option and those who can't build each week can get a break...

Well, I must say, I think there would be very few people interested in free-building with a 14 day week. If we switched, you bet I'd only build once every two weeks! If I want to free-build, I'll build for GoH, or build one of the multiple ideas I have that get put on my "to-build" list but never get built because of things like this, .

If I really wanted to do an extra AG build, I'd just slap it in the same post with the other one. Sure, that might not up the points as much as just building a larger/better overall one, but it should help a little. At least, I'll feel like it helped, rather than feel like it just got wasted.

It's true that the 7 day week does put pressure, but ultimately, a 14 day week would put pressure too for those people who wait until the last minute (and for the most part, those are probably the people that are having trouble with the 7 days). And yeah, I definitely do feel LJ's difficulty - how to build for this and something else and get schoolwork/chores/social activities/etc. done. But after all, I've had that trouble ever since MOCathalon in March (it was that, then the GoH challenge, then AG)... so I should be getting good at handling it. And I agree with Mike S. Prioritizing is part of the game.

I can see how this puts more pressure on MANTIS players, I suppose. But all things considered, you guys had 11 builds last week. I believe we only had 10. In terms of players, you have a whopping 1 less than we do. Sure, you have a few more that haven't built anything. But you're not that far behind, except on the map. And that could change!

[mrcp6d]

My suggestion is a week off after the challenges end, and the same would occur after every challenge.

I second this option.

[Dannylonglegs]

I agree that the week-length week is perfect! Shmails' offer though is a great one.

Guys (and the girl), the "3 days" option was a joke

I know!

There's only one woman? I'm pretty sure there are a few... or at least more than one. although I do refer to some members by the gender of their character on accident now and again.

Well, interestingly enough, the "3 days" option would actually probably create a situation more similar to the 7-day week with a break or so, since it makes the game more "build at your own pace" rather than "build once every week" (by which I mean that more people would accept that they don't have to build every time it is judging time).

I was just joking... but seriously... I won't lie. I would abuse that timeframe. Figs on baseplates every other day... I'd probably get 2s consistently, with a few 3s, but I'd still get more points than otherwise. I may not be the best builder playing... but I can churn out vignettes.

In the past three months of AG, I have built more MOCs than I have in the past 20 years.

I signed up for AG because I needed motivation and incentive to build. The muse does not strike for me often, and when she does, I fall into the trap of getting stuck because I need my MOC to be "perfect" (which results in nothing being built). I imagine this must be what writer's block is like, except it's a MOC block.

Thus, I bought LEGOs, but never did anything with them; and they sat around fueling the imaginary builds I would never get done. I still have several sets from those years that are unopened, because I can't find the time to sort the bricks.

The way AG is currently structured, I get over my MOC block. If the muse doesn't strike, too bad, I need to build something regardless if she's around or not. If the MOC is not perfect, well...too bad, it gets posted by the deadline, anyway.

So I am voting to keep the game as is.

I agree with literally everything you said here, from the motivation issue, down to the "more Mocs than the past 20 years of life."

I second this option.

I third this. I actually agree that a week off after challenges would be great! At the very least it would enable me to make a reserve build to make up for the one I used in "chemical rain"

~Insectoid Aristocrat