vacation mode? (in General)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 5:59 PM EDT

i propose the addition of a vacation mode of 7 to 14 days usable only twice a year that would allow one to store up all ba naturally accrued during that time. when you enter vacation mode, your ba is set to zero if not there already.

once you leave vacation mode you would need to use all of your stored ba within 24 hours or else it disappears down to 160 and could not start an ncb until after that time.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 6:03 PM EDT

also, when you return you do not generate clan points for that 24 hour period as well.

three4thsforsaken March 8 2009 6:06 PM EDT

and it should be unaffected by wacky times

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 6:09 PM EDT

ooh, i did forget that part. any bonus time would be ignored during that 24 hour period after ending the vacation mode. thanks! ; )

kevlar March 8 2009 6:22 PM EDT

See I like the idea of 7 days vacation mode (it's used in another game I used to play often) but it seems to contradict the other discussion about increasing overall BA. The big thing with that thread was that one of the aspects of CB is based on when one can and can't log into the game to get an advantage. (I'm sure that can be put more eloquently). So why would saving BA for vacations be different from those who work 8-12 hour shifts at work or school everyday mostly? I'm not trying to start a discussion about increasing overall BA, but just thought this related to the argument against it.

Flamey March 8 2009 6:33 PM EDT

My BA hasn't hit 160 when I get home from school :) Dude, good idea, you seem to have covered every hole in the old idea.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 6:36 PM EDT

our population is still in a steady decline, this past week was one of the worst ever. we went from a pretty steady 250 down to around 215. it may be time to look at many of these different ideas.

i guess what i am saying is requiring dedication is fine, but if the game dwindles to just a couple dozen of the most dedicated players, that will not be much fun either.

QBRanger March 8 2009 6:45 PM EDT

There have been many suggestions to increase the player and play of CB.

However, most have been ignored by those in charge for various reasons.

I can start with the NUB as a driving force behind people leaving and spend hours discussing this.

I can spend hours on the NCB and to make a real run at the top one needs hundreds of millions of CB2. Not applicable to the non-USD player. And how many people spend millions upon millions of CB2 making a NCB run only to find out the NCB was woefully low. Money lost----loss of desire to play---loss of players.

I can spend tons of time on the lack of fun playing a tank and spending CB2 all the while mages can do just as well if not better.

I can go on and on.

However, a vacation mode is a great idea. But there is no reason to restrict it to 1 or 2 times a year.

QBRanger March 8 2009 6:47 PM EDT

And one last point.

I do now believe that the BA regeneration zones should be reversed.

In a game like this, it should be harder to be at the top then the bottom. Why do the top players have it easier and have to log on every 8 hours to max their BA, while new players have to log on every 5 hours to max theirs.

New characters are at quite a disadvantage in that respect. Quite demoralizing IMO.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 6:56 PM EDT

i still disagree with that idea. if any changes are made i would rather we all get the same ba regeneration rate.

QBRanger March 8 2009 6:58 PM EDT

I can live with the same regeneration rate.

However the way it is now is quite unfair to those trying to make a run at the top.

kevlar March 8 2009 7:05 PM EDT

Why do you need 100's of millions for a NCB?

Vacation mode should have some restriction to it. One being if you enter vacation mode, that player shouldn't be able to access that character (can still log into the main account) for the duration and not be allowed to cancel the mode... or along those lines to make it a decision with purpose. Might also consider something for if in a clan too.. where it just "ghosts" ya where you can still be attacked but it won't affect your clan points going negative.

QBRanger March 8 2009 7:11 PM EDT

If one is making a NCB run at the top, one needs to buy all their BA.

For me at 1.5M, it is 192 BA at 3817 each. Or 732,000 per day.

Given the NCB is now 180 days, that is 131,760,000. Minus the CB2 one makes from fighting normally. But 100M is just an estimation. I do suspect it is close though as the cost goes up as one gets higher MPR.

[P]Mitt March 8 2009 7:11 PM EDT

Kevlar, you misread what he said. He said that you need 100s of millions to make a run for the top with a NCB.

That's pretty common knowledge - BA costs alone will cost an amazingly high amount. Not to mention adding minions.

QBRanger March 8 2009 7:13 PM EDT

Yes the 100M is just for BA, and it may even be more as one gets higher on the MPR ladder.

We all know to make a real run one has to buy minions later.

Each can cost over 50M near the top.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] March 8 2009 7:59 PM EDT

"In a game like this, it should be harder to be at the top then the bottom."



I have been making this point since day one, and you were always a staunch opponent Ranger. ;)

kevlar March 8 2009 8:04 PM EDT

I don't understand why it costs so much to try again to make a new character (NCB)? Why do you have to pay for BA with a NCB?

BadFish March 8 2009 8:07 PM EDT

You don't kev. That cost is if you want to get into the top 5, basically.

kevlar March 8 2009 8:22 PM EDT

So the cost is a limiter for runs to the highest positions? I'm still confused. The point of the NUB character when you start is to make it allowable to be competitive (granted I'm almost finished with my time and am nowhere near the top 5), but still BA didn't cost anything. If you want to do a NCB down the road or whenever, why is the cost so high or there at all? Shouldn't it be free to allow different ideas or strategies? I mean it's still a six month long commitment.
Ranger said that NUBs are a reason for people leaving. I read this before where the idea was that new players can pass players that have put more time in before prior to the NUB bonus?
So why not give people the option to do a NCB with BA that is free like the NUB? I can understand if someone had an 'older' character and was passed up and wanted to try a new strat or make another run but was limited because of the cost. I still don't get why it costs money. Make NCB BA free? <---would this help or why would it not?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] March 8 2009 8:37 PM EDT

The NCB gets hit twice on Cash.

Increased BA costs you *have* to buy (not buying NCB BA is just like wearing a Double chain Mail. You can do it, but for no reason), and no Free BA.

It's a charge to allow you to have another shot at the top, when you should have really made your first ever character competitive from day one.

QBRanger March 8 2009 8:49 PM EDT

That is the great debate.

Jon states that xp gained should be tied to the cost of purchasable BA.
And plenty see his point.

Others think the cost, while giving extra BA, is cost prohibitive for a real run at the top.

I used to believe with Jon, now I do not.

The cost is now to much for anyone other then a real USD heavy spender to make a real run at the top.

Yes, one can do a NCB without buying BA, but you will end up with 50% less BA then if you do. Given bought BA adds 50% to the BA you can possible use in a day.

kevlar March 8 2009 8:49 PM EDT

So is it better that people lose interest and leave or let them have another shot to do something different? Again, it's a 6 month commitment. Maybe that is a change that could be tried? Could limit it to one NCB run per 6months as is or 1 year. 1 year would ensure a 6 month cool off period, which is better than the current permanent one. It would be interesting to ask the people who have left or are considering to (who are in that category) if they still would the change was made to NCB BA :)

kevlar March 8 2009 8:50 PM EDT

I was writing my last post while you posted your last one, Ranger.

QBRanger March 8 2009 8:55 PM EDT


It is one of the most polarizing issues of CB.

AdminNightStrike March 8 2009 9:37 PM EDT

What would be the purpose of vacation mode compared to just retiring all of your characters and buying BA once a day?

If the mode was implemented, it would have similar costs -- some $$ in fees (say, $50k per active character), restricted time delays (ie, you must be in the mode for at least 4 days), maximum BA that you can accrue while in the mode (say, 1600), etc.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 9:51 PM EDT

"What would be the purpose of vacation mode compared to just retiring all of your characters and buying BA once a day?"

it would be nice, and i am saying this after playing solid for six years mind you, to actually not have to worry about it at all for a week. normally i love playing cb, that is evident by my prolonged presence and continuous activity.

i am heading down to the coast this next week to work on our place down there. i will likely be able to use some of my ba while there on my phone or by taking my laptop to the dairy queen parking lot where they have free wireless. that just got me to thinking that in the midst of my ncb run and after six years dedication, it would be nice to actually just not have to worry about it for one week!

while that is selfish, i also thought that surely i am not the only one to feel this way. we can certainly keep the status quo though, if a dwindling population is the goal that is.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 9:55 PM EDT

i think that last sentence came off harsher than i meant it to. what i really mean is that holding the course and our dwindling population might have a correlation. perhaps it is time to think outside of the traditional box?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 10:07 PM EDT

"If the mode was implemented, it would have similar costs -- some $$ in fees (say, $50k per active character), restricted time delays (ie, you must be in the mode for at least 4 days), maximum BA that you can accrue while in the mode (say, 1600), etc."

i am actually fine with all of that except the ba limit. if you are implementing it with a ba limit then there is no reason to implement. for it to be a true vacation mode i would ask that there be no ba limit at all. think of it as a way to take time off without losing any growth other than the lost clan bonus rewards and xp times.

AdminNightStrike March 8 2009 10:22 PM EDT

1600 BA is 12 days, so....

Fatil1ty March 8 2009 10:43 PM EDT

I absolutely 1000% percent agree with dudemus's idea and I will actually be quite frustrated if it is implemented because I just took my vacation! :)

While the rolling bonus seems to be a popular but unlikely solution to the problem I see this one week vacation thing as a fantastic middleground. I am running a high quality NCB currently (along with dudemus) and it is very frustrating that when I went to cuba I missed out on a full week of NCB time which works out to a couple hundred MPR lost.

Also there is relatively no downside for abuse with this system!

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 10:46 PM EDT

7 ba per refresh, 3 ba refresh per hour, 24 hours per day, 7 days per week

7 * 3 * 24 * 7 = 3528 no?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] March 8 2009 10:54 PM EDT

nightstrike, i think you misunderstood my original request hence the confusion on numbers.

"i propose the addition of a vacation mode of 7 to 14 days usable only twice a year that would allow one to store up all ba naturally accrued during that time."

i am not asking for a way to store up bought ba, buyable ba would actually be lost under my proposal. i am asking for a way to store all the naturally accrued ba during a vacation time period.

Flamey March 8 2009 10:56 PM EDT

Why are we arguing about NCB runs? Seriously guys, we have a tendency to get extremely off-topic and argue about the same old crap. It's one of the reasons I stopped posting.

The thread is about vacation mode and only that. While some of us are talking about it some are talking NCB runs and what it takes to get to the top. Take it to another or stop discussing the NCB in that detail to do with a vacation mode.

Fatil1ty March 8 2009 10:58 PM EDT

flamey: while I agree that most threads get off topic I think NCB runs are very much the reason for the thread!

Losing a week of an NCB that is say 4 months in is BRUTAL! running a normal character and missing a week isn't as much of a loss because there isn't a clock ticking on your current growth.

QBRanger March 8 2009 11:06 PM EDT

The lack of a "vacation" mode is one of the few reasons I will not attempt a NCB run.

I have vacations planned, out of the country, where I cannot log onto CB for a week. Losing a week or 2 makes the NCB run not worthwhile for me.

There are other reasons also, perhaps for another thread.

Flamey March 8 2009 11:10 PM EDT

But fat, you're not missing a week, the BA gets stored up and you still get to use it with your bonus..

Fatil1ty March 8 2009 11:17 PM EDT

huh... it gets stored up to 160BA and you lose the other like 2000 if you're unable to log on at all for a week.

QBRanger March 8 2009 11:22 PM EDT

At 8 BA regeneration you can have a max of 576 BA per day if you buy all your BA. 384 if you buy none.

Even if vacation mode lets you accumulate BA to 1600, after 2 days 19 hours you start to lose growth compared to buying all BA.

By 4 days and 2 hours you lose growth compared to not buying BA.

Not much potential for abuse.

QBRanger March 8 2009 11:33 PM EDT

O darn,

Numbers are a bit off

576 if you do not buy and add 192 if you buy your ba.

My bad.

Flamey March 8 2009 11:39 PM EDT

Fat, I was arguing FOR this idea and assumed you were arguing AGAINST it, guess not.
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002gM7">vacation mode?</a>