Defence 75% of you Att

Locked
User avatar
~phalax~
Forum Regular
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:04 pm
Alliance: Omegan Empire
Race: Omegan Monkey
Location: New Zealand

Defence 75% of you Att

I apologize if this has already been mentioned, I also have been busy at work and haven't read the new updates.

So the complaint that is made the most in this game is about snipers accounts.

So how hard would it be to design the game so you had to have at least 75% defense of your attack,

Eg; A 1trill Att would require 750bill def, before you could start attacking, and if you are in a online battle and you fall below that percentage then your armies will need to retreat back to their home system to defend it until you can get back to that 75% mark again.

(No your attack doesn't get damaged because they return home to defend, but you should not be able to attack while your home system is under siege either.)

So you would receive a message something like this..

Your Commander stands aboard (YOUR MS NAME) as the communications come through that your home system is under siege, your armies must retreat until the defense has been restored within your system.

I'm no game developer so is it possible to do? and has it been suggested before? what are the problems with this idea?

And PS; cheaper defense weapons would also be handy
User avatar
MaxSterling
Forum Elite
Posts: 1705
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:32 pm
Alliance: The Dark Dominium
ID: 83707
Alternate name(s): Naq Daddy, The guy that just stole your naq.
Location: In ur bank... stealin ur nakz.

Re: Defence 75% of you Att

Like a broken record... this has been suggested so many times that my eyes hurt. 75% is kind of high. 25% would be sufficient enough, but I agree. An attacking army should not leave their home world undefended.

I've even gone as far as saying that they should require a % of one's army to defense, otherwise miners leave the mines. Meaning that the defenders are the ones that make sure the miners don't leave the mines.
User avatar
GeneralChaos
Forum Addict
Posts: 3421
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:56 pm
Alliance: Omega
ID: 59627

Re: Defence 75% of you Att

It is no longer required, with the massive loss on selling attack weapons, you wont get someone that farms and sells off now, and with sabbing increased, if you build a massive strike and very little defense, and someone sabs you, its going to cost you way more than you farm.
Deep within Noob Cave, you find a strange pool filled with a glowing blue liquid. You think back to what your mother told you about unfamiliar liquids found in caves.

You're pretty sure she said "Drink it! What's the worst that can happen?"
Doc
Fledgling Forumer
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:44 am

Re: Defence 75% of you Att

No.
User avatar
~phalax~
Forum Regular
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:04 pm
Alliance: Omegan Empire
Race: Omegan Monkey
Location: New Zealand

Re: Defence 75% of you Att

MaxSterling wrote:Like a broken record... this has been suggested so many times that my eyes hurt. 75% is kind of high. 25% would be sufficient enough, but I agree. An attacking army should not leave their home world undefended.

I've even gone as far as saying that they should require a % of one's army to defense, otherwise miners leave the mines. Meaning that the defenders are the ones that make sure the miners don't leave the mines.


Thought it may have been suggested before, so simple an idea... I like the idea of miners being eaten into once your defense is gone.

GeneralChaos wrote:It is no longer required, with the massive loss on selling attack weapons, you wont get someone that farms and sells off now, and with sabbing increased, if you build a massive strike and very little defense, and someone sabs you, its going to cost you way more than you farm.


Sweet that makes sense.
I best read these updates now i have some time :)

Doc wrote:No.


Not very insightful and very boring comment.
Tekki
Forum Addict
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:37 pm
ID: 0

Re: Defence 75% of you Att

I'd still like to see something like it, or killable attack supers - which is the other variation on this that has been suggested to death!
Spoiler
Initial masser on Field Marshal's 120t defence and on Rodwolf's 177t defence.

The forces of Rodwolf fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 178,947,245,996,720 damage on Tekki's forces!

The forces of Rodwolf fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 3 damage on Tekki's forces!
Jedi~Tank wrote:@ADMINS- ALL ADMINS, this is the absolute worst game forum I have ever seen (this sentiment is shared by many) It is amazing how ya;ll can go from good job to complete garbage in no time at all.

Jedi~Tank
A sentiment I can agree with, except some of them have never done a good job. For further details, PM me INGAME Id 9095.
---
Image
Image
Image
Spoiler
Image Image
Image Image
User avatar
Frozen Flame
Forum Intermediate
Posts: 927
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:36 am
Alliance: Forgotten Serenity
Race: Unknown
Location: Hiding in bushes with my AK..

Re: Defence 75% of you Att

would we talk about this some more..
nowadays there are many people with 20T defences and 0 attack..
could we please make a % how big is you def compared to defence..
couse building 20T def.. and buy 10m spys with lvl 34 and your naq is almost 100% safe..

i want to farm with 2,5t strike and its same as if i had 1t attack, since there are people with def up to 1T or from 5T above..
Image
Locked

Return to “Suggestions Archive”