Page 1 of 1
MS attack option
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:17 am
by Lebe
What about adding one more attack type. MS attack option. ATs cost would be lower, MS casualities higher and it would be only your MS vs theyr MS.
Plus winner could take 1/10 of killed ships as captured.
Re: MS attack option
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:26 am
by Juliette
A raid on someone's fleet?
Sounds very interesting; I will pitch it and we will see about the feasibility..
Keep providing ideas; the more ideas, the better.
Re: MS attack option
Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:52 am
by dark lord tacoma
ms's are fragile enough imo redusing the at's used to destroy them doesnt add up imo
Re: MS attack option
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:07 pm
by Mathlord
I agree, it's difficult enough getting attacks like this:
Sep 16, 14:05 Warayth Attack defended 15 1 (+1 MS) 0 (+4 MS) 148,971,200 28,573,709 details
I inflicted devastating damage, and while he only lost 1 troop and 1 ms, I lost 4 motherships. I'd instead propose that if you want to attack someone's mothership it at the very least can't be devastating damage inflicted on the attacker.
Re: MS attack option
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:20 pm
by Juliette
Makes sense.. destruction is good, too much destruction stops the game in its tracks.
Re: MS attack option
Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2012 6:38 pm
by Freestyle304
Mathlord wrote:I agree, it's difficult enough getting attacks like this:
Sep 16, 14:05 Warayth Attack defended 15 1 (+1 MS) 0 (+4 MS) 148,971,200 28,573,709 details
I inflicted devastating damage, and while he only lost 1 troop and 1 ms, I lost 4 motherships. I'd instead propose that if you want to attack someone's mothership it at the very least can't be devastating damage inflicted on the attacker.
I'm guessing then that most of your defense was land based. It makes some sense, in a way. Your MS fleet was hurt more by his because it was out-classed. Having gotten past this, his fleet was unable to take anything because your large ground-based defense, in turn, overwhelmed his fleet.
The question though is why the ground defense doesn't take out motherships, and whether we would want that to change. The name of the defense weapons though is consistent with tech that would not produce fleet casualties (e.g., Negative Energy Vortex Field Generator). Personally though, I'd want a defense with teeth, and I'd want to know what my energy satellites were doing while all this was going on!