StarGateWars Forums

SO...

Based on the current vote:
Damage taken when attacking weaker opponents should be A LOT LESS. 4 57%
Damage taken when attacking weaker opponents should be A LITTLE LESS. 2 29%
Damage taken when attacking weaker opponents should be THE SAME. 1 14%
Damage taken when attacking weaker opponents should be A LITTLE MORE. 0 0%
Damage taken when attacking weaker opponents should be A LOT MORE. 0 0%

It seems the majority wish less damage (to whatever extent) when attacking weaker opponents (thus making having a strong attack more viable)

I voted for "A LITTLE LESS", so if we take my vote out (I shouldn't have that much of a say imo), it becomes about 2/3rds wish alot less, and the rest are for a little less, and same.

I now ask, HOW should it be less . This was sorta discussed in another thread: viewtopic.php?p=2503660#p2503660

My initial suggestion:

Sarevok wrote:Hmm, seems perhaps a scale based on defenders defence is needed?

The weaker the defenders defence, the less losses/damage you take. Something like:
90-100% = 100% normal weapon damage
40-90% = 50-100% normal weapon damage respectively.
0-40% = 50% normal weapon damage

Hope that made sense (it did in my head). So if you take someone on who has a defence 65% of yours, you take 75% of the losses you would have, had you engaged someone with 90+% of your attack.
Lower limit is 50% of what you would loose at the moment.

Note: Those % are of what you would take NOW. And not % of your offensive army/weapons

What are other people's thoughts?

Edit: Description updated for the scaling, I used losses, not damage.

Personally, I'd like it if when you're attacking someone who has 0-5%, there would be up to 15% of normal losses. Although I have to admit that the fact that my rank is #1 makes me pretty biased

I'm opened to scaling all the way to 0%. But that won't mean 0% damage to your weapons

Oh great, and all that time I thought the issue discussed was precisely the damage to weapons...
I feel like a complete idiot now

Nah, with you there.. 'damage taken' sounds like weapon damage, otherwise it would be 'unit losses' or something like that.. That is just what I thought, anyway.

ljietuvis wrote:Oh great, and all that time I thought the issue discussed was precisely the damage to weapons...
I feel like a complete idiot now

It is damage to the attack weapons.

If you read the initial though, the issue was raised of large strikes attacking defenseless accounts after being built to hit active players, and the damage inflicted on the weapons and their repair, would usually out-weigh the resources gained.

If you can suggest very clear vote options, I'll reset it once more

Contradiction detected. Or do you mean that regardless of %, you will always take some damage? Then I think ljietuvis and I misunderstood your post.

Sarevok wrote:I'm opened to scaling all the way to 0%. But that won't mean 0% damage to your weapons

Sarevok wrote:It is damage to the attack weapons.

If you read the initial though, the issue was raised of large strikes attacking defenseless accounts after being built to hit active players, and the damage inflicted on the weapons and their repair, would usually out-weigh the resources gained.

If you can suggest very clear vote options, I'll reset it once more

Misunderstanding detected

Sarevok wrote:I'm opened to scaling all the way to 0%. But that won't mean 0% damage to your weapons

See first post, add this line in place of "0-40% = 50% normal losses"
0-40% = 25-50% losses.
Losses is a bad word to use I see now. It should read "Weapon damage"

I'm completely lost here. Are you saying 'even if the damage to weapons was 0%, there would still be damage to weapons'? I don't get it.

The weapons take damage now, regardless of defense (like main).

The scaling would reduce what about of damage the weapons take (how much health they've lost) by the percentage displayed.

I've not implemented this, and it seems to be working well