Raising trade, raid and plague caps

[BarelyAllen]

...Did I hear that right? Amag must be crazy!

I think we should raise all of the caps, or change the formula so it'll be higher. It may or may not be a good idea to raise UP with this, but my brainpower already went into thinking about what I have here. My reasoning for this is that, when C2 built his monster 100t def, everyone went crazy. The cost of the UU and weapons used for it and the spies to protect it exceeded that of his covert level. Now, that's quite near impossible. In the grand scheme of things, building a 100t defense and getting it massed is a relatively small setback when you're saving up for c40. I compare these, because most people that would build a defense like that nowadays are at least c39. The thing is, no one really builds more than that, because of the plague-avoidance-dance.

Now, it'd be possible for someone to build, and therefore lose, a lot more if the caps were raised. People may complain that it'd make it harder for new people to catch up, but getting to the raid cap nowadays is ridiculously easy compared to what it once was anyway. It'd make it more of a challenge to build page one stats. If you could build a 400t def, you'd actually lose well over a quad in weapons and UU when you get massed. That'd set you back pretty far.

I know this doesn't solve a lot of problems, but it should solve one. I tried to comb through scenarios for problems, but I can't check everything. Can you all tell me if this presents any problems?

[Bioflick]

I think this is a terrible idea. i think they should be lowered, so the ones that aint on 24h can actualy do anything. would open game up more for others but still be the same, just not that big numbers in stats

[Sol]

I think this is a terrible idea. i think they should be lowered, so the ones that aint on 24h can actualy do anything. would open game up more for others but still be the same, just not that big numbers in stats

I'm inclined to agree.

[Melisandre]

I think this is a terrible idea. i think they should be lowered, so the ones that aint on 24h can actualy do anything. would open game up more for others but still be the same, just not that big numbers in stats

I'm inclined to agree.

As am I.

[BarelyAllen]

Good thing I asked for problems with it.

Edit: I just want to point out that the Gatewars community seems split about this. I started a thread months back asking why the game was always said to be declining, and the general consensus was that no one was actually losing anything when massed. That seems to be in direct opposition of what I see here.

[Sol]

I started a thread months back asking why the game was always said to be declining, and the general consensus was that no one was actually losing anything when massed. That seems to be in direct opposition of what I see here.

I think what people meant is losing things that bring a person down a few notches. i.e if someone gets massed make them raid for UU instead of buy it back. When people lose a few hundred mill or a few hundred trill in weps they just buy it back. It means nothing. Cash spending probably wouldn't phase too many people if the resources they lost still meant something to them, if it still meant farming and raiding it back, if it meant they were down and out for a little while.
Back in the day THAT is what forced strategy, in a war you could only attack a limited number of people to 0 because you had to regenerate your resources, sitting on people actually meant something. It's why vultures were massed, it's why many operations occurred.

[Rodwolf]

I started a thread months back asking why the game was always said to be declining, and the general consensus was that no one was actually losing anything when massed. That seems to be in direct opposition of what I see here.

I think what people meant is losing things that bring a person down a few notches. i.e if someone gets massed make them raid for UU instead of buy it back. When people lose a few hundred mill or a few hundred trill in weps they just buy it back. It means nothing. Cash spending probably wouldn't phase too many people if the resources they lost still meant something to them, if it still meant farming and raiding it back, if it meant they were down and out for a little while.
Back in the day THAT is what forced strategy, in a war you could only attack a limited number of people to 0 because you had to regenerate your resources, sitting on people actually meant something. It's why vultures were massed, it's why many operations occurred.

* I Like*

[Bioflick]

I started a thread months back asking why the game was always said to be declining, and the general consensus was that no one was actually losing anything when massed. That seems to be in direct opposition of what I see here.

I think what people meant is losing things that bring a person down a few notches. i.e if someone gets massed make them raid for UU instead of buy it back. When people lose a few hundred mill or a few hundred trill in weps they just buy it back. It means nothing. Cash spending probably wouldn't phase too many people if the resources they lost still meant something to them, if it still meant farming and raiding it back, if it meant they were down and out for a little while.
Back in the day THAT is what forced strategy, in a war you could only attack a limited number of people to 0 because you had to regenerate your resources, sitting on people actually meant something. It's why vultures were massed, it's why many operations occurred.

* I Like*

we all do! <3 Bring the good old days back! go SoL

[BarelyAllen]

I started a thread months back asking why the game was always said to be declining, and the general consensus was that no one was actually losing anything when massed. That seems to be in direct opposition of what I see here.

I think what people meant is losing things that bring a person down a few notches. i.e if someone gets massed make them raid for UU instead of buy it back. When people lose a few hundred mill or a few hundred trill in weps they just buy it back. It means nothing. Cash spending probably wouldn't phase too many people if the resources they lost still meant something to them, if it still meant farming and raiding it back, if it meant they were down and out for a little while.
Back in the day THAT is what forced strategy, in a war you could only attack a limited number of people to 0 because you had to regenerate your resources, sitting on people actually meant something. It's why vultures were massed, it's why many operations occurred.

Okay, let's pretend there was no cash spending in this game for a minute. That doesn't change the fact that you can farm enough to pay for rank 1 stats (provided you have a decent covert and MS) in one week*, with sufficient turns. I can't be sure, but I'd be willing to wager it took C2 a little more than a week to farm for his defense. Now, add money spending back in. How did it get to the point where money was what made it too easy to build up? There was money spending back then, correct? According to someone, I think Kjarkur, even money spenders went "oh, **Filtered**" when they logged in massed back then**. I wasn't really a big player back then, so I have to go on what others say. Tell me, why is it that now, anyone with a Visa card can go straight up to the top 10 rankings without even making a dent in his or her pocket?

* That's even a little generous. A 100t def takes about 470t (I've never build one, so come in and correct if you want) in UU and wep costs, which isn't even 70t a day for a week. I know tons of farmers that average that, and a 100t def isn't even needed to hold rank 1 sometimes.

** viewtopic.php?f=101&t=197796#p2537147

[Juliette]

All increasing caps will do is simply increase the amount of resources on the server (because when farms grow on their UP, so does their income, and so on), making it even easier to rebuild after being massed.

I am in favour of reducing the caps, reducing income per unit, increasing weapon costs, and gradually making UP more inefficient as you become larger - like it is on Ascended. (Already mentioned as Melisandre though not in specifics.)

[Sniperwax]

All increasing caps will do is simply increase the amount of resources on the server (because when farms grow on their UP, so does their income, and so on), making it even easier to rebuild after being massed.

I am in favour of reducing the caps, reducing income per unit, increasing weapon costs, and gradually making UP more inefficient as you become larger - like it is on Ascended. (Already mentioned as Melisandre though not in specifics.)

Please don't increase wep costs on main. You can have the #1 def on ASC and farm the weps up in about....oh.....180 secs. Takes a good solid few days of drug fueled naq farming binge to farm enough naq for a superior def and/or strike.

[BarelyAllen]

double post, where's the delete button?

[BarelyAllen]

Ah- Juliette explained something I was missing. I forgot that players would be able to have higher incomes and then become farms. I was thinking that not changing UP with it would keep it staying the same, forgetting about the flaw that would arrive later.

I like your solutions, however I have a problem with it.

It would make the losses of units less painful. Raiding wouldn't be very affected, because a large percentage of good raids have so few total units that they wouldn't have a reduced UP. Therefore, while weapons become more expensive, units don't, at least not by a lot.

What arises:

When massing a defense to zero, you lose a lot less. The thing that deters a lot of massers is the fact that you'll lose a lot of UU on an unsuccessful attempt. This would take that away, and make massing a lot more about taking out weapons as opposed to spies and UU. An attacker would never have to suffer major losses unless he masses away his strike or gets sabbed.

[Bioflick]

Edit:
The major problem is the cap. I dont see why income or up is the problem. That should in fact not be adjusted. that should be the major benefit of building a good account.

lets say the cap was 250mn uu's. (no plague) the way to get too rank 1 from there should be the mercs who should be a pain in the ass to get, with the current merc limit. it would take 10h to raid 250mn, from zero. trust me i know, i have done it without a farmlist.The Cap can not be set in one go, it needs to go down slowly, so it would be fair enough for the ppl over 250mn.

Weapons can be boosted in strength to keep the stats we currently are used to.
Imagine the war activity.

The problem with this game is its so boring to farm i rather stay at work for a few hours extra to just buy them off someone else than do it myself, If the cap was lowered, i would not even considered it.

the other thing is the 60k + inactives who is worthless having. i dont see why they are there in the first place, imagine a game with only active players. you would have to think before doing things, imagine how important it would be to be in a active alliance.

well, i dont know, its just an idea. im not sure how long i will stay around as it is now.

The other thing is. make a new account. build it to 40/40. it would take .. i dont know, 2 years without spending? + the time it takes to ascend from 1-23. who the hell can go trough that? i managed to get to 13/23 before i did Black marked ones, for 10$ each, man that is alot.
Who on earth wanna rebuild 22 times with getting gangbanged by the players still remaining.


I dont know, we are all still around, we must be quite special
Its only cos the community this games still going on.

I started playing this cos my math and my english wasnt good, since i dropped out of school.
6 months ago i could not even write a single line without looking on google translate. and my math is much better than when i started.

Jesus crist.. post is propaly too long for most ppl to bother reading. i might be alot off topic aswell..

EDIT: You have been playing 0 Years, 5 Months, 23 Days, 6 Hours, 14 Minutes, and 42 Seconds.

[Neimenljivi]

Why was it so expensive back then? C2's defence cost about 200$. Now the same amount of resources can be bought with 50$. Increasing the caps would only lower the prices of UUs and naq in $$ and thus it would be even easier to purchase such defences.

The problem is not in the amount of UUs one has to go around, the problem is in the prices of naq and UU which are, mostly, based off ingame cash market. If those were to, say, double, I bet within a few weeks the prices of naq and UUs would double on forum resources for $ market as well. That should be the priority. Decreasing the cap would help as well, but the main thing is to increase the worth of naq which should be done without any drastic measures such as changing the miners and income planets. It, instead, should be done by changing the amount of income UUs produce and by increasing the cost to buy naq and UU in ingame cash market. As UUs are the main source of income for inactive accounts, they will have less naq out thus there will be much less naq generated per turn if you look at the naq generated per turn combined with all the players throughout the server, thus naq will be rarer and the prices will increase, in turn it will be easier to "hurt" someone by massing them.

Removing the inactives would work too, but we all know that is not going to happen mostly because game with 60k+ players gets more profit from advertising than a game with 500 players, even if only these 500 are active.

So the thing to solve your problem would be to decrease the amount of income UUs produce and increase the price of naq in ingame cash market which will result in naq and UUs being more valuable and people will think twice before losing them.

~N