auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

When BIG changes come, some advance notice MAY be given, depending on the type of enhancement.
this is where to discuss these that are announced, and where we announce them.
User avatar
Juliette
Verified
The Queen
Posts: 31802
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:57 pm
Race: Royalty
ID: 4323
Alternate name(s): Cersei Lannister
Location: Ultima Thule

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

Lore wrote:Are you saying regular income units are killable? And if so what stops them from just makinf lifers?
Yes. Nothing stops them from making lifers, but you know as well as I do that converting everything into lifers pretty much wrecks your account, turning it into a big farm when Bloodwar ends. :)
Lore wrote:At Admin,,,,,, You do realise you can raid a couple mill men in 10 to 15 minutes? Train to strike, burn strike, nothing left to kill. You know, the same sniper tactics that have been used and complained about for the last 6 yrs I been playing this game. ](*,)
Sorry to answer (I know - directed at Admin), but this cannot be done while the Bloodwar rages. Compare it to a 'Private Realm', where you cannot interact with anyone but the ones who are in your Realm - your Bloodwar partner/enemy. Sure, you can do it outside of the Bloodwar (before or after..), but then the units count towards the 'entry army', and you will have to kill more. :)
CCexyDCapedCrusader wrote:yea u cant hit anyone outside bloodrealm but the thing is the same. if you smash your defence and dont train more until next time on when you notice others with stats little strike plus little defence = less kills for enemy
And where do you propose you hide the units you need to build that little strike / defence? Miners? Get killed. Attackers? Get killed. AC? Get lifered. Spies? Get ACed.. :) There is nowhere to hide the units, so how could you train them at some later point? If your enemy sees you with any kind of units and leaves you alive, then they bring the sniper on themselves. See an enemy with units => kill it with fire.


Small wonder the Bloodwar Motto is "Everyone gunna die!" (Sayeth the Rabbid.)
Image
Gandy 181
Forum Expert
Posts: 1025
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 12:58 pm
Race: System Lord
ID: 44650
Location: Round the corner

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

what about vendettas ?
Image
Image
User avatar
Juliette
Verified
The Queen
Posts: 31802
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:57 pm
Race: Royalty
ID: 4323
Alternate name(s): Cersei Lannister
Location: Ultima Thule

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

Gandy 181 wrote:what about vendettas ?
What about them? Only alliances will be in that Bloodwar. If your members cause a Bloodwar between alliances by heavy farming, ha.. discipline. :)
Image
User avatar
Forum
Site Admin
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:52 pm

Honours and Awards

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

Juliette got the answers above (testing it in dev helps!)
The sniper issue should not exist in bloodrealm.

IF you go in with no units -how do you kill? Your enemy getting 10% of your few units killed should not be hard. So **Maybe** you can win the war with kill count, but I seriuosly suspect you'd get bloodcurse not being able to kill 10% of theirs...

IF you go in with full units -- nowhere to hide them except lifers, and thats gonna have serious impact after the war almost worse than if they all got killed :)
(if the lifer thing becomes an issue, lifer suicide can get lifers too, in bloodrealm)

IF you go in with full units, and don't convert to lifers, everything else can be killed.

Attack and Defense are same in bloodrealm so defending kills attackers.
Lifer attack gets miners.
spies and AC killable too...

I have put a good amount of thought to the ways fights are avoided, and most of those disappear in bloodrealm. If you do manage to avoid (as a group) you suffer bloodcurse, most likely. now I am sure somebody will find a converluted way, but will address that as it comes up.

Bloodrealm is a FIGHTING arena - not a hit and run. There is nowhere to run. Its just you and the enemy, face to face, by yourselves......
Don't make me use this!!!
WoofyBear
Forum Irregular
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:26 am
Alliance: Ω TITAN
Race: BEAR
ID: 8008

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

Gandy 181 wrote:what about vendettas ?



It seems vendettas will have to take part between two ppl that leave their respective alliances for the duration of their vendetta or they risk getting their alliances sucked into a blood war..
Image

"...Although I have made a career out of remodeling the truth into convenient shapes while taking possession of commodities legally belonging to others. I would dispute the fact that what I've done has been wrong. Legally yes, but you should know that the universe is not by nature an equitable distributor of good health and good fortune."

FeedBack
Spoiler
Spoiler
Everyone else has nice little quotes about them in their sig.. I thought this one would be snazzy...
AeonKnight wrote: You know you single Handedly made nearly all of them inacitve. well done.
Spoiler
Cobolt wrote:
Another important thing regarding such things are that I also feel that my "shadow" shouldn´t be "everywhere" in the alliance. A legacy is in my opinion a good thing as long as it is on a foundation level, values and such. But if it seeps to much into things it is very hard for current leadership to make own policy as ppl tend to referr to "old ways" wich rarely are up to date.... As I have said to other leaders, it was never my intention to try to keep the alliance as a static entity - infact quite the opposite, I was adamant to keep evolving the alliance according to how the game developed, only thing I felt needed to be solid is the sprit, heart and foundation of Titans that in my opinion could be described with a few words - "good guys". :)
[/quote]
Spoiler
~Desert Phantom~ wrote:
Kjarkur wrote:
~Desert Phantom~ wrote:DDE SUCK...that is all!!!
Bring it on TAF. ;)
TAF posted that?!?!...I thought ~DP~did!!!
Osiris™ wrote:
~Desert Phantom~ wrote:DDE SUCK...that is all!!!

If there is anything you do suck on then its my back vagina ;)
You sir must like men doesn't mean I do and if I did KJ would be my type I don't go after bottom feeders :smt078
ZERO
Spoiler
On 1/14/14, at 5:12 PM, Dean Bailey Z E R O 1907332 HVE Canadia wrote:
> glad his return overshadowed our betrayal.
User avatar
Juliette
Verified
The Queen
Posts: 31802
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2005 6:57 pm
Race: Royalty
ID: 4323
Alternate name(s): Cersei Lannister
Location: Ultima Thule

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

WoofyBear wrote:
Gandy 181 wrote:what about vendettas ?
It seems vendettas will have to take part between two ppl that leave their respective alliances for the duration of their vendetta or they risk getting their alliances sucked into a blood war..
Not exactly, but it does prevent it becoming an issue altogether (so probably a good idea). :)
2 people attacking each other can never get to 100% Bloodiness -> no BloodWar. If the rest of your alliance is actively attacking the alliance of your vendetta-partner, then yes, it does lead to BloodWar.

Your suggestion does prevent a BloodWar following vendettas. ;)
Image
User avatar
Forum
Site Admin
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:52 pm

Honours and Awards

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

to hopefully clarify further (as i did think about this when setting the 'war meter'' )
** any one alliance member can only count for 100AT used against your alliance.
So -for example - 10 members in alliance A. 10 members in alliance B.
Having 10 memebers, you need to hit alliance B 600 AT worth (100x 60% x 10) to bloodwar qualify.
member 1A hits member 1B 10000 times (ouch!) ...
alliance A is now 100 / 600 towards bloodwar. (again since the 100 per member cap).

Now --if alliance A member 2,3,4 and 5 also hit 1B 1000 times each -- still 100 / 600.

If member 1A hit 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B 9B 9B and 10B with 70 AT each, then you'd be at 700/600 and in range of bloodwar (if they hit back).

so in short a massing of 1 player in an alliance will not start a bloodwar on its own....

hope this explains a bit further.. cause i sure dont want to get in the way of a vendetta :)


WoofyBear wrote:
Gandy 181 wrote:what about vendettas ?



It seems vendettas will have to take part between two ppl that leave their respective alliances for the duration of their vendetta or they risk getting their alliances sucked into a blood war..
Don't make me use this!!!
BMMJ13
Lord of Winterfell
Posts: 3601
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 5:46 pm
Alliance: Tauri Alliance
Race: Tollan
ID: 89633
Location: On the Mothership...

Honours and Awards

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

Forum wrote:to hopefully clarify further (as i did think about this when setting the 'war meter'' )
** any one alliance member can only count for 100AT used against your alliance.
So -for example - 10 members in alliance A. 10 members in alliance B.
Having 10 memebers, you need to hit alliance B 600 AT worth (100x 60% x 10) to bloodwar qualify.
member 1A hits member 1B 10000 times (ouch!) ...
alliance A is now 100 / 600 towards bloodwar. (again since the 100 per member cap).

Now --if alliance A member 2,3,4 and 5 also hit 1B 1000 times each -- still 100 / 600.

If member 1A hit 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B 9B 9B and 10B with 70 AT each, then you'd be at 700/600 and in range of bloodwar (if they hit back).

so in short a massing of 1 player in an alliance will not start a bloodwar on its own....

hope this explains a bit further.. cause i sure dont want to get in the way of a vendetta :)


WoofyBear wrote:
Gandy 181 wrote:what about vendettas ?



It seems vendettas will have to take part between two ppl that leave their respective alliances for the duration of their vendetta or they risk getting their alliances sucked into a blood war..

What about the limit in the opposite direction. 1 Member goes rogue and hits everyone in an opposite alliance. It sounds like a single member can cause blood war, however massing a single one does not. Is there any way you are going to place a limit on the most % a single member can cause in the opposite direction, or is it open ended?

Also don't know if this was asked before, as I can't find it. It says 100 attacks, is that consider 100 of any, or 100x 15 at attacks, which would require 500x 3 at hits etc.
Mar 18, 14:52 General Zeus Sabotage Repelled 104,724,369 details
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Spoiler
Image
ImageImage

ImageImage

ImageImage

Image

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
Forum
Site Admin
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:52 pm

Honours and Awards

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

"If member 1A hit 1B 2B 3B 4B 5B 6B 7B 9B 9B and 10B with 70 AT each, then you'd be at 700/600 and in range of bloodwar (if they hit back)." -- so one person in an alliance can start a bloodwar. So it actually matters who you let in :)
And its 100 x member count x 60% AT (attack turns) - no matter in 1's or 15's ... just average 60 (100x60%) AT per enemy member. This is easily adjustable, but this is where its currently set. Again this is in THE LAST 24 HOURS....and it will tell you clearly where you're at...

BMMJ13 wrote:What about the limit in the opposite direction. 1 Member goes rogue and hits everyone in an opposite alliance. It sounds like a single member can cause blood war, however massing a single one does not. Is there any way you are going to place a limit on the most % a single member can cause in the opposite direction, or is it open ended?

Also don't know if this was asked before, as I can't find it. It says 100 attacks, is that consider 100 of any, or 100x 15 at attacks, which would require 500x 3 at hits etc.
Don't make me use this!!!
User avatar
Forum
Site Admin
Posts: 2844
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:52 pm

Honours and Awards

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

the other side also need to expend 70 per person
Don't make me use this!!!
BMMJ13
Lord of Winterfell
Posts: 3601
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 5:46 pm
Alliance: Tauri Alliance
Race: Tollan
ID: 89633
Location: On the Mothership...

Honours and Awards

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

Forum wrote:the other side also need to expend 70 per person

70 ats per person seems really low for a war declaration. Normal autowar is 300 ats per person. 300 seems kinda low, but 70 can be done very easily with just farming. It would seem if this is supposed to be blood, there should be a significant amount that would at least take some desired effort to do rather than small enough to just be farming.

I would also argue that an alliance war shouldn't be able to be caused by a single person hitting everyone on the other side a mere 70 ats worth. I mean I can understand the idea of sabotage or espionage being involved, but the fact that it's an alliance war should require at least some % of the alliance to be doing attacks and not just a single person.
Mar 18, 14:52 General Zeus Sabotage Repelled 104,724,369 details
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Spoiler
Image
ImageImage

ImageImage

ImageImage

Image

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
EbilCC
Forum Addict
Posts: 3316
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 4:19 pm
ID: 0

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

right lifers can kill miners really i dont think that should be allowed you can kill everything is bull its hard work getting your account in order

juillete you misunderstood

say i have a 3 trillion strike. someone has a 1 trillion defence with say 500 bill strike.

if i mass it down the uu i loose will mean my strike will be lowered to say 1 trillion or less

if they dont retrain defence i dont need to retrain the uu lost and if i have no defence that is how this can be abused

eg if i go mass all of the enemy and train enough uu say 5 members then leave my account to nothing to kill
Image

SJ MENTAL "I have no idea why they would ban you cc you add so much to the community at large"

[9:28:51 PM] robert_paul97: cc is the best

Teesdale: ive been farming all day and havent repaired MS
so CCs little cant blew through my shields (worry)
thorsworld1
Fledgling Forumer
Posts: 245
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:25 am

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

I dont know if this has already been discused or mentioned

0 Def accounts do they count, some alliances have accounts left in limbo for them to be a source of income to their alliances until they return, they would not rebuild a def when it naturally looses its weapons through destruction. I would like to see accounts that have 0 def stats not be included in achieving bloodwar

What if 1 alliance has say less than 10 and they cause a bloodwar on an alliance who say has 20 or 30, the initiator alliance has low or little stats because of either natural size of armies or they sell off loads of stuff just to cause the war, then they do nothing in bloodrealm, surely they would then initiate the, what do you call it ? bloodletting ? where xx% gets naturally destroyed because of inactivity, does this affect both sides ?

after all what a load of bull would it be if such a thing happend when overal army size could be like 2.3b in total against say 20b armies, if they both lost say 10% just by 1 doing nothing then alliance A would loose 230m in total units were as alliance B would loose 2b army units

see where I am comming from
WoofyBear
Forum Irregular
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:26 am
Alliance: Ω TITAN
Race: BEAR
ID: 8008

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

BMMJ13 wrote:
Forum wrote:the other side also need to expend 70 per person

70 ats per person seems really low for a war declaration. Normal autowar is 300 ats per person. 300 seems kinda low, but 70 can be done very easily with just farming. It would seem if this is supposed to be blood, there should be a significant amount that would at least take some desired effort to do rather than small enough to just be farming.

I would also argue that an alliance war shouldn't be able to be caused by a single person hitting everyone on the other side a mere 70 ats worth. I mean I can understand the idea of sabotage or espionage being involved, but the fact that it's an alliance war should require at least some % of the alliance to be doing attacks and not just a single person.



Very good point. I mean there are some alliances out there with many dead accounts in them that are farmed regularly.. If I was to raid some of these dead accounts in an alliance, say 4 or 5 members that are inactive, This could easy set my alliance at 100% on the meter. HOWEVER, the active members of that alliance would then have to reach 100% on the meter by hitting me or my alliance.. That I show i see it... So we do not really have to worry about it if the ACTIVE people in the alliance are aware it is just regular farming and keep a good attitude about things. This is going to mean we need to actually get diplos to do their jobs.. (wow, what a novel idea!)

There is a downside. If you farm an alliance regularly like that by raiding them as well as regular turn farming this can keep you at 100% on the meter which will leave you open to get sucked into a blood war if the alliance you farm get sick of it and mass you back.

Setting the % of attacks to at least war setting level with more than 50% of the alliance members might be a better idea. I can raid my farms once and turn farm a few hours and have my alliance at 100% with 3 or 4 different alliances in about 8 hours with no actual malicious intent to anyone but hitting dead accounts that are in alliances with a few active members.

Question regarding vendettas and bloodwar:

Many vendettas can go on for hours with just one online battle. This can easily exceed the amount of ATs used by both sides to be at 100% on the meter. Is there a way that the alliance leaders can click off a button or something that allows them let these users go at it indefinitely without running up the meter and causing a blood war? Most vendettas now in big alliances are usually done with High Council approval anyway. Or would it just be best to have the two opponents leave their alliances and duke it out lone wolf? One vendetta could easily run that meter up in just a couple hours if its a good onliner involved.


Am I the only one that sees the future of gatewars involving lots of 4 member alliances and MS massings? This is going to make certain that those people complaining of "sabbing being the new massing" never shut up... Even with the cov update, sabbing is going to be more common now just to avoid a blood war and still be damaging your opponents.. Dont get me wrong, I can roll with it either way.. but am I the only one that is seeing this??
Image

"...Although I have made a career out of remodeling the truth into convenient shapes while taking possession of commodities legally belonging to others. I would dispute the fact that what I've done has been wrong. Legally yes, but you should know that the universe is not by nature an equitable distributor of good health and good fortune."

FeedBack
Spoiler
Spoiler
Everyone else has nice little quotes about them in their sig.. I thought this one would be snazzy...
AeonKnight wrote: You know you single Handedly made nearly all of them inacitve. well done.
Spoiler
Cobolt wrote:
Another important thing regarding such things are that I also feel that my "shadow" shouldn´t be "everywhere" in the alliance. A legacy is in my opinion a good thing as long as it is on a foundation level, values and such. But if it seeps to much into things it is very hard for current leadership to make own policy as ppl tend to referr to "old ways" wich rarely are up to date.... As I have said to other leaders, it was never my intention to try to keep the alliance as a static entity - infact quite the opposite, I was adamant to keep evolving the alliance according to how the game developed, only thing I felt needed to be solid is the sprit, heart and foundation of Titans that in my opinion could be described with a few words - "good guys". :)
[/quote]
Spoiler
~Desert Phantom~ wrote:
Kjarkur wrote:
~Desert Phantom~ wrote:DDE SUCK...that is all!!!
Bring it on TAF. ;)
TAF posted that?!?!...I thought ~DP~did!!!
Osiris™ wrote:
~Desert Phantom~ wrote:DDE SUCK...that is all!!!

If there is anything you do suck on then its my back vagina ;)
You sir must like men doesn't mean I do and if I did KJ would be my type I don't go after bottom feeders :smt078
ZERO
Spoiler
On 1/14/14, at 5:12 PM, Dean Bailey Z E R O 1907332 HVE Canadia wrote:
> glad his return overshadowed our betrayal.
Sarevok
Forum Addict
Posts: 4042
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 7:42 pm
Race: NanoTiMaster
ID: 0

Re: auto alliance wars -> bloodwar

CCexyDCapedCrusader wrote:right lifers can kill miners really i dont think that should be allowed you can kill everything is bull its hard work getting your account in order
Personally I like it. It means that you have to be dead serious about going to war, and be prepared to loose it all. It also means an outcome, and no more never-ending wars for the simple sake of pride. It can be done, a winner determined, and life in game can continue.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=162732
Suggestions, Comments please :)
R8 wrote:TEAM WORK WILL BEAT $$ ANYDAY OF THE WEEK
angel wrote:Except the payday [-X
12agnar0k wrote:Also it's still not a war game, you have att/def weps yes, but you also have uu and UP, does this mean its a sex game, oh no, XRATEDSGW, THIS GAME IS PORN!
Ban Admin
<+CABAL> so adminHere, ever thought about playing SGW? :b
<~adminHere> cabal - i do :)
<+CABAL> :o
<+Sarevok> Cabal, look up Jtest ;)
<~adminHere> no -not jtest
<~adminHere> another :) i am a multi ;)
<+Sarevok> :O
* +CABAL screens
<+CABAL> :b
* +Sarevok Ban's Admin
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion on Enhancements (coming up)”