Reconsidering lifer suicide mision

[blahh]

As per admin Jasons request on tonights meet admin, I am making this poll.
If moderators think it should be moved to a more apropriate area -aka game sugestions than plz move it there, I ve decided to put it here to get "a better responce rate".

It was pointed out by several players already that lifer suicide misions dont get used realy often due to the high sacrifice rate - 5 lifers to kill 1 AC unit.
Admin is willing to reconsider the rate.. but would like some player imput be4 he does so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A quick "objective" overlook:
-While massing you can reach a death rate of 1:1 or even better (using ms, planets..)
-Killing spys is done at a 0 death rate aka 0:xyz rate
-lifer suicide 5:1 - is it realy worth it?

-Yes "uu" (trained in form of attackers defenders and spys) are more valuable than lifers which are not untrainable, but still, lifers do produce the same income, dont need to be sent away while ascending,... their only downsize is that they cant be "reused" somewhere else if needed which usualy isnt an issue unless you realy got alot of them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aside choosing on changing the rate, another option is availible, the alternative solution to the problem.
One of such solutions as was sugested on the meeting is:

Taking away lifer suicide mision, and puting in place a new type of attack... one combining both strike and covert... esencialy strike would have to be bigger than defenders defence, and covert bigger than defenders anticovert... in order for it to work.

The overcrowding lifers could be solved by adding a "rehabiltation facilities" that would rehabilitate lifers into normal miners at some naq costs and % loss of test subjects...(optional improoving rate of success through a new technology - at high costs)

or using market turns to convert a set ammount of lifers into normal miners, again at some % loss and so on.

Remember this are just sugestions that were voiced out, and does not mean that it would change exactly like said here.

Now go and vote, post your opinions,ect...

PS: Apologise for any gramatical or spelling errors in the post, hope it still makes sence, contribute them to the late hour, a bit intoxicated state, or the fact that eng isnt my 1st lang.

Suggestions mod edit: let it stay here a few days, then move it...

Tanith edit: I'm moving this to suggestions after the 03/19/2008 admin meet.

[smooshable]

As stated, it's not strategic atm. New type of attack all the way!

[bebita]

2:1
lets give a chance for defenders when they are massed

[blahh]

added option to change your mind, if anything you read later on from user coments makes you change it

EDIT: my personal viev.. or at least first thing that came to my mind was, no more fake "alliance power" from ac during the warrs

[bebita]

it will be nice 1:1 option
or no more account with 0 stats and milions with ac
it will be nice way to kill away troopers
to kill multi in this game

[killtacular]

I would like to say a 3 to 1 rate would be benificial. We dont need anymore screwy updates not one of the last 3 or 4 have been anygood.

[Bull-E]

i like the strike covert combination attack

[Lord Silent Bob]

i like the strike covert combination attack

yeah, me too

[Rottenking]

i voted 2:1 but now really thinking about it i think the alternitive is probably just as good.
but i think it can be worked on a bit better

[pc]

1:1 would be good ...I like my lifers and would not use 1:1 much
5:1 = self massing and not much of a option as far as war goes

in the last war I was in. 1 player had 9 mil Assassin trained ..but at the cost
of 45 mil lifers...nah not a option ...even 1:1 ..still a lot to lose

[smooshable]

1:1 would be good ...I like my lifers and would not use 1:1 much
5:1 = self massing and not much of a option as far as war goes

in the last war I was in. 1 player had 9 mil Assassin trained ..but at the cost
of 45 mil lifers...nah not a option ...even 1:1 ..still a lot to lose

Exactly PC - why do an attack that hurts you as much, or even more than the person you are hitting.

[SVaRuN]

I suggested and am still sticking to the:

A new Technology:

The Technology on rehabilitating lifers would work as the one with mercs...you would have levels and I would go with as far as 6 levels each giving you 15% lifers recovered so when you buy them all you are able to successfuly rehabilitate 90% of lifers
Each Tech upgrade would cost you 1 trill in naq giving it some actual value unlike the other Techs...and could only be reached later on in the game...meaning only bigger players older palyer would get to buy the tech, which does seem normal seeing how they are the ones who would actually need lifers converted into miners...

- Also lets face it the tech tree is old and hasnt recieved an addition in ages...



As for AC units killed I would seek another alternative:
- The current one I dont like:
first reason being the rate
the second being no risk while attacking...the attacker simply risks nothing...he knows how many he ll kill and can do it whenever he feels like it...no other technique comes without a risk...
Therefor I would do the following...
Player he has an alternative attack option smilar to ascension where he may hunt AC units with penetrating his defence and perhaps therefor loosing like at massing but perhaps adding a feature of losing 30 ats per attack...



Blue

[geisha]

One of such solutions as was sugested on the meeting is:

Taking away lifer suicide mision, and puting in place a new type of attack... one combining both strike and covert... esencialy strike would have to be bigger than defenders defence, and covert bigger than defenders anticovert... in order for it to work.

and who had this excellent idea? *cough*

Might also add the idea behind it: assassins are the bad dudes who kill the sneaky dudes (covert). So I think it would only be fair if the sneaky dudes had a chance to do the same if they are smart enough, meaning if your covert is higher than their anticovert, your covert agents sneak into the realm, check out the situation there and call reinforcements (your army). Of course your army will have to be strong enough to beat their defence.

So effectively, if the operation is successful, you won't lose any covert units, however you will have the regular strike losses. If it was unsuccessful part of your covert agents would be eliminated. I think the same rate as a failed sabotage or recon would be fair.

[Borek]

As stated, it's not strategic atm. New type of attack all the way!

Agree, i don't think it's a very good solution as it stands, so i vote for a new type of attack.

[nobby]

The "strike+covert" new type of attack sonds good to me.