miners

[Boa]

Do you want the ability to untrain miners?

[Richard_Destroyer]

I say yes but it would screw up teh whole market price on uu.

[Lore]

You can discuss it all you want but it won't happen. Admin refuses to allow an account to be defeatable, and protected incomes is the best way to do so. He took it out of ascended so I doubt he will add it to main.


Personally I like the idea if you limit it. My suggestion for ascended can be used here as well. Leave a "safe" amount that can't be untrained. It can be tied to your UP. The higher your UP the higher you "Safe zone" UU/Miners limit is. This allows accounts to be hurt but not crippled or reset.

Without being able to cripple someones income, wars will never be winable.

[Richard_Destroyer]

That is a very good point lore.

[GeneralChaos]

He cant even limit it now, imagine the outcome of that, player A 200mill army, untrains say even 10% of player B 100mill army miners, then raids them away, Player B would not only lose say 9mill UU but a lot of income, it would cripple the game, allowing set players IE snipers to dominate even more than now.

If a defense is removed you can farm the person each turn, i think thats as close as you will get to your goal here.

[Lore]

He cant even limit it now, imagine the outcome of that, player A 200mill army, untrains say even 10% of player B 100mill army miners, then raids them away, Player B would not only lose say 9mill UU but a lot of income, it would cripple the game, allowing set players IE snipers to dominate even more than now.

If a defense is removed you can farm the person each turn, i think thats as close as you will get to your goal here.

The flip side is that 2 or 3 "player B"s can only be stripped down so far, but they can strip 1 "player A" much, much further down. The bigger you are the more you stand to loose. We all know there is strength in numbers.

meh, either way. All I know is the present system does not work. Period.

[Wolf359]

Do you want the ability to untrain miners?

LOL

At least other people have the courtesy as to put forward an argument for it one way or another. Seriously, what is the point in a simple poll, covering a topic that has been discussed to death elsewhere?

And I take it that by 'miners' you mean 'lifers'? - since miners can be untrained, but lifers can't - which I think is the point.

[GrizzZzzly]

he means people can untrain other people's miners.(i think)
I think it can work if it was based on percetages and after that percentage you can't untrain for the next 3 weeks or so. Or even better. You can only untrain other people's miners once you descend them. This could restrict people from waiting 3 weeks in a war for people to untrain units.

edit:
I think it should be introduced on these terms:
_percentage killable should be tied towards UP most being about 15% least being about 5%
_only once you descend someone
_It costs attackers to untrain
_defence protects miners

Nice suggestions Lore

[GeneralChaos]

He cant even limit it now, imagine the outcome of that, player A 200mill army, untrains say even 10% of player B 100mill army miners, then raids them away, Player B would not only lose say 9mill UU but a lot of income, it would cripple the game, allowing set players IE snipers to dominate even more than now.

If a defense is removed you can farm the person each turn, i think thats as close as you will get to your goal here.

The flip side is that 2 or 3 "player B"s can only be stripped down so far, but they can strip 1 "player A" much, much further down. The bigger you are the more you stand to loose. We all know there is strength in numbers.

meh, either way. All I know is the present system does not work. Period.

Or big guys build a super defense, and sit on the smaller guys everyday to stop miners being untrained........admin always said anything that hurts income wont happen.

Also its to easy abused, player B decides mmm i want a new account, cause i get farmed to much, untrains say 40mill miners raids it, then sends it away, does this 4 times boom new account 160mill army, MULTIS would love this update.

[GrizzZzzly]

He cant even limit it now, imagine the outcome of that, player A 200mill army, untrains say even 10% of player B 100mill army miners, then raids them away, Player B would not only lose say 9mill UU but a lot of income, it would cripple the game, allowing set players IE snipers to dominate even more than now.

If a defense is removed you can farm the person each turn, i think thats as close as you will get to your goal here.

The flip side is that 2 or 3 "player B"s can only be stripped down so far, but they can strip 1 "player A" much, much further down. The bigger you are the more you stand to loose. We all know there is strength in numbers.

meh, either way. All I know is the present system does not work. Period.

Or big guys build a super defense, and sit on the smaller guys everyday to stop miners being untrained........admin always said anything that hurts income wont happen.

Also its to easy abused, player B decides mmm i want a new account, cause i get farmed to much, untrains say 40mill miners raids it, then sends it away, does this 4 times boom new account 160mill army, MULTIS would love this update.

did you not read my post? A certain percentage depending on UP ranging from 5% to about 15% and i suggest with a higher UP the percentage should go up to help out smaller players. Also i said untraining should be acomplished by using attack supers, furthermore only once you've descended someone. So your point is flawed in pretty much every way.
edit: the part about the percentage going up with UP was new. Also im pretty sure being a multi is against the rules so what is your point?
It would be clear to spot multi's that way.

[Lore]

admin always said anything that hurts income wont happen.

Also its to easy abused, player B decides mmm i want a new account, cause i get farmed to much, untrains say 40mill miners raids it, then sends it away, does this 4 times boom new account 160mill army, MULTIS would love this update.

You are correct about admin.

As for the other point, can't they do that now?

[GrizzZzzly]

Lore you suggested the the same as Im thinking right??
People have gotten little confused, some think its untraining lifers and some think its people untraining other players miners.
Lore and myself so far believe we should be able to untrain other peoples miners. I think that's the only option in question at the moment seeing as the other has been as Wolf said, "debated to death," with no success.
Beta, you could maybe change the title to "Who thinks players should be able to untrain other people's miners" and then add this to the terms:

Terms:
_percentage killable should be tied towards UP most being about 15% least being about 5% ( don't know for who it shoud be benefitial lower UP or higher, the percentage can be debated on )
_It costs attackers to untrain
_defence protects miners
_ The amount you untrain per 15 turns should depend on the amount of miners the player has. ( quantity can be debated )
_you can only untrain a certain amount ( the percentage ) every 1 or two months ( time can be debated )
The figues on all these terms can be debated, but the principle still counts, This could be a very good way to prevent wars being boring and fought with 0 stats it encourages people to build defences when a few of your miners are on the line.

[Lore]

I was refering to miners in general. Not just lifers. Either way the idea won't fly.

[GrizzZzzly]

better now? shame, i think it could work

[Wolf359]

Untraining miners/lifers - whatever......

There is one thing that needs to be realised and then considered:

Miners were introduced as a method to increase income and to be able to protect UU from being raided. Lifers were introduced as the penalty for this. Therefore, to introduce a method to be able to untrain somebody else miners defeats both reasons as to why it was created.

It is ironic to me that people complained that UU were killable (although strangely not those who were involved in the most battles), and therefore UU became unkillable. Then, people complained that some way of capturing UU was needed, now that they were unkillable - and so raid was introduced. The irony continues because people then complained they wanted some way of protecting their UU (and hence their income) from being stolen - hey presto, we got miners/lifers. And now we have people complaining that we should be able to untrain miners? Where does it end?

If the suggestions were to the benefit of the game, then fine - but all of them mentioned in the above paragraph were to the detriment of the game and were brought in after each other in an attempt to address the unbalance in the game THAT DIDN'T EXIST initially.