Stupid 1 AT vs 15

[GeneralChaos]

I think its time admin fixed this stupid 1 AT massing crap, there are to many people in this game, no matter what alliance/empire etc, that will send hit with 1 AT to mass a huge def, it should be set that if you use 1 AT you only do 1/15th of the strike,

If you use 15 AT's you use the full strike, its only fair, this will seperate out the REAL massers in the game, from the i dont want to lose my strike massers....

[TacticalCommander]

Don't the defenders also take less weapon damage/casualties? When it is being attacked with only 1 turn.

[GeneralChaos]

Its not about damages, there doing max damage with 1 AT.

Someone with a 1.5trill strike will hit with 1.5trill whether its 1 at of 15,

To do all 1.5trill they should use 15AT's, both sides will have loses deal with it, to many are using 1 AT to bring the weapons down and leave the UU, then they massed away the unarmed UU, its stupid, and i fairly sure thats not how admin intended for it to work.

Wanna be a masser, prove it,

[TacticalCommander]

Now you explained why you think that whole weapon damage down, and mass the UU away.

I have to ask this though. If their using less AT, wouldn't it take longer to accomplish the goal of massing.


From my (admitted limited massing exp), 1 AT massing takes longer than 15 AT.

To me that seems fairly balanced, if you would like to take longer with fewer losses, then so be it.

If you decide to rush in more, then you should expect higher loses.

TC

[GeneralChaos]

You miss the point completely

Its not about how long it takes...

said person has 2trill def, another person with 2trill strike masses it with 1AT, weapons fail completely, person may still have say 15mill super defenders with no weapons, someone else comes in with 1 attack weapons and uses 15 AT's to take out there unarmed supers up to 200k+ a hit, how is that FAIR,

If you want to use your full strike you should have to use 15 AT's end of story, and i will push for admin to look into this, as the game wasn't designed to mass someones 2trill def with a series of 1 AT hits,

Am i right in guessing your 1 of the people that use this tactic.....

Masser has minimal losses, defenders loses all, this wouldnt happen in a real war.

[TacticalCommander]

actually, I'm one who uses a low strike, 1 AT MS masses, I rarely one who goes after defenses so this 1 AT only has strike deal 1/15 damage doesn't effect my style of game play. enough about me.

My point was think that if someone was taking longer, greater chance that the person being massed/ or alliance would be able to possibly sab that strike or mass the masser, or do something to try and stop him from completing.

Though, thats often easier said than done.

I personally have never seen the AT massing weps down.

Does it cost them more AT to do this sort of 1 AT massing?

As for the 2nd person who comes in with 1 wep, I am too assume he is also ACing any spies in addition to killing off remaining supers. It does seem a bit unbalance getting potentially massive kills in two areas using in a single hit.

TC

[drakcore]

The 1AT massing is abusive and no it doesnt take longer to mass some1 with 1AT a time to 15AT a time unless they on nox / realm alert.

Simple put when u attack/spy/raid some1 u can click on the "again" button to do another action against them.
Here they can be abusive aswell by clicking on say the "raid" button fast enough to prevent the page from refreshing / redirecting to the result page allowing them to attack multiple times in a fraction that would be required by normal means.

[Stickm@n]

If you were massing someone would you rather use 1 AT or 15? I rekon most people would agree 1 is better because you use less turns to mass someone.

[ARC_trooper]

i love this suggestion!

I'm always massing with 15 ats since i believe 1 at attacks are for cowards.
its a wargame, you lose stuff!

This will make massing 'expensive' again.. if i get it right

Great idea!

and stickman, your doing less damage with 1 at turn, it takes alot longer.. with 15 at's the defense is gone within a minute..

i prefer the 15 at's

[Envy]

First of all this suggestion is useless.

1 ATs = less damage to ennemie weapons and also LESS loses for ennemie defenders

1 ATS = less damage to attackers weapons and also LESS loses for attackers

So its 50/50 ur strike still has to be bigger to gain victory.

15 ATs = more damage to ennemie weapons and also MORE loses for ennemies defenders

15 ATs = more damage to attackers weapons and also MORE loses for attackers strikers

Also 50/50 strike also has to be bigger to gain victory (and serieusly bigger with 15 ATs).


Also ur suggestions will bring harm to smaller account GeneralChaos. Cus of people mass them 2 times their size how can a small person every archieve victory with 15 ATs and a strike against a defence bigger than hes strike.

Also this suggestion is way to difficult to code cus their to much % involved for each AT used.

[GeneralChaos]

First of all this suggestion is useless.

1 ATs = less damage to ennemie weapons and also LESS loses for ennemie defenders

1 ATS = less damage to attackers weapons and also LESS loses for attackers

So its 50/50 ur strike still has to be bigger to gain victory.

15 ATs = more damage to ennemie weapons and also MORE loses for ennemies defenders

15 ATs = more damage to attackers weapons and also MORE loses for attackers strikers

Also 50/50 strike also has to be bigger to gain victory (and serieusly bigger with 15 ATs).


Also ur suggestions will bring harm to smaller account GeneralChaos. Cus of people mass them 2 times their size how can a small person every archieve victory with 15 ATs and a strike against a defence bigger than hes strike.

Also this suggestion is way to difficult to code cus their to much % involved for each AT used.

It would have no affect on a smaller player, if a def is bigger than theres they will lose out with 1 at or 15 at, most smaller players wouldnt go around randomly attacking bigger guys, but right now the big guys can mass a smaller def with very little loses, but 15 at's would make them lose more because of having the bigger army size, so if the big guys want to mass, bring on the 15AT's.

Myself i tried the 1AT and got bored after about 30seconds, this game is all about numbers, im not scared to lose 200k attackers on a hit, if my target is losing 500k.

[Mato]

well 1AT MS massing is unbalanced.

[dardar]

nice idea. i only use 1 at if i seeing if some1 is to big to attak or not