10% Rule.

[Mystake]

To achieve full potential of your miners, atleast 10% of your army must be trained as a Stat action unit.

in other words, 100m size, 10m trained units (attack/def)
maybe 50% of trained units can be either covert or AC so as to not lock them away permanently.

if ur 10% under how many units u need, baibai 10% of ur income ? (to a maximum of having only 25% of your income?)

means that ppl playing statless and growing on UP/income alone can't (except UP, they can, but thats not like its a unit that creates other units, its.... a... factory?)


"Your miners do not feel safe working without adequate protection. Some are revolting until you create a proper safety barrier for them"


for wars, this means that anyone who sits statless get penalyzed and might add some more "i need to build a defense so that it can get massed away otherwise i wont have my income". this means that a war won't be decided on who can last the longest but who just can't play hte game anymore.

@ income planets.... throw them into the equation. do this off total income not natural income

[Juliette]

Expect resistance.
The idea is sound, if you indeed aim to have everyone play the risk game.
Personally, I think that should be everyone's game, risking a lot, but I know I play with low stats myself. I would not fight an update like this being introduced though.

[Mystake]

Expect resistance.
The idea is sound, if you indeed aim to have everyone play the risk game.
Personally, I think that should be everyone's game, risking a lot, but I know I play with low stats myself. I would not fight an update like this being introduced though.

that's fine.

have that rule in effect during WAR times. So, if alliance is at war then the 10% rule comes into play. Maybe even have it as a War mode?

[GeneralChaos]

Yea the educators will love this idea wont they....now they can pick on more tiny accounts.

[weilandsmith]

Everybody has different style of play. Take a look at AN. They're stat builders. They have huge def in proportion to their whole army population. Others like blah prefer huge attack to def. What you are proposing is an effective rule that will curtail the freedom of placement for UUs. How would you like it if someone told you how to build your armies? Do you think that you would still enjoy playing SGW if Jason told you how to build your army?

It all depends on the style of play. When you put limits on the way you can play a game, you also limit the versatility of the game. The more limitations you have, the less that can be done, the more people who'll get turned off by the game.

Since the object of admin here is to have as many active players as possible, placing too many limitations is something admin won't want to do.

[Mystake]

hence why in the post above yours I suggested to add it as a War Mode?

[weilandsmith]

hence why in the post above yours I suggested to add it as a War Mode?

well sir, you'd need more versatility in a war. train miners into attack soldiers then back to miners or anti-cov when you log off for the day. it's a valid strategy that will be taken away if 10% rule is put in place during war.

[Wolf359]

I kinda like it, Mystake.

Needs some work I think (I'll think more on that) - but I like it.

Brings in some element of risk and strategy that the game is sadly lacking at the moment.

[GrizzZzzly]

It would be logical that you need at least a certain amount because if you have none then who is going to protect the miners or watch over the miners with the Gou'uld, but ingame that could be difficult to control, what would be the consequences of failing to have 10%, losing miners would be a good one, but there are many flaws.

What if someone gets massed when that person is asleep then he could lose a lot of miners during the night, also this could destroy people's army sizes quite a lot thus being unpopular with many. Also 10% is a lot for many people , puting that many into strike or defence troops could mean 20 or even 30 mill UU, that would be very expensive for them or costly in terms of loses, of they are put into retrainably units then they are very vulnerable.

[GeneralChaos]

I guess thats why admin has it set that without a def or a high enough 1 you lose what your miners produce, n thats your balance.

[Envy]

I dont think suggestion should lead forcing people how to build their accounts. Its silly as their be totally no need in playing a game when ur need to do this to have that. And that to get this.

Im a democratic. LET people chose their way how they wanne put their accounts and not being forced in what they have to do. Else theirs no use in playing this game u can let it play automatic for u . hows that for a suggestion ?

A automatic account with everthing on it lmao

[Lore]

The biggest problem i immediately see is,,,,,, why not just train 10% into untrainable raiders who can't be hit or killed? Kinna shoots the entire idea in the head. You can't really base it off DEF as it is so easily massed, and would lead to true account destruction when alliances sit on singular accounts.

[Zogean King]

It would just lead to blahh massing me more.... which pretty much seems to be his hobby I would not like this.