DO SOMETHING

[Sarevok]

Let me get this straight, if i sab someones defense to nothing, as soon as they say go to bed, they'll start loosing a % of their income/UP before they even get a chance to wake up? Hardly fair.

I doubt anything like this would be implemented, as it would remove farming/raiding from the game. Without many changes to the proposed idea

[Lore]

It is a tricky slope this one.

It has been suggested time and time again to bring Strike in as a defensive measure, but nothing solid ever came out of the discussions.

Will this time be different?

[Wolf359]

It is a tricky slope this one.

It has been suggested time and time again to bring Strike in as a defensive measure, but nothing solid ever came out of the discussions.

Will this time be different?

Bring back the good old days!

It could work, and it could work well - if properly implemented and appropriate safeguards put in place so that an account cannot be wiped out in mere minutes.

[12agnar0k]

if someone doesnt build stats their a undefended farm for you to vulture at their turnly growth, why would you need to do more damage to them.

The game could do with being able to totally 0 accounts but im sure their would be uproar like the old ascended revoloution > raid tactics, It would also make many players leave and make a lot of people less willing to invest $ into the game. So yeah ... not going to happen.

[Sarevok]

Exactly, being able to 0 accounts is bad. It would allow the very large ( > 250mill or whatever size you can't raid) to wipeout all raid targets for other players, so they'd have to rely soully on their income, and buying other peoples UU, which only goes to 180mill atm anyway

[Wolf359]

*cough*

Nobody said accounts should be able to be wiped to 0 - only that a defenders attacking force should be affected once the defence has gone. And again, nobody said completely - but it was said that there would be certain safeguards and limits to ensure it wasn't possible to wipe it out completely and/or in a short time span.

Would it make players leave as 12agnar0k suggested? Maybe some - more than likely the ones who weren't very tactically minded anyway and rely on only 1 stat to be able to play. But the better players would remain.

Would it reduce people's willingness to invest $ into the game? Again - I'm not convinced! When it was possible to kill both attacking force AND UU, people still invested $$ into the game - and I'd be willing to be that it was, proportionally, higher than what is done so now.

Nor would it be able to wipeout raid targets as Sarevok alludes to - since, as mentioned above, it does not relate to UU - attacking force only.

Nor has anybody said that implementing this would be easy, or to everyone's complete satisfaction - but let's be honest here, quite a number of updates have enraged a significant number of people, and those updates are still continually debated on how they can be improved/reversed MONTHS or YEARS after they have been released (raid/market-unlimited AT/planets/unkillable UU - the list goes on!). Frankly, the majority of reasons behind why people resist proposals to improve/reverse some of these updates is because things will be made harder for them. Well, so what? The game's already far too easy as it is! But the main point is that most of the suggestions made would make it harder for everybody - it's just that the majority of people can't see past how it affects them personally or realise they will not be in as dominant position as they were previously.

[GeneralChaos]

Ok then to counter the i have a 2trill strike and 0 def i cant lose anything mode, if you have 0 def for more than say 8 hours * gotta be fair to people who have school/kids/work/sleep etc, (everyone) if you are sabbed after 8 hours and still have 0 def, you lose 300% more attack weapons then normal,

So say atm you would lose say 40k / sab you would lose 120k / sab, as with no defence to protect your covert they start to weaken and enemies sab's become far more affective, * abit like how the ACing works with 0 def, more affective *

If someone has a huge strike and 0 def, its gonna start costing,

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

bump for a good idea

[Tacet]

...you lose 300% more attack weapons then normal...

That will take out weps, which are very often sold when not farming/massing. It will be annoying, but not really damaging. I prefer the option of letting the attackers play defence after a set time, but in an increasing way:

after 8 hours of 0 def: 10% of the attackers act as defenders, with normal defence death rates
after 9 hours: 15%
after 10 hours: 20%

That way you'll be able to mass an attack down, but it is going to take some time, and an active player will have ample time to rebuild.

As for token defences: let "time with 0 def" be defined as time with less than 100k defenders, or time with less defenders than 10% of attackers, whichever is more.

Meaning that if you play in raiding mode without strike you need at least 100k defenders, and if you have a strike of 2 mil attackers, then you need at least 200k defenders.

Numbers subject to great change.

[Duderanch]

I'm likeing the sound of this idea so far, there isn't anything more anoying in this game than getting massed by people with nothing to lose.

This way you can atleast do a little damage to those losers.

[Nostradamus]

I think that every 12 hours 10% of the attacking force should act as defenders doing a random damage between 30 and 70%.

So if you have 1 mil attack supers armed and for 12h you stay at 0 def then for the next attacks 100k supers will defend with 30 to 70% power until they are gone. After 12 more hours 10% of the remaining 900k, so 90k will act as defenders and so on.

In order to prevent people staying with 1 defending super armed a zero defense is considered anything under 1% of the attack .... so in the example you need to have 10k defense supers in order to be considered as actually having a defense.

The problem is that this kind of calculations will increase the turn lag unless admin doesn't do something like HE proposed. Or at least .... flag accounts that haven't logged in the last week and for them don't do all the ranking calculation.

[Demeisen]

Let me get this straight, if i sab someones defense to nothing, as soon as they say go to bed, they'll start loosing a % of their income/UP before they even get a chance to wake up? Hardly fair.

i agree with that.

this would be an excessively complex change to implement. having to have a minimum defence relative to army size isnt great either. it wouldnt take account of wars or personal playing styles for example.

i dont like people playing with nothing to kill but i dislike punishing then for it. UP/income/miners shouldnt be affected by a player defence/lack of same.

the idea of increasing raiding efficiency if you have defence sounds ok. its a bit of carrot instead of the massive stick.

[TheRook]

24 hours after having 0 defence (for a solid 24 hours off ppt)

your strike troops move into defending your realm... they only take 1/2 the standard troops losses (this is to make it mroe difficult to kill the strike troops but also allows you to kill them) and the weapons get damaged (quicker) down to a minimum 1% weapon strength left (never destroyed) but when down to 1% you destroy 1-2% of the weapons (actual numbers) for each 15 AT... so in 450 AT (max of 30 hits on strike weapons when at 1%) you can destroy between 30- 60% of the strike weapons leaving the others to need to be repaired.. when strike weapons are at 1% they no longer add any defence (aka 3 (0) damage)

this allows you to eventually destroy enemy strike forces while not being able to wipe them out easily... but at the same time making the system utterly pointless as they can come on for 1 turn in 24 hours and build 1 defence weapon and get out of the 24 hour problem... (cough descension cough)

TheRook

[Tekki]

this allows you to eventually destroy enemy strike forces while not being able to wipe them out easily... but at the same time making the system utterly pointless as they can come on for 1 turn in 24 hours and build 1 defence weapon and get out of the 24 hour problem... (cough descension cough)

TheRook

This the main problem I foresee. You can set times and all that but if they buy one weapon it's back to square one.

I don't like saying you must have percentage of your men trained in defence either. That's forcing a play style on to people that's artificial. 'cos face if it you can get away with 0 defence and a great covert to avoid being farmed (out of a war) why should you be punished?

I do like increasing - immediately upon 0 defence - sab damage to strike weapons. It's not like that will wipe them out completely because the sab limits are still there but it does help. Or putting some strike supers into defence, immediately that the defence hits 0. A small percent so as once again not to wipe them out immediately.

People need the chance to fight back 'cos no one sits here all day every day waiting to be massed.

[Reschef]

bump