a few quick sugestions for admins

[blahh]

did a bit of "testing" with strike this weekend as i had time heres a few sugestions/conclusions:

1. lower repair costs of attack weapons its ridiculusy high and variates ridiculusly (eg about 330 top weapons at costs about 5mil repairs were from 200-almost 500k variating totaly randomly(on 1 hit) - i d get variations depending on how strong def you hit but i got a similar def as my strike and got 200k repairs, and a tiny def and got 500k repair.. so realy retarded, whoever was working on that coding.. no offence ment:) ) and considering naq thats out there its sadly too expencive to make active attacking realy profitable

2. do something to discurage ppl from building ridiculusly high defences, defence is ment to protect income mainly, but not from 3 weeks of piling it up, atm rank 1 strike is less than 1/3 of rank 1 defence... meaning alot of ppl have defences that are "overbuild", now that could be cause they are retarded (which cant be counted out considering whatkinda lot is arround) or because overbuilding defence is way too profitable which is also true...

address this with, a) defence units dont produce naq... its retarded that they do.. if you want strikers to produce naq thats ok but make it when they dont attack (meaning if you attacked this turn, they dont generate naq.. as they were on a missinon, in their "spare time"(when you didnt attack for a turn) they can be used to generate naq... but defence troops are always on "guard" they are always protecting you ergo they dont generate naq... you cant mine and keep guard duty at the same time kinda logic...

second make either defence more expencive to repair, or rebuild or build in the first place or something, cause atm its aperently too cheap to build a high one and just sit behind it like an idiot, sorry but thats not playn the game

3. what in gods name on a successfull recon mision spys die.. i d like to meet the idiot who came up with that, and its no minor number i d add lost up to 12 spys on a successfull mission, which is less than a 15 at blind hit and failed.... and with 1 at using only a portion of power retarded.. its simply put dumb. The point of spyn is that you avoid hitting some1 who has a higher def and there for loosing troops, that is kinda cancled when you loose spys nomatter if you are successfull or failed on recon.....

probably more to add here, hope the guys up there read some and take in account, cause atm the game isnt being played.. farming inactive or multie accounts isnt actualy playn a game.. activity comes from hitting active players, that eventuly leads to war, that eventualy leads to diplomacy, and than later on some more war, just building stuf and hitting inactives.... thats just horsecrap.

have fun

[Lore]

did a bit of "testing" with strike this weekend as i had time heres a few sugestions/conclusions:

1. lower repair costs of attack weapons its ridiculusy high and variates ridiculusly (eg about 330 top weapons at costs about 5mil repairs were from 200-almost 500k variating totaly randomly(on 1 hit) - i d get variations depending on how strong def you hit but i got a similar def as my strike and got 200k repairs, and a tiny def and got 500k repair.. so realy retarded, whoever was working on that coding.. no offence ment:) ) and considering naq thats out there its sadly too expencive to make active attacking realy profitableAG (Admin Gary), believes in variables, but he has adjusted several so I'm sure he will look at this.

2. do something to discurage ppl from building ridiculusly high defences, defence is ment to protect income mainly, but not from 3 weeks of piling it up, atm rank 1 strike is less than 1/3 of rank 1 defence... meaning alot of ppl have defences that are "overbuild", now that could be cause they are retarded (which cant be counted out considering whatkinda lot is arround) or because overbuilding defence is way too profitable which is also true...
Honestly this seems like a player issue. Your saying to not allow people to play like they want? and it seems your saying the ATTACKERS are just to lazy. Now I do agree that the naq farms are to many and too fat, and there is no reason to war presently.
address this with, a) defence units dont produce naq... its retarded that they do.. if you want strikers to produce naq thats ok but make it when they dont attack (meaning if you attacked this turn, they dont generate naq.. as they were on a missinon, in their "spare time"(when you didnt attack for a turn) they can be used to generate naq... but defence troops are always on "guard" they are always protecting you ergo they dont generate naq... you cant mine and keep guard duty at the same time kinda logic...I have to agree with this logic 100%. Me and Replimagni brought this point up previously. In the long run IDK if this income system is going to work. In a year when someone starts then the average 0 defense dead farm will be making 100 or 1000 times the income your making.

second make either defence more expencive to repair, or rebuild or build in the first place or something, cause atm its aperently too cheap to build a high one and just sit behind it like an idiot, sorry but thats not playn the game In this point I disagree, or atleast want to spin it a bit to also include the fact that the attackers are just to lazy and also not playing the game. If they want the big hits then work for them and mass those big defenses.

3. what in gods name on a successfull recon mision spys die..A-MEN brother!!!!!! I havent done any recon since week 1 when you lost 10% of your spies on a SUCCESSFUL spy. And it has improved drasticly since then LOL i d like to meet the idiot who came up with that, and its no minor number i d add lost up to 12 spys on a successfull mission, which is less than a 15 at blind hit and failed....I always just use a 1AT tap, much cheaper. and with 1 at using only a portion of power retarded.. its simply put dumbI disagree with you there. I think thats an improvement over main where massers sit using 1AT doing full damage but accepting less losses. This is a new thing to the game, only a week or so old. lets try it a bit first.. The point of spyn is that you avoid hitting some1 who has a higher def and there for loosing troops, that is kinda cancled when you loose spys nomatter if you are successfull or failed on recon.....Agrred there.

probably more to add here, hope the guys up there read some and take in account, cause atm the game isnt being played.. farming inactive or multie accounts isnt actualy playn a game.. activity comes from hitting active players, that eventuly leads to war, that eventualy leads to diplomacy, and than later on some more war, just building stuf and hitting inactives.... thats just horsecrap.Well keep in mind that the attackers have to want to attack, so if they are to lazy to hit a def then its not the defenses fault. Biggest problem with main is defenses are useless and liabilities. You and Q have proven that. When a strike can lose 2 to 5 mill men to kill 20 to 50 mill men then the system is to far scewed to the attackers side. Here is it not. There is limited AT, and not the major size differences. You want to hit big defenses then build a big strike, and then actually use it.

have fun

I do agree with the jest of the problem. To much free income is causing a situation of there being no need to war.

[Mr Nice Guy]

did a bit of "testing" with strike this weekend as i had time heres a few sugestions/conclusions:

1. lower repair costs of attack weapons its ridiculusy high and variates ridiculusly (eg about 330 top weapons at costs about 5mil repairs were from 200-almost 500k variating totaly randomly(on 1 hit) - i d get variations depending on how strong def you hit but i got a similar def as my strike and got 200k repairs, and a tiny def and got 500k repair.. so realy retarded, whoever was working on that coding.. no offence ment:) ) and considering naq thats out there its sadly too expencive to make active attacking realy profitableAG (Admin Gary), believes in variables, but he has adjusted several so I'm sure he will look at this.

2. do something to discurage ppl from building ridiculusly high defences, defence is ment to protect income mainly, but not from 3 weeks of piling it up, atm rank 1 strike is less than 1/3 of rank 1 defence... meaning alot of ppl have defences that are "overbuild", now that could be cause they are retarded (which cant be counted out considering whatkinda lot is arround) or because overbuilding defence is way too profitable which is also true...
Honestly this seems like a player issue. Your saying to not allow people to play like they want? and it seems your saying the ATTACKERS are just to lazy. Now I do agree that the naq farms are to many and too fat, and there is no reason to war presently.
address this with, a) defence units dont produce naq... its retarded that they do.. if you want strikers to produce naq thats ok but make it when they dont attack (meaning if you attacked this turn, they dont generate naq.. as they were on a missinon, in their "spare time"(when you didnt attack for a turn) they can be used to generate naq... but defence troops are always on "guard" they are always protecting you ergo they dont generate naq... you cant mine and keep guard duty at the same time kinda logic...I have to agree with this logic 100%. Me and Replimagni brought this point up previously. In the long run IDK if this income system is going to work. In a year when someone starts then the average 0 defense dead farm will be making 100 or 1000 times the income your making.

second make either defence more expencive to repair, or rebuild or build in the first place or something, cause atm its aperently too cheap to build a high one and just sit behind it like an idiot, sorry but thats not playn the game In this point I disagree, or atleast want to spin it a bit to also include the fact that the attackers are just to lazy and also not playing the game. If they want the big hits then work for them and mass those big defenses.

3. what in gods name on a successfull recon mision spys die..A-MEN brother!!!!!! I havent done any recon since week 1 when you lost 10% of your spies on a SUCCESSFUL spy. And it has improved drasticly since then LOL i d like to meet the idiot who came up with that, and its no minor number i d add lost up to 12 spys on a successfull mission, which is less than a 15 at blind hit and failed....I always just use a 1AT tap, much cheaper. and with 1 at using only a portion of power retarded.. its simply put dumbI disagree with you there. I think thats an improvement over main where massers sit using 1AT doing full damage but accepting less losses. This is a new thing to the game, only a week or so old. lets try it a bit first.. The point of spyn is that you avoid hitting some1 who has a higher def and there for loosing troops, that is kinda cancled when you loose spys nomatter if you are successfull or failed on recon.....Agrred there.

probably more to add here, hope the guys up there read some and take in account, cause atm the game isnt being played.. farming inactive or multie accounts isnt actualy playn a game.. activity comes from hitting active players, that eventuly leads to war, that eventualy leads to diplomacy, and than later on some more war, just building stuf and hitting inactives.... thats just horsecrap.Well keep in mind that the attackers have to want to attack, so if they are to lazy to hit a def then its not the defenses fault. Biggest problem with main is defenses are useless and liabilities. You and Q have proven that. When a strike can lose 2 to 5 mill men to kill 20 to 50 mill men then the system is to far scewed to the attackers side. Here is it not. There is limited AT, and not the major size differences. You want to hit big defenses then build a big strike, and then actually use it.

have fun

I do agree with the jest of the problem. To much free income is causing a situation of there being no need to war.

The only thing i disagree is that this does not avoid a war, people avoids the wars. Maybe the high costs of repairs makes them way too hard to do. But as the growth is so low and there are plenty farms people just want to keep growing. Right now this is the stat builders paradise. But in a few months it might be just the snipers paradise. Lets wait.
I do agree with all Lore green words.

[Tek]

it must be just me that seems to have attracted war.

Although the big issue with hitting back is the cost. Its not profitable at the moment to have a strike big enough to A.) Mass the larger defences B.) Hit active players

when you make 4 mil naq and 50/60% is repair fund and retraining lost soldiers it defeats the purpose.

And as for massing it takes little to nothing to rebuild a defence, but it takes masses to maintain a strike.

I mean i had my 40k defence massed down and it was back up literally as soon as the guy had finished. I guarentee the attacker spent nearly the same amount retraining lost soldiers & repairing weapons. Kinda puts me off wanting to mass back, not the ideal attitude i know.

[Mr Nice Guy]

it is really worst... if think about the low cost of buying new weapons compaired with the cost of repairing the ones been massed u would just wait and buy new ones... really silly issue i most say... could admin just get extra power to the attack weapons so i can build up and start farming the active ones please ( just kidding about it (maybe not) he he )

[Tek]

works both ways that though, the longer your defence stands the more hits the attacker has to make and the more repair naq he needs.

[Mr Nice Guy]

exactly.. increase attack weapons power or lower the costs of repairs... but do it soon please... i want to start farming

[adminGary]

I'll look into the ratios on weapon durability vs defence.

I'll think about adding an upkeep fee if you have too many of one type of unit. Without miners the game needs a better source of income for players. The amount of naq generated by both attack and defence vaires by their respective alert or fatigue levels. When a fatigue level is full those units do not generate any naq.

I'll look into further reducing the chances of loosing units on recon missions.

I changed the attack system. Since turns now closely represent time in game. A 15at attack could be considered as X amount of time spent attacking the enemy, therefore a 1at attack is 1/15th of X amount of time and logically should do 1/15th the damage.

I've been thinking about reducing the amount of naq generated by UU from 6 per turn per tick to 3. This would reduce the amount of naq generated from 'farm' accounts by 1/2. I will also take into account the cost to repair wepons and perhaps reduce this accordingly.

I hope I haven't missed any points that were made.

[Lore]

I'll look into the ratios on weapon durability vs defence.

I'll think about adding an upkeep fee if you have too many of one type of unit. Without miners the game needs a better source of income for players. The amount of naq generated by both attack and defence vaires by their respective alert or fatigue levels. When a fatigue level is full those units do not generate any naq.

I'll look into further reducing the chances of loosing units on recon missions.successful spy attempt should be 0 losses. I can understand assasins dieing even if successful, but not spies as the defender suffers no losses on a spy, assasins do kill so i can see the attcker losing a few.

I changed the attack system. Since turns now closely represent time in game. A 15at attack could be considered as X amount of time spent attacking the enemy, therefore a 1at attack is 1/15th of X amount of time and logically should do 1/15th the damage.

I've been thinking about reducing the amount of naq generated by UU from 6 per turn per tick to 3. This would reduce the amount of naq generated from 'farm' accounts by 1/2.Something is going to have to be done, and im not sure this will fix it but it is a step in the right direction. I will also take into account the cost to repair wepons and perhaps reduce this accordingly.Just really look at it, it may or may not need changing, IDK yet. reduction of farm accounts income will spark more interaction among active players.

I hope I haven't missed any points that were made.

[Seaborgium]

2. do something to discurage ppl from building ridiculusly high defences, defence is ment to protect income mainly, but not from 3 weeks of piling it up, atm rank 1 strike is less than 1/3 of rank 1 defence... meaning alot of ppl have defences that are "overbuild", now that could be cause they are retarded (which cant be counted out considering whatkinda lot is arround) or because overbuilding defence is way too profitable which is also true...
Honestly this seems like a player issue. Your saying to not allow people to play like they want? and it seems your saying the ATTACKERS are just to lazy. Now I do agree that the naq farms are to many and too fat, and there is no reason to war presently.

This is crap, i had a strike of 350k about a week ago, i hit some people that sat behind them large defs, even massed, even sabbed. Then for 1 week i had to endur someone doing to me, never did find out who. So something is wrong. This game is geared more to teh def side unlike main. I think a lot of it is great, but sab is way over powered for someone to keep working on the people with the large defs.

I think the losses with atk/def and the cost of the weapons ins good, i do agree that the repair cost is way out there. I have had times where i hit a 250k def with my 275k atk and had liek 147k repairs and then hit someone with a 140k def and had 345k repairs. I can't hit the lower players due to the cost of the reapirs. so as i stand the lowest person i can hit is 600k out and i get anywhere from 147k-520k from it.

[blahh]

@admin nice to see some1 activly working on a server, reminds me of sgw in beginings you keep looking we ll keep testing and throwing ideas

@lore, i never said 1 at thing was a bad considering massings and so on, its acualy not a bad spin of using only a portion of your power something similar was my sugestion eons ago to be done in main.,.. so you dont need to use full force just a portion... the point i was making was that if you cant test with 1 at (as you only use a portion of power) and you cant spy and not loose units... theres realy not much to conserve lossed but to just hit strait up. meaning no point in actualy having a spy option. (so i was mearly pointing that out not sayn 1 at is bad thingi )

and as for "lazy" attackers, i build about 350k strike just to test stuf, sold it in less than 24h did about 20 or so hits with it, some decent some not so... I also got no problem building 3x biger one in a week or so when i increase my bank size suficiently... I agree with you if ppl want big hits they gotta work their way to up their strike to owerpower the defences, but atm defences are just too big because simpy ppl dont loose anything with it.,.. they still get income off them, and it protects them. Now same argument could be said that attackers also produce naq, ,so there isnt much loss there, but the catch is that 3x the strike i had this weekend costs 1.5mil in repairs per hit to maintain, which means that even if you have a strike that can top the bigest def, its not much use to you as there arent much hits to be made (1.5mil naq out at least for repairs, up to 30 troops to just retrain, and than try to aprise the value of the troops lost.. ) thats why every1 farms inactives, 0 repairs and casualties make it by far most profitable.

so the bottom line of this is its not lazy attackers, but rather a big defence has close to no trade offs, and curent "huge" defences dont produce, and wont produce for quite some time the necesary income to farm eficienty among active population comparing to the costs of that farming.

and i m not sayn there arent many ways to play a game, and not tryn to undermine any1s, but i do think you ll agree with me that a game that has as its only activity farming inactive accounts, isnt much of a game at all, cause honestly, if we wanted that, we could get the code, create our own server on local pc, spawn a few 1000 random accounts and go hit them, there just isnt any "interaction"

[Tek]

and as for "lazy" attackers, i build about 350k strike just to test stuf, sold it in less than 24h did about 20 or so hits with it, some decent some not so... I also got no problem building 3x biger one in a week or so when i increase my bank size suficiently... I agree with you if ppl want big hits they gotta work their way to up their strike to owerpower the defences, but atm defences are just too big because simpy ppl dont loose anything with it.,.. they still get income off them, and it protects them. Now same argument could be said that attackers also produce naq, ,so there isnt much loss there, but the catch is that 3x the strike i had this weekend costs 1.5mil in repairs per hit to maintain, which means that even if you have a strike that can top the bigest def, its not much use to you as there arent much hits to be made (1.5mil naq out at least for repairs, up to 30 troops to just retrain, and than try to aprise the value of the troops lost.. ) thats why every1 farms inactives, 0 repairs and casualties make it by far most profitable

That was my point too, i agree wholeheartedly. Theres no reason to build a strike to beat the monster defences because, fine you can beat that defence, but you cant make any naq off it long term. And even if you do string a few hits toghether, the profit is similar to using 45 turns with 1 attack weapon on inactives.

[adminGary]

I think to adress the NAQ issue, if a player hasn't logged in for a week or two their account gets moved to an inactive status. This status would reduce their income by 90 percent. The account would still be attackable while it's inactive, but just generate far less naq.

Before we do that though I'll need some suggestions for balancing the game, because if suddenly the farms go away, and people can't attack the large defence accounts then who is left to attack?

[Seaborgium]

I don't see how we can attack as it is

Just now i did

452,898 Naquadah stolen 15 4 6 186,240 176,055

That hit took 10 points off my strike
Your Neutronium Bomb went from strength 160 to 150 (now 150/160 and 6 percent damaged)
cost for repair 34560 per point

34560*10 = 345,600


452,898-345,600= 107,298

Then i had to retrain 6 attackers
They managed to eradicate 6 of ****'s troops.
15,000*6 = 90000

Which means i gained 17,298 on that hit..

[Tek]

I think to adress the NAQ issue, if a player hasn't logged in for a week or two their account gets moved to an inactive status. This status would reduce their income by 90 percent. The account would still be attackable while it's inactive, but just generate far less naq.

Before we do that though I'll need some suggestions for balancing the game, because if suddenly the farms go away, and people can't attack the large defence accounts then who is left to attack?

would sorting the repair issues out not mean more people attacking the active accounts?

Im dont know a thing about coding so excuse me if im asking something unreasonable mate