Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Which is a better way?

Leave reduced AT
7
13%
Improve defence effectiveness in some way
41
76%
Other Option(please specify)
6
11%
 
Total votes: 54
Tekki
Forum Addict
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:37 pm
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Sarevok wrote:
Tekki wrote:
Sarevok wrote: However, this also cripples the inactive farmers, slowing everyones growth to a standstill.

Err I WANT the inactive farmers to be dead!

By this you mean people whom farm inactive accounts? Or those whom are barely active and farm other accounts?

The second - your phrasing was not clear on which type 'inactive farmers' can mean either and it's annoying to havet he barely playing peoples able to catch up to 'decent' in about 2 mins.
Spoiler
Initial masser on Field Marshal's 120t defence and on Rodwolf's 177t defence.

The forces of Rodwolf fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 178,947,245,996,720 damage on Tekki's forces!

The forces of Rodwolf fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 3 damage on Tekki's forces!
Jedi~Tank wrote:@ADMINS- ALL ADMINS, this is the absolute worst game forum I have ever seen (this sentiment is shared by many) It is amazing how ya;ll can go from good job to complete garbage in no time at all.

Jedi~Tank
A sentiment I can agree with, except some of them have never done a good job. For further details, PM me INGAME Id 9095.
---
Image
Image
Image
Spoiler
Image Image
Image Image
Sarevok
Forum Addict
Posts: 4042
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 7:42 pm
Race: NanoTiMaster
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Oh yeh, in that case true. I agree.

I meant people who farm account that are inactive to grow themselves. They will be the ones hardest hit, since they rely on lower prices to make a profit to grow themselves better
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=162732
Suggestions, Comments please :)
R8 wrote:TEAM WORK WILL BEAT $$ ANYDAY OF THE WEEK
angel wrote:Except the payday [-X
12agnar0k wrote:Also it's still not a war game, you have att/def weps yes, but you also have uu and UP, does this mean its a sex game, oh no, XRATEDSGW, THIS GAME IS PORN!
Ban Admin
<+CABAL> so adminHere, ever thought about playing SGW? :b
<~adminHere> cabal - i do :)
<+CABAL> :o
<+Sarevok> Cabal, look up Jtest ;)
<~adminHere> no -not jtest
<~adminHere> another :) i am a multi ;)
<+Sarevok> :O
* +CABAL screens
<+CABAL> :b
* +Sarevok Ban's Admin
User avatar
CABAL
Forum Expert
Posts: 1310
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:44 am
Alliance: Aquila Ignis
Race: Death Watch
ID: 0
Location: Holy Terra

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Lower ATs, but not as low as now, and improve defence effectiveness a bit.
Image
Image

MS-1 -> T-26 -> T-46 -> T-28 -> KV -> KV-3 -> IS -> IS-3 -> IS-4 -> IS-7
User avatar
Sir Phoenix Knight
Forum Regular
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:41 am
Alliance: Justice League
Race: Kryptonian
ID: 1949343
Alternate name(s): ~KAL EL~
Location: Fortress of Solitude...

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Well i say improve defenses and don't lower AT's

For the reason i am on a fast ascension's once every 14 days it requires alot of naq to be able to do this every 2 weeks around 35 trill at the moment so i spend some were around 75k AT's a fornight stealling naq buying more AT's and getting a little bit of UU from inactive accounts
so you could say I am one of these players that stays out of the way from war and conflicts to farm so i can grow fast.
I started my account about 18 months ago and am trying to reach lvl 23 ascension +
I rely on spending about 10 hours a day playing this avg'ing about 10 trill a day in stolen naq as with AT prices the way they are at the moment i am only making 50% profit and the rest goes on more AT's
if the AT's go to a price were i am barely braking even from farming i will not be able to ascend at all as it will take a year just to get enough naq to reach the next lvl..

I have already spent more Real Cash on this game then i thought i ever would no were near as much as some on here but i do not want to have to spend $50 USD a week to have enough turns just to farm
i will just save my self the trouble and pretty much quit in farming and just PPT all the time.

And also the Defense Increase would be nice, as at the moment but what is the point of even having them as 1 account using all of 500'ish turns can lvl even any size def as long as they can match it or beat it with there attacks, before nox even has a effect so what if they have to wait 7 seconds i have still had my defense 0'ed in less then a turn change from 1 account and before my nox even kicks in if you want to make it harder to mass someone cut the nox limit in half from 640 at max defcon to 320 atleast that would give me a fighting chances if i am not online for all of 1 turn change especially since having nox on and defcon max drians 75% in total of your income per turn..
you are paying alot of naq for nothing as you can still find you def gone and your MS gone in all of 15 minutes...

Sorry guys i know how to ramble on a bit :D but this really is pissing me off about the AT's..
Image
Hoochivette
Forum Intermediate
Posts: 874
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:13 am
Alliance: Pure Poison
Race: Tollan
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Raise the number of ATs! Who cares about being randomly massed, it wasn't impossible to rebuild with all those ATs around. Random massings wont stop, you'll see. If anything, the people in the massed alliances just wont be able to rebuild very quickly again.

At Apophis' point about being in the game so long. If you never had a single war in those 5 years, I'm sure your MS and army size would be incredibly impressive right now. Wars set you back.

New accounts that begin playing are focused purely on growth cos their competition is so far ahead of them when they start. Yeah, they can get the army size within 2 months and do some massing but how does that mean they've caught up to you?

Their ascended level is probably prophet, their MS will most definitely suck and their planets are probably all UP ones hence their not actually able to fight much without taking large losses.

It'll probably take a year or more before they can compete effectively. That's long enough. With this update, it'll take 3-4 years. The game wont be around that long. Without new accounts and mid sized accounts growing, the game will be dead this year
Poison is good for the soul
Image
Man Called Jim wrote:SHUDDUP HOOCH!
Prior - Prophet - Messiah - Incarnate - LG - LG1 - LG2 - LG3 - LG4 - AG - EAG
- AGL
- IAG - TAG - PTAG - LTAG - QTAG - KTAG - GAG - TOE - TUS - TUN - TUK
Sarevok
Forum Addict
Posts: 4042
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 7:42 pm
Race: NanoTiMaster
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Sir Phoenix Knight wrote:And also the Defense Increase would be nice, as at the moment but what is the point of even having them as 1 account using all of 500'ish turns can lvl even any size def as long as they can match it or beat it with there attacks, before nox even has a effect so what if they have to wait 7 seconds i have still had my defense 0'ed in less then a turn change from 1 account and before my nox even kicks in if you want to make it harder to mass someone cut the nox limit in half from 640 at max defcon to 320 atleast that would give me a fighting chances if i am not online for all of 1 turn change especially since having nox on and defcon max drians 75% in total of your income per turn..
you are paying alot of naq for nothing as you can still find you def gone and your MS gone in all of 15 minutes...
It is true. However, it will limit whom is able to.
As it stands, you can have a 3T defense taken down by a 1T attack (even a 500B attack if their really game, and waiting for the AB), coupled with Attack planets, mercs, and MS, the actual cost in UU for the attacker is minimal.
Even increasing the % needed to 75% will help alot. Rather then needing 500B (take the extreemest whom use AB to damage), they'll need a minimum of 1.125T to even damage you on the AB, and 2.25T if they want every hit to count.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=162732
Suggestions, Comments please :)
R8 wrote:TEAM WORK WILL BEAT $$ ANYDAY OF THE WEEK
angel wrote:Except the payday [-X
12agnar0k wrote:Also it's still not a war game, you have att/def weps yes, but you also have uu and UP, does this mean its a sex game, oh no, XRATEDSGW, THIS GAME IS PORN!
Ban Admin
<+CABAL> so adminHere, ever thought about playing SGW? :b
<~adminHere> cabal - i do :)
<+CABAL> :o
<+Sarevok> Cabal, look up Jtest ;)
<~adminHere> no -not jtest
<~adminHere> another :) i am a multi ;)
<+Sarevok> :O
* +CABAL screens
<+CABAL> :b
* +Sarevok Ban's Admin
Chronus
Forum Intermediate
Posts: 797
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:53 pm
Race: System Lord
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

improve defense in some way

reducing the attack turns just makes growth way too slow

I am all for making random massings harder to do but not at the expense of slowing growth to an almost stand still
Image
User avatar
Kaps1
Forum Irregular
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:30 pm
Alliance: Warlords of Briton
Race: Gao'uld
ID: 75061
Location: Chicago

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Hoochivette wrote:Raise the number of ATs! Who cares about being randomly massed, it wasn't impossible to rebuild with all those ATs around. Random massings wont stop, you'll see. If anything, the people in the massed alliances just wont be able to rebuild very quickly again.

At Apophis' point about being in the game so long. If you never had a single war in those 5 years, I'm sure your MS and army size would be incredibly impressive right now. Wars set you back.

New accounts that begin playing are focused purely on growth cos their competition is so far ahead of them when they start. Yeah, they can get the army size within 2 months and do some massing but how does that mean they've caught up to you?

Their ascended level is probably prophet, their MS will most definitely suck and their planets are probably all UP ones hence their not actually able to fight much without taking large losses.

It'll probably take a year or more before they can compete effectively. That's long enough. With this update, it'll take 3-4 years. The game wont be around that long. Without new accounts and mid sized accounts growing, the game will be dead this year



EXACTLY. New accts are dead! well said my dear!
Image
Image
" To live is to suffer, to survive is to find the meaning within the suffering "

Trade Feedback Please!
http://herebegames.com/StarGateWarsNew/ ... 8&t=139209
User avatar
Brythalious
Forum Intermediate
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 1:59 am
Alliance: Warlords of Briton
Race: Briton
ID: 19326
Location: Suth Saexe

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

mm, yeah not sure how to vote on that., I dont think def should be improved as sometimes its annoying enough to listen to the argument it is easier to defend, many wars have proven with the right tactics attacking can win out... The way it is in this game seems that we have the Russian approach through a gate....... The game has in many ways moved on from this single point, yet the attacker can only hope to have planets or a larger MS to batter them down, I dont think the attacks should change as dramatically as they have but they can be reduced so long as turn created ones stay as they are since newbies often need those more too.

As for the $$ player thing, well they are steadily creating enough of a gap anyway so whatever on that front, yes they support the game, fine glad about that, I have spent some money doing that too.
Main ID: 19326. Ascended: 2853
A Warlord never asks how many but where they are!
Image
Image
Arturus Rex Quondam, Rexque Futurus
User avatar
Brythalious
Forum Intermediate
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 1:59 am
Alliance: Warlords of Briton
Race: Briton
ID: 19326
Location: Suth Saexe

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Ok, personally I think the planets also help in the random massings, using this to stop that or cut down on silly farming wont help, people who do this have large MS's and normally good planets stopping them from taking losses which make the farming more profitable, sure this will make turns more expensive and should cut down farming for silly amounts or some people massing for no reason other than "to make a name as a bad ass"

Also, erm, planets dont really make sense, seriously, so while people pour through my gate to attack my home world another planet is doing what? bombarding me, oh great, thanks! or what I toe a few planets with me to attack another world.

Hmm, planets of attack, def and coverts make more sense as MS type ships customisable or whatever to a single task, you make a fleet/ship and have to decide what it does, they you would be able to untrain it, reship it or whatever you wanna call it but for a tiny amount of the resources transfered over, you build a ship for a specific purpose, you have to chose,or you can only build certain numbers of certain things and planets too, I dunno, but as it stands reading them and the weapons makes no sense., What if you only trained soldiers and had to arm attack and def at the same time, maybe deciding how many to use to attack with leaving def to cover you, that might solve some issues people have with no one building in a war.

Anyway, I think that covered everything I spoke to Kaps about..... Maybe I made sense at some point there...... we can always hope ;)
Main ID: 19326. Ascended: 2853
A Warlord never asks how many but where they are!
Image
Image
Arturus Rex Quondam, Rexque Futurus
User avatar
~Solrayne~
Forum Grunt
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2008 4:15 am
Alliance: Areseorii Knights (2IC)
Race: Tollan
ID: 1950813
Location: Saratoga, N.Y. USA

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Improve defenses. Not really sure why it wasn't already done long ago..... :roll:
~Solrayne~ Areseorii Knights (2IC)
The UnKnown of the AJNA
ImageJoin Us!
Image
My Trade Feedback Area
"If you want peace, prepare for war".
"It's better to be judged by 12, rather than carried by 6".
"When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you".
"Forgiveness is between them and God...It's my job to arrange their meeting".
Thora
Forum Newbie
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:13 am

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

improve defense

reducing attack turns only helps the people who can afford to spend$$
Image
Gadget98
Forum Newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 1:44 pm
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

i agree with my sister

improve defense
Tekki
Forum Addict
Posts: 4332
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:37 pm
ID: 0

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

Well if most people want improved defences, how do you do that?

The percentages have already been tweaked a lot.

Personally what I would do is the following but this applies only for ascended accounts:

1. Equalise the strength of attack and defence supers
2. Equalise the cost and strength of upgrades to attack and defence planets
3. Equalise the cost and strength of attack and defence weapons
4. Then look at the percentage death rates for attack and defence supers as well as the damage taken to each in attacks
5. come up wtih some way of killing strike supers without declaring blood realm
6. increase effectiveness of sab when there are no defence weapons.

Okay so some of these aren't directly related to attack/defence but they are necessary I think.
Spoiler
Initial masser on Field Marshal's 120t defence and on Rodwolf's 177t defence.

The forces of Rodwolf fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 178,947,245,996,720 damage on Tekki's forces!

The forces of Rodwolf fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 3 damage on Tekki's forces!
Jedi~Tank wrote:@ADMINS- ALL ADMINS, this is the absolute worst game forum I have ever seen (this sentiment is shared by many) It is amazing how ya;ll can go from good job to complete garbage in no time at all.

Jedi~Tank
A sentiment I can agree with, except some of them have never done a good job. For further details, PM me INGAME Id 9095.
---
Image
Image
Image
Spoiler
Image Image
Image Image
User avatar
Vertigo1
Fledgling Forumer
Posts: 123
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:23 pm
Alliance: Majestic 12
Race: Gargoyle
ID: 60503
Location: Tennessee, USA
Contact:

Re: Loss of AT vs Improve defences

SuperSaiyan wrote:and link strikes and defenses...


I actually like this idea, though I would rather have all stats linked in some way. As it is, it's pretty pointless to build a defense, when all it takes is for some slugger to come by with a massive strike to wipe it out in less than two minutes with minimal losses. There needs to be some kind of ratio set in place, so you can't have a stat over a given % without increasing something else.
"Physics be damned: a stack of CDs knocked onto a wood floor sounds louder at Midnight when rest o' the family is asleep." - Patrick Norton
Locked

Return to “For Admin Archives”