Attack/Defense planets, a bug or a "feature"?

[deni]

It is not ruining the game. It is called strategy.

Same as Caspain did, and same as blahh did.

How so?

The bonus from planets is limited. You can get up to +500% to your raw strike /defense / UP. And that is in the case that you have 10 planets of the same kind.

Planets back in time of Caspain were ridiculously uneffective. They added (within stats of the time) shockingly minimal stats. So there was a need of *massive* help to rise up this account. Admin updated them shortly after because they added almost no stats.

"Limited" I would use this term with caution. You can get up to +1000% when blessing kicks in. So massing a person with 10mil supers/weapons with less than 1mil troops having likely smaller losses than target, is possible.

Blessing is random and you have a chance to get it as well. Thus it is irrelevant to the matter.

As for massing 10 mil supers with 1 mil attackers: Now lets do a calculation. Add up the naq needed to upgrade and protect those attack planets and compare it to the smaller losses you have when massing. You would reach break even eventually depending on how often you mass, but it takes a lot of time to reach that break even.

[bebita]

how manny whinners are still in this game

[Legendary Apophis]

It is not ruining the game. It is called strategy.

Same as Caspain did, and same as blahh did.

How so?

The bonus from planets is limited. You can get up to +500% to your raw strike /defense / UP. And that is in the case that you have 10 planets of the same kind.

Planets back in time of Caspain were ridiculously uneffective. They added (within stats of the time) shockingly minimal stats. So there was a need of *massive* help to rise up this account. Admin updated them shortly after because they added almost no stats.

"Limited" I would use this term with caution. You can get up to +1000% when blessing kicks in. So massing a person with 10mil supers/weapons with less than 1mil troops having likely smaller losses than target, is possible.

Blessing is random and you have a chance to get it as well. Thus it is irrelevant to the matter.

As for massing 10 mil supers with 1 mil attackers: Now lets do a calculation. Add up the naq needed to upgrade and protect those attack planets and compare it to the smaller losses you have when massing. You would reach break even eventually depending on how often you mass, but it takes a lot of time to reach that break even.

It's not irrelevant because of the amount of troops involved. 1.5tril strike with 1mil weapons without MS, is wrong.

As as I said Caspain was funded by biggest guns (Metal Messiah, JUAN..) to build those strike planets, so it's not like what you bring up requires the one having planets to be only payer. An alliance can build themselves such a person, by feeding the account so this person could mass everyone in wars involved. And then this person can farm/mass whoever is in their range with minimal losses while others paid for them. Difference with a MS monster alliance built, it cannot be massed by others and doesn't require repairs, and last but not least, is affected by blessing. Sure planets can be stolen, but as it's not massive planets required but one giving bonus to others, you just need to protect this planet. That's why I consider it worse than Blahh issue, as he had to defend all involved dual planets with big defs.

UP is lost on ascending, so are covert/AC levels/MS techs.
UP is lost beyond plague.
MSs can be massed and need repairs. And last but not last, are ALSO capped! (if I was to build 20bil strike, my MS wouldn't do x5 on my strike).
Blessings by themselves are random.

See where I'm coming from?

how manny whinners are still in this game

Alot, from thread about admin's update regarding MTs.

[deni]

It is not ruining the game. It is called strategy.

Same as Caspain did, and same as blahh did.

How so?

The bonus from planets is limited. You can get up to +500% to your raw strike /defense / UP. And that is in the case that you have 10 planets of the same kind.

Planets back in time of Caspain were ridiculously uneffective. They added (within stats of the time) shockingly minimal stats. So there was a need of *massive* help to rise up this account. Admin updated them shortly after because they added almost no stats.

"Limited" I would use this term with caution. You can get up to +1000% when blessing kicks in. So massing a person with 10mil supers/weapons with less than 1mil troops having likely smaller losses than target, is possible.

Blessing is random and you have a chance to get it as well. Thus it is irrelevant to the matter.

As for massing 10 mil supers with 1 mil attackers: Now lets do a calculation. Add up the naq needed to upgrade and protect those attack planets and compare it to the smaller losses you have when massing. You would reach break even eventually depending on how often you mass, but it takes a lot of time to reach that break even.

It's not irrelevant because of the amount of troops involved. 1.5tril strike with 1mil weapons without MS, is wrong.

As as I said Caspain was funded by biggest guns (Metal Messiah, JUAN..) to build those strike planets, so it's not like what you bring up requires the one having planets to be only payer. An alliance can build themselves such a person, by feeding the account so this person could mass everyone in wars involved. And then this person can farm/mass whoever is in their range with minimal losses while others paid for them. Difference with a MS monster alliance built, it cannot be massed by others and doesn't require repairs, and last but not least, is affected by blessing. Sure planets can be stolen, but as it's not massive planets required but one giving bonus to others, you just need to protect this planet. That's why I consider it worse than Blahh issue, as he had to defend all involved dual planets with big defs.

UP is lost on ascending, so are covert/AC levels/MS techs.
UP is lost beyond plague.
MSs can be massed and need repairs. And last but not last, are ALSO capped! (if I was to build 20bil strike, my MS wouldn't do x5 on my strike).
Blessings by themselves are random.

See where I'm coming from?

You are comparing apples with oranges.

You say attack planets can be funded, so the cost is irrelevant. I say then that uu can be transferred too ... so the losses you take when massed do not count as well because someone could have donated the uu to build the defense.

What I see is you bringing team play into the discussion.

Do we want to limit that too? As it provides an advantage to the one funded

[Legendary Apophis]

It is not ruining the game. It is called strategy.

Same as Caspain did, and same as blahh did.

How so?

The bonus from planets is limited. You can get up to +500% to your raw strike /defense / UP. And that is in the case that you have 10 planets of the same kind.

Planets back in time of Caspain were ridiculously uneffective. They added (within stats of the time) shockingly minimal stats. So there was a need of *massive* help to rise up this account. Admin updated them shortly after because they added almost no stats.

"Limited" I would use this term with caution. You can get up to +1000% when blessing kicks in. So massing a person with 10mil supers/weapons with less than 1mil troops having likely smaller losses than target, is possible.

Blessing is random and you have a chance to get it as well. Thus it is irrelevant to the matter.

As for massing 10 mil supers with 1 mil attackers: Now lets do a calculation. Add up the naq needed to upgrade and protect those attack planets and compare it to the smaller losses you have when massing. You would reach break even eventually depending on how often you mass, but it takes a lot of time to reach that break even.

It's not irrelevant because of the amount of troops involved. 1.5tril strike with 1mil weapons without MS, is wrong.

As as I said Caspain was funded by biggest guns (Metal Messiah, JUAN..) to build those strike planets, so it's not like what you bring up requires the one having planets to be only payer. An alliance can build themselves such a person, by feeding the account so this person could mass everyone in wars involved. And then this person can farm/mass whoever is in their range with minimal losses while others paid for them. Difference with a MS monster alliance built, it cannot be massed by others and doesn't require repairs, and last but not least, is affected by blessing. Sure planets can be stolen, but as it's not massive planets required but one giving bonus to others, you just need to protect this planet. That's why I consider it worse than Blahh issue, as he had to defend all involved dual planets with big defs.

UP is lost on ascending, so are covert/AC levels/MS techs.
UP is lost beyond plague.
MSs can be massed and need repairs. And last but not last, are ALSO capped! (if I was to build 20bil strike, my MS wouldn't do x5 on my strike).
Blessings by themselves are random.

See where I'm coming from?

You are comparing apples with oranges.

You say attack planets can be funded, so the cost is irrelevant. I say then that uu can be transferred too ... so the losses you take when massed do not count as well because someone could have donated the uu to build the defense.

What I see is you bringing team play into the discussion.

Do we want to limit that too? As it provides an advantage to the one funded

I'm not really saying that. I mean that monster MSs funded by alliances can be taken down by other MS monster owners. When MS is down, you have to rebuild it.
Blahh had to build defs on all of his dual planets. Heavy cost to keep 10 planets. Here, you got one planet that matter, or two, and the rest is just tiny ones easy to replace to keep the bonus going. So you can keep merlins out of PPT and you got them protected without buying USSs frequently.

I'm not saying teamwork is a bad thing, never said that. I'm saying the way planets have bonuses is wrong. That bonus from attack/def planets, given their nature, and absence of plague like for UP/uu growth, is wrong. It should give the same amount as raw. So people would have to build more troops and weapons to get an advantage from planets. Yes. They would lose troops, but given blessing/planets, would still have an advantage for what they paid. Just that it wouldn't be out of proportions.

[deni]

It is not ruining the game. It is called strategy.

Same as Caspain did, and same as blahh did.

How so?

The bonus from planets is limited. You can get up to +500% to your raw strike /defense / UP. And that is in the case that you have 10 planets of the same kind.

Planets back in time of Caspain were ridiculously uneffective. They added (within stats of the time) shockingly minimal stats. So there was a need of *massive* help to rise up this account. Admin updated them shortly after because they added almost no stats.

"Limited" I would use this term with caution. You can get up to +1000% when blessing kicks in. So massing a person with 10mil supers/weapons with less than 1mil troops having likely smaller losses than target, is possible.

Blessing is random and you have a chance to get it as well. Thus it is irrelevant to the matter.

As for massing 10 mil supers with 1 mil attackers: Now lets do a calculation. Add up the naq needed to upgrade and protect those attack planets and compare it to the smaller losses you have when massing. You would reach break even eventually depending on how often you mass, but it takes a lot of time to reach that break even.

It's not irrelevant because of the amount of troops involved. 1.5tril strike with 1mil weapons without MS, is wrong.

As as I said Caspain was funded by biggest guns (Metal Messiah, JUAN..) to build those strike planets, so it's not like what you bring up requires the one having planets to be only payer. An alliance can build themselves such a person, by feeding the account so this person could mass everyone in wars involved. And then this person can farm/mass whoever is in their range with minimal losses while others paid for them. Difference with a MS monster alliance built, it cannot be massed by others and doesn't require repairs, and last but not least, is affected by blessing. Sure planets can be stolen, but as it's not massive planets required but one giving bonus to others, you just need to protect this planet. That's why I consider it worse than Blahh issue, as he had to defend all involved dual planets with big defs.

UP is lost on ascending, so are covert/AC levels/MS techs.
UP is lost beyond plague.
MSs can be massed and need repairs. And last but not last, are ALSO capped! (if I was to build 20bil strike, my MS wouldn't do x5 on my strike).
Blessings by themselves are random.

See where I'm coming from?

You are comparing apples with oranges.

You say attack planets can be funded, so the cost is irrelevant. I say then that uu can be transferred too ... so the losses you take when massed do not count as well because someone could have donated the uu to build the defense.

What I see is you bringing team play into the discussion.

Do we want to limit that too? As it provides an advantage to the one funded

I'm not really saying that. I mean that monster MSs funded by alliances can be taken down by other MS monster owners. When MS is down, you have to rebuild it.
Blahh had to build defs on all of his dual planets. Heavy cost to keep 10 planets. Here, you got one planet that matter, or two, and the rest is just tiny ones easy to replace to keep the bonus going. So you can keep merlins out of PPT and you got them protected without buying USSs frequently.

I'm not saying teamwork is a bad thing, never said that. I'm saying the way planets have bonuses is wrong. That bonus from attack/def planets, given their nature, and absence of plague like for UP/uu growth, is wrong. It should give the same amount as raw. So people would have to build more troops and weapons to get an advantage from planets. Yes. They would lose troops, but given blessing/planets, would still have an advantage for what they paid. Just that it wouldn't be out of proportions.

You have posted the solution to your problem already. Steal the small/crappy unprotected planets.

[Legendary Apophis]

I'm not really saying that. I mean that monster MSs funded by alliances can be taken down by other MS monster owners. When MS is down, you have to rebuild it.
Blahh had to build defs on all of his dual planets. Heavy cost to keep 10 planets. Here, you got one planet that matter, or two, and the rest is just tiny ones easy to replace to keep the bonus going. So you can keep merlins out of PPT and you got them protected without buying USSs frequently.

I'm not saying teamwork is a bad thing, never said that. I'm saying the way planets have bonuses is wrong. That bonus from attack/def planets, given their nature, and absence of plague like for UP/uu growth, is wrong. It should give the same amount as raw. So people would have to build more troops and weapons to get an advantage from planets. Yes. They would lose troops, but given blessing/planets, would still have an advantage for what they paid. Just that it wouldn't be out of proportions.

You have posted the solution to your problem already. Steal the small/crappy unprotected planets.

Which isn't a solution at all as it can be replaced within a day or less with zero cost by other crappy planets =/= blahh spending naq on all his planets (and thus vulnerable lot, not just single planets=>easier to protect than in blahh's case, and less costly, and more effective, which is why I denounce it), not just one giving same bonuses as if you spent alot on all of them.

[deni]

I'm not really saying that. I mean that monster MSs funded by alliances can be taken down by other MS monster owners. When MS is down, you have to rebuild it.
Blahh had to build defs on all of his dual planets. Heavy cost to keep 10 planets. Here, you got one planet that matter, or two, and the rest is just tiny ones easy to replace to keep the bonus going. So you can keep merlins out of PPT and you got them protected without buying USSs frequently.

I'm not saying teamwork is a bad thing, never said that. I'm saying the way planets have bonuses is wrong. That bonus from attack/def planets, given their nature, and absence of plague like for UP/uu growth, is wrong. It should give the same amount as raw. So people would have to build more troops and weapons to get an advantage from planets. Yes. They would lose troops, but given blessing/planets, would still have an advantage for what they paid. Just that it wouldn't be out of proportions.

You have posted the solution to your problem already. Steal the small/crappy unprotected planets.

Which isn't a solution at all as it can be replaced within a day or less with zero cost by other crappy planets =/= blahh spending naq on all his planets, not just one giving same bonuses as if one spent alot on all of them.

you do realize that upgrading 10 planets to 50 bil is a lot cheaper then upgrading one to 500 bil and having 9 crappy ones to get the same bonus?

[Legendary Apophis]

I'm not really saying that. I mean that monster MSs funded by alliances can be taken down by other MS monster owners. When MS is down, you have to rebuild it.
Blahh had to build defs on all of his dual planets. Heavy cost to keep 10 planets. Here, you got one planet that matter, or two, and the rest is just tiny ones easy to replace to keep the bonus going. So you can keep merlins out of PPT and you got them protected without buying USSs frequently.

I'm not saying teamwork is a bad thing, never said that. I'm saying the way planets have bonuses is wrong. That bonus from attack/def planets, given their nature, and absence of plague like for UP/uu growth, is wrong. It should give the same amount as raw. So people would have to build more troops and weapons to get an advantage from planets. Yes. They would lose troops, but given blessing/planets, would still have an advantage for what they paid. Just that it wouldn't be out of proportions.

You have posted the solution to your problem already. Steal the small/crappy unprotected planets.

Which isn't a solution at all as it can be replaced within a day or less with zero cost by other crappy planets =/= blahh spending naq on all his planets, not just one giving same bonuses as if one spent alot on all of them.

you do realize that upgrading 10 planets to 50 bil is a lot cheaper then upgrading one to 500 bil and having 9 crappy ones to get the same bonus?

-10 duals is far harder to protect. You need to adjust the 10 to higher def enough compared to top fleets. One planet however can hide behind merlins/PPTs/platform.
-You have 20 capacities to build up, not just two.
-You have to defend those ten planets by building defs on all of them enough to avoid being stolen, not just have one planet 4days on PPT 3 days on merlin. 10 defs versus one. Platforms are limited to three. You can use one platform for big planet, however, for 10 duals, you have to spend for two more platforms, and 7 planets wouldn't have them.

[bebita]

or u can simple buy more mercs and have same bonus
your issue is a big noise for nothing
just adapt

[JediMasterX]

The planet system as far as I can understand it works is that if you have 100 bil attack planet, and nine 50 bil attack planets, all you need is a 50 bil strike and you'll get a 600 bil strike.

I had a 26 bil defence, and a bunch of planets ranging from 8-15 bil in defence bonus and I ended up with a 75 bil defence. I've seen people get a 500-1 tril defence bonus from 2 mil supers and 2 mil mercs.

I think its a bug. Yes its not as bad as it used to be when planets were introduced and you intsantly got the bonus, no matter what, but I think you should have at least 50% of the bonus in your raw stat for all planets combined, instead of each planet.

[Legendary Apophis]

The planet system as far as I can understand it works is that if you have 100 bil attack planet, and nine 50 bil attack planets, all you need is a 50 bil strike and you'll get a 600 bil strike.

I had a 26 bil defence, and a bunch of planets ranging from 8-15 bil in defence bonus and I ended up with a 75 bil defence. I've seen people get a 500-1 tril defence bonus from 2 mil supers and 2 mil mercs.

I think its a bug. Yes its not as bad as it used to be when planets were introduced and you intsantly got the bonus, no matter what, but I think you should have at least 50% of the bonus in your raw stat for all planets combined, instead of each planet.

Indeed.

This game isn't meant to have planets as main focus. They are meant to be a bonus, not the main core of your account.

[Nigatsu_Aka]

If you have a 50bil strike you can have MAX 50bil+ 10*25bil= 300bil attack. Stop overreacting.

Note:Planets can only match 1/2 of your natural UP/att/cov/def scores. So if you had strike action of 1,000,000 - and 2 attack planets that contribute 1,000,000 each - your strike would be 1,000,000 + 2 x 500,000 or 2,000,000 (not 3,000,000 since your natural strike was 1,000,000 so the planets can only add 1/2 that much, times the number of attack planets you have).

[JediMasterX]

Yes, a 50 bil strike will get you a 300 bil strike with ten 25 bil attack planets. Not that big of a deal. BUT you can get those with no investment.

See, with the amount of money running through the game planet defences are no longer needed. Because of fleets sizes and merlins. Fleets can steal any planet in the game and with merlins, there is no need to invest into defences. So just put that into the bonus.

Now its not that hard to get a bunch of 100 bil strike planets. So a 200 bil strike, and ten 100 bil strike plannets will get you a 1.2 tril strike. The cost of 1 mil or so supers.

And that's how more and more people are playing now. Dropping a couple bucks or melins and abusing this bug.

[deni]

*sighs*

It is NOT a bug but a feature. Jason has it confirmed many times now.