BETA UPDATES 2010

[Sarevok]

And to combat the snipers who will build defense so they can mass then untrain, in the first 24 hours after training weapons, make it you cannot untrain them, or just set value to 0, ( this was suggested before months ago by me and got good feedback, but i guess it doesnt fall into what admin considers balance as it can punish someone, where boost to stats dont )

That or make it based on that the defender has to have supers.

[minisaiyan]

maybe use the suggestion by general chaos that defence needs to be a certain % to let the attack work. Then say only so many units can be untrained and weapons sold per turn. So you could click to sell say 1million, but they are sold 100k each turn. Meaning there is a 5 hour wait to sell all of the weapons. Could be a way to stop sniping so much as there is more risk of getting caught, Would also be interesting to see how those ascending work around it?

[Sarevok]

Just start selling the weapons the day before PPT ends

[minisaiyan]

well yeah... but thats possibly a day out of gnr.

[lurtz1122334]

I totally disagree with the surveys. Now instead of having people work hard for their naq or actually paying for it, they can spam surveys and get tons of naq easy. My opinion is either lower the amounts by alot, or dont imploment the surveys at all.

[Chronus]

I like the survey option for people to get resources who can't afford to spend money.

[RoKeT]

I thought that was lame... it was Selling out more

[Forum]

ok caught up on the reading...although have been reading the whole time, just not yet commenting

thanks to those who listened and made CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.
The balance of the houses is being looked at - an initial change done already, and 6 (of 8 or 10) total houses now in.

The surveys are for those who want to help, have time, but no money. It is not like one can 'mass a survey' and get infinite resources. If need be I will limit them, but I believe they are self limiting. people have always had issue with some getting advantage casue they can afford it...now this is not changed but hte currency of 'afford' is $ and time, opposed to just $. ..

The sab has been increased in damage potential, and reduced in turns (3 to 2) ... people STILL think more needs being done?

I am hearing a LOT of 'def needs to be useful' ... There are some good (but impractical) ideas on how to do this. And some options that are good... the question comes down to 'which to choose, and which has lowest risk of going bad with highest chance of successful balance'

The ideas I like best, are:
1) have max strike as a % of def (ie 200%) .. this has limit of if def is massed, cannot build strike until def is rebuilt (or use strike till def rebuilt) -- ways around this are impractical.
2) supers are supers. not def super; attack super; just supers. they do def and att. weapons are still att/def, but supers are not. This will still allow someone an only attack (with mercs/regulars) but such is very costly in troop deaths and costs. OR they accept that no def means a massable offense.... this is my preference, but no small change so must be thought out. On this one I would like comments.

for the covert change, it is true - one must attack/defend/buy troops to have the change kick in... rest assured that it will be equal for all

lastly regards houses, they will be bonused. not huge bonuses, but bonused to make controlling one worthwhile. the bonuses can be altered of course. i am debating, too, having the opposite houses auto-2-way-war ... ie light/dark order/chaos etc/cte
as it stands too, one cannot attack another voting member of your own house.


keeping it coming...

[Wepwaet]

ok caught up on the reading...
thanks to those who listened and made CONSTRUCTIVE criticism.
The balance of the houses is being looked at - an initial change done already, and 6 (of 8 or 10) total houses now in.

The surveys are for those who want to help, have time, but no money. It is not like one can 'mass a survey' and get infinite resources. If need be I will limit them, but I believe they are self limiting. people have always had issue with some getting advantage casue they can afford it...now this is not changed but hte currency of 'afford' is $ and time, opposed to just $. ..

The sab has been increased in damage potential, and reduced in turns (3 to 2) ... people STILL think more needs being done?

I am hearing a LOT of 'def needs to be useful' ... There are some good (but impractical) ideas on how to do this. And some options that are good... the question comes down to 'which to choose, and which has lowest risk of going bad with highest chance of successful balance'

The ideas I like best, are:
1) have max strike as a % of def (ie 200%) .. this has limit of if def is massed, cannot build strike until def is rebuilt (or use strike till def rebuilt) -- ways around this are impractical.
2) supers are supers. not def super; attack super; just supers. they do def and att. weapons are still att/def, but supers are not. This will still allow someone an only attack (with mercs/regulars) but such is very costly in troop deaths and costs. OR they accept that no def means a massable offense.... this is my preference, but no small change so must be thought out. On this one I would like comments.

for the covert change, it is true - one must attack/defend/buy troops to have the change kick in... rest assured that it will be equal for all

lastly regards houses, they will be bonused. not huge bonuses, but bonused to make controlling one worthwhile. the bonuses can be altered of course. i am debating, too, having the opposite houses auto-2-way-war ... ie light/dark order/chaos etc/cte
as it stands too, one cannot attack another voting member of your own house.


keeping it coming...

Would you consider MPDSD power as an option of benefits of doing a survey?

Also out of the two options mentioned the second seems like a far better solution but the question is, which is given priority? Say you have 100 atk weapons and 100 def weapons and 200 supers and your hit and lose 150 supers, does this mean the person will have a 50 super def left or a 50 super atk left or a 25 super def and a 25 super atk left...

Voting for housing can be just as manipulated using a straight "population" count as it can with a straight "power" count. You should think of using a hybrid version where people can't rig it one way or the other... theres a reason the US government employs both types (to limit the disadvantage to any one group).

Edit: Also anyway to keep our 1 AT probing ability?

[Forum]

I could have a 'probe' attack type (1 at no damage...)
or using 1at simply does not damage enemy (just you).

as for surveys, lets start with naq and see how it goes....if i throw the whole thing out no point in too much work into it

and - how do you see population via houses being exploited?
as for 200 supers lose 150 -- your att and def will have 50 each (and 50 total) to use. again there is no 'att' and 'def' supers. just supers, who go where they are needed.

Would you consider MPDSD power as an option of benefits of doing a survey?

Also out of the two options mentioned the second seems like a far better solution but the question is, which is given priority? Say you have 100 atk weapons and 100 def weapons and 200 supers and your hit and lose 150 supers, does this mean the person will have a 50 super def left or a 50 super atk left or a 25 super def and a 25 super atk left...

Voting for housing can be just as manipulated using a straight "population" count as it can with a straight "power" count. You should think of using a hybrid version where people can't rig it one way or the other... theres a reason the US government employs both types (to limit the disadvantage to any one group).

Edit: Also anyway to keep our 1 AT probing ability?

[Wepwaet]

I could have a 'probe' attack type (1 at no damage...)
or using 1at simply does not damage enemy (just you).

as for surveys, lets start with naq and see how it goes....if i throw the whole thing out no point in too much work into it

and - how do you see population via houses being exploited?
as for 200 supers lose 150 -- your att and def will have 50 each (and 50 total) to use. again there is no 'att' and 'def' supers. just supers, who go where they are needed.

A probe attack type would be wonderful or conversely have spying not tied to covert turns...

Fair enough about the surveys, make sure the cakes edible before adding on everyones favorite icing

I can see the population being exploited through snipers who don't build anything and alliances of 60+ people only being put together to push established people out of a house. Every alliance has their inactive members sitting in the 10k+ ranks with no stats, they shouldn't be counted toward an alliances voting power just because they haven't been removed from the alliance by the leaders. I would suggest some type of average power a person needs before their population can add to their alliances voting power.

About the supers being just supers, your saying that effectively we will need half as many supers, if this went into effect, as we have now? I don't know if I like that... I would think (and this is just my opinion) that people would be more in favor of defense having the priority if your defending and attacking has the priority when hitting someone. Such as if I massed my strike on your defense, my defense would bleed away to keep my strike up. If I massed your defense your strike would bleed away to keep your defense up.

An example would be:

100 atk weapons, 100 def weapons
200 supers

Im attacking and have lost 50 supers. My strike would still be 100 supers but my defense would be 50 supers.
Im defending and have lost 50 supers. My defense would still be 100 supers but my strike would be 50 supers.
... actually come to think of it were both saying the same thing the only question is when not hitting someone or being hit, would the 150 supers be split or would I 'show" a full strike and defense?



Edit: How do perg and lone wolves factor into the houses?

[Sarevok]

I could have a 'probe' attack type (1 at no damage...)
or using 1at simply does not damage enemy (just you).

I would prefer no damage to the defender. Think about it this way. Like sending a drone in You loose resources for doing it, and the defender wipes it clean out. But based on data collected, you can estimate their defence potential. Not saying make the ability to send probe drones, use what attack guys you have, and they take normal battle damage, but this is treated like a probe, so no offensive against the enemy.

as for surveys, lets start with naq and see how it goes....if i throw the whole thing out no point in too much work into it

I agree with you here. Though perhaps to allow people with time, and people with $ to be on a more level playing field. Make each survey whatever value it is (lets say for arguments sake $5) of naq as if bought. This way, people can either spend $200/month straight out, or try and do 40 surveys a month. Making it $2 would be 100/month. But take the amount earned from the total 200 you can spend. For example, I spend $100 cash and buy resources, and with the $5 survey, do 20 of those, and that's my limit for the month. How does this sound?

and - how do you see population via houses being exploited?
as for 200 supers lose 150 -- your att and def will have 50 each (and 50 total) to use. again there is no 'att' and 'def' supers. just supers, who go where they are needed.

I think I understand correctly here. Basically, if you have only attack weapons, then the supers would act like defence supers without weapons? And similarly, if you were to attack with 1 weapon, then they would go in as now, 1 guy armed, the rest un-armed?

PS: Good to see you on the Forum Admin J

Edit: How do perg and lone wolves factor into the houses?

I see your point here. Perhaps an adjustment for lone wolves, would be they can choose like 1/2 the maximum bonus for an area? For example, those in the Chaos(Attack?) House would get let say 10%. A lone wolf whom chooses say mercenary class, would get a 5% boost. That way, they aren't left out more and more, and they can still get some bonus. But because they aren't part of a larger entity, this bonus is smaller?

[Brdavs]

Loving the planet names now being links. Real practical.

Also the nerf on the original 4 house bonuses is welcomed.

The new ones present a bit of an issue... especially the AB bonus one.

Hard to balance that one, make it 1-2% small and it wont mean much - but at 10% it effectivly bumps a 23x ascended account from a good chance of more than a half of his hits being blessed to a shot of 2/3rds being thus. Not... bad at all... shall we say heh.

[Sarevok]

Loving the planet names now being links. Real practical.

That's so much more helpful. Save loading planets, then clicking planet name, THEN adding say merlins or something. Just 1 click and away you go

Also the nerf on the original 4 house bonuses is welcomed.

Agreed. These are much more realistic.

The new ones present a bit of an issue... especially the AB bonus one.

Hard to balance that one, make it 1-2% small and it wont mean much - but at 10% it effectivly bumps a 23x ascended account from a good chance of more than a half of his hits being blessed to a shot of 2/3rds being thus. Not... bad at all... shall we say heh.

Well thing is. Ascended accounts won't be so great, if you battle someone in the Science house. With no AB, you only get the realm bonus. And with the Tauri and Asguard bonus to protect troops 100%. That will make things MUCH more interesting lol

One thing I'd like to suggest. Rather then having supers being both attack and defence, I'm not sure of the practicality, but what if all supers go to war/defend? For example, your attacking someone, and you have lets say 1T strike, and a 1T defence. Your defence guys come along to the fight, and add like 25-50%of their power to the attack (basically, a 1.5T attack, or 1.25T) Same with defending. This allows for massers to be massers. But also they need some sort of defence, lest their attack units fight back against an attack, and only do 1/2 their power, and get wiped out

[GeneralChaos]

The sab has been increased in damage potential, and reduced in turns (3 to 2) ... people STILL think more needs being done?

The ideas I like best, are:
1) have max strike as a % of def (ie 200%) .. this has limit of if def is massed, cannot build strike until def is rebuilt (or use strike till def rebuilt) -- ways around this are impractical.
2) supers are supers. not def super; attack super; just supers. they do def and att. weapons are still att/def, but supers are not. This will still allow someone an only attack (with mercs/regulars) but such is very costly in troop deaths and costs. OR they accept that no def means a massable offense.... this is my preference, but no small change so must be thought out. On this one I would like comments.

Surely that would throw the balance out even more that it currently is, as it stands if someone has supers in attack and defense say 20mill of each 40mill total, and they get massed they lose 20mill and can hit back with the 20mill,

If it was just 40mill max, surely then someone could mass all 40mill away taking both defense and attack, this would allow the biggest players in the game to become untouchable, as they could keep everyone down to stop them getting anywhere close to them,

You would end up with alot of accounts that have just mining...

I could have a 'probe' attack type (1 at no damage...)
or using 1at simply does not damage enemy (just you).

Brilliant idea, probably very easy to introduce too, aslong as the 1 AT does not count towards NOX or Crit phasing, this will stop someone being phased by a team mate to stop attacks on them, you also need to make it that Motherships take the damage but do not give it aswell.