BETA UPDATES 2010

[MaxSterling]

Now that I've edited all of my posts in this thread, you think Admin will get the hint not to add any more bonuses to this game than there already is?

[Sarevok]

I am Now that the time is more convenient for me. Rather then 3.30am, it's back at 1.30am.

[Wepwaet]

Docking stations for the whole alliances fleets... no offense but a bad idea. It'd be more trouble than its worth, difficult to implement, rarely used, easily exploitable.


"Prestige" modes for alliances... again more trouble than its worth. You'd have to deal with alliances that already have 40ish members, some alliances have 100's of Tril in their banks already which would be wasted.


What ever happened to buying "upgrades" to alliances though? 3ic = 20t, ability to send mercs to other alliance members = 50t, ability to see more in depth alliance member atk logs = 5t, ability to give other members of your alliance your covert turns = 50t, ability to use one of your own MT's to put a fellow alliance member on ppt = 100t, ability to see when your alliance members fall off ppt = 50t, ability to give turns to and recieve turns from an alliance storage (leader sets rate from 0-4 of your natural turn production given and the limit of how many you can take) = 100t. Let us used the naq we've saved, its ours after all . I'd also like to see the alliance bank split into 2 groups one for upgrades with a leader/leader determined person buying them and a second group for those alliances that collect taxes and such. They could buy upgrades for the bank size and set the amount or % deducted from members each week. They can also authorize "payments" from this second group to people through the broker system with the naq coming from the bank.

I'd like to see an alliance front page similar to our individual front pages. Maybe with a leader edited list of alliances they've warred, member links, how long they've been ingame and a check as to which is their best stat ie if the alliance has 10 people and 6 of them have MS's ranked 50th or higher then it'd say "Random Name of the large enter whatever stat their ranked highest collectively in". So if collectively the alliance has huge UP's then their description would reflect that. You could add different options to this page by purchasing alliance upgrades with their banks.

[MaxSterling]

I put my ideas for alliance banks here...
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=113481&p=2071248#p2071248

[TheRook]

Hows about the following (I haven't read every page so far upto half of em):
Please read these all the way through before replying and take into account I've tried to balance it...

for both attackers and defenders... (on the attacking/defending section) it is leant slightly more heavily towards defenders as currently many believe defences are pointless so we have to put a little something extra towards defence so it gains more 'value'

Instead of Houses - Make it Empires so every empire can create there own thing...

Dont give huge bonuses - 1 or 2 % on each variety
(based on the original races Attack, Defence, Covert, Income)

This will be spread across all alliances in that empire
with an empire consisting of 2 alliances minimum - 5 Alliances Max
(if you have more than 5 alliances tough *sugar* make two empires
and split your alliances how you see fit)

with reducing the stat bonus you can provide slight Empire based advantages... (not stat bonus - except for income)

for example (Empire bonuses)

Attack oriented empire
slightly reduced attack weapon prices (between 3-5% price reduction)

Defence
as with attack empire but reduced defence weapon costs
(between 5-10% reduction to promote more defence building as it will be cheaper)

Covert
Cheaper covert levels (4%) as this becomes a large amount at higher covert levels
e.g. 12 trill covert level will save you 480 bill naq

Income
2-3% income bonus (not including planets) (total bonus would be 4-5 % if income based empire)
20 bill (20,000,000,000) a turn income will get you an extra 800 mill (800,000,000) per turn depending on final % given


Costs to change between these empire bonuses is 1 trill from each alliance bank in the empire

When creating an empire you must 'submit' your empire approval to the Nox
To do so each alliance leader of the alliances invited to the empires must agree which Empire bonus to take

First Empire bonuses is agreed when forming the empire from the consensus and doesn't cost anything


To stop/prevent abuse:

if an alliance leaves they cannot be invited back into that empire for 4 weeks
to stop leaving/rejoining abuse to avoid the alliance bank costs.
(The Nox frown upon those who dilly dally (undecisive))

Empire bonuses only changeable once every 4 weeks.
(The Nox dont like the undecisive as mentioned previously)

If an Empire disbands they are unable to join/form an empire for 4 weeks from the date of disbanding
If the Empire drops down to 1 alliance they automatically disband and suffer the same 4 week penalty (if you cant keep your empire together the Nox will be not so quick to approve your next request)




Attacking/Defending

I'm proposing a tweaked method for attack and defence...
by increasing the strike required against the defence before they deal damage and
putting in higher losses for those who try to mass you with a far lower strike
(currently around 30% strike total compared with defence total)

For Attackers (Strike total does not MS bonuses)

You must have 60% of their defence power as strike power
this will kill their defenders but not enough to damage weapons

When you have over 85% of their defence power in your strike you kill defenders and
they suffer weapon damage (% based as it is currently)

When you have over 130% of their defence power in you strike you kill defenders, damage weapons (%) and for each defender killed they lose that weapon.
e.g.(just made up figures not actual ingame numbers)
100k soldiers killed from 1million (with 1 million weapons)
weapon damage (whatever it is currently)
and 100k (weapons destroyed)

leaving you with

900k supers
900k weapons
% weapons damaged.

This in my opinion will boost the chances of people using larger strikes on defences
as even if you dont mass their weapons to zero you will still give them greater costs
by destroying weapons which they will have to replace.

The stronger your strike the less weapon damage (%)


For Defenders (defence total does not MS bonuses)

similar to attackers...
but slightly changed at higher level to reduce weapon damage % when overwhelming their defences

60% of your defence as their strike... they lose there troops, take weapon damage (%) and lose weapons

85% of your defence as their strike they lose troops, take weapon damage (%)

130% of your defence as their strike they lose troops and take a smaller amount of weapon damage (%)


Pro's for attackers
you can reduce your massing weapon repair costs if you do more than 130% of there defence as your strike. (cheaper massing!) You will destroy weapons when attacking as well as killing troops and damaging there weapons.

Cons for Attackers
more troops/weapons required to mass


Benefits to defenders
requires a larger strike to hurt your defence
destroy attackers weapons, damage weapons and kill troops

Cons to Defenders
more weapon losses from partial massings


Also introduce this or some form of it from General Chaos

Real quick fix for the defense argument,

You must have a defense of 50% of your attack at all times, for your attack to work, and to stop the snipers who would take the loss, you cannot sell weapons off once bought.

Want a good example of them problem, go check out any alliance or player in war, FIGNUTS alliance comes to mind, 1trill+ strikes 2bill defense.. balance huh, LOL whatever.

So, 50% defense of attack, or

The attacking force refuses to leave your realm with such a low defense to protect it until it returns,

And give the person 24 hours to rebuild said defense or the attackers start merging over to defense to protect the realm until a suitable defense is built, ( you have to set 24 hours to make it fair for people who dont get online as much )

On another note can J a s o n please explain what he believes to be balance, as im fairly sure that adding all these bonus's etc to the game is far from balance.


(TheRook)with his later addition (TheRook)

(General Chaos)
unless you extend that 24 hour delay to being able to attack, ONLY when it'd destroyed, and not just sold(General Chaos)


(TheRook)which I take as you have 24 hours to fight back before the % of defence troops required to attack further (not if you sell your defence weapons) (potentially exploitable if you sell all but one weapon... perhaps if you sell while being massed the game says leaving your troops unarmed is frowned upon by the Nox or something...)

I'll also add the following

If you have 25% (x%) of your strike as defence you can only use 50% (x% defence doubled) of your attack force (so you dont have to rebuild defence entirely to get back into fighting)
e.g. (made up figures)

2 trill strike (10 mill supers) 100% strike total
500 bill defence (2.5mill supers) 25% of strike total

your effective strike is 1 trillion (your defence % of strike doubled) you will only send 5mill supers and 5 mill weapons to attack

(yes this is a slight advantage to the attacker that some of the troops wont get sent in and 'kept back' but you have to give some balance to the fact that after 24 hours of having 0 defence they HAVE to build a defence to use there strike - and balance is what were trying to achieve here...)


(TheRook)

Please feel free to build on these ideas and make improvements hopefully people will feel they are more balanced and a bit further away from lets just add x% to various stats for certain people (no offence intended Jason)

Regards,

TheRook

I'm not overly likely to check this thread too often due to busy home/work life but wanted to try and help benefit SGW
I will check pm's in game and forum pm's tho

[MaxSterling]

Okay... I just missed the Admin Meet. What exactly did I miss?

[Sarevok]

Okay... I just missed the Admin Meet. What exactly did I miss?

Mostly discussions about the Houses, and probably removing the bonus from them (I'm sure your pleased)

@TheRook: Good ideas mate. It's more aligned with what it should be imo.

[MaxSterling]

Okay... I just missed the Admin Meet. What exactly did I miss?

Mostly discussions about the Houses, and probably removing the bonus from them (I'm sure your pleased)

That's good. Now if he'd only take our suggestions and convert them to Empires, that would take care of one issue.

[Sarevok]

Okay... I just missed the Admin Meet. What exactly did I miss?

Mostly discussions about the Houses, and probably removing the bonus from them (I'm sure your pleased)

That's good. Now if he'd only take our suggestions and convert them to Empires, that would take care of one issue.

Are they not like that now? Or do you mean more functionality like an empire?

[MaxSterling]

Are they not like that now? Or do you mean more functionality like an empire?

I don't play Beta unless I'm testing out planet defenses or comparing losses, so unsure of how they currently work on Beta. As long as they provide no bonuses and only act as a means of grouping alliances together and improving communication throughout the empire, then that's a good thing. He'll definitely be needing more than 6 though. Houses sounds pretty gay, too. They should be called empires and should have names that you can customize... nothing preset.

[Sarevok]

Are they not like that now? Or do you mean more functionality like an empire?

I don't play Beta unless I'm testing out planet defenses or comparing losses, so unsure of how they currently work on Beta. As long as they provide no bonuses and only act as a means of grouping alliances together and improving communication throughout the empire, then that's a good thing. He'll definitely be needing more than 6 though. Houses sounds pretty gay, too. They should be called empires and should have names that you can customize... nothing preset.

If that were to happen, wouldn't they be the same as an alliance? Just that they didn't have sub-sections, which could be determined simply by change the name you can give them whilst apart of your allinace

[Unimatrix881]

Disciples of Science
BONUS:100 Percent Negates All Ascended Blessings In Battle

Okay, well I can understand having some of the houses around, but it's really unreasonable to throw in this one. You would be negating the work that some players worked long and hard for, and invested tons of resources into getting those extra ascensions so they could have a little advantage.

[renegadze]

Disciples of Science
BONUS:100 Percent Negates All Ascended Blessings In Battle

Okay, well I can understand having some of the houses around, but it's really unreasonable to throw in this one. You would be negating the work that some players worked long and hard for, and invested tons of resources into getting those extra ascensions so they could have a little advantage.

Kind of a strange bonus as well really, I guess it helps people that are still LG's....but the fact it would prevent your own AB's (if I understand it correctly) would probably stop anyone higher then LG wanting to go into it

[Legendary Apophis]

Disciples of Science
BONUS:100 Percent Negates All Ascended Blessings In Battle

Okay, well I can understand having some of the houses around, but it's really unreasonable to throw in this one. You would be negating the work that some players worked long and hard for, and invested tons of resources into getting those extra ascensions so they could have a little advantage.

Think about unascended players.

[Sarevok]

Disciples of Science
BONUS:100 Percent Negates All Ascended Blessings In Battle

Okay, well I can understand having some of the houses around, but it's really unreasonable to throw in this one. You would be negating the work that some players worked long and hard for, and invested tons of resources into getting those extra ascensions so they could have a little advantage.

Think about unascended players.

Exactly. Then unascended players would have a unique tech advantage. Though you still get to keep your what, +49% stat boost over them

I personally love it. Means that, if your defence is large enough, they MUST build a bigger attack, rather then just wait for them to get blessed, and you to not be. Especially if you decided to stay at LG+1, due to a large UP or covert levels.