BETA UPDATES 2010

[GeneralChaos]

...a worthless update....

I agree, but sadly what we think doesnt seem to matter, its easier to push the update wait for loads to quit the game, or sit statless, then in a year say mmm maybe i need to change that,

@renegadze, i was also thinking the same thing, buy a bunch of weapons, sit and wait, then sell off after the update, the only other way admin could do it would be to sell everyones weapons before the update and allow to rebuy after it, level the play field,

Oh wait or he could see sense and not push the update.

[Sarevok]

TBH, with the feedback at the meets, he won't be putting in the 10x weapon costs.

Though what i would like to see, is the only 10% of re-sell value on attack weapons, and defence weapons lasting at least 2x as long as they do now. So that you don't loose like 3m units of 10m, and have all your weapons gone, for then free kills. Have the weapons last to at least 50% of units killed off, THEN, and only then, having them so weakly damaged they die off.

[Iƒrit]

who cares aboout the sell off of attack weapons....its pretty easy to just add an ability to kill attackers then snipers wont be **Filtered**, everyone and there brother's mothers uncle's father has said that would be best to do, but we all just get spat in the face....

[TheRook]

TBH, with the feedback at the meets, he won't be putting in the 10x weapon costs.

Though what i would like to see, is the only 10% of re-sell value on attack weapons, and defence weapons lasting at least 2x as long as they do now. So that you don't loose like 3m units of 10m, and have all your weapons gone, for then free kills. Have the weapons last to at least 50% of units killed off, THEN, and only then, having them so weakly damaged they die off.

The 10% re-sell value will hurt those who ascend... every two weeks I'm ascending and I've quite a large account so I can afford it but if I lost anotehr 40% of my naq when doing so it would sting a lot!

[Iƒrit]

the re-sale change wont do **Filtered** about snipers, just make it more expensive to ascend

[Sarevok]

Really. So when the snipers decide to start selling weapons, to avoid sabotage, it WON'T slow them down? Interesting.

[TheRook]

Really. So when the snipers decide to start selling weapons, to avoid sabotage, it WON'T slow them down? Interesting.

double/triple the cost of strike weapons... that way its far more costly for people to build large strikes and even more so to be caught and sabbed...

[TheRook]

why not add a 'Tainted' button... once 100 people class someone as tainted (clicking a button for them) they then have trouble selling weapons at a good price...

Each player would get 1 tainted vote per week (like a MT/trade) that applies to the person for the whole week...

Once a person has 100 votes of being tainted he is kind of treated like an outlaw and finds it difficult to do business with the universe

this way the population of SGW can punish those who are snipers and they will have a negative impact on their accounts for playing in such a way

but could also be used in large scale wars as a tool of weakening the biggest strike holding person as they can then get caught with lots of strike weapons and either take a large loss selling their weapons off or take the risk of losing some to being sabbed...

This is just a rough idea thought of now... but you probably get my point of just punishing the sniper accounts and it wont negatively effect anyone who just plays the game normally.

[Sarevok]

Except the large empires just go around 'tainting' anyone that stands in their way

[Iƒrit]

Really. So when the snipers decide to start selling weapons, to avoid sabotage, it WON'T slow them down? Interesting.

no they dont unless they are massin over 1.5t+ defense, I can point to 5+ (that just a quick thought) with a 1t or less covert and 6m+ weapons. No its not gonna do much to stop them at all, weapons are so cheap and sab on attack weapons is garbage. making sell at 10% hurts more people then it benefits

[TheRook]

Except the large empires just go around 'tainting' anyone that stands in their way

well they can only taint 1 person as there vote for that week, it is a rough idea so could be tweaked to 200 votes thats a small population of the game... and then it would be quite tough for a large empire to get all of its members to vote.

How many Empires have 200+ people


or make it so strikes are only 50% effective with 0(3) defence and dont get support from planets

unless they have at least 15% of the defence (planet bonuses not taken into account with the % required)they have as strike they will only get 50% strike effectiveness, and 20%+ for planets to provide support.

a 1 trill strike would then require 200bill defence... so they will have additional costs...


edit - this will impact people in wars aswell to avoid the "I have no defence so you cant do much to hurt me, but I can still mass your players"

TheRook

[Mathlord]

TBH, with the feedback at the meets, he won't be putting in the 10x weapon costs.

Though what i would like to see, is the only 10% of re-sell value on attack weapons, and defence weapons lasting at least 2x as long as they do now. So that you don't loose like 3m units of 10m, and have all your weapons gone, for then free kills. Have the weapons last to at least 50% of units killed off, THEN, and only then, having them so weakly damaged they die off.

He fixed super losses recently anyway by dramatically reducing the effectiveness of 1 turn attacks at killing supers. Sure you lose defense weapons, but it takes a TON of turns now to actually kill defense supers.

[Lithium]

i dont understand why some want to ban the sniping tactic? so an allaince can sit on a small one? or when an epire strike on a small allaince, rubish.

snipers are the product of the easy life that empires offers , if u accepted the empire style then why not the sniping way

[GeneralChaos]

why not add a 'Tainted' button... once 100 people class someone as tainted (clicking a button for them) they then have trouble selling weapons at a good price...

Each player would get 1 tainted vote per week (like a MT/trade) that applies to the person for the whole week...

Once a person has 100 votes of being tainted he is kind of treated like an outlaw and finds it difficult to do business with the universe

this way the population of SGW can punish those who are snipers and they will have a negative impact on their accounts for playing in such a way

but could also be used in large scale wars as a tool of weakening the biggest strike holding person as they can then get caught with lots of strike weapons and either take a large loss selling their weapons off or take the risk of losing some to being sabbed...

This is just a rough idea thought of now... but you probably get my point of just punishing the sniper accounts and it wont negatively effect anyone who just plays the game normally.

I know where your idea is coming from, and its not a bad idea, just way to easy to exploit, imagine this update, then take another FUALL Vs TJP etc, lol everyone would vote on each other instantly,

[Lithium]

@the rock

think about robin hood, lol cmon guys snipers are part of the game did any of u thought what froced these ppl to be snipers? as far as i know they are guys who are being sat from from group of ppl , alliances or empires so its their product and now some do want to make them delete so they can produce easy naq, JUST remember there will be always smone farming u