lifer suicide change - will also kill attack units (plus AC)

[~Phoenix~]

It's 3 to 1 for A/C isn't it?


So it should also be 3 to 1 for normal trained attack units.


And if supers are involved they have 2x power of normal units.. so naturally 6 to 1.

Does it actually need that much discussion?

[krsnik666]

It's 3 to 1 for A/C isn't it?


So it should also be 3 to 1 for normal trained attack units.


And if supers are involved they have 2x power of normal units.. so naturally 6 to 1.

Does it actually need that much discussion?

is 2 to 1 for A/C and yeah supers are double power to normal so they should use double the amount of lifers to take down
2:1 A/C (was 3:1 but last year was cut down to 2:1 and haven't heard complaints)
3:1 normal (since there trained for heavy combat)
6:1 super (have double the power so need double the effort)

i dont see them ratios being a problem they have legit reasons for being like that.

[~Phoenix~]

is 2 to 1 for A/C and yeah supers are double power to normal so they should use double the amount of lifers to take down
2:1 A/C (was 3:1 but last year was cut down to 2:1 and haven't heard complaints)
3:1 normal (since there trained for heavy combat)
6:1 super (have double the power so need double the effort)

i dont see them ratios being a problem they have legit reasons for being like that.

Yeah soz I missed that update when reading through.

Yeah thats fine or even
2:1 A/C
2:1 atk
4:1 atk super

Doesn't really make much difference.



How you will choose the attack is more important. Another button? Drop down option?

[krsnik666]

is 2 to 1 for A/C and yeah supers are double power to normal so they should use double the amount of lifers to take down
2:1 A/C (was 3:1 but last year was cut down to 2:1 and haven't heard complaints)
3:1 normal (since there trained for heavy combat)
6:1 super (have double the power so need double the effort)

i dont see them ratios being a problem they have legit reasons for being like that.

Yeah soz I missed that update when reading through.

Yeah thats fine or even
2:1 A/C
2:1 atk
4:1 atk super

Doesn't really make much difference.



How you will choose the attack is more important. Another button? Drop down option?

no prob i wouldn't of noticed if i hadn't lifered recently xD
both ratios are good i just like the idea of using more lifers so they can be drained more in battles
i think a drop down option like conquer planet would be good. and using a set amount of turns like the lifer system already has up and adding a phasing point on the person whos bieng lifered

[Sarevok]

Personally, which seems to share the views of some:
*Separate attacks. Maybe you don't want to kill their AC units, cause they are getting massed every time they attack you anyway
*I've 2 views on the ratios
1) 1:1, 2:1, 4:1 (merc, atk, s.atk)
2) Mercs unaffected (I mean, they die easily enough anyway), and the other 2 ratio's the same
*I would say weakest first, like sabbing. Yes, if you are going to blow yourself up, you go for the most valued target, however, usually the most valued, are the most protected.
*I think you should have to over-come the defence, like sabotage again. Remembering that, if you need to train attack to use this, the opponent, can then use this tactic back

[matty~]

and with this update ..

there will be changes in massing/defending yet again big time

[Field Marshall]

i think this is stupid, tbh i think this shouldn't happen your basically empowering bigger players to completely stomp the weak

So I read 2 pages and got bored.

This post was pretty much the decider.

I put forward the idea of attackers being vulnerable at the last admin meet. Obviously you haven't spied the larger people recently.

Almost everyone, Tekki, myself, Robe, JT ALL train up normal attackers when offline, as they can be trained/untrained at a low cost whilst being 100% safe and train them all into spies when online.

Before massing RW I had 250m units that I could keep safe indefinately.

This is a tactic that plays advantage to the bigger players, with these units at risk, you will find that they have less to play with as they will be using miners more often to counteract their enemies and as they have no other choice. Encompassing the lifer ability as Admin had first wanted it to be.

[Iƒrit]

supers may count for double the power, but only when they are armed, and it only takes 1 unit to train them. Besides that the whole concept of lifering supers is retarded the idea was put in perspective to stop players from putting units somewhere they were safe and still manageable, you cannot untrain supers (at least not in large quantities), unlike normals which is where the real issue is.

Lifering Attacking Mercenaries? who gives a crap? NOT needed.
Lifering Normal Attackers? YES!! this is where players try to safeguard their units.
Lifering Supers? NOT needed, unnecessary as they are not untrainable in large quantities like normals. They should ONLY be subject to lifering if they are unarmed, and not even really then.

[Field Marshall]

Lifering Attacking Mercenaries? who gives a crap? NOT needed.
Lifering Normal Attackers? YES!! this is where players try to safeguard their units.
Lifering Supers? NOT needed, unnecessary as they are not untrainable in large quantities like normals. They should ONLY be subject to lifering if they are unarmed, and not even really then.

+1

That's it in a nutshell!

[GeneralChaos]

Lifering Attacking Mercenaries? who gives a crap? NOT needed.
Lifering Normal Attackers? YES!! this is where players try to safeguard their units.
Lifering Supers? NOT needed, unnecessary as they are not untrainable in large quantities like normals. They should ONLY be subject to lifering if they are unarmed, and not even really then.

+1

That's it in a nutshell!

But of course you have finished ascending, so what about all them people who are still ascending who now cannot safely store there UU, unless they train it into miners and lose 10%, why should everyone who got to max ascended have been allowed to maintain nearly all of there UU but now people ascending cannot?

This update only benefits the biggest players in the game, and gives them yet another massive advantage over smaller players.

Which takes me back to my other statement that admin should also undo the updates with plague and 50% on planets, he wants to let the bigger get bigger and no one else a chance, might aswell do it all in 1 go.

[Field Marshall]

Lifering Attacking Mercenaries? who gives a crap? NOT needed.
Lifering Normal Attackers? YES!! this is where players try to safeguard their units.
Lifering Supers? NOT needed, unnecessary as they are not untrainable in large quantities like normals. They should ONLY be subject to lifering if they are unarmed, and not even really then.

+1

That's it in a nutshell!

But of course you have finished ascending, so what about all them people who are still ascending who now cannot safely store there UU, unless they train it into miners and lose 10%, why should everyone who got to max ascended have been allowed to maintain nearly all of there UU but now people ascending cannot?

This update only benefits the biggest players in the game, and gives them yet another massive advantage over smaller players.

Which takes me back to my other statement that admin should also undo the updates with plague and 50% on planets, he wants to let the bigger get bigger and no one else a chance, might aswell do it all in 1 go.

BS - very few people use normal attackers to store their UU whilst ascending. You never have a full army due to the expense of ascending.

You tell me 1 person who uses this method...and i'll tell you 5 who don't...

This update will hurt me a lot..my whole method of gameplay uses this, it makes me more or less untouchable...I put my hands upto this...

[Iƒrit]

@FS - I did, and it worked well for me Limited my lifers BIG time.

@GC - with the current bank update, this suggested update will limit those with huge coverts, HUGELY. I have a 37 which isn't that strong, but I can put all my UU in normal attackers and not risk loosing them at all, still have my huge bank (4 times bigger then it was previous to the update), and not care that I have no income since I can farm 100++ times what my income could be. While yes you loose 10% of what you train, so 40m on 400m UU, not that big of a deal IMO.

[~Dä Vinci~]

i think this will effect raiding because of the cost of turns, and uu 100m trained into miners thats 10m lost already 7t down the drain as i have no need for miners.. silly update can argue all you want that thats not much of a loss but it is for me.

[Iƒrit]

i think this will effect raiding because of the cost of turns, and uu 100m trained into miners thats 10m lost already 7t down the drain as i have no need for miners.. silly update can argue all you want that thats not much of a loss but it is for me.

not really people will readjust what they can take per hit in a raid and adapt according to the costs. Like they have with the cost of turns, ect, ect, ect.

[Field Marshall]

so 40m on 400m UU, not that big of a deal IMO.

However, those 40m now become useful as you can now target those with attackers trained...