attacking not worth it.

[[SGC_ReplicÅtors]]

i DID switch to as'gaurd and i am trying to do the same my self

LOL


thats th not the point there defences grows so much that no matter what u do even sabbing them u cant even bring it down too ur strike level


i ahve sen so many asgards accounts with 5+ billion def and guesse what zero spies...what do i do sab sab sab but no matter how much i sab next day boom they even have more defence then the day i sabbed them.


and even if u manage to somehow smash them andget there stuff is it worth it in the end having repair bill in the multi hundred million or even higher and the gains seems to be just swalloewd up by the repair bill cost and dont forget the combat losses i dont no whats makes me feel quesy attacking asgads....the combat losses or the repair bill...

[Flavar]

Well i think i will have to say something after reading everything.

My strike is ranked 20 and i think i can get through the defenses ranked till 100. The only problem are the losses. I loose normaly at least 1k troops each attack. The repair costs 20 million + 50 million for the mothership.
That means that i have to get atleast 370 million in an attack to get my expenses back.

That means attacking below 500 million is just not worth it.
And i am three times ascended so i have the advantage of not needing so many Supersoldiers. Also i use masses of mercs as meetshilds not that it helps.

What i am trying to say is that having a high strike gives nearly nothing. In the time i scroll through the pages to find possible tagrets with enough naq i could make much more by simple farming with one weapon.

Ok i get the occasional good hit of 1 bill or two but that is only becauese i spent hours a day searching for targets.

For me the solution is quite simple , reduce the losses for the attacker or for both defender and attacker.
and maybe the damage that is done do motherships.
But the losses are the main point.
IF they werent so high i would get a much higher srtike to get the really big targets nbut until then i wait to finish my ascnesions and hope for good luck at attacking.

LOWER THE LOSSES

[Artiglio]

lowering the losses would make it harder to mass people you would need like twice as many turns ...

[Flavar]

and were is the problem in getting turnsß you can get all you ant over the market...

[pianomutt20000]

i agree with flavor. Lower the losses.

Bill

[Aronock]

Well it is true that i have found no use in attacking, and have found like others that the losses should be lowered and the repair cost of weapons should also be lower. If and only if these changes are made i will attack

[Mango]

remember turns are also getting more expensive making a defensive strategy more and more appealing.

We should be promoting attacking by having cheap turns available

[Aronock]

Interesting idea, and it's a good one.

NOTE TO ADMINS: READ THE ABOVE POST

[cinder__393]

turns ARE cheap as they are... i make loads of them there is no reason you shouldnt....

if your not makeing a big profit then maybe yous should think about your stratagie a bit

[Mango]

I do make quite a profit from my turns, but as you may have seen turns are gradually becoming more expensive.

only a week or so ago they were about 7kuu for 1000, now they are 7800uu for about 900 turns and i would suggest they are only going to get more expensive and as I mentioned the more expensive turns become the more advantage to having a defensive strategy.

You can still make a good return on your turns by farming targets but if you wish to mass someone (actually war with someone) then the costs are becoming higher and higher.

If turns were cheap then it would encourage war between players, you would get less from farming because more people would be farming and so you would have to accept a lower amount of return because there would be more competition for the farms.

[SGC_Sam Fisher]

One additional fact: the forces of ****** were so completely overwhelmed that they could not even breach the perimiter of SGC_Sam Fisher! As a result, it appears that the weapons and forces of SGC_Sam Fisher suffered no damage!! Was it a suicide run? Proving some sort of unknown 'point'? Or maybe a tactical strike to recon the strength of the opposition? Nobody is 100% sure, but one thing is sure: the attack was eliminated before they even got close, and had no effect on the target!

If I get this when my defence completely destroys an attacking force, why not make it so I can get something like this when my attack completely destroys someones defence?

[~Phoenix~]

Want to make attacking worth it?

Easy to do. Make it so if you have 5x the attack of the enemy's defense. You dont get any losses. Like it is when you have 5x the defense of the attacker.

That way. People will increase their strikes. Attacking wil become ever more popular. And people may actualy get their attack's much much higher then defences.

[311 [TA]]

i agree with phoenix

that is a great idea!

[Mango]

it seems like a good idea on the surface and I was about to agree with it until I realized that it would mean that someone with a large attack could easily mass person after person all for the small cost of the turns used.

Picture someone with 10 bill attack massing every person in your alliance with 2 bill def or less.......that would be far too powerful

[311 [TA]]

well, something needs to be done to tip the balance more in the favor of attacking versus hiding behind a big defense, cuz where is the fun in a game where all the top players cant even be attacked