Bring back raiding?

[Sol]

So then I can build a 2 bil CER and be the savior to all noobs?


No.

- It will be available for people with a proportionally lower (e.g say 20%) of the average CER, and also based on a set average of powerups (so people dont purposefully keep a low CER).

Sure if you get everyone else to build a 2 bill CER, and good luck building that.


If you read the title of the thread ladies and gentlemen read the damn opening post as well.

[Rabbid Thom]

im going to say yes but raid upto 1 bil planets gives the newbies a boost but not somthing where one could stock 4 k turns and bring down a person like last time

[Neimenljivi]

Yep it would be nice if people actually read the whole thread before saying what they think once they see the title as a lot of their fears or hesitations have been answered

~N

[Lore]

And you guys should stop thinking people will play by the rules of "how things should be done".

You know very well you will see players getting masses down much further just so they can raid. You know very well people will be made targets of that do not have "the biggest and the best" backing them. You know very well one of the issues with all games, main included is hyper inflation. That is exactly what you are wanting to do. To flood the game with large amounts of resources. It has never worked before, so why do you think it will work now? You say you want more DMU for noobies but your giving much more to the older and the more active so you are solving nothing. With the right restrictions raiding is OK but I do not think you have the right restrictions. You know you will see ascended accounts built specifically for raiding. Building good defensive measures, but not building areas that effect raiding. They will be kept in this manner to hurt certain players. You guys still have not even attempted to explain who John should be allowed to have 20 bill planets raided off him by 5 other people, but he can not raid a single one of them back. Being attacked by someone in a manner you can not do in return is complete BS.

As for untrained units, There are many out there and they are used for a reason. Perfect example is myself. I have 12 bill planets. I built up for war and lost 8 bill planets. So my choices are simple. Build every planet into military and farm DMU, then in war have my planet count dropped to 1 bill or less. The other option is to not train them, and build them when needed. It might be different if a military force could stand more then 30 minutes. Even on crit my defense has yet to last a day. So forcing everyone to train income units will just make this worse. Now I will have a harder time controlling my income, and you will see the smaller/mid grade players taking more of a beating because their defenses can not hold and they will be viewed as a better farm.

You guys have been offered some limitation that address your concerns, yet you ignore them. Why? But you want to say we who have concerns are the blind ones.


You keep saying you are bound by your size, yet you can very easily change your size (dropping it to raid)
One of the few ways to hurt or stop a sniper is to drop his planet count so far below yours he can no longer attack you. Doing this gives you a few days or weeks of peace, this will remove that.
Lastly the biggest issue in ascended is the snipers who dump everything into strike, farm a few quad, then walk away for days or weeks and there is Nothing you can do to them, but this idea makes that problem far worse because now your handing them raiding for size and planets to dump into strike as well.


So yes some of my hesitations and fears have been answered, but not all and not the most important.

Guess what I am saying is the 2 of you immediately assume people will use it in a certain fashion, such as to build up with. Neither of you have acknowledged that as time has proven again and again that people will find a way to exploit things for their benefit.

Also, please explain why we even have a 3 bill cap inplace if your intending to allow noobies to be able to raid 20 bill planets. Is that not a conflict of interest? What stops a player from NOT building stats just so they can maintain high raiding % and actually growing to 20 bill planets? You have not stated. All your restrictions are based on the idea that players WILL build.

[Neimenljivi]

Why do people dump all units in strike to farm a few quads from the bigger accounts? Because there is not enough DMU on inactive accounts to go about. What I proposed will completely change that in a manner that there will be enough DMU to go around but it won't be such a sudden spike of DMU, in relation the inactives will have enough DMU out compared to the actives to be worth farming. It's been done on Quantum and it has worked very well, one of rather few things that have worked great for so long.
I still don't get what is the point of having 20b planets untrained? They can just as easily be trained into income planets. If you have no defence and don't login for a couple of days then what's the difference between being attacked 10 times or 20 times? You do not lose anything you would otherwise have had anyway, right?

The point is that mid-sized players won't be better farms compared to inactive players than now. If you had read the suggestion about a set percentage of untrained planets being automatically trained into into income planets, each day, then you know why.

The whole point of suggestion is also that the amount of planets directly affects how much you can raid. Hence the bigger you get, less you can raid. So I don't see how they could get 20b planets so easily.

People who'd farm a few quad and go away for weeks - well they couldn't do that anymore. They'd get raided. Besides I already said the planets raided/AT rate does need to go significantly down from what it was exactly to prevent the huge army sizes built in minutes but that it still takes weeks, months to achieve it. So I don't see why would anyone drop their army sizes so significantly to be able to raid? It won't be exactly as profitable as before when that was the case.

Then again, you're welcome to suggest the restrictions you think are suitable for raiding. I don't think this is the last step before raiding being either implemented or not implemented any time in the future, but it's also to get suggestions as to what would work the best if it is going to be implemented.

Anyway, do you not think the newer accounts should be able to compete? In a game such as this it's impossible for them to compete with the oldest accounts. Sure they'd have to put a lot of work in being able to compete, but they have to be given an option to put in the work required that would close down the gap.

Raiding should not be made so it's possible to raid 5b units a day. There should be some sort of a limit. Perhaps like 600 mil units per day (average for raiding 1 day's planets limit would be, say 1k or 1,5k ATs), the limit going down relative to the rise of your planets count? That would mean it'd take 10 days of raiding to get 6b army size, and that's if the limit on ATs was 10k ATs, but seeing how it's 4k ATs (I'm not sure exactly how many ATs one gets per turn), but the number of days would easily rise to like 20, 30 days to raid 6b planets - that'd mean around 6 months of raiding even if the amount of planets one is allowed to raid per day and the percentage they get from raiding wouldn't change as their army increases. So to raid units it'd take a lot more time.

~N

[Mathlord]

Actually that brings up a valid point...feeder accounts that are set up to make 1-2 bil planets a day. An alliance could have a few people sacrifice their accounts and stay below plague and be raided over and over again every two days or so to boost everyone else, in turns, in their alliance. Alternatively, you could just have a market system of trading planets back and forth that becomes part of ascended because of this. Hell if this happens, I might change my focus and just open an ascended planet shop. I'll sell you all planets for main naq...

@ SoL, last time I logged in was today. My humblest apologies for not noticing the lack of an initiate revolution button. Thanks for the condescension.

[Neimenljivi]

Mathlord - I did suggest a limit on who you can farm based on your planets count, not the only 1/5th limiter, but for instance a 20b planets sized account could only raid those between 18 and 22b planets size. So someone like this couldn't really make a big impact.

~N

[Sol]

@ SoL, last time I logged in was today. My humblest apologies for not noticing the lack of an initiate revolution button. Thanks for the condescension.

That's ok , it was removed an eternity ago though.

[SSG EnterTheLion]

If you bring back raiding, remove initiate revolution.

I was actually about to suggest the same thing!

[wardyward]

I think raiding should be brought back with some limitations,

My reasons for wanting this is because I have put many years of work into my ascended account, I have been massed so much since 6 weeks ago when I came back from being inactive, ive gone from top 50 planet count to just under 5 billion planets, there is no way I will ever catch up to where I was no matter how much I farm DMU on ascended.

Iniate revolution shouldn't be brought back as that will be abused by alliances targeting one player at a time, like they used to back in the day.

You could set a raid cap, so eventually you cant go over a set amount, say 25 - 50 bill planets. Also make it harder the bigger you get regardless of whatever amount of planets someone has out.
I.E if someone finds a 20 bill raid target doesn't mean they can raid em all, have there own size factor into this when raiding.
so they can only take say:
2 mill per 15AT if at 5 bill size
1 mill per 15AT if at 10 bill size
500k per 15AT if at 20 bill size

By doing this you could catch up, but it would take alot of time just not years to do it.

[IceBreaker]

Mathlord - I did suggest a limit on who you can farm based on your planets count, not the only 1/5th limiter, but for instance a 20b planets sized account could only raid those between 18 and 22b planets size. So someone like this couldn't really make a big impact.

~N

Totaly agree to this ... only problem is that their are many in-active accounts on ascendet mostly likely most of them and planets will auto grow to big nummber and bigger players will let it grow to a point worth taking ... only advantage will have those who did not build ascendet account from begining ... no one can hit or destroy them ...

[wardyward]

so they can only take say:
2 mill per 15AT if at 5 bill size
1 mill per 15AT if at 10 bill size
500k per 15AT if at 20 bill size

Rough maths based on blowing through 4k turns

2 mill per 15AT if at 5 bill size / gain 532 mill planets per 4k turns used
1 mill per 15AT if at 10 bill size / gain 266 mill planets per 4k turns used
500k per 15AT if at 20 bill size / gain 133 mill planets per 4k turns used

This would allow for growth but not to fast to undermine the hard work of the players who have great accounts, also by having a limit like this, you would have to choose how to grow, do I go for levels or do I go for size.

[Lore]

Why do people dump all units in strike to farm a few quads from the bigger accounts? Because there is not enough DMU on inactive accounts to go about. What I proposed will completely change that in a manner that there will be enough DMU to go around but it won't be such a sudden spike of DMU, in relation the inactives will have enough DMU out compared to the actives to be worth farming. It's been done on Quantum and it has worked very well, one of rather few things that have worked great for so long.
This has nothing to do with the topic of bringing back raiding, and I am not addressing this issue. I am not for nor against seeding accounts but I do see the benifit of doing it in many cases.
I still don't get what is the point of having 20b planets untrained? They can just as easily be trained into income planets.
Point is if you build stats they get removed, planet count drops. If you build income you get farmed removing defense and dropping planet count. If you leave them untrained, you can carry on without getting farmed and without losing planet count. I have seen No One who makes more from their own income then from farming.
If you have no defence and don't login for a couple of days then what's the difference between being attacked 10 times or 20 times? You do not lose anything you would otherwise have had anyway, right?
under those conditions I agree you are common. You are not looking at it from every aspect. What about the guy with a mid grade account, who logs in daily. He is in an active alliance that wars alot. Any military stats he builds are removed daily, now you want to force him to train income units so his enemies can make a better farm of him taking away his option to keep untrained until needed. See you are not looking at this from all sides.

The point is that mid-sized players won't be better farms compared to inactive players than now.
Ok explain to me how forcing me to train my 10 to 15 bill planets to income planets therefore massively jumping my income is NOT going to make me a better farm? I am a bit confused by this point. Are you saying since all the inactives are forced to do the same that we are all equal? I so NO we are not. If 100 accounts size 5 bill planets are all trained to income, and my 10 to 15 bill planet count is trained to income I WILL be the better farm and I WILL be attacked more. I do not think you can honestly argue that point. You even agree it is what you do.
If you had read the suggestion about a set percentage of untrained planets being automatically trained into into income planets, each day, then you know why.
Has nothing to do with this topic about raiding and I am not addressing that issue here.

The whole point of suggestion is also that the amount of planets directly affects how much you can raid. Hence the bigger you get, less you can raid. So I don't see how they could get 20b planets so easily.
Ok why do you keep saying "So easily"? Why are you the only one saying it? My point is NOT that they can raid 20 bill planets "so easily". My point is they can raid 20 bill planets PERIOD. Now Sol said the amount raided would be tied to stat increases and power up levels such as CER, not total size. You are saying total size which is totally different. You stop all raiding at say 5 to 10 bill total planets and I am fine with that, but you still refuse to address the issues with that system as well. one being handing sniper accounts the keys to the castle. By your own admission its the only way to play, build a massive strike and burn it. This system fits you and your play style perfectly while taking away the only defense against it. Sorry if I have a problem with that and voice my opinion as I do not think its the correct way to fix a problem, and yes I fully admit there is a problem. Secondly you again have not responded to the problem of those accounts intentionally left small, low CER or what ever other stat they need to keep low to keep raiding % high. Then these accounts are used to keep players raided down after others mass them over and over. 1, 1.5, and 2 bill CER accounts would suffer greatly from this if a big enough group choose to make an example from a lone wolf or smaller group.

People who'd farm a few quad and go away for weeks - well they couldn't do that anymore. They'd get raided. Besides I already said the planets raided/AT rate does need to go significantly down from what it was exactly to prevent the huge army sizes built in minutes but that it still takes weeks, months to achieve it. So I don't see why would anyone drop their army sizes so significantly to be able to raid? It won't be exactly as profitable as before when that was the case.
I agree its not going to be as easy nor as profitable. What you are missing is how it will be exploited by those who do not care about easy or profitable, but how they can use the system to screw someone else. As pointed out above.

Then again, you're welcome to suggest the restrictions you think are suitable for raiding. I don't think this is the last step before raiding being either implemented or not implemented any time in the future, but it's also to get suggestions as to what would work the best if it is going to be implemented.
I do not understand why all accounts 1 to 3 bill in size are not open to all noobies to hit. Remove the 1/5 and 5 times rules until you hit 3 bill in size. This gives them income to build their CER. IF raiding is allowed, do 1 of 2 things. Add a new class of "idle" units. Untrained can be trained into idles. Untrained can then be raided. This protects active accounts who do not want to become a daily farm and source of income for their enemies. Then Hard capp raiding by time such as 90 days from creation, or by total population, such as 9 bill planets. that is 3 times the growth cap, and allows you to hit up to 27 bill planet accounts so thats 99% of the accounts in the game. You get massed back down to under 9 bill to bad. You could also add a total raided limit. Any account can raid a total of 12 bill planets in its lifetime before raiding is forever removed from it.

Anyway, do you not think the newer accounts should be able to compete? In a game such as this it's impossible for them to compete with the oldest accounts. Sure they'd have to put a lot of work in being able to compete, but they have to be given an option to put in the work required that would close down the gap.
It is far easier to compete here then on main. Opening up the minimum size restriction for farming to 3 bill planets would give them a massive boost. I agree that some help needs to be given, but not this, and not to those well versed in ascended who can and will exploit the system so they can negate the years of actually playing ascended others did when ascended sucked.

Raiding should not be made so it's possible to raid 5b units a day. There should be some sort of a limit. Perhaps like 600 mil units per day (average for raiding 1 day's planets limit would be, say 1k or 1,5k ATs), the limit going down relative to the rise of your planets count? That would mean it'd take 10 days of raiding to get 6b army size, and that's if the limit on ATs was 10k ATs, but seeing how it's 4k ATs (I'm not sure exactly how many ATs one gets per turn), but the number of days would easily rise to like 20, 30 days to raid 6b planets - that'd mean around 6 months of raiding even if the amount of planets one is allowed to raid per day and the percentage they get from raiding wouldn't change as their army increases. So to raid units it'd take a lot more time.
And you feel 6 bill planets a month is fair/good for the game? Since a new player can reach the 3 bill capp in the first 30 days you are saying you want noobies to be 9 bill planets strong in their first 30 days of play? You do not think that a bit to fast? I agree you need limits, but your not giving me what limits you want to impose, and your not tlling me how to defend from it. Again I agree there is a problem, I just do not feel this is the solution.
~N

You are a good debater and I enjoy these conversation. I think they are productive.

[GeneralChaos]

It was removed for a reason, its easy to catch up in ascended, there are so many inactive accounts on that server that make great farms, newly ascended players can already catch up and an unbelievable rate, least make them work for something.

Its not broken, dont try and fix it.

[Neimenljivi]

Lore - yes in absolute sense you would produce more income, but what you fail to see is that you already produce more income. So you've got 15b untrained planets compared to 5b untrained planets a lot of inactives have - you have 3x bigger income. If all untrained planets are trained into income planets you'll still have only 3x bigger income than them, but since there's a lot more of those accounts than of your accounts, you'll still be farmed just as often as now, except the difference is that you'll be farmed for 3x bigger amounts of DMU.
So from warring perspective or any other - you won't be a better farm for it because all other farms will increase as well because their units will get trained as income planets. This is my idea, Sol has taken some bits out of it to mention here, but I am talking about the whole picture. I think the proposal is still in "make some good suggestions" phase so I am trying to show how my suggestion would work.

Again about the planets that could be raided - I am talking about what my idea was, I agree it can't be linked only to CER and I say it must also be linked to total planet count.

I fail to see how it would take away the only defense against building a huge strike. I think I did explain that the only reason why this tactic is the only chance of catching up is that the inactives don't grow proportionally to other accounts which is why the DMU they have out is less and less in comparison to a lot bigger accounts. Again in my proposal inactives would also grow proportionally to other accounts so their income will be big enough that there will be no need for anyone to go into all this trouble as there will be enough DMU to go around.

I don't see how it's easier to compete here than on main because here in order to compete you have had to be active big time for at least 3 years. Sure it shouldn't be like main where one can buy their way to the top in a matter of seconds, but c'mon - 3 years?

I was giving an example of what could be the limit. Anyway don't you think 6 months to catch up (and that's not by accounting that the raiding limit and % would change based on total planet's count which is, again, my suggestion) is much better to increase activity and interest in game than 3 years? Yes it might be a bit too much for a brand new account, but then again there could be a way, possibly, so that the new account could not raid that much in first 30 days so they learn how to play first.

GC - it was removed because it was way to strong, not because it's easy to catch up. It's very hard to catch up, it takes a huge amount of time both to farm and the time one has to wait, without being massed at all, to get the needed planets. Furthermore due to an increase in activity on ascended as Sol has made some wonderful updates that spike things up, the DMU inactives have is decreasing so they're worse and worse farms.

Anyway, I have suggested a way to reduce the gap which is probably to big for everyone bar the biggest accounts, but seems like people are not even reading my suggestions carefully and only interested in keeping the newer accounts so far adrift as to not pose a threat to them and not giving the new players any real chance to catch up. I'm done trying.

~N