ATTACK/DEFENSE MODIFICATIONS

What do you want to see in the game? what can be improved? any suggestions welcome here...
User avatar
jedi~tank
Forum Zombie
Posts: 9936
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 12:43 pm
ID: 0
Location: Creepin in the back door

Re: Attacking, defense with sab

Sarevok wrote:
Jedi~Tank wrote:
Sarevok wrote:Another alternative would be, as suggested before, attackers help defend.

So those without a defence, their attackers help out.

Perhaps, based off some percentage, say 15%, your attack troops step in to meet this to defend. For example, you have a 20T strike, and 0 defence. As a result 15% of your attack power helps defend. So 3T of your attack units would be defend (1.5T attackers if say you had 1.5T defence already) and that would be your effective defence, and as a result, those units could be killed when attacking the person with 0 defence, but 20T attack.


Elaborate just a little more please.
:-k Let me try.
It essentially means, if you have a large attack, you need 15% of that power in defence. If you don't have that, then your attack units help your defenders defend (Whether the power of the attacks should be reduced would need to be considered).
So, if you have a 10T strike, then your account MUST have a 1.5T defence. If you only build 1T yourself, then 500b power worth of attack units will help to defend your realm. These can be killed similar to defence units, and weapons damaged the same way.

Problem I'm now seeing, is that whoever strikes first, sorta wins. You can mass their defence, and then with no defence, you can mass their attack basically. Perhaps a timer would need to be used. 16 hours of a defence being under 15%, then attacks start defending. Allows people to rebuild and not loose their units, also allows large strikes with no defence to be brought down.


[BoT] Jason wrote:Make it a supers ratio. So that a cov 41 can't just screw a few people massing their alliance


What do we think about this one?
Image

Image

Image

"What I want to see is a tight knit group not a collection of people pulling in different directions"
Deni
Sarevok
Forum Addict
Posts: 4042
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 7:42 pm
Race: NanoTiMaster
ID: 0

Re: ATTACK/DEFENSE MODIFICATIONS

Supers would work a little better yes. So the units can't be untrained, and the weapons sell at such a poor ratio now.
viewtopic.php?f=13&t=162732
Suggestions, Comments please :)
R8 wrote:TEAM WORK WILL BEAT $$ ANYDAY OF THE WEEK
angel wrote:Except the payday [-X
12agnar0k wrote:Also it's still not a war game, you have att/def weps yes, but you also have uu and UP, does this mean its a sex game, oh no, XRATEDSGW, THIS GAME IS PORN!
Ban Admin
<+CABAL> so adminHere, ever thought about playing SGW? :b
<~adminHere> cabal - i do :)
<+CABAL> :o
<+Sarevok> Cabal, look up Jtest ;)
<~adminHere> no -not jtest
<~adminHere> another :) i am a multi ;)
<+Sarevok> :O
* +CABAL screens
<+CABAL> :b
* +Sarevok Ban's Admin
borg
Forum Irregular
Posts: 489
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 12:16 pm

Re: ATTACK/DEFENSE MODIFICATIONS

I have not studied the game in detail - but it does seem to me that some modification of the relationship between attack and defence is needed - i have no problem with the concept that a first strike should be sucessful but also present an opportunity for the counter attack. You should not be able to load all your resources into attack without having much of a defence - which means the counter attack has little effect - with farming being profitable atm its easy to replace lost weapons so even if your weapons are sabbed away your attackers remain - in my view - too safe from the counter attack - i like the suggestion that a % have to rebadge as defenders once a def is zeroised but there needs to be some limiting factor to avoid the whole of the attackers being sucked into being defenders.

does this make sense ?
Post Reply

Return to “Game Suggestions”