Tetrismonkey wrote:TBH I love the income planets. Without that added income it would be near impossible for most of us who can only log on once or twice a day for a quick farming run, to somewhat play catch up. Even with a combined 600bil income per turn from two accounts, covert 38-39 will take 6 weeks to acheive. 40 would take 12 or so. Thats just one side, covert. It would take well over a year from just INCOME to get decent levels. Thats if you keep all the income AND planets.
TBH the more restrictions you place on money spenders, the more they will spend in other areas, thus limiting what normal players can achieve. No matter what the game staff does, it will never be enough to keep ahead of people that spend thousands on this game do.
With that said, keep attack/defense modifiers, IE volleys, planets, double strike limited and tied to RAW Strike and defense. Doing so forces even those with massive planets and MSs, to use more supers. Sure they will always have far better ratios, but it will bring ridicules rations of 20:1 down to 10:1 or 5:1.
There should not be any reason a 60tril defense of 150mil supers, gets torn apart by a 5tril RAW strike of 5mil supers. With these kinds of situations it causes players like myself and many others so just say **Filtered** it once your massed. Whats the point of rebuilding a defense or for that matter fighting back if you will be severely penalized for doing so.
I think many people feel the same way Tets and agree 100% on the problem but not necessarily the solution to solve it. It is very refreshing to see Admin generate a response to this growing complaint. I just hope that everyone's well being is considered that means all the weakling casuals to the fierce and mighty OCD crowd.
I feel like these proposals spade and neuter everyone without regard for necessity. The build itself is taking the punishment here regardless of whether it is giving you 1:1 kill ratio or 3:1 or 20:1. Not everyone bought 10q-30q naq from shady mysterious naq vendors. Some people worked very hard farming for months to get their little 1.25:1 opener versus small to midsize defs.
The solution that needs to manifest here from one of you nerds is the one that shrinks that kill ratio back down to awesome but not stupidly awesome while still allowing the lame juggernaut cash accounts (which caused all of this mess) to still benefit from their build against appropriately sized armies. Small to midsize armies should also benefit from their build against appropriately sized armies.
There are a few directions that thinking can run towards. None of which are perfect but maybe worth thinking more upon. Would people get seriously pissed if their many attack power/defensive power boosting gimmicks only went as high as the opponent's total power? The excess supers are treated as 'normal supers'. So no 4t power per 1m supers for the excess just 460b which is normal
This gently shrinks the fun ratio a bit when attacking targets with less power than you.
As for attacking targets with higher power yes the under-massing dilemma does need to be addressed. Borek's 8m Strikers vs 80t def example and Tets 5m vs 60t examples are disturbing.
How about a formula that first looks for you to beat the target's power with your own then treats your excess units as 'extras' that will do the actual killing upon winning the battle? This makes it so you can technically enjoy your minimal losses landing nice 'wins' on people for say naq steals/uu raid/MS mass/etc. but you won't explode your enemy's units while doing it. If you want to blow up the enemy army you still can but it will require you to send a bit extra. The math behind that is mostly effortless.
A bunch of lopsided planets and other unilateral indiscriminate nerfing is a mistake that cannot be changed back after. You can't lure people in claiming the sky is the limit and then say juuuuust kidding there's a limit. A vote for NO CHANGE is a vote for democracy!