Limiting number of fleets

[Mujo]

seeing that planet stealers with nothing to destroy annoy all of us - i was thinking, maybe it should be made that hangers could be bought up to total of 25% of the lower between capacity for weapons and shiels. for example, if one has capacity to build 1k guns and 5k shields, he could be able to buy 250 hangers at most, as lower of the two is 1k.
to back it in "physical" MS appearance - hangars take more space on the hull of the mothership then guns(or shields) do - so it takes 4 guns to cover 1 hangar, not leaving any "dead angle"

or maybe the same rule being implemented when purchasing fleets - so using the example above, one could buy up to 250 fleets total.

this would make planet stealing accounts a bit less usable, and i believe everyones had their share of annoyance by those

and maybe some other restrictions, which "normal" player wouldnt mind, and would make planetstealing "for living" much harder

[Artiglio]

... that would be hard for people who acctually play to steal planets... u would need to have a very good MS to steal some of the better defended planets... my fleets are well over 25% of my weapons/shields... hell there like 100% over... and im not a account purly for stealing planets...

[Mujo]

it was only an idea - maybe number should be better fine tuned, to say 50% of the lower - or maybe even 30-50% of the sum?

[Artiglio]

i understand the idea ... but ... i have seen planets with over 10bil defence... do u know how hard it woulf be to take those if u could only have 30-50% for fleets... its hard enoguth even when u can hace an unlimited numbere of fleets

[Timmy]

i like the idea but maybe it should be power related. Say u have a 10bil strike on ur ms and 10bil defence u can hav up 2 5bil fleet strength. just an idea.

[Artiglio]

i like the idea but maybe it should be power related. Say u have a 10bil strike on ur ms and 10bil defence u can hav up 2 5bil fleet strength. just an idea.

would that be better or worse... which are more powerful ... the weapons or the fleets?

[Timmy]

i like the idea but maybe it should be power related. Say u have a 10bil strike on ur ms and 10bil defence u can hav up 2 5bil fleet strength. just an idea.

would that be better or worse... which are more powerful ... the weapons or the fleets?

it would be better, i was referring to the pod volley and shields on the ms when i said strike and defence. the fleets and podvolley are different because they are used for different things.

[Artiglio]

it would be better, i was referring to the pod volley and shields on the ms when i said strike and defence. the fleets and podvolley are different because they are used for different things.

why not 25% of the total power of the MS shields and weapon... so 10bil MS defence and 10bil MS strike is able to make a 5bil fleet... that way its limited but not too limited...

[Timmy]

it would be better, i was referring to the pod volley and shields on the ms when i said strike and defence. the fleets and podvolley are different because they are used for different things.

why not 25% of the total power of the MS shields and weapon... so 10bil MS defence and 10bil MS strike is able to make a 5bil fleet... that way its limited but not too limited...

yea that is what i was meaning with my posts.

[gooseman the first]

tis a great idea, its all down to the fine tuning now.
i think 25% of total power sounds good tho

[BenjaminMS]

Sounds good

[Lord Thanatos]

no, i'm fine with fleets as they are now. if people want to spend all their time and money on fleets, they should be allowed to. It really isn't that different then having a massive strike and no D or Having massive defence and a bazzilion miners. We shouldn't restrict the game because of the way a few people chose to spend thier naq.

[Artiglio]

no, i'm fine with fleets as they are now. if people want to spend all their time and money on fleets, they should be allowed to. It really isn't that different then having a massive strike and no D or Having massive defence and a bazzilion miners. We shouldn't restrict the game because of the way a few people chose to spend thier naq.

most people who concentrate on there fleets concentrate on there MS aswell anyway cause just having a fleet is useless ... this would just get rid of accounts that are there purley to steal planets to sell...

i dont care if this is or isnt implemented but if it is thats how i think it would work best...

besides most things meantioned in this section never get implemented anyway...

[SG1]

seeing that planet stealers with nothing to destroy annoy all of us - i was thinking, maybe it should be made that hangers could be bought up to total of 25% of the lower between capacity for weapons and shiels. for example, if one has capacity to build 1k guns and 5k shields, he could be able to buy 250 hangers at most, as lower of the two is 1k.
to back it in "physical" MS appearance - hangars take more space on the hull of the mothership then guns(or shields) do - so it takes 4 guns to cover 1 hangar, not leaving any "dead angle"

or maybe the same rule being implemented when purchasing fleets - so using the example above, one could buy up to 250 fleets total.

this would make planet stealing accounts a bit less usable, and i believe everyones had their share of annoyance by those

and maybe some other restrictions, which "normal" player wouldnt mind, and would make planetstealing "for living" much harder

this is a bad idea it would b heaps annoying and u'd have 2 pay heaps for hangers then so i think this should b a no 2 this 1

[Acheron]

just make hangers more expensive (i.e. increasing the value it increases with per hanger you buy). it may not solve the "planet stealing" problem, but it sure will make it harder