An option to prevent attacking for zero naquadah

[Groc]

I would like to see an option to prevent inadvertantly attacking someone with zero naquadah. A simple check box like on trades. Click to set it and it remembers your setting. I have in my short time in the game attacked a number of targets seconds after someone else had done the same. This just seems to add insult to injury.

That is to say person A attacks target and acquires all of the precious naquadah. Person B attacks target with the same plan but ends up simply doing damage to the target for no good reason. The target has now had all of their naquadah stolen and their defences damaged twice. Perhaps the increase in damages to the defender is a useful part of the game as a method of teaching people to not leave naquadah in the open, or maybe coding that kind of a check would be a bad idea/difficult/strain on the server.

I just don't see a good reason to do damage to a target that has just had their naquadah stolen. Now if doing damage is the sole purpose of the attack we could simply click the check box and attack till our fingers bleed or we run out of attack turns. Not that anyone would ever do something like that. (mild sarcasm)

A second option for preventing inadvertant damage to a target would be to ask for a confirmation on the first attack on a target with zero naquadah but not request confirmation on any additional attacks to that target for a day or so.

Please let me know of the flaws in my logic here. I can't think of a real downside, but I have not experienced as much of this game as others have. I guess I could send a message saying sorry, but that would just get tiresome.

[Teal'auc of the Void]

That would prevent all massings. It is not going to happen.



Teal'auc

[Lord Balor]

I'm sure the person you attacked really appreciates that. lol

I think it's a bit funny when it happens.

[Groc]

That would prevent all massings.



Teal'auc

That is the purpose of the check box or the confirmation of your intention to attack. Massings could still occur. You would need to confirm one time that was your intention and unload your attack turns.

[Zeratul]

this would be useful for those not massing...

perhaps the question wether to attack for zero naq should come on only the first two attacks, that would not stop (nor slow) the massings, as massers have just begun on the first two attacks...

[Nigatsu_Aka]

If that person who is being farmed by 2 other persons at the same time and he has Def Con other than "none", he can`t be attacked by both of them at the same time, because it will apear the message "other military is in that realm" or something like that and you can`t attack, so what you suggest is already implemented.

[Fenrir Oorgata]

about the checkbox idea and the massings


make it so that if you are attacking for naq, you check a box, which enables the protection ni the event taht someone else attacks half a second before...

as for massing, you just wouldn't check it, allowing you to mass, undisturbed

[Wolf359]

Or alternatively - why not just pay more attention to what you are doing?

And, if someone attacks half a second before you do and gets all the naq - unlucky, these things happen!

Seriously do you really need to be spoonfed? What is the next suggestion? How about everybody is provided with their own Personal Assistant to type on the keyboard and move the mouse for them?

Honestly!

[Fenrir Oorgata]

:roll:

Or alternatively - why not just pay more attention to what you are doing?

And, if someone attacks half a second before you do and gets all the naq - unlucky, these things happen!

Seriously do you really need to be spoonfed? What is the next suggestion? How about everybody is provided with their own Personal Assistant to type on the keyboard and move the mouse for them?

Honestly!

now now now wolf... it was a reasonable request... its meant to help the players of the game but its a minute change... its not as drastic as you make it sound... i think its a fair and resonable idea...

[Chris M]

I would like to see an option to prevent inadvertantly attacking someone with zero naquadah. A simple check box like on trades. Click to set it and it remembers your setting. I have in my short time in the game attacked a number of targets seconds after someone else had done the same. This just seems to add insult to injury.

That is to say person A attacks target and acquires all of the precious naquadah. Person B attacks target with the same plan but ends up simply doing damage to the target for no good reason. The target has now had all of their naquadah stolen and their defences damaged twice. Perhaps the increase in damages to the defender is a useful part of the game as a method of teaching people to not leave naquadah in the open, or maybe coding that kind of a check would be a bad idea/difficult/strain on the server.

I just don't see a good reason to do damage to a target that has just had their naquadah stolen. Now if doing damage is the sole purpose of the attack we could simply click the check box and attack till our fingers bleed or we run out of attack turns. Not that anyone would ever do something like that. (mild sarcasm)

A second option for preventing inadvertant damage to a target would be to ask for a confirmation on the first attack on a target with zero naquadah but not request confirmation on any additional attacks to that target for a day or so.

Please let me know of the flaws in my logic here. I can't think of a real downside, but I have not experienced as much of this game as others have. I guess I could send a message saying sorry, but that would just get tiresome.

ive been caught out by this before... but i dont like this idea. whats the point. boo hoo you waste 15 turns... be quicker next time.
and the whole, its not fair on the person being hit line... dont leave that much out. or make a defence that can defend ur income.

[Angelus Errare]

i think he's trying to find a way around the asgard's unique technology. if this was implemented, the asgard's technology would be useless (for me, that technology was about making that person waste the 15 turns).

[Fenrir Oorgata]

I would like to see an option to prevent inadvertantly attacking someone with zero naquadah. A simple check box like on trades. Click to set it and it remembers your setting. I have in my short time in the game attacked a number of targets seconds after someone else had done the same. This just seems to add insult to injury.

That is to say person A attacks target and acquires all of the precious naquadah. Person B attacks target with the same plan but ends up simply doing damage to the target for no good reason. The target has now had all of their naquadah stolen and their defences damaged twice. Perhaps the increase in damages to the defender is a useful part of the game as a method of teaching people to not leave naquadah in the open, or maybe coding that kind of a check would be a bad idea/difficult/strain on the server.

I just don't see a good reason to do damage to a target that has just had their naquadah stolen. Now if doing damage is the sole purpose of the attack we could simply click the check box and attack till our fingers bleed or we run out of attack turns. Not that anyone would ever do something like that. (mild sarcasm)

A second option for preventing inadvertant damage to a target would be to ask for a confirmation on the first attack on a target with zero naquadah but not request confirmation on any additional attacks to that target for a day or so.

Please let me know of the flaws in my logic here. I can't think of a real downside, but I have not experienced as much of this game as others have. I guess I could send a message saying sorry, but that would just get tiresome.

ive been caught out by this before... but i dont like this idea. whats the point. boo hoo you waste 15 turns... be quicker next time.
and the whole, its not fair on the person being hit line... dont leave that much out. or make a defence that can defend ur income.

haha i dont know what you are talking about... I have a defense that holds my income quite nicely... but i get attacked for it anyways... its NEVER profitable... and the people end up spending about 3 bil and 8k uu more than they recieved in the attack... but hell... if they can bust my defense... they will go for it... dont try the pity remark... you know thats a load of bull


from the other person above...
as for the asgard defense bit... how would this negate that at all? it only causes the attack not to happen if the person has the naq stolen a second before... once again... poor logic

[Rukia]

That would prevent all massings. It is not going to happen.



Teal'auc

i agree ^_^

[Groc]

As I progress, read, and learn more I begin to see that someone with enough naquadah out to be a target can probably handle the repair costs. I do not like the idea of hitting someone when they are down, but that seems to be a cost of war if you will. I do apoligize for submitting a suggestion with little to no merit.

:roll:

Seriously do you really need to be spoonfed? What is the next suggestion? How about everybody is provided with their own Personal Assistant to type on the keyboard and move the mouse for them?

Honestly!

I admith this was not the kind of response I expected. Good idea or bad, either way given my request to tell me the flaw, I expected to have the flaw(s) pointed out and I would then be on my merry way. I did not anticipate insinuation that I am in some way handicapped by a forum moderator. I would respond in kind with witty banter but rule 7 precludes showing disrespect. Therefore, rather than subject my physical or mental prowess to further ridicule and no way to defend myself I would like to rescind the idea. Only this one though, I am sure I will have various bad ideas that will no doubt provide fodder for further speculation about my faculties.

I will, however, mention that despite numerous other areas that need work I am fully capable of feeding myself with most internationally recognized eating apparatus, including the oft used spoon. If the comment about being spoon-fed was an offer wolf, I will need to see a recent photo. I will not reimburse travel expenses though. Of course, this is all based on the supposition that you are female. If male, you would be ineligible.

[Wolf359]

As I progress, read, and learn more I begin to see that someone with enough naquadah out to be a target can probably handle the repair costs. I do not like the idea of hitting someone when they are down, but that seems to be a cost of war if you will. I do apoligize for submitting a suggestion with little to no merit.

:roll:

Seriously do you really need to be spoonfed? What is the next suggestion? How about everybody is provided with their own Personal Assistant to type on the keyboard and move the mouse for them?

Honestly!

I admith this was not the kind of response I expected. Good idea or bad, either way given my request to tell me the flaw, I expected to have the flaw(s) pointed out and I would then be on my merry way. I did not anticipate insinuation that I am in some way handicapped by a forum moderator. I would respond in kind with witty banter but rule 7 precludes showing disrespect. Therefore, rather than subject my physical or mental prowess to further ridicule and no way to defend myself I would like to rescind the idea. Only this one though, I am sure I will have various bad ideas that will no doubt provide fodder for further speculation about my faculties.

I will, however, mention that despite numerous other areas that need work I am fully capable of feeding myself with most internationally recognized eating apparatus, including the oft used spoon. If the comment about being spoon-fed was an offer wolf, I will need to see a recent photo. I will not reimburse travel expenses though. Of course, this is all based on the supposition that you are female. If male, you would be ineligible.

You could have responded how you wished - I was speaking as a player, not a mod.

(This is what mod speak looks like)

The overarching point being - it's a war game - whether you leave naq out, or attack for naq, you are effectively taking a risk - the idea would have eliminated an element of risk. I didn't elaborate on the flaw previously as I thought it was fairly self-evident.