The future of war?

[Lord_Zeus]

I think this is a good idea, the damage is limited but still there, and if you wish to keep your lifers/miners safe you still have that option of not fighting them , I think also think a percentage system should be implemented not a fixed amount. The percentages could be tweaked a little but I think they are alright as they are .

[spasticinformation]

Make how much you loose a ratio to how much total uu you make in a day. So someone that has a 1mil up can loose 5mil miners/lifers a day caped. This way you could also increase the precentage of miners killed to something like 1% per attack.

The amount of miners you can kill can also be capped to maybe 10 times your up, ie you have to put yourself into a equally dangerous position to be able to mass kill a persons lifers.

So someone with -

50kup (total):

250k lifers/miners killable a day

500k lifers/miners of other players killable a day

Numbers are of course flexable.

[The Xeno]

I like the basing in UP idea a lot.... Indeed, I like this idea alot.
SGW needs a valve down which to pour the millions of units created each day - the death of lifers would a be a good thing. As it stands, you can only hurt and account so much... and far from being a good thing, I believe that makes many accounts near-invulnerable.

The UP cap would keep players from losing everything... but it would also allow the bigger players to wear themselves down... letting the little ones catch up - and repeating the cycle.

----------------

Of course... Just basing this on UP has consquences, we would probably need to base it in both UP and army size - picking the highest percent.


I really like this. I think would be a very good thing, and needs to be implemented.
With something like this in place, the caps could be removed no problem.

Whether or not the Future-war gets implemented - this needs to be put into the game.
I know it's something that comes up all the time... but hey, Forum's not put it in yet.

[Vendetta]

lifers are great so quit complaining.

THis isn't a fair attack lets put it that way, Forget the%

instead, for every turn used 75-100 miners/lifers die.

This way its a standard attack.

Set a limit that only 10% of an army can die per day.

and that only 50% or 2 Mil. damages, meaning that when someone at 2M army size left he can't be hit anymore. or when someone loses 50% of the average gross mean over 1 month period he can't be hit anymore,( note that the arveage is always going down).

BTW this is a way to get rid of the Big guys, which are mostly in COP, however Its' a way to keep the little guys little as they can only purchance so many attack turns.

**** no, your ideas are even worse. atleast Sleips is proportional. With a set number dieing each time, a guy with 80mill miners, could kill a guy with 8mill miners, 10 times faster and use 10 times less turns. that is less naq on turns, less naq on repairs and less UU lost FOR THE BIGGER GUY WHO CAN AFFORD IT! basically your idea allows big people to kill little people for crap all cost, and little people have to save up for a week to do what a big guy can do in under a day.

[Sleipnir]

Make how much you loose a ratio to how much total uu you make in a day. So someone that has a 1mil up can loose 5mil miners/lifers a day caped. This way you could also increase the precentage of miners killed to something like 1% per attack.

I'd say no to that. Someone who has invested massively in UP but hasn't been playing that long would then stand to lose a whole lot more than someone who has a lower UP but has played a lot longer and has aqcuired a much larger army over time. UP should be like a natural defense against losing miners. Higher UP means you can replace more of the fallen troops naturally. If damage is based on army size, it will mean that having a large army requires a large UP to keep up with the losses and still grow.

The amount of miners you can kill can also be capped to maybe 10 times your up, ie you have to put yourself into a equally dangerous position to be able to mass kill a persons lifers.

Again a no. This would directly counter the threat of a smaller account retaliating against a large one. The idea was that a large one could sit on a small one, but would risk a lot more if the little guy bit back. It would promote bullying rather than discourage it.

the only change I'd make would be that nox would not have to be on for the revival of miners/lifers to occur

I wasn't really clear about that. I used the name Nox because they're the ones in the show that can bring people back to life. It wouldn't necessarily have to be linked to the Nox protection.

[spasticinformation]

Perhaps I wasnt clear, the little guy would still have to declare war agaisnt the big guy and vis versa. If your stupid enough to go 1v1 against someone thats played the game twice as long as you have then they can destroy your account in any case.

[Xanthors]

i like this idea very much

[Fear Of The Duck]

I like the general idea of the idea ?

As for miners/lifers: would it be possible to kill just miners leaving lifers intact?

[Lord Dougy]

i love this idea, and i think some ppl are missing the point that Sleipnir made...
u can only loss miners and lifers if u are at war with the other person!!!
if u dont want to risk lossing stuff, then dont get into a war with someone else and be a coward the entire game....

i think another point is that big ppl wont so easily declare war on small ppl, as they have more to loss if it turns badly

[Cole]

Miners and lifers dying?
LMAO!
HELL NO

[Fear Of The Duck]

Miners and lifers dying?
LMAO!
HELL NO

they should be dying anyway. it's a dangerous job...

[Cole]

It's not real life it's a game and in past uu died during conflict and it has been changed why loopholing updates?

[Sleipnir]

It's not real life it's a game and in past uu died during conflict and it has been changed why loopholing updates?

That's exactly why I made it optional this time. I made it very clear, as long as you don't go to war with someone, you have nothing to worry about. This will in turn reduce the number massings, be they over a single naq strike, a forum post or just for no good reason at all. And in turn, this will reduce the accelerated rate of turn inflation. Maybe even provide cheaper turns. Fewer massings means less anger and a more agreeable community. And when it really gets to a war, the casualties will keep it from getting boring. Besides, making UU immortal was one of the worst mistakes ever made.

[mclarenf1]

I can see a lot of merit in this idea, the current situation is not working and this would help to make wars more winnable. With the surrender option this would allow players not too lose all their uu but make sure that if people want to go to war then they are prepared to take big loses and not just defence and spies

[hfown]

NONONONONONONONONONONO

i got a lot of those in my "kill income maker's" suggestion, i think it went on for about 5 pages before it died out if i remember correctly it was because someone else came up with a modified version of my idea and now this?

but all i really want is a way to kill lifers or miners so i say... YES!

"only 10x a given players UP in lifers can die in 24 hours" 10k UP = 1mil lifers kill-able in 1 day??? i suppose that idea could work.....


i think this idea is good but when will an admin come and say if its possible to be put in the game? or do we have to go in the chat place and tell him ourselves? i tried to go in chat today but it dont work for my computer some error dll or whatever but nevermind that SOMEONE PLEASE TELL ADMIN!!!!!