Ok, I have always understood anti covert as being 0 losses if you attack and they have zero defence, and a crapload if you attack and they do have a defence, of any nature, Regardless of the strength of this defence. Can someone please explain this to me?
As with all battles, this one has been recorded for the official history of your realm. You, of course, are the first to know the results as they are reported directly to you first. This is the official report of the battle:
The army of Player stormed the realm of Gordash!
Player sent:
998,867 Anti-Intelligence Drone and 386,423 Super Questers and 8 Questers
Careful and thourough observation records that the troops were armed as follows:
386,423 Super Questers have Equipped Military Fleet
8 Questers have Equipped Military Fleet
Opposite this, stood the forces of Gordash
Gordash resisted the aggressors with:
18,290 Super Repulsors and 986 Repulsors
Careful and thourough observation records that the army carried the following arsenal:
1 Super Repulsors have Self Aware Ni-Planets
18289 Super Repulsors came unarmed!
986 Repulsors came unarmed!
In a fury, the two opposing forces clash!
Player, personally commanding Big Ship, their MotherShip, initiates the battle.
Gordash was was commanding Imperium MS, thier MotherShip.
Big Ship hovers above the battle, with all available fleets launching!
Imperium MS, and its fleets, meets it head on!
Big Ship uses its Pod Volley to inflict 2,986,990,000 damage, destroying 0 Matter-Phasic Shields on Imperium MS!
Blowing through the extended shield defenses, it also destroyed 0 Nano Volley, and totally destroyed 0 fleets!
Player's Big Ship adds 2,862,470,000 additional attack onto their ground troops!
Imperium MS uses its Nano Volley to inflict 37,810,000 damage, destroying 0 Energy Shields on Deathship of Love (damaged)!
The Mothership has exhausted all of its offensive power.
The forces of Player rush in full force, and inflict 134,122,667,263 damage on Gordash's forces!
Judging from the troop and army makeup, 851,251,500 of that damage came from support planets.
It was confirmed that 404 of Gordash's forces fell at the hands of Player's assult.
The forces of Gordash fought back with all they could, and managed to inflict 422,354 damage on Player's forces!
Judging from the troop and army makeup, 168,941 of that damage came from support planets.
They managed to eradicate 0 of Player's troops.
The forces of Player's Anti-Intelligence Drone break off from main attack force, and seek out Gordash's Covert Manipulators!
123 Anti-Intelligence Drone are taken down by the defending army while attempting to disengage from the main battle!
The remaining Anti-Intelligence Drone engage the covert networks of the realm.
The Anti-Intelligence Drone outspied, outintelled, outwitted and overall overpowered the defending Covert Manipulators at their own game!
With 134,333,105,354 power remaining, they manage to eliminate 26277 of Gordash's Covert Manipulators!
The damage done by the Anti-Intelligence Drone was directly influenced by their covert killing capacity, and the covert capacity of the defending Covert Manipulators
The damage to the Anti-Intelligence Drone was directly influenced by the defending military power, and the strength of the Anti-Intelligence Drone
Putting down the chronicled battle report, you cross reference and call for the corrosponding military armory reports to see the state of your weapons after such a battle...
Your Self Aware Ni-Planets went from strength 5,147 to 5,115 (now 5115/5750 and 11 percent damaged)
The forces of Player annihilated those of Gordash
The forces of Gordash flee from the battlefield! One could see glory on the face of the victors, and spite on the defeated!
Considering what was available at the time in the realm of Gordash, it is recorded that
a total of 0 Naquadah was taken from the realm of Gordash
This appears to be different to how the anti system used to work, I may be wrong, but I'm 95% sure I'm not, if so why has their been a change to the fundamental war gameplay without anyone being notified? I apologise if I'm wrong, but I can't find this update anywhere.
Has there been a rule change without notification?
-
Lord_Zeus
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:28 am
- ID: 0
- Location: Where the world is better...
Has there been a rule change without notification?
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Stickin it to the man!
Stickin it to the man!
-
Atticus
- Forum Newbie
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:11 am
- ID: 0
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
His defence wasn't 0, as your report indicates one of his supers was equipped with a defence weapon, thus your anti's died.
Dear Pirate King, We love your Purple Pants
-
Lord_Zeus
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:28 am
- ID: 0
- Location: Where the world is better...
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
He was attacking, he lost about 150 men, normally you would lose sending a mil many many more.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Stickin it to the man!
Stickin it to the man!
-
Atticus
- Forum Newbie
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 2:11 am
- ID: 0
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
hmm my apologies, I didn't read properly. Maybe the anti-loss percentage has been reconfigured to reflect (more realistically) the defensive potential of the target. To be honest I reckon your defence super did rather well and should maybe even given a medal, he took down 127 of them
, your surviving spies however might need a lesson on how to hide better 
Dear Pirate King, We love your Purple Pants
-
Lord_Zeus
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:28 am
- ID: 0
- Location: Where the world is better...
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
I know... I supsect that its been reconfigured as well, however I think that things such as this should be posted... little gameplay changes have a huge effect on strategy.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Stickin it to the man!
Stickin it to the man!
- Legendary Apophis
- Forum History
- Posts: 13681
- Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:54 pm
- Alliance: Generations
- Race: System Lord
- ID: 7889
- Alternate name(s): Apophis the Great
- Location: Ha'TaK
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
Nah it's normal I remember when I killed spies or got my spies killed, that if my def was small, very little lossses would happen, BUT if the guy had small strike, I dont think losses would be minimal for him. I believe more difference between strike/def in percents there is, less losses there are, apart of 0 def people that kill no assassins.

Spoiler
Incarnate - LG - LG1 - LG2 - LG3 - LG4 - AG - EAG ~ AGoL - Completed
Spoiler
<Dmonix> Damnit Jim how come every conversation with you always ends up discussing something deep and meaningful?
<Dmonix> We always end up discussing male/female differences or politics or football
<Dmonix> All the really important issues in life
<Dmonix> We always end up discussing male/female differences or politics or football
<Dmonix> All the really important issues in life
-
Lord_Zeus
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2005 3:28 am
- ID: 0
- Location: Where the world is better...
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
That would make a little sense... most acers have low strikes so the damages would be small.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Stickin it to the man!
Stickin it to the man!
- Bazsy
- The Elder Admin
- Posts: 3131
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:18 am
- Alliance: -
- Race: -
- ID: 0
- Location: Stockholm, Sweden
-
Honours and Awards
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
Its okay
The 5% AC loss when loosing is only the maximum.
You can loose less when you have lots of AC and the defender has only a small def. I also used that as a tactic before:)
The 5% AC loss when loosing is only the maximum.
You can loose less when you have lots of AC and the defender has only a small def. I also used that as a tactic before:)

-
RepliJake
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 2505
- Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 3:52 pm
- Alliance: JURY IS OUT MISTRAIL
- ID: 5242
- Location: Combing the verse's for potential Omega victims
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
LOL
A "rule" reconfigured for Omega no less hahaha
A "rule" reconfigured for Omega no less hahaha
WeaponX wrote:i quit the game, good luck trying to extort resources out of me you jackasses


REK wrote:I hate **Filtered**GunZ wrote:Eat me
- Anarchy_
- Forum Intermediate
- Posts: 789
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:41 pm
- Alliance: Δ Allegiance
- Race: NanoTiMaster
- ID: 52622
- Location: Australia
Re: Has there been a rule change without notification?
as far as i kno, its been like this for a while.
u lose up to a max of 3% (i think its 3%, mite b 5%) when you attack. the higher the defence the more AC units you will lose.
and my reasoning behind ACers having small strikes is to minimise the repair costs. i mean, would you AC when you had to pay 500mill-1bill each time u hit with 15 turns when you could pay next to nothing and get the same results?
u lose up to a max of 3% (i think its 3%, mite b 5%) when you attack. the higher the defence the more AC units you will lose.
and my reasoning behind ACers having small strikes is to minimise the repair costs. i mean, would you AC when you had to pay 500mill-1bill each time u hit with 15 turns when you could pay next to nothing and get the same results?



