StarGateWars Forums

Wolf359 wrote:

law7441 wrote:well I played these game for when it was only 7months old and uu was never killable, unless at the beginning it was, personally I quit if miners or uu was killable, because large alliance would have even more power than ever before and all the time people put in will be destroy with few hours or days, as for raiding and market I agree with you there. and not even update is bad, it just you don't want to work on something else, MS and anti-covert are pretty good updates.

I played since the game was 2 weeks old - and trust me - uu used to be killable!

And why does everyone persistently insist on viewing all the points separately?? A large alliance would not have even more power than before if uu was killable, because at the same time we would remove artificially produced AT - therefore any player and/or alliance would have to carefully consider how to use their AT because they will be a scarce resource - and because uu are now killable, the consequences of any player/alliance massing someone else would be more severe once retaliation comes in.

Apophis wrote:killable uu - very bad idea (teaming up on a player and boom his/her account is nothing, not to mention he could have spent cash)

well because they are seprate issues, they connect to each but still seprate and that people why people are views as seprate, maybe that true, but it still mean that alliance can destroy members if they wish and most fear that more than even being massed now, no matter if it only one member, as that member could take 1 or even 2 years to build up is army and all gone in one day or less not something I like to anyone even people I don't like.

hey jason you had a good run but with all the **Filtered** why not just shut the game down. impossible to please everyone look how many different people want different things. game had a good run but it is slowly dying. think i am wrong ask yourself how often you are online at this game compared to 1 year ago, also the huge players see it coming and are trying to sell their accounts as fast as possible. just go check out the accounts for sale section

guys solution is very simple


it was usgested over 1 year ago and u laughed it seems that only sgc_replicator and me seen a bit more far in the future


viewtopic.php?f=13&t=19178

Borek wrote:

Wolf359 wrote:

Borek wrote:i'm not making your point, there was NEVER any skill involved.

WRONG - trust me, ask all the people who played in the first few months.

If there was no skill involved, then how come smaller alliances were able to win wars against larger and (on paper) more powerful alliances? It was because they were more organised, they prepared more efficiently, they knew when to strike - and they did all this without a limitless supply of AT?

no, they just played more or were online at the right time, that has nothing at all to do with skill, just effort, as i already said. Farming naq never took skill, just like raiding never has, it's all about effort.

It's a browser game using simple maths, if you want to think common sense and some basic maths knowledge is "skill" then that's fine, but you are deluding yourself.

Wrong again - and I know because I was one of the top players. I didn't play more, as you suggest, but was better organised than, and was very good at diplomacy. I seleted my targets carefully and made sure that if I got any come back from attacking that I could either fight my way out of it or talk my way out of it. My alliance beat bigger and more powerful alliances, not because we played more, but because we were better organised and better prepared.

All the big players of the time were the same - the3rdlibra, THE SAZ, JaseB, BJammin, Lord Dougy, ELUSIVE - to name but a few.

You can think what you want - fact is you needed a strategy in the early months - all that is gone now. Like I said - what is the point in a role playing game when everyone plays the same role?

Wolf359 wrote:

Apophis wrote:That's why I mentionned gang on, because I considered other facts, if 5 people with 500ATs mass someone it's different than one person with 2500, isn't it? It affects less the people when it's collective work, so, nomatter what happens to ATs my point is right.

Sorry, I don't get what you mean. But if UU was made killable, and AT limited, then your point is wrong, because I'm not talking about the consequences of 5 people having less damage to their accounts if they mass someone - I'm talking about the consequences of retaliation. Therefore, if UU was killable and AT were limited than anybody doing any attacking (whether by themselves or as part of a group), would have to consider all the factors before actually making the decision to attack or not - i.e. could they soak up any retaliation or not - this is valid whether they attack as individuals or a group.

If there was problems of retalliation then my other "scenario" would be how it would end (biggest players training 90% lifers and stat building def/covert to death knowing that other players wouldn't dare attack them as they would loose alot of their troops)
And if your case deletes lifers, then, there would be nomore wars as retalation would be devastating so everyone would NAPing everyone and all people would sit stat building def and covert for making more naq then putting it in UP/covert levels to make more and be more invisible to others.
Insert killable uu NO MATTER WHAT IS LINKED OR NOT WITH IT, me and ALOT OF PEOPLE will QUIT FOR EVER the game, and the "sgw is dying" will be "sgw is DEAD"!

wmd9999 wrote:hey jason you had a good run but with all the **Filtered** why not just shut the game down. impossible to please everyone look how many different people want different things. game had a good run but it is slowly dying. think i am wrong ask yourself how often you are online at this game compared to 1 year ago, also the huge players see it coming and are trying to sell their accounts as fast as possible. just go check out the accounts for sale section

Even worse idea than killing the uu and reseting the game altogether lol


And Baha your idea didn't make laugh btw I believe it was quite a good idea, as there are still few very strong people unascended right now and it would be cool to keep them!

I agree with wolf here... before the market with AT's you could just mass someone to pass time or raid until you fell asleep you actually had to use those AT's to good use because you were limited. You couldnt really test defs. either because on 1AT a turn that would be 1 turn's worth and if you hit for 15 afterwards then you used up 1/3 of your days AT's so you were limited very much on the resources you could try to use

Apophis The Great wrote:

Wolf359 wrote:

Apophis wrote:That's why I mentionned gang on, because I considered other facts, if 5 people with 500ATs mass someone it's different than one person with 2500, isn't it? It affects less the people when it's collective work, so, nomatter what happens to ATs my point is right.

Sorry, I don't get what you mean. But if UU was made killable, and AT limited, then your point is wrong, because I'm not talking about the consequences of 5 people having less damage to their accounts if they mass someone - I'm talking about the consequences of retaliation. Therefore, if UU was killable and AT were limited than anybody doing any attacking (whether by themselves or as part of a group), would have to consider all the factors before actually making the decision to attack or not - i.e. could they soak up any retaliation or not - this is valid whether they attack as individuals or a group.

If there was problems of retalliation then my other "scenario" would be how it would end (biggest players training 90% lifers and stat building def/covert to death knowing that other players wouldn't dare attack them as they would loose alot of their troops)
And if your case deletes lifers, then, there would be nomore wars as retalation would be devastating so everyone would NAPing everyone and all people would sit stat building def and covert for making more naq then putting it in UP/covert levels to make more and be more invisible to others.
Insert killable uu NO MATTER WHAT IS LINKED OR NOT WITH IT, me and ALOT OF PEOPLE will QUIT FOR EVER the game, and the "sgw is dying" will be "sgw is DEAD"!

wmd9999 wrote:hey jason you had a good run but with all the **Filtered** why not just shut the game down. impossible to please everyone look how many different people want different things. game had a good run but it is slowly dying. think i am wrong ask yourself how often you are online at this game compared to 1 year ago, also the huge players see it coming and are trying to sell their accounts as fast as possible. just go check out the accounts for sale section

Even worse idea than killing the uu and reseting the game altogether lol


And Baha your idea didn't make laugh btw I believe it was quite a good idea, as there are still few very strong people unascended right now and it would be cool to keep them!

You seem to be missing the over-arching point that before UU was unkillable, and before these other updates such as raid, lifers and mass availability of AT were brought in - THERE WERE MORE WARS!!!!!! Not only that, but the wars were more meaningful.

Even after uu was made unkillable it still worked and wars were good - but it was the introduction of raid that then set us down the slippery slope. Raid in itself was okay (at the second attempt) - but then some people (again not a majority) got greedy and said they need more AT to raid. Then they complained that they couldn't generate enough naq because people raided them - and so we got the miner/lifer. Anyone else see a pattern emerging?

It is like I said - and anyone can try and counter it with as much retort as they like - but the simple fact is these updates were brought in for these people (a minority it has to be said) who could not be bothered to play the game as it was intended and wanted it EASY. Now people like it easy and are scared of having to actually play the game.

Bahamut wrote:guys solution is very simple


it was usgested over 1 year ago and u laughed it seems that only sgc_replicator and me seen a bit more far in the future


viewtopic.php?f=13&t=19178

Having just re-read that post - there was some merit in Bahamut's ideas - He even managed to convince me!!! I don't believe they were the solution as they stood - but some good ideas nonetheless!

Well worth a read if you haven't already done so!

Wolf359 wrote:

Apophis The Great wrote:

Wolf359 wrote:

Apophis wrote:That's why I mentionned gang on, because I considered other facts, if 5 people with 500ATs mass someone it's different than one person with 2500, isn't it? It affects less the people when it's collective work, so, nomatter what happens to ATs my point is right.

Sorry, I don't get what you mean. But if UU was made killable, and AT limited, then your point is wrong, because I'm not talking about the consequences of 5 people having less damage to their accounts if they mass someone - I'm talking about the consequences of retaliation. Therefore, if UU was killable and AT were limited than anybody doing any attacking (whether by themselves or as part of a group), would have to consider all the factors before actually making the decision to attack or not - i.e. could they soak up any retaliation or not - this is valid whether they attack as individuals or a group.

If there was problems of retalliation then my other "scenario" would be how it would end (biggest players training 90% lifers and stat building def/covert to death knowing that other players wouldn't dare attack them as they would loose alot of their troops)
And if your case deletes lifers, then, there would be nomore wars as retalation would be devastating so everyone would NAPing everyone and all people would sit stat building def and covert for making more naq then putting it in UP/covert levels to make more and be more invisible to others.
Insert killable uu NO MATTER WHAT IS LINKED OR NOT WITH IT, me and ALOT OF PEOPLE will QUIT FOR EVER the game, and the "sgw is dying" will be "sgw is DEAD"!

wmd9999 wrote:hey jason you had a good run but with all the **Filtered** why not just shut the game down. impossible to please everyone look how many different people want different things. game had a good run but it is slowly dying. think i am wrong ask yourself how often you are online at this game compared to 1 year ago, also the huge players see it coming and are trying to sell their accounts as fast as possible. just go check out the accounts for sale section

Even worse idea than killing the uu and reseting the game altogether lol


And Baha your idea didn't make laugh btw I believe it was quite a good idea, as there are still few very strong people unascended right now and it would be cool to keep them!

You seem to be missing the over-arching point that before UU was unkillable, and before these other updates such as raid, lifers and mass availability of AT were brought in - THERE WERE MORE WARS!!!!!! Not only that, but the wars were more meaningful.

Even after uu was made unkillable it still worked and wars were good - but it was the introduction of raid that then set us down the slippery slope. Raid in itself was okay (at the second attempt) - but then some people (again not a majority) got greedy and said they need more AT to raid. Then they complained that they couldn't generate enough naq because people raided them - and so we got the miner/lifer. Anyone else see a pattern emerging?

It is like I said - and anyone can try and counter it with as much retort as they like - but the simple fact is these updates were brought in for these people (a minority it has to be said) who could not be bothered to play the game as it was intended and wanted it EASY. Now people like it easy and are scared of having to actually play the game.

Like you said there WAS more wars, BUT, at that time, we had NOT experienced the updates that came AFTER, so, when you put same caracteristics than in beginning of the game, NOTHING tells you that game will be again the same as it was!
If it happend ONCE, it doesn't mean it can happen TWICE! It happens in football (the "we can do it again"), but doubtfully here, very doubtfully.

Sorry - I don't understand what you're trying to say there.

If you're trying to say that making changes along the lines suggested will not work in creating more strategy, wars, whatever back into the game, then I think you are wrong. Besides, ADmin has tried tweaking the updates, and bringing in modifications to improve the situation for over 18 months now - and I think it's safe to say that it hasn't worked.

Wolf359 wrote:Sorry - I don't understand what you're trying to say there.

If you're trying to say that making changes along the lines suggested will not work in creating more strategy, wars, whatever back into the game, then I think you are wrong. Besides, ADmin has tried tweaking the updates, and bringing in modifications to improve the situation for over 18 months now - and I think it's safe to say that it hasn't worked.

What I mean is, it worked in past, nothing says that if you bring back same configuration the situation and attitude of players will be same, as players experienced other style of game, and many old skool players left. So...if it worked, nothing says it will work again.

Killing UU/non lifer miners is not the solution.

If anything, it would simply discourage future wars as no one would want to lose their large army sizes. Even if wars broke out, smashed everyone to less than 20mil, a few very large 100mil + accounts would survive, band together, and literally make unmassable defenses because they will have such a huge army size with the units to do it and the income to support it.

Even if an Alliances went around killing all the high army accounts and each other, a few could probably escape unnoticed on vacation mode. Unless you manually search every Id.

TC

Wolf359 wrote:

Borek wrote:

Wolf359 wrote:

Borek wrote:i'm not making your point, there was NEVER any skill involved.

WRONG - trust me, ask all the people who played in the first few months.

If there was no skill involved, then how come smaller alliances were able to win wars against larger and (on paper) more powerful alliances? It was because they were more organised, they prepared more efficiently, they knew when to strike - and they did all this without a limitless supply of AT?

no, they just played more or were online at the right time, that has nothing at all to do with skill, just effort, as i already said. Farming naq never took skill, just like raiding never has, it's all about effort.

It's a browser game using simple maths, if you want to think common sense and some basic maths knowledge is "skill" then that's fine, but you are deluding yourself.

Wrong again - and I know because I was one of the top players. I didn't play more, as you suggest, but was better organised than, and was very good at diplomacy. I seleted my targets carefully and made sure that if I got any come back from attacking that I could either fight my way out of it or talk my way out of it. My alliance beat bigger and more powerful alliances, not because we played more, but because we were better organised and better prepared.

All the big players of the time were the same - the3rdlibra, THE SAZ, JaseB, BJammin, Lord Dougy, ELUSIVE - to name but a few.

You can think what you want - fact is you needed a strategy in the early months - all that is gone now. Like I said - what is the point in a role playing game when everyone plays the same role?

lol, for a start it's not a role playing game, we don't play a role, we just manipulate numbers in a database.

I already told you how smaller alliances beat bigger ones, basic grasp of maths, common sense and playing more often. You don't win because you have more skill, most of the time a "win" is just the other side getting bored of being farmed so much that they give up.

It takes no skill to mass someone, it takes no skill to farm them, it just takes Effort. if you put in more effort you win, it's that simple.

Of course some people are, to be brutally honest, terrible at maths and have little common sense, so beating them is a cake-walk, but their failures do not make you skilled, lol.

It's just your arrogance that insists you have skill, but arrogance doesn't change the fact this is a simple mathematical game.

I've given many players advice to help them since i've been playing, simple mathematical advice based on my experience and they have all done just as well as i could afterwards, better in some cases because they were prepared to put in more time playing. Now if i can teach someone all i know in under 15 mins and they can do just as well as i can how on earth can you claim there is any skill involved? it's simple, there is none, once you have a grasp of the basics and apply common sense you are as good as anyone else. After that it's down to effort plain and simple.

I'm sure you'll keep telling yourself you're better than other people, and you will be better than people with less common sense and a worse grasp of basic maths, but the reason you're telling us all this is arrogance, anyone with half a brain knows you are no better than at least 500 other players of this game.

I don't need to proclaim my greatness to anyone, i'm quite happy to do my thing, meet other players and enjoy the game for what it is. That's a simple mathematical game, nothing more. Skill, pah, it's actually sad you think any is involved to be honest.

And as for going on and on about the UU's being killable then get with the times, that's ancient history and won't be coming back. There's a good reason too, that reason has already been mentioned, people don't want to spend a long time playing to have all their hard work ruined by some putz with an itchy trigger finger.

Another thing you may want to think on, you talk about skill being involved at the start of the game, pop over to Quantum when next wave starts and prove it, it's in less than a week. If you are really so hot surely your "skill" should see you winning the wave...

LOL lets see A if any of them rank,
B if any of them places in the top 10.

Q doesn't take too much skill, but lots of luck is needed.

Borek... you are not grasping how wars used to be fought? You are saying that it was just whoever farms for the longest wins... this was not the case. You simply couldn't farm every turn, there weren't the turns for it. With 1 at a turn there werent, even with 3 ats a turn there isnt enough, you can only do that now because of the damned unlimited turns!