StarGateWars Forums

For losing attackers you have to keep it right though, and that makes it hard, the bigger the persons strike at the minute the more then lose massing a smaller defense, yet someone with a smaller strike can mass a massive defense with less loses.......

Chris M wrote:i am less keen on planets being protected but more about the original idea of attackers being lost.

I can agree with that, would still like to see this come alive.

GeneralChaos wrote:Planets should not be protected from this idea.

i see what you mean but i mean apart form the defences on the planets there not relay a way of killing off fleets when they attack your planets now say if you say like the becons it cos one bill to place a mine and a mine had like 15% chance of blowing up a single enemie ship when attack an planet so if you put 10 on then them ten ahd 15% of blowing up ten fleets or some think like that any feed back on idea would be great

Then to counter the time limit, you can only have 1 mine active on your realm at any one time.

but that would just mean everyone hires scouts to test the ground.
mines if not on a time limit would need to go off at random intervals if this is on multiple hits, not necesarily the first hit.
i would prefer a limit time window in which a mine could be active and very few available to use per week.

as for losses, if your sending as many in your example suggests the forces charging would be close together so loads would be killed...

i dont know, tough call. but it has to be significant enough to be worthwhile but not so severe that it discourages wars

How about 1 in any 24 hours, and it randomly goes off 10 times within the first 500 attack turns used on you, ( most massing will use way more, depending on person )

true enough
a limit on how many could be use a week also much like MTs?

this idea is great but i think keeping it simple is the best thing

i d like the idea about different mines for killing attackers AC and ms.

however i think it should be based solely around killing attackers

i think the best idea so far is the one that chris said right at the start

I think they need a downfall/drawback.

I think if you have mines deployed, and you move to att that you run a risk of hitting your own mines, they should be defensive in nature and not an attack, hide behind mines, att, hide behind mines, type tactic. Just make gorilla warefare / terrorist tactics more effective.

bump

mines should only hit high strikes so you cant get someone with a really weak strike to "find" the mines first and when they are all gone the real strike comes in....

hfown wrote:mines should only hit high strikes so you cant get someone with a really weak strike to "find" the mines first and when they are all gone the real strike comes in....

define "high strike". Would you tie it to the defense that sets it? Also, Doesnt that still offer the Att a way to strike without setting off the mines? By massing with a strike just below the defense like in ascended to avoid the phasing problem?

Bump for a great idea, just dont have any ideas on how to improve it as of yet.