StarGateWars Forums

whereub wrote:build a smaller ms then

Thank you for making the point.


As it stands now, having a big MS is pointless.

Can we keep on topic please?

Centauri Prime wrote:Of course I bring up TTF-FUALL. Why? Because it affects the TTF-FUALL war lol. Not to mention this "last straw" was done to you during this war. So don't act like this is for "the betterment of the game". This is for you not losing your mothership.

It effects the entire server. Not just the TTF vs FUALL war. It is for the players who actually put resources into their mothership not to have some boob call it 'strategy' when he masses you with a 34B MS. Clear enough?

This is a SUGGESTION thread based on the topic at hand, so once again. As I said before, agree or disagree. Don't make this a debate. Keep on topic or don't even bother posting.

Noobert wrote:

Centauri Prime wrote:Of course I bring up TTF-FUALL. Why? Because it affects the TTF-FUALL war lol. Not to mention this "last straw" was done to you during this war. So don't act like this is for "the betterment of the game". This is for you not losing your mothership.

It effects the entire server. Not just the TTF vs FUALL war. It is for the players who actually put resources into their mothership not to have some boob call it 'strategy' when he masses you with a 34B MS. Clear enough?

This is a SUGGESTION thread based on the topic at hand, so once again. As I said before, agree or disagree. Don't make this a debate. Keep on topic or don't even bother posting.

How is it not on topic though? Of course updates affect the entire server, but they mostly affect the people actually fighting, but don't act all blind to the fact this is only being brought up because it is being done IN THE SERVER WAR that the majority of the people posting here are in.

My initial comment still stands, stop messing with the game machinery mid-wars. It happens way too often when fighting a FUALL alliance.

Centauri Prime wrote:How is it not on topic though? Of course updates affect the entire server, but they mostly affect the people actually fighting, but don't act all blind to the fact this is only being brought up because it is being done IN THE SERVER WAR that the majority of the people posting here are in.

My initial comment still stands, stop messing with the game machinery mid-wars. It happens way too often when fighting a FUALL alliance.

This is not on topic because it is a suggestion thread to post your opinions on the idea which you have done, not debate over it because it is FUALL or TTF.

Yes, they are posting. Why? I asked players from TTF, and FUALL to post their OPINIONS on this matter. That is why you see those faces here. I do not know many outside of the war, so I cannot simply go around asking for people to post their opinions if they will not.

My suggestion is still there. Stop exploiting game mechanics, and build a mothership like the rest of the players who play this game. It happens way to often when fighting a TJP alliance.

Now that is said, I will not argue with this further. It is not why I put this thread up.

Centauri Prime wrote:

Noobert wrote:

Centauri Prime wrote:Of course I bring up TTF-FUALL. Why? Because it affects the TTF-FUALL war lol. Not to mention this "last straw" was done to you during this war. So don't act like this is for "the betterment of the game". This is for you not losing your mothership.

It effects the entire server. Not just the TTF vs FUALL war. It is for the players who actually put resources into their mothership not to have some boob call it 'strategy' when he masses you with a 34B MS. Clear enough?

This is a SUGGESTION thread based on the topic at hand, so once again. As I said before, agree or disagree. Don't make this a debate. Keep on topic or don't even bother posting.

How is it not on topic though? Of course updates affect the entire server, but they mostly affect the people actually fighting, but don't act all blind to the fact this is only being brought up because it is being done IN THE SERVER WAR that the majority of the people posting here are in.

My initial comment still stands, stop messing with the game machinery mid-wars. It happens way too often when fighting a FUALL alliance.

well, as it seems this war is going to go on forever, so I do not think you are seriously suggesting that no further updates/fixes take place?

After all, there is always a war going on stargateWARS.com. What makes the war you are involved with so special. Isn't that a bit arrogant towards other alliances?

Of course, but considering this war consists of the vast majority of major fighters and fighting alliances in the game, it is more important than most as it affects the game as a whole far more than two page two alliances duking it out.

Leave the MS they way they are.

I am not involved in whatever petty little war is happening - no offence anyone fighting in any war - but I still think this is rather unusual as previously posted.

No matter who or what or whichever factions are fighting, the game is served by getting rid of these inconsistent and rather unusual things. In SG ships are always vulnerable if they have no shields, yet in SGW it does not seem that way. Unless something in my previous post is incorrect, though the ohter posts since seem to back it up.

In Stargate, Tauri's didn't posess ion cannons as their major form of defense...and yet in SGW?

Not everything translates right from show to game, the game is designed to be as interesting to play as possible, and I find this an extra wrinkle to ms massing.

Let me put it a different way then... if your MS has no shields, what is stopping an enemy MS from having a full spread volley attack against you, destroying all the volleys on the 'showing' side of your MS?

Say the volleys are spread evenly around the MS, so let's say that in a direct confrontation only 25% of the total capacity 'faces' the enemy. Except of course we don't have battles with 25% of our MS power, it's always assumed that we can bend gravity around our MSs so that the rear guns can also engage the forward enemy. But let's ignore that...

So we have 25% of our volleys facing the enemy and directly in their line of site, similarly we have 25% of the enemy's MS facing us. If one of the MSs has NO shields or has been MS shield massed, then why shouldn't the ohter MS be able to rake all 25% of the exposed volleys? While those exposed volleys got off a shot and destroyed some shields, they were destroyed because there was nothing between them and the incoming fire.

Even if the damage is upped to say 15% that's still more - I hesitate to say fair - but more likely than the mere approx max 5% volleys destroyed.

This issue comes down to why or how can a MS with no shields take the damages that an MS with shields would take on it's volleys?

Fire_of_Venus wrote:Let me put it a different way then... if your MS has no shields, what is stopping an enemy MS from having a full spread volley attack against you, destroying all the volleys on the 'showing' side of your MS?

Say the volleys are spread evenly around the MS, so let's say that in a direct confrontation only 25% of the total capacity 'faces' the enemy. Except of course we don't have battles with 25% of our MS power, it's always assumed that we can bend gravity around our MSs so that the rear guns can also engage the forward enemy. But let's ignore that...

So we have 25% of our volleys facing the enemy and directly in their line of site, similarly we have 25% of the enemy's MS facing us. If one of the MSs has NO shields or has been MS shield massed, then why shouldn't the ohter MS be able to rake all 25% of the exposed volleys? While those exposed volleys got off a shot and destroyed some shields, they were destroyed because there was nothing between them and the incoming fire.

Even if the damage is upped to say 15% that's still more - I hesitate to say fair - but more likely than the mere approx max 5% volleys destroyed.

This issue comes down to why or how can a MS with no shields take the damages that an MS with shields would take on it's volleys?

or lets concider that our MS's are aurora type ships who use the ancient weapons. and we all know what happens to wraith cruisers (that don't have shields) when they meet one of those.

seriously why can't we make the damage% more flexible like the massing damage. if you can do it for massing damage the thing can be done for MS damage. cuz seriously it's unfair to mass an MS 5times your size who bites into your volleys every turn.

zeekomkommer wrote:and we all know what happens to wraith cruisers (that don't have shields) when they meet one of those.

well wraith cruisers have hull regeneration instead of shields, so it does balance out. If they go against a much more powerful ship they are dust, no matter if they have shields or not.

urogard wrote:

zeekomkommer wrote:and we all know what happens to wraith cruisers (that don't have shields) when they meet one of those.

well wraith cruisers have hull regeneration instead of shields, so it does balance out. If they go against a much more powerful ship they are dust, no matter if they have shields or not.

I think that's the point here. My MS is nothing to rave about so if it comes up against a super powerful one I expect it to get totalled. Having the smaller ships able to destroy a bigger one is okay but only if it takes quite significant losses as well, especially if unshieled as it has nothing to protect it.

lol some strange and funny replays...

let me explain it this way....

lets have a game of chicken... ill drive my tank strait at u... and u can ride a bicycle strait at me... my shields (armor) is much better then yours... but using SGWs theory u can still be in with a chance of whooping me...

i think my tank will destroy u completely but this rule makes things a little confusing...