StarGateWars Forums

What a stupid idea. It won't add anything to the game (yay, accept 10 billion naq and it turns into a bomb or something stupid), only idiots would fall for it, there are more important things to worry about, and it would waste server resources.

Indeed, no one would fall for it. Its the indirect consequences that make it worth server space though.

It would mean that big players can't threaten "send me 1000 UU or my whole alliance will sab you". The threatened one could just send a booby-traped gift. The big player would be a fool to accept the 1000 UU sent. So, there would be no point in making the threat in the first place.

It wouldn't stop bullying. There still would be ways around it. However, it would make bullying a heck of a lot harder.

ive got a good idea for this although id never want to see this implemented ... ever ....

you can send naq bombs, turn viruses , and uu assains

the mroe you send the mroe damage it does, i.e 1 million naq would do less damage than 100 million naq.
same applies to turns and uu

although .. there has to be a cost to the sender , when the greeks (i think it was the greeks) sent the trojan horse into the gr8 city they didnt actually get that horse back they used it, and some of the men in it died ...

thus if you send a 1 million naq bomb you lose 1 million from your acc, and you do something like either equal damage to their naq/weps or something or 10% of what you sent, which would be mroe fair to the unsuspecting reciever.

Its another far more costlier way of killing someone

excellent idea, i think though you could only do it if you where both at war with each other , then if you trade on the black market, you could make sure no-one would booby trap your stuff

No... I don't think that'd help. Then you would just say, "declare peace with me first or your resources will be wasted." The entire idea would be ruined!

Nevertheless there does have to be some way to almost garauntee whether it is or isn't. Now, you could be right next to them, watching as they do it. But I bet the majority of trades are with people we don't know personally. I wouldn't know... never been into the whole trading thing that much.

Actually, I know a bunch of people who get logged onto by the strongest player in our alliance, and he transferrs all thier stuff to his account and further ensures his lead in the alliance.

There should be a thing in the main command center "always send trojan horses" which can only be updated so many times a month... then less of that kind of thing would be done. Could you imagine sending yourself some units and naq only to have them hurt you?

Yeah. I like this idea. Hope it succeeds.

I would like this one one condition.


could i have a prophet that flat out tells me that this is a trap only to be eaten by possedions serpant?

I don't like it

GREAT IDEA

the I accept button kinda sucks if you are reciviving billlions of naq at once...

winks at WhiteyDude.

Yeah, we definitely have to have some way of almost knowing.

"Your investigators tell you that it is " + "probably fine " OR "probably tampered with " OR "definitely fine " OR "Definitely a trap "

The higher your spy level than theirs, the more likely you'll be correct.



receiver is three or more above: 65% odds you're correct, 25% odds you're on its probably, 5% odds you're on the opposite probably, 5% odds you're on the opposite "for sure"

receiver is two below: 45% odds you're correct, 35% odds you're on its probably, 15% odds you're on the opposite probably, 5% odds you're on the opposite definite.

reciever is one above: 35% odds you're correct, 35% odds you're on its "probably," 20% odds you're on the other probably, 10% odds you're on the opposite "for sure"

receiver is equal: 20% odds you're corect, 35% odds you're on its probably, 35% odds you're on the other probably, 10% odds you're on the opposite "for sure"

receiver is one below: 10% odds you're correct, 20% odds you're on its probably, 35% odds you're on the opposite "probably", 35% odds you're on the opposite "for sure"

receiver is two below: 5% odds you're correct, 15% odds you're on its probably, 35% odds you're on the opposite probably, 45% odds you're on the opposite definite.

receiver is three or more below: 5% odds you're correct, 5% odds you're on its probably, 25% odds you're on the opposite probably, 65% odds you're on the opposite "for sure"


There are no 0%s so that nobody can ever be sure one way or another. Otherwise, A would send B cargo, and if A has 3 more levels + B gets the message "definately fine" He would know that being correct is impossible, and that this is therefore a trap. That is not what we want. With a 5% chance, he knows he might be risking losing a future trader and maybe a very good deal.

Also, if we wanted to keep this really hidden, it could be an unfindable tech upgrade: "Trojan Horse Technologies level" which would cost as much 1.5x your last upgrade, starting at 500,000. Then going to 750,000, then 1,125,000, all the way up to 145,964,630 (145 mil) at level 15.

Level 20 would be 1,108,418,909 naq (1bil, 108 mil)

It starts out very cheap, but most noobs don't have supporter status anyway.

KnightValor wrote:Actually, I know a bunch of people who get logged onto by the strongest player in our alliance, and he transferrs all thier stuff to his account and further ensures his lead in the alliance.

that mother is going down

this idea is useless if to had to accept them if the legit transfers continue to be automatic. for this to work properly all legit and false transfers will need an accept option to be nessesary or else the false transfers wont work.
there is also another problem with the idea. lets says some person fell for it and got hurt. they will only be more determind (and angry) to hit you back even more.

gatx -207 wrote:there is also another problem with the idea. lets says some person fell for it and got hurt. they will only be more determind (and angry) to hit you back even more.

As much as sabbing someone seven times in a row? Or massing them? Or raiding thous of UU? Or maybe a combo of all three?

How your target responds is part of strategizing. If you don't strategize and blindly go forward than maybe yes, they will get angrier than simply refusing to comply. But that is in no way the idea's fault!

any sort of detection method... Otherwise... You'd have to be quite cautious about everything... any sort of detection or at least a certain percentage chance of discovery of the traps?

LMAOOO i voted yeah cos it sound fun ..

How could n funny would it be to send an alliance a peace offering of 10bil to repair themself and then it sabbs their weps LMAOOO lol

BA RA DU DA RA IM LOVING IT!!