StarGateWars Forums

GeneralChaos wrote:Well after 500k defenses the doubling is fine, but i dont think every 100k is right, it should be every 300k after that, as an alliance will fund 1 motheship to take down a planet with huge defense, but an alliance would not spend the same naq to defend a planet.

I would be interested to see how people with MS would respond, if their fleet hanger costs doubled every 100k.

GeneralChaos wrote:Actually while he is at it, he should make it that people in perg who have planets only receive 30% boost from them, should state

Due to the mass of the planet in your realm it is impossible to move it into pergatory, so the resources must be sent via other means, alas because of the radiation out there, 70% of the resources perish before they reach your realm.

PERG is meant for slower game play, its not meant for those to sit with 10 x 150k up planets, to leave once a month to sell off UU to return, nor is it designed for people to sit with massive attack planets to just attack those who really need the protection.

I agree with more limitations to planets in perg. I mean, it's almost impossible to take planet defences in perg. All you need to do is have a defence about 5x larger then fleets to guarantee it's safe. Since it can only take 60AT of damage from any realm

Sarevok wrote:

GeneralChaos wrote:Well after 500k defenses the doubling is fine, but i dont think every 100k is right, it should be every 300k after that, as an alliance will fund 1 motheship to take down a planet with huge defense, but an alliance would not spend the same naq to defend a planet.

I would be interested to see how people with MS would respond, if their fleet hanger costs doubled every 100k.

Actually i meant double the cost to planet defenses, currently when it hits 500,001 the costs doubles, and 600,001 it doubles again,

600,000 will give you 1.8trill defense, alliances will fund 1 member of there alliance to soon beable to mass a defense that big,

Im saying,

500,001 double
800,001 double

So on and so fourth.

GeneralChaos wrote:

Sarevok wrote:

GeneralChaos wrote:Well after 500k defenses the doubling is fine, but i dont think every 100k is right, it should be every 300k after that, as an alliance will fund 1 motheship to take down a planet with huge defense, but an alliance would not spend the same naq to defend a planet.

I would be interested to see how people with MS would respond, if their fleet hanger costs doubled every 100k.

Actually i meant double the cost to planet defenses, currently when it hits 500,001 the costs doubles, and 600,001 it doubles again,

600,000 will give you 1.8trill defense, alliances will fund 1 member of there alliance to soon beable to mass a defense that big,

Im saying,

500,001 double
800,001 double

So on and so fourth.

Yeah yeah, i got that. What i meant was, it would be interesting to see how many people would complain about doing this, and ALSO complain about making it a fairer system, by making fleet hanger upgrade costs double as an example every 100k.

Though, i would say make it something like every 250k, after the first.
250,001 not-doubled
500,001 doubled
750,000 doubled
1,000,000 doubled.

Doubling any cost on planets defenses or fleets isn't very fair tbh.
For example - those who already have their defenses/fleet hangars very big have had spent a lot more naq than those wishing to catch up now will have spend, in case these updates go live. Unless you figure out what top fleet hangars and planets defenses are and then round the number above it (ie if the number of top fleet hangars is 451 293 round it up to 500 000) and make the cost double after that.
Otherwise those that were funded to build up that high will be at even bigger advantage than they already are as people trying to catch up will spend A LOT more naq to get there

~N

Neimenljivi wrote:Doubling any cost on planets defenses or fleets isn't very fair tbh.
For example - those who already have their defenses/fleet hangars very big have had spent a lot more naq than those wishing to catch up now will have spend, in case these updates go live. Unless you figure out what top fleet hangars and planets defenses are and then round the number above it (ie if the number of top fleet hangars is 451 293 round it up to 500 000) and make the cost double after that.
Otherwise those that were funded to build up that high will be at even bigger advantage than they already are as people trying to catch up will spend A LOT more naq to get there

~N

That or take away anything above the first double. And give the Naq back to the player whom spent it. Although, if you simple remove/shift the doubling of planets, it actually makes it easier for others to catch up, as compared to MS, where it would be come harder

Sarevok wrote:

GeneralChaos wrote:

Sarevok wrote:

GeneralChaos wrote:Well after 500k defenses the doubling is fine, but i dont think every 100k is right, it should be every 300k after that, as an alliance will fund 1 motheship to take down a planet with huge defense, but an alliance would not spend the same naq to defend a planet.

I would be interested to see how people with MS would respond, if their fleet hanger costs doubled every 100k.

Actually i meant double the cost to planet defenses, currently when it hits 500,001 the costs doubles, and 600,001 it doubles again,

600,000 will give you 1.8trill defense, alliances will fund 1 member of there alliance to soon beable to mass a defense that big,

Im saying,

500,001 double
800,001 double

So on and so fourth.

Yeah yeah, i got that. What i meant was, it would be interesting to see how many people would complain about doing this, and ALSO complain about making it a fairer system, by making fleet hanger upgrade costs double as an example every 100k.

Though, i would say make it something like every 250k, after the first.
250,001 not-doubled
500,001 doubled
750,000 doubled
1,000,000 doubled.

Fleets already increase almost Exponentially, unless you are talking about arming them.

50k is 12.5 tril
100k is 50 tril
150k is 112 tril
200k is 200 tril
250k is 312 tril
500k is 1,250 tril.

As a Comparison:
50k can mass roughly a 100k Defense with new update
Cost to build 250k fleets is 312 tril, cost to build a Defense that can't be massed by one is at most 45 tril. While they are able to mass multiple ones, massing a 500k defense is likely going to cost 10 tril+ after fleet losses and repairs. a 1 mil defense at the largest size currently costs 600+ tril, while the fleets cost 1.2 quad, so that is obviously getting to a point where it is unrealistically high for the planet.

As you can see, the jump from 250k to 500k is already quite large, by making it require more fleet power to mass a natural defense it is already evening it out more. I agree with the defenses not doubling quite so fast. Should be more like every 500k.

Thoe you have to be fair, planet def cost increases can in a large way be mitigated by the fact one can stack 3 platforms on one.

Make it one platform per planet and then you can talk balancing like that.

Brdavs wrote:Thoe you have to be fair, planet def cost increases can in a large way be mitigated by the fact one can stack 3 platforms on one.

Make it one platform per planet and then you can talk balancing like that.

Yes, but also MS Techs are able to mitigate fleet costs. As it stands the largest reasonable planet defense of natural and platforms would need 660 bil in fleets to mass, anything beyond that and gets exceedingly expensive, and that is only capable of protecting one planet.

Ok... sorry if I'm behind the times here, but I just read some of the posts in regards to Houses on the first couple of pages in this thread. Here are my thoughts.

Houses
1.) Perhaps change Houses to Empires
2.) Houses or Empires serve no purpose other than improving communication between the alliances.
3.) No bonuses. More bonuses only hurt smaller players even more. Nothing you do will correct this... and to be frank, new accounts should have a difficult time just like everyone else that has played this game had to go through. Those that go through the gauntlet will be better players for it.
4.) Empire Attack logs. Similar to alliance logs, but contain activity from all alliances within the empire. To reduce the lag, reduce the time frame to only include the last 4 or 6 hours.
5.) Increase the number available.
6.) Permit a voting sytem within the House/Empire.
7.) Allow communication throughout the empire.

other thoughts...

Military Experience
1.) Swap the values for killing attack and defense soldiers. This gives you more experience for building a defense and killing attack supers... possibly encouraging people to actually build a defense and discouraging people from using the ME hunting excuse to mass people.
2.) Lifer Suicide attacks are not included and in my opinion, should be worth more than most ME values.
3.) Fix the all time records so the values are not doubled.
4.) ACers killed by lifer suicide attacks are not included in ME.

Planet "feature/exploit"
The only way to find out how much this is used, is to actually look at all alliance members while they're on PPT and look at their planets. Based on the number of people in the planet market selling huge planets, I'd dare say this "feature/exploit" is more widely used than people think... and given the choice more people would use the "feature/exploit" if they were able to acquire the funds to do so.

I'm also curious as to how losses are calculated. Would admin care to share his formulas for this?


Oh... no more bonuses please.

Sorry, for all the spoilers, should help break it down, and not take up 1/5 pages of text lol

RE: Platforms[spoiler]

Brdavs wrote:Thoe you have to be fair, planet def cost increases can in a large way be mitigated by the fact one can stack 3 platforms on one.

Make it one platform per planet and then you can talk balancing like that.

Thing with platforms there easy to mass through. Requiring only 10%, and always taking damage, even if the fleets are completely wiped out. Also, platforms increasing in cost by 30b/defence/100k. So at 300k, it is up about 90b/defence. And with 300k defences, you need 78k fleets to damage it.[/spoiler]

RE: Fleet costs[spoiler]

BMMJ13 wrote:Yes, but also MS Techs are able to mitigate fleet costs.

And not only fleet costs, but the other 2 aspects of MS as well.

BMMJ13 wrote:Fleets already increase almost Exponentially, unless you are talking about arming them.
50k is 12.5 tril
100k is 50 tril
150k is 112 tril
200k is 200 tril
250k is 312 tril
500k is 1,250 tril.

Well actually, that's not quite true. If your talking about from 0 to that number, then yes. However, if you go off the previous and onto the next, it's actually a linear progression.
0-50k is 12.5 tril
50-100k is 37.5 tril (3x)
100-150k is 62 tril (about 2x)
150-200k is 88 tril (about 1.4x)
200-250k is 312 tril (about 1.3x)
Well, looking at this, it starts off at 3x the cost, and quickly gets towards similar costs (1.3 is only 30% more, as opposed to 3x which is 300% more).
Now, lets consider the costs when using MS tech 10, for total costs
50k is 35k - 6.1T
100k is 77k - 29.6T
150k is 115k - 66.1T
200k is 154k - 118.9T
250k is 192k - 184.3T
500k is 384k - 741.1T (not 1250T...)
For actual upgrade costs from previous
50k is 35k - 6.1T
100k is 77k - 23.5T (4x)
150k is 115k - 36.5T (1.6x)
200k is 154k - 52.8T (1.4x)
250k is 192k - 65.4T (1.2T)
So, with techs, the get cheaper alot faster[/spoiler]

RE: Max's ME post[spoiler]

MaxSterling wrote:Military Experience
1.) Swap the values for killing attack and defense soldiers. This gives you more experience for building a defense and killing attack supers... possibly encouraging people to actually build a defense and discouraging people from using the ME hunting excuse to mass people.
2.) Lifer Suicide attacks are not included and in my opinion, should be worth more than most ME values.
3.) Fix the all time records so the values are not doubled.
4.) ACers killed by lifer suicide attacks are not included in ME.

IMO, do 1 and 2. But also, fix the bugs listed in the bugs section for ME, AND make the minuses work. Something along the lines of deducting 1.5-2x what you get for killing. Eg:
Spies Killed(100) and then Spies Lost(-150 OR -200)
This way, it's not about whom can throw the most resources at accounts, but whom has the skill, to both defend themselves, protect their men AND successfully assault enemy realms[/spoiler]

RE: Max's Losses Question[spoiler]

MaxSterling wrote:I'm also curious as to how losses are calculated. Would admin care to share his formulas for this?

What losses? You mean for attacks? Cause i think thats in calculations section[/spoiler]

Sarevok wrote:RE: Max's Losses Question

MaxSterling wrote:I'm also curious as to how losses are calculated. Would admin care to share his formulas for this?

What losses? You mean for attacks? Cause i think thats in calculations section

Yes. When player A attacks player B, how are losses determined for both soldiers and Motherships?
Calculations section? What calculations section?

... and no more bonuses please.

MaxSterling wrote:

Sarevok wrote:RE: Max's Losses Question

MaxSterling wrote:I'm also curious as to how losses are calculated. Would admin care to share his formulas for this?

What losses? You mean for attacks? Cause i think thats in calculations section

Yes. When player A attacks player B, how are losses determined for both soldiers and Motherships?
Calculations section? What calculations section?

http://gatewars.com/help.php#Calculations
Though i'm not 100% sure MS damage/losses is included.

Sarevok wrote:http://gatewars.com/help.php#Calculations
Though i'm not 100% sure MS damage/losses is included.

Well, the army losses were in there and that's the main thing. I'm trying to come up with a way to increase a defense's efficiency. Perhaps reduce their weapon decay by half since their on their own planet and can better care for their weapons thus making a defense last twice as long or have the weapon decay % effected by the realm alert level (x% X RAL)?

Admin should not add any more bonuses of any kind.

Sarevok wrote:RE: Fleet costs[spoiler]

BMMJ13 wrote:Yes, but also MS Techs are able to mitigate fleet costs.

And not only fleet costs, but the other 2 aspects of MS as well.

BMMJ13 wrote:Fleets already increase almost Exponentially, unless you are talking about arming them.
50k is 12.5 tril
100k is 50 tril
150k is 112 tril
200k is 200 tril
250k is 312 tril
500k is 1,250 tril.

Well actually, that's not quite true. If your talking about from 0 to that number, then yes. However, if you go off the previous and onto the next, it's actually a linear progression.
0-50k is 12.5 tril
50-100k is 37.5 tril (3x)
100-150k is 62 tril (about 2x)
150-200k is 88 tril (about 1.4x)
200-250k is 312 tril (about 1.3x)
Well, looking at this, it starts off at 3x the cost, and quickly gets towards similar costs (1.3 is only 30% more, as opposed to 3x which is 300% more).
Now, lets consider the costs when using MS tech 10, for total costs
50k is 35k - 6.1T
100k is 77k - 29.6T
150k is 115k - 66.1T
200k is 154k - 118.9T
250k is 192k - 184.3T
500k is 384k - 741.1T (not 1250T...)
For actual upgrade costs from previous
50k is 35k - 6.1T
100k is 77k - 23.5T (4x)
150k is 115k - 36.5T (1.6x)
200k is 154k - 52.8T (1.4x)
250k is 192k - 65.4T (1.2T)
So, with techs, the get cheaper alot faster[/spoiler]

Yes, but if you look at it, 0-250k is 184 tril, while 250k to 500k is 557 tril. It already is 3x the cost for the same amount of stats, so doubling it seems wrong, as it is already increasing by more then that much. The only reason the number required gets lower as you go is do to ms techs I believe, otherwise it would be significantly more expensive for each group.

MaxSterling wrote:

Sarevok wrote:http://gatewars.com/help.php#Calculations
Though i'm not 100% sure MS damage/losses is included.

Well, the army losses were in there and that's the main thing. I'm trying to come up with a way to increase a defense's efficiency. Perhaps reduce their weapon decay by half since their on their own planet and can better care for their weapons thus making a defense last twice as long or have the weapon decay % effected by the realm alert level (x% X RAL)?

By efficiency, do you mean ability to last longer? Or just damaging attacks more? I made a suggestion that you could have say 1% of your banked naq as auto-repair naq for a defence. Such that it would almost simulate an online battle, and would help defences last longer, but no body really liked the idea, stating it would then become to hard to mass. I'm not sure if this is what your after, or something else

BMMJ13 wrote:Yes, but if you look at it, 0-250k is 184 tril, while 250k to 500k is 557 tril. It already is 3x the cost for the same amount of stats, so doubling it seems wrong, as it is already increasing by more then that much. The only reason the number required gets lower as you go is do to ms techs I believe, otherwise it would be significantly more expensive for each group.

Well no. Look at this part
0-50k is 12.5 tril
50-100k is 37.5 tril (3x)
100-150k is 62 tril (about 2x)
150-200k is 88 tril (about 1.4x)
200-250k is 112 tril (about 1.3x) ** Sorry, i put a 3 and not a 1 at the start here
The costs to go from 50-100k were 3x the amount. From 100-150 was 2x, and from 150-200 was 1.4x. The reason it seems so massive from 250-500k, is because your not realising that each step along the way, is becoming closer to just doubling the cost. Where as planets more then double the cost. Since every 100k, the cost of the next 100k doubles. Where as, once you get to 150k fleets, the cost of the next, is the same as the previous.