1 AT, war is over fix it

[Buddha]

that leads to another concern Nim. a non ending war or a long war is supported by alliance players. if u ve 40 members and 30 are willing to support then u get enough turns to do the job

at's have been limited to direct the cash flow to game market, that all. we mortals that dont use will become less active.

im already going down to inactivity, thnx to new mini update , hope smone buys my sweet account

Still depends how turns are getting around.

Well what will actually happen, is those in larger alliances, have people whom spend money on the game, cause it's a hobby. Those people don't need to buy from the player market, and can support their alliance, better then an alliance whom don't spend.

No because i want that removed as well so that will not be a reason.

Beside i still don't get people who use money in this game to even live and handle them self, i have seen tons of players who can do it without using money.

But no in my eyes Turns are to plenty and to easy to get and that should be changed as well.

[Sarevok]

Well what will actually happen, is those in larger alliances, have people whom spend money on the game, cause it's a hobby. Those people don't need to buy from the player market, and can support their alliance, better then an alliance whom don't spend.

No because i want that removed as well so that will not be a reason.

As in not be able to buy with $$? It won't happen. Think about it. Remove the ingame BM. People can just as easily spend $1 for 1T naq. They can then offer rates of 1T/1kAT, and get the same benifit. The only difference? Less security. But if you have a reliable trader, then this doesn't even factor

Beside i still don't get people who use money in this game to even live and handle them self, i have seen tons of players who can do it without using money.

And i don't get people whom spend money improving their cars, or building model boats. It's a hobby, what you enjoy/have interest in.

But no in my eyes Turns are to plenty and to easy to get and that should be changed as well.

I don't entirly agree with this. As people have said, turns are needed, especially by new players, to grow themselves. The only real solution, would be to put the AT rates on the market back where they were, or even more, BUT remove the ability to trade/send turns at all. Then it's what you can get form the market, and not what you can get from others.

[Buddha]

Well what will actually happen, is those in larger alliances, have people whom spend money on the game, cause it's a hobby. Those people don't need to buy from the player market, and can support their alliance, better then an alliance whom don't spend.

No because i want that removed as well so that will not be a reason.

As in not be able to buy with $$? It won't happen. Think about it. Remove the ingame BM. People can just as easily spend $1 for 1T naq. They can then offer rates of 1T/1kAT, and get the same benifit. The only difference? Less security. But if you have a reliable trader, then this doesn't even factor

Beside i still don't get people who use money in this game to even live and handle them self, i have seen tons of players who can do it without using money.

And i don't get people whom spend money improving their cars, or building model boats. It's a hobby, what you enjoy/have interest in.

But no in my eyes Turns are to plenty and to easy to get and that should be changed as well.

I don't entirly agree with this. As people have said, turns are needed, especially by new players, to grow themselves. The only real solution, would be to put the AT rates on the market back where they were, or even more, BUT remove the ability to trade/send turns at all. Then it's what you can get form the market, and not what you can get from others.

Turns are needed but not in so plenty as it has been, remove the ability to trade for turns, to buy turns and only get turns from the Market it self and you will see people think twice before massing at will.

new players will need turns yes but so will everyone else. So i don't see a problem in it it hurts all.

[Sarevok]

The only real solution, would be to put the AT rates on the market back where they were, or even more, BUT remove the ability to trade/send turns at all. Then it's what you can get form the market, and not what you can get from others.

Turns are needed but not in so plenty as it has been, remove the ability to trade for turns, to buy turns and only get turns from the Market it self and you will see people think twice before massing at will.

Though this should probably be done in another thread, as this WAS originally about fixing the 1AT bug that exists, was once fixed, but due to war, was re-instated. Of which i agree, it should be fixed

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

WTH?

why exactly was the enormous bias in favor of attacking motherships reinstated?

[Sarevok]

:shock:

WTH?

why exactly was the enormous bias in favor of attacking motherships reinstated?

where...

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

um, your previous post, dude...

[Sarevok]

um, your previous post, dude...

You mean where if <15 AT is used, then BOTH MS don't engage? That bias?

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

Though this should probably be done in another thread, as this WAS originally about fixing the 1AT bug that exists, was once fixed, but due to war, was re-instated. Of which i agree, it should be fixed

[Sarevok]

Though this should probably be done in another thread, as this WAS originally about fixing the 1AT bug that exists, was once fixed, but due to war, was re-instated. Of which i agree, it should be fixed

You do realise thats in reference to 1AT massing don't you...

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

you mean as opposed to the gigantic advantage given to the attacking Mothership during the course of 1AT massing?

no I didn't... perhaps you'd like to clarify more.

[Sarevok]

I didn't count the hits, now i know during the war 1 AT was used to mass mother ships, i suggest here, make it that the min Attack turns used is 5 in order to get your Mother ship to engage in battle, if you use less than 5 AT's your mothership will not engage in battle.

+1 votes

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

the amount of turns is still less than 15, which means it will most likely still be tilted in favor of the attacking mothership...

(which is okay to a small extent, as it is with 15Turn attacks
because the attacker gets to fire first...)

[Sarevok]

the amount of turns is still less than 15, which means it will most likely still be tilted in favor of the attacking mothership...

(which is okay to a small extent, as it is with 15Turn attacks
because the attacker gets to fire first...)

Yeh, i'm pretty sure, the defender takes the same damage no matter what ammount or something silly. But the attacker will take (for 5AT) only 33% of the damage.

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

well, my suggestion is different, I guess...

if you want to save your strikers and their defenders, and your AT,
pit your MS against their MS... that's fine...

the attacker's MS strikes first, as it should,
kills some stuff on the defender's MS...

and then the defender's MS gets to strike...

that should be the only advantage to attackers,
regardless of the number of turns used... :p

I'm thinking about 1-turn attacking people who continue to do it to me.