Page 3 of 7
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:37 am
by RobinInDaHood
heh. Nice update Jason. You just sealed my fate for a whole pile of ascensions even though I was wavering on whether or not to pull the trigger.
Now I just need 150K UP and I'm golden. 70K to go...

Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:35 am
by [SGC_ReplicĂ…tors]
YAY robins fleets can still be there same with my crappy MS too
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 2:02 pm
by Antius
Crappy? nah...
Non-existant? Yep!
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 1:46 am
by REK
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:15 am
by cimi
hmm thinking.... Sux ... this is my opinion.
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:13 am
by Mato
great update ... now I can actaully invest tons of naq in my MS. (my MS will pass 20bil power for the first time ..yay)
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:23 am
by Madness81
my god this is a sweet update.. its like a dream come true. ....looks for i love admin bumper sticker....
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:42 am
by Tivadar
YEEEEHAAAA!!!!
lubb ya admin

Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:35 pm
by eragorn
should only keep the slots not the actuall weapons. Buying them will not take that long if you know how to play, but keeping a full MS will hurt the game. Now when you ascend and come back you gotta build up again, but with this you have a huge def right off the bat. People will just put everything into MS cause no need to have an attack can just boost MS forever. train all UU into covert / miners an use MS for def and attack and will just keep getting stronger.
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 7:23 pm
by Manetheren
eragorn wrote:should only keep the slots not the actuall weapons. Buying them will not take that long if you know how to play, but keeping a full MS will hurt the game. Now when you ascend and come back you gotta build up again, but with this you have a huge def right off the bat. People will just put everything into MS cause no need to have an attack can just boost MS forever. train all UU into covert / miners an use MS for def and attack and will just keep getting stronger.
You still need an attack or defense or the ms doesnt do anything besides engage your opponents ms.
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 8:53 pm
by eragorn
is there a min amount of attackers/ defenders? if not then all you would need would be 1 of each, Should at least require min amount of attackers / defenders or the ship won't come. tie it o a % of total army size like must have 5% of army be trained as supers with weapons or the ship just stays home. Same with def. Could also change cost of fleets to include a pilot so each fleet you replace or buy would also cost 1 UU or maybe a new player type like a pilot that must be trained first to some stupid class like navigator (basic) then pilot (super) and that each fleet ship requires a pilot and navigator or two trained pilots (for better attack power) so the fleets would be better if 2 pilots per ship then if pilot and navigator. Possibly also have a range of ship types (like weapons with diff ships worth more in attack, although still limited to what the fleet will actually attack i.e. planet stealing or MS vrs MS only and no ground support form fleets.
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 2:12 am
by RobinInDaHood
eragorn wrote:is there a min amount of attackers/ defenders? if not then all you would need would be 1 of each, Should at least require min amount of attackers / defenders or the ship won't come. tie it o a % of total army size like must have 5% of army be trained as supers with weapons or the ship just stays home. Same with def. Could also change cost of fleets to include a pilot so each fleet you replace or buy would also cost 1 UU or maybe a new player type like a pilot that must be trained first to some stupid class like navigator (basic) then pilot (super) and that each fleet ship requires a pilot and navigator or two trained pilots (for better attack power) so the fleets would be better if 2 pilots per ship then if pilot and navigator. Possibly also have a range of ship types (like weapons with diff ships worth more in attack, although still limited to what the fleet will actually attack i.e. planet stealing or MS vrs MS only and no ground support form fleets.
Way too complicated.

Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 2:32 am
by GeneralChaos
The MS doesnt need to lose anything, it does not count towards GnR anymore, so it makes no difference.
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 8:58 am
by Ston
bad update, is raising inflation of naq in main cause no anq is being drawn out of the game, soon we will have someone breaking the trillion MS action and main is slowly becoming more and more like chaos (which so many of us simply "dislike").
Re: Mothership vs Ascension
Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2007 9:25 am
by RobinInDaHood
Ston wrote:bad update, is raising inflation of naq in main cause no anq is being drawn out of the game, soon we will have someone breaking the trillion MS action and main is slowly becoming more and more like chaos (which so many of us simply "dislike").
I'm fine with making mother ship fleet hangers disappear during ascension as long as you're willing to concede the loss of all planet defenses during ascension.
It was not fair for people to boost their planet defenses to unlimited levels and lose none of that in ascension while the cost of building fleets was huge due to being reset after each ascension. Admin is trying to make ascending attractive again to those who have already spent dozens of trillions of naq in their mother ships (like me).
I say again, great update Admin.