StarGateWars Forums

Unless you basically accept to exchange nox for weapon damage. Sort of like paying the Nox for protection, or keeping the naq yourself to defend yourself.

viewtopic.php?f=43&t=163668&p=2068128&hilit=realm+alert#p2068128

Tekki wrote:I -thought- the purchase alliance gift came out of the alliance bank which doesn't refill that fast. Though I admit I haven't checked in Beta.

Currently on main and beta it's 1% of Alliance Income, which I have not seen anything yet to change it. This would mean that 50 bil a turn income would put 500 mil a turn in the bank, and since the 1 hour of ppt only costs 1 bil, it would make that amount per hour so you could ppt indefinitely, though that feature is not currently working, so I doubt that is the final figure.

Alliance: (cost 1% income)
Alliance Bank:

Sarevok wrote:

BMMJ13 wrote:Sniping is as much a tactic as having a single large planet/dual or 2 to offset losses. Both are used to make less losses, just take different ways. I don't believe there is any good way to eliminate either of them without changing a lot of how the game is played. I know a member of EPA has constantly wished for kill-able UU, which is an extreme end of what some say (kill-able attack), though not that long ago AC wasn't kill-able.

I agree in principle. Except that, planets are more liable, and will take up MTs to protect. Whereas snipers don't need to spend MTs protecting them, and can just use the MTs for more AT

Yes, but planets already give a bonus, I see no reason why they should be made easy or non-liable to have.

Sarevok wrote:

BMMJ13 wrote:I must say, a new thing I've noticed is one of my favorite updates:

PURCHASE ALLIANCE GIFTS
Plus One Hour PPT Entire Alliance for 1,000,000,000 Naq.

This could give some strategy to the game about having leaders who are active, able to set ppt if they notice their group is getting massed, though at its current amount it seems a bit low, as only 50 bil a turn Income would allow your alliance to be on ppt indefinitely. I think something like 6 hours worth of PPT per 1 month of a normal alliances Income might be a closer value. It also would be interesting if it adds to the previous amount (kinda like merlins)or if you have to do it every hour (kinda like ppt ends).

Does that include 2IC? Cause if it doesn't i think it should. So it's not always the Leaders job to be on all the time, checking the alliance logs.
Also, what Tekki said is right. If it is only 1B naq. Thats only 100b/turn the alliance has to make. Perhaps should be more like 1T, and only doable like 3x/week.

I believe it does currently, as 2ic and Leader are the Same except for Disbanding alliance if I am correct. I believe Lore has suggested before about using alliance bank to add a 3ic position, which would also help with this new idea. And yes, I believe it currently is low based on how much people make and the % taken out, however limiting the amount of times I don't agree with as it's only an hour, but the the amount should not make it that it's easy to do all the time either.

Sarevok wrote:

BMMJ13 wrote:This next part I may be a bit bias, however making attack soldiers killed worth more then defense makes sense and would lower the ability to mass for M/E, yet:

# PlanetDef Killed=300
# MS Fleet Killed=200
# MS Weap Killed=300
# MS Shield Killed=300

I feel that planet defenses and fleets should both be worth more then what they are, fleets cost 10x shields or weapons, yet get 2/3 of the M/E if you kill them? Then planets, they cost 30x shields or weapons, yet get the same M/E if you kill them. Also, I don't believe fleets count if they are killed by being destroyed by your a platform, which should also be included.

Perhaps Naq for points more so? Like fleets cost 22m each, and weapons/shields 2m each. So each fleet should be 2000? Also because you have to reduce their power to 0, they aren't instantly wiped out like weapons/shields

It would make sense to have fleets and planet defenses be more then MS Weapons/Shields, maybe not actually related to cost, but more so. Like say 1000 for planet defenses and 600 for fleets.

Sarevok wrote:

Tekki wrote:I don't think anyone is arguing that sniping is a valid way of playing just at the moment it's about the only viable way of playing hence my belief that something needs to be done to allow either super sabbing on attack weapons or killing attack soldiers without blood realm AND balance up the cost of attack and defence weapons and planet bonuses. Why are attack weapons cheaper?

And make defences further more effective then they are. Max had a good suggestion. If you have your realm alert up, then what ever % of income you loose, gets put into maintaining defence weapons. Like if you have it set at critical (70%), then your weapons only take 30% of the normal damage. Though unit deaths are the same, so that defences don't become impenetrable

I like the idea of alliances working together more to say put you on ppt come a massing, could make it more interesting and make defenses more secure, as most have most to lose when not at war. I believe admin is already trying to make sniping/attack with little defense less useful with the increase in sabbing ability/kills.

Tried to spoil the different parts, but the forum didn't like them to end the way they should.

knight37 wrote:"Fixing" the planets is so much more important than fixing the snipers that never have anything killable.

How about Jason listens to someone that actually plays the game the way it was meant to be played (has a defense close (hell, I'll take half) to their strike) and not a nub sniper?

Lost Legends for the sniper alliance of the year.

IF I was a sniper like you induce...wouldn't I seek lesser losses?
Now that doesn't make ANY sense. The planet features would enable me to mass people with minimal losses and one or two planets always protected. Thus being a kull warrior-like sniper.
What I wanted with this update is to have people take more losses like this game is meant to be, and not rely only on planets and actually train troops in their strikes or defenses.

I am not sure, but isn't it the EXACT contrary to a sniper (or "nub sniper" )?

Shocking news, I happened to have built half my strike defenses regularly in my war against Ricos. So yes, admin listened to someone that actually plays the way game is meant to be played. It's good to suggest he should, but that's what he did.

Sarevok wrote:

Leg Apophis wrote:[spoiler]Now that's the proof Jason isn't deaf to arguemented demands. Interesting thing is I didn't mention this time most common proposal to fix those planets, which he apparently used..
People complain admin doesn't fix bugs or unnatural things but when he does they complain also...never satisfied bunch. And people wondered why Jason prefered not to change anything & admitted it openly he prefered to change nothing for a while. There we got the answer.
People are never satisfied of what he does. Yes he does mistakes sometimes, but when he corrects them, oh yes people are again here to criticize. No matter what he does people criticize. No wonders admin "never listens" as you say[/spoiler].

Thats the thing. People were complaining about the planet glitch/bug that was never intended. Now he's fixed it, he's done the wrong thing...

Wakko wrote:Maybe if they were longer it wouldn't be an issue, some people have lives that they must attend to.

Maybe, just maybe, Jason does as well

Wakko wrote:[spoiler]Continue to 'help' and get a few things fixed with worrying and pushing your own opinions and ideas onto Jason and i'm sure, assuming that they were the voice of everyone as well. Just like the houses maybe?[/spoiler]

Well, why don't you turn up and argue against Leg Apophis

Wepwaet wrote:[spoiler]Again, Forum has canceled almost every afternoon meeting in the last 2 months. How can we present our ideas when the times to present them keep being removed?[/spoiler]

1) Get someone to express the view for you at the AM meet?
2) Make the AM meet?

Wakko wrote:[spoiler]2 meetings 8 hours apart That's an 'average' work day and I know many people who have an hour+ commute to/from work. You're just being the common-sense-less person you usually are [/spoiler]

Wow good stuff. Insult is much better then suggestion a change in one of the times...

1-Indeed, that's what I noticed.
2-Obviously Jason does, but people tend to forget about it.
3-People say it's bad and that majority was against it but don't really argue, while it's just them who consider themselves as majority, just like I would. So neither side really is majority.
4-That's what I did and do this time, do for people who cannot attend but want something to be done, I forward demand. When people ask/are nice of course.
5-Insults are the last resort when one doesn't have any arguments left.
I couldn't care less anyway about those digs at me, because I know for a fact if I was a so called senseless person, Jason would have been deaf to what I asked him. If I was a so called senseless person, I would have infact acted exact opposite way than I did. Way I used with Jason being neither threat/aggressive style nor complaining/criticizing empty-of-arguments (such as "it's bad I don't like this it should be changed because I want so).


I'm sure the "majority" doesn't have 300-800bil bonus coming from planets, but more like trying to build defenses to stop farming on them from snipers and other massive strike people. They try to build it big, see they take 5 to 10x losses to their attackers due to them having mega strike bonuses, small amount of supers, regular blessings and massive MSs. Sometimes they don't even bother to build def, become regular farms then quit the game thinking it became totally crazy. And newbies tend to quit as well seeing those monsters to which they cannot defend against no matter what they build. They ascend and lose alot due to building alot to try to defend their accounts against unprofitable naq hits (ie: 25bil naq hit on 500bil def), they lower their incomes to avoid being farmed and thus have little ressources to rebuild when they ascend (to try to get blessings as well).
THAT, IS the majority.

Does Admin actually read what the community wants or just skim over it, so far id say there are more against the houses than are for it, now if the update was, alliance can create there own houses, ( with no bonus )

So say during the server war

FUALL house, automatically sets all alliances in that house to friendly
TJP house, automatically sets all alliances in that horse to friendly,

FUALL house declares TJP house as hostile, all alliances are automatically hostile,

You get the idea,

That way you would keep your concept of houses but without the bonus, and im fairly sure it would have been 1000 times easier to code,

He could have also added under that idea, a message board for that house, that only house alliance members can see, like a quick message system, ( like the old chaos server ) would allow vastly greater communication. ( i even suggested this message board idea several times, but gave up when you know admin aint listening )

Instead we have these updates coming which basically no one wanted, it will make the game far to complex now, you want to expand your player base, not drive the existing players out, instead of all this push them out slowly, if your base goal is to kill the game, just turn the server off, dont make us leave the game that we enjoy because you have made us sick of it with updates we do not wish for.

I doubt admin will see this message let alone take any of it in,

His job is difficult and thankless, but he needs to listen to us everyone once and awhile.

GeneralChaos wrote:
He could have also added under that idea, a message board for that house, that only house alliance members can see, like a quick message system, ( like the old chaos server ) would allow vastly greater communication. ( i even suggested this message board idea several times, but gave up when you know admin aint listening )

I asked Jason this for races few monthes ago (races over a certain amount of members of course, like 20), to make races like in the old chaos server. Would be good to see that for houses.

BMMJ13 wrote:Yes, but planets already give a bonus, I see no reason why they should be made easy or non-liable to have.

Nono. Sorry, may have worded wrongly. It was more in reference to the fact that, both using planets, and only having an attack reduces losses. So in essence there similar styles.

BMMJ13 wrote:[spoiler]I believe it does currently, as 2ic and Leader are the Same except for Disbanding alliance if I am correct. I believe Lore has suggested before about using alliance bank to add a 3ic position, which would also help with this new idea. And yes, I believe it currently is low based on how much people make and the % taken out, however limiting the amount of times I don't agree with as it's only an hour, but the the amount should not make it that it's easy to do all the time either.[/spoiler]

Fair call. So make the cost in the order of trillion or something. Highly costly, so it can't constantly be used. But can be used alot if you have enough saved. Problem is, it advantages the strong/large. So maybe something like 4 hours/day is the maximum allowed, and leave the cost the same?

BMMJ13 wrote:It would make sense to have fleets and planet defenses be more then MS Weapons/Shields, maybe not actually related to cost, but more so. Like say 1000 for planet defenses and 600 for fleets.

Sounds fair to me.

BMMJ13 wrote:[spoiler]I like the idea of alliances working together more to say put you on ppt come a massing, could make it more interesting and make defenses more secure, as most have most to lose when not at war. I believe admin is already trying to make sniping/attack with little defense less useful with the increase in sabbing ability/kills.[/spoiler]

Yes. sabbing is meant to be becoming alot more powerful. And covert power being reduced, means covert planets will become more useful then they were before

BMMJ13 wrote:Tried to spoil the different parts, but the forum didn't like them to end the way they should.

It's not easy lol. Select between the {quote="BMMJ13"} and {/quote} parts and just click Spoiler.

GeneralChaos wrote:[spoiler]Does Admin actually read what the community wants or just skim over it, so far id say there are more against the houses than are for it, now if the update was, alliance can create there own houses, ( with no bonus )[/spoiler]

My Response[spoiler]If he didn't read the forum then why would he:

1) Minumum Turns to Use on Attack/Raid
The minimum attack turns to use is increased from 1, to 3. No slapfights here!

You've been an advocate for this for quite some time if i recall. Sure, it wasn't changing it to actually to 1/15 the damage. But it was something no?

2) Sabotage
Ability to damage enemy increased. This is to keep the sab potential in line with growing power bases.
The percent max damage per sabotage attempt went from 2 to 4% of their total weapons (double if 2way war is in place). The 'count' of spy actions against the realm, after successful sab, went from 3, to 2...SO in short you can do double sab damage, compared to before, and 33% more often before they hit the maximum amount of covert activity

Again, many people said how useless sabbing was, but guess what...

3) HOUSE VOTE POWER
Is now done by army size - 1 citizen or military gives one vote. (opposed to done by power, as it was before).

Was suggested as opposed to based on power. Guess Jason didn't listen to this either

4) Time Display
Will show- hh:mm for current day | mmm dd, hh:mm for current year (but not current day) | mmm dd, YYYY for previous years.

Huh, i seem to recall a thread i made that had this suggestion...[/spoiler]
I could list most of the updates from beta, which have been included due to player request. But this will save space

Leg Apophis wrote:

knight37 wrote:"Fixing" the planets is so much more important than fixing the snipers that never have anything killable.

How about Jason listens to someone that actually plays the game the way it was meant to be played (has a defense close (hell, I'll take half) to their strike) and not a nub sniper?

Lost Legends for the sniper alliance of the year.

IF I was a sniper like you induce...wouldn't I seek lesser losses?
Now that doesn't make ANY sense. The planet features would enable me to mass people with minimal losses and one or two planets always protected. Thus being a kull warrior-like sniper.
What I wanted with this update is to have people take more losses like this game is meant to be, and not rely only on planets and actually train troops in their strikes or defenses.

I am not sure, but isn't it the EXACT contrary to a sniper (or "nub sniper" )?

Shocking news, I happened to have built half my strike defenses regularly in my war against Ricos. So yes, admin listened to someone that actually plays the way game is meant to be played. It's good to suggest he should, but that's what he did.

1t strike and 100b defense? You don't call that a sniper?

The point I'm trying to make is this:

Why are there two units (attack and defense)? I'm pretty sure if you go around the world you will find that the countries use what they have as both.

Except France which they use their army to hold white flags.

knight37 wrote:
1t strike and 100b defense? You don't call that a sniper?

The point I'm trying to make is this:

Why are there two units (attack and defense)? I'm pretty sure if you go around the world you will find that the countries use what they have as both.

Except France which they use their army to hold white flags.

That's not me. I didn't rebuild my strike up to 1tril because my strike is sufficient for war I'm into.

As for the last part..surrendering once doesn't mean surrendering all the time.
But well, silly jokes are silly..

Anyway, I've been in quite a big amount of those mmorpg games, and most used the attack =/= defense troops way.

knight37 wrote: The point I'm trying to make is this:

Why are there two units (attack and defense)? I'm pretty sure if you go around the world you will find that the countries use what they have as both.

Except France which they use their army to hold white flags.

Was suggested by Jason himself. Primary reason not to do this was because if your defence was massed, you had not strike units to attack back with.
Its a major question but. Do we have Supers, which attack and defend, or do we keep the current setup, and find some way to attack attack units. I think once we work out the best solution for this, we can improve the game once again

Leg Apophis wrote:

knight37 wrote:
1t strike and 100b defense? You don't call that a sniper?

The point I'm trying to make is this:

Why are there two units (attack and defense)? I'm pretty sure if you go around the world you will find that the countries use what they have as both.

Except France which they use their army to hold white flags.

That's not me. I didn't rebuild my strike up to 1tril because my strike is sufficient for war I'm into.

As for the last part..surrendering once doesn't mean surrendering all the time.
But well, silly jokes are silly..

Anyway, I've been in quite a big amount of those mmorpg games, and most used the attack =/= defense troops way.

You need to read better. Where did I say it was you? Besides, you are on PPT.

I said alliance, not you specifically. Go spy your alliance.

@Sarevok,

I know what your implying by that admin does read the forums, but honestly alot of them ideas where mentioned really early in this thread, and several times in the past, they where given updates that should have been introduced 2+ years ago when the game was developing far faster,

Since them ideas there has been alot of negative feedback on how the update will ruin the game, and its all ignored.

if tis sniper stuff bothers that much , what about those 300-500b def wit 1b strike?

sure makes sabbing them hard due not killing much but is same as sniping

yeah, i see what you mean by that GC. I hope to try to get jason to make them a redistribution instead of an out right bonus.

Or do people prefere it just a grouping with advantages like group pms etc?

All updates should be put up to a vote, some updates yea, alot they are goin to ruin the game, and if the planet update goes through im quitting, ive spent to much naq on plats and 1 planet to have some noobs get an update through, just because they dont like how it is...

And, Apophis this will hurt the big $ in this game, zilch!! They will just spend a lil more and have 10 planets merlined forever!

Sarevok wrote:

MaxSterling wrote:[spoiler]The best possible way for admin to get feedback is either to have a poll done in main or to have a separate thread for each update instead of one general overall update. This way he can see the feedback for each update and then gauge the appeal and determine if the update can/should be pushed forward.[/spoiler]

I agree with you Max. But then again, it's only about 10% of the game that use the forum, and probably only 5% come here. Though it would be better then those whom can fit in an hour window once a week.

MaxSterling wrote:The best possible way for admin to get feedback is either to have a poll done in main or to have a separate thread for each update instead of one general overall update. This way he can see the feedback for each update and then gauge the appeal and determine if the update can/should be pushed forward.

I guess this would take care of the rest of the people, then... huh?