StarGateWars Forums

~Massin4Christ~ wrote: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!

Merlining a planet or two is far more easy than merlining ten planets...not to mention it costs alot more to have 10 planets than one...and I'm sure not many people have more than 4 planets which are big/duals and need to be merlined..
Now people will have to spend more & take risks instead of relying on one or two planets that they know will never be lost unless they forgot to merlin them. Ten planets means more merlins, more defenses...and not platforms for all.
The end of the almost untakable planets with total of almost 3-4tril defs on it giving immortal bonus to get 1tril strike with 1mil supers. This game isn't based on planets, and certainly not on something that can barely have risk to be stolen.

Spies die by assassins, assassins die by lifers, motherships can be massed, defenses can be massed or sabotaged, strikes can be sabotaged, planets can be stolen...wait a planet merlined all time with full defs and platforms unless cannot be stolen. However managing to keep multiple planets due to absence of more than 3 platforms, cost to build them all and their defs...Now yzes that's how it should be.
People used to invest a while ago alot in covert because covert couldn't be killed, so they trained all as spies and built max covert because it was the key way to power. Now planets are almost same unless human mistake. But the more planets there are, the more the risks are to lose them.

People will have to build something that we call stats based on troops and weapons. Oh yes...actually have troops losses in wars when they mass people.

each update aims to spend more naq and if one really spends a lot can take fully usage of it for a period of max 1 year then admin changes

~Massin4Christ~ wrote: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 if we were given the option to sell stats on a planet, for say 2 weeks, so we could get back the then unused stats, and put it else where. Would that work.

MaxSterling wrote:

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?

If he got over 2000 votes, and there was a clear winner by more then say 20% then yes it would.

Leg Apophis wrote:People will have to build something that we call stats based on troops and weapons. Oh yes...actually have troops losses in wars when they mass people.

I'd actually like this back. where you train for power, not acquire it through ascending etc

Is this all the use of the alliance bank will have to offer?

Not having access to any info about cost and such can someone explain it to me? I know you have to pay to "vote" or something, but once in a house do you continue to have to pay or vote or are you there until you move yourself or get kicked or what?

My question is basicly, is there enough "costs" involved to actually drain a bank? or will the cost reamin lower then an alliances increase?

Lore wrote:Is this all the use of the alliance bank will have to offer?

thats it so far, could turn out to be more later

Lore wrote:Not having access to any info about cost and such can someone explain it to me? I know you have to pay to "vote" or something, but once in a house do you continue to have to pay or vote or are you there until you move yourself or get kicked or what?

you have to pay to enter into a House and change your vote for who is in control of that house, and i think that is is. it wont cost any more to stay in that house, but if you get kicked, you have to spend the naq to re-join

Lore wrote:My question is basicly, is there enough "costs" involved to actually drain a bank? or will the cost reamin lower then an alliances increase?

for the larger alliances, the bank's capacity will only decrease for a very short amount of time
for those in the smaller alliances, it will take some time, but it wont have a huge impact

I'm with Lore. You should have to choose were to spend your Naq. So that not everyone can use every upgrade available.

not sure if this has been addressed and i refuse to read so many pages so i'll just say, it appears the alliances houses are due to be determined by army size rather than total power, i am fairly against this, i dont have much power or army size atm but i really liked the idea that there was finally a reason to have total power, atm there is no good reason to have stats, making the houses based on power would of given people a reason to build up and a reason to want to weaken others......

doing things by size basically eliminates the smaller alliances and empires from the running permenently, the more popular empires will rule unopposed, at least when it was power there was the option to fight for power within a house now there is nothing, no chance, boring, stupid, pointless.

of course this is all hinging on the fact the houses are going to be size based still, if not ignore this post

Heka wrote:not sure if this has been addressed and i refuse to read so many pages so i'll just say, it appears the alliances houses are due to be determined by army size rather than total power, i am fairly against this, i dont have much power or army size atm but i really liked the idea that there was finally a reason to have total power, atm there is no good reason to have stats, making the houses based on power would of given people a reason to build up and a reason to want to weaken others......

doing things by size basically eliminates the smaller alliances and empires from the running permenently, the more popular empires will rule unopposed, at least when it was power there was the option to fight for power within a house now there is nothing, no chance, boring, stupid, pointless.

of course this is all hinging on the fact the houses are going to be size based still, if not ignore this post

Thats a bad idea. If that whese to happen people would get anti lvl 35 and 100m anti covert to build the powerto be in control. Would onlx need 2 people to do that all week to own a house

Ok, and those with large armies would simply crush anyone who's power-base came within cooee of theirs, and would look like rivalling there's. Army size allows you to put more into miners/lifers, which can't simply be stripped in a matter of minutes.

-Edit-

Rottenking wrote:Thats a bad idea. If that whese to happen people would get anti lvl 35 and 100m anti covert to build the powerto be in control. Would onlx need 2 people to do that all week to own a house

Excellent point. And even not being on PPT can be bypassed. 2 PPT say monday-thursday, and 2 others thursday - sunday

I still struggle with trying to find the reasoning behind making the houses "controlled" anyway. That feature, much like the ASW will always be controlled by certain groups. So why create the feature knowing the end result?

Hope of a different outcome?

Hope is a powerful thing, but its as dangerous as it is powerful.


have you looked at beta and who controls what now? but that is beta, and only a small % play there so maybe it will be different on main.

lol, I've noticed Lore. Your empire buddies booted us out

But yes, unfortunately Beta is but a shadow of Main really. And the injection of 1Q naq to everyone didn't help that

Sarevok wrote:lol, I've noticed Lore. Your empire buddies booted us out

But yes, unfortunately Beta is but a shadow of Main really. And the injection of 1Q naq to everyone didn't help that

ahhh, you dont like the 1/2/3 million raw UP's

We have tried and tried and tried to tell jason over and over, but meh.

If I wanted to "test" something, I would prefer it be close to what I'm am really dealing with, not 100 times more powerful.

In beta, there's a lot more aggression and from waht I understand so long as you are in the house, after 5 days you get teh bonus from the house.

There's nothign to stop more informal agreements between empries and alliances that say you want to come into my house - fine, you can but you start to challenge me, then you will be booted. At the moment of course there's the enforced NAP but assuming that there weren't too many miscellaneous alliances entering the house, I think you will find that some of the House Owners will be content.