StarGateWars Forums

IF, all that defence was purely on the planet (eg about 700k) then yes you would. If 500k is planet, and 200k is platform, then no, you only need 20% of 500k, not 20% of 700k

Sarevok one can have 0 shield capacity, 0 weps capacity and 15 million hangars so your whole argument about MS vrs planets how much it adds, the cost to rebuild MS weps and shields etc etc is inappropriate in this topic

~N

id say keep everyhting the way it is and jsut give the defender more of an advantage ag 15% chance of planetary blessing or something.

every time an update is brough in it effect the attacker in a positive way when the defender gets stuffed the updates have to give more of an advantage to the defender for once

Neimenljivi wrote:Sarevok one can have 0 shield capacity, 0 weps capacity and 15 million hangars so your whole argument about MS vrs planets how much it adds, the cost to rebuild MS weps and shields etc etc is inappropriate in this topic

How on earth is it inappropriate? To nullify your 'apparent' argument, one could have 0 planets all together. Or better still, a statless planet (these exist).
Also:

Neimenljivi wrote:Sarevok - it costs you about 10T naq IN REPAIRS ONLY to mass a 2t+ defense, let's also not forget about the ATs used, naq used for buying fleets, etc etc

AND

renegadze wrote:I think you massively underestimate the cost of massing down the big planets. Anything 2tril+ (including plats) costs me 120bil+ per hit to repair

Lets see, you take out, hmm, 10k defences/hit? So, if I'm actively repairing as you are, that's about 800b naq every time you hit me. So lets see... 800B - 120b(repair) - 12B(AT cost) = 640B MORE cost to defend the planet, then to take it. Yup, that's fair...
Even, taking out 5k defences, it still costs someone 240b MORE per hit to repair, then it costs you to attack.
What's that you say? But i have to BUILD the fleets? Ok, hit someone 30 times, and hey presto, that 240b/hit, becomes 7.2T, compared with the 6.6T to build 300k fleets.
Or better still, if you are taking out 10k, it's about 10 hits.

GOLDEN WING wrote:every time an update is brough in it effect the attacker in a positive way when the defender gets stuffed the updates have to give more of an advantage to the defender for once

Hopefully Jason's comment "The age of defence is coming" is accurate.

Sarevok as you said:Why are we complaining about % we are just going back to the ratios that were before,right?

.....em yes maybe,but we didnt have plats those days,did we?

Didnt you mentioned once that in Jason eyes planets arent meant to be untakable?

........you did come to this point once before in other topic: If you dont have Huge MS you cant understand it.......and people commenting here have both:huge MS + huge planets........ so they understand planet side too

Players can build one or two untakable planets by todays standards and keep one perma merlined.......so three huge Dualls,what else do you need?

Sarevok wrote:

renegadze wrote:I think you massively underestimate the cost of massing down the big planets. Anything 2tril+ (including plats) costs me 120bil+ per hit to repair

Lets see, you take out, hmm, 10k defences/hit? So, if I'm actively repairing as you are, that's about 800b naq every time you hit me. So lets see... 800B - 120b(repair) - 12B(AT cost) = 640B MORE cost to defend the planet, then to take it. Yup, that's fair...
Even, taking out 5k defences, it still costs someone 240b MORE per hit to repair, then it costs you to attack.
What's that you say? But i have to BUILD the fleets? Ok, hit someone 30 times, and hey presto, that 240b/hit, becomes 7.2T, compared with the 6.6T to build 300k fleets.
Or better still, if you are taking out 10k, it's about 10 hits.

and one failed hit by that fleet and all 6.6tril gone in 1 hit! show me where fleets can cause 6.6tril damage in 1 hit!

beliblisk wrote:Sarevok as you said:Why are we complaining about % we are just going back to the ratios that were before,right?
.....em yes maybe,but we didnt have plats those days,did we?

Sure, lets remove the doubling of fleet power, MS tech, and platforms. I'm all for that

renegadze wrote:and one failed hit by that fleet and all 6.6tril gone in 1 hit! show me where fleets can cause 6.6tril damage in 1 hit!

Against planet defences, that is impossible. This would only occur, if you failed to meet the 10% platform strength. If you fail to meet planet strength, they simply don't attack.

Sarevok wrote:

beliblisk wrote:Sarevok as you said:Why are we complaining about % we are just going back to the ratios that were before,right?
.....em yes maybe,but we didnt have plats those days,did we?

Sure, lets remove the doubling of fleet power, MS tech, and platforms. I'm all for that

As i understand that is not under discussion is it?Or did i missed something?

Do you understand that a lot of big defended planets are untakable by 99,99% of players today?

Where is the point of making them untakable by 100%?

Why did you comment other things i wrote?...like why you think that is good to have more that three untakable planets?

Sarevok wrote:

beliblisk wrote:Sarevok as you said:Why are we complaining about % we are just going back to the ratios that were before,right?
.....em yes maybe,but we didnt have plats those days,did we?

Sure, lets remove the doubling of fleet power, MS tech, and platforms. I'm all for that

renegadze wrote:and one failed hit by that fleet and all 6.6tril gone in 1 hit! show me where fleets can cause 6.6tril damage in 1 hit!

Against planet defences, that is impossible. This would only occur, if you failed to meet the 10% platform strength. If you fail to meet planet strength, they simply don't attack.

and because there is no way to spy the platforms it a hell of a gamble. Maybe you should be able to spy platforms? it strikes me that a huge platform defending a planet would be fairly easy to spot

Indeed, I would suggest special kind of recon using 2 or 3 reconing turns like sabotages, with 25-30% chances to show it (and 75-70% to appear as ???). This way the risk decreases to lose all your fleets at once due to unknown platforms, but seeing the platforms power isn't "too" easy either.

I agree with LA. Making stuff so much harder, well you should at least be able to see the platform defense somehow too.

Sarevok I don't understand what you're trying to say with planets and MS (not fleets). One could have no MS/small one that couldn't hurt a fly too

You also only calculated how much it costs you if the planet is the biggest size possible

~N

beliblisk wrote:As i understand that is not under discussion is it?Or did i missed something?

No it's not. But you seemed to like the idea of removing platforms. So i figured, why not put it back right to the start, without either of the power boosts as well.

beliblisk wrote:Do you understand that a lot of big defended planets are untakable by 99,99% of players today?
Where is the point of making them untakable by 100%?

Due to lack of team work imo. And because, why can't someone have planets and not a MS, why must we have a MS, and not planets? Sure, MS get massed, and it costs what, 2T to repair? 100k weapon slots gives 200b power. For 200b defensive power alone from a planet costs 51T. To also have an attack planet (since a MS can be used in attack), would cost another 51T. Plus the costs for defences on these planet.

beliblisk wrote:Why did you comment other things i wrote?...like why you think that is good to have more that three untakable planets?

Because people were complaining about me trolling and commenting on everything they said, but sinice you want me to

beliblisk wrote:Didnt you mentioned once that in Jason eyes planets arent meant to be untakable?

Not that i recall. I know he initially planned them to be non-permanent to any 1 realm. I'm pretty sure he's view changed, otherwise, why introduce merlins to permanently hide planets from everyone forever?

beliblisk wrote:you did come to this point once before in other topic: If you dont have Huge MS you cant understand it.......and people commenting here have both:huge MS + huge planets........ so they understand planet side too

Really. Care to point out those whom vote against the update, and have large planet which AREN'T merlined, and large fleets?

beliblisk wrote:Players can build one or two untakable planets by todays standards and keep one perma merlined.......so three huge Dualls,what else do you need?

Define untakeable. If by untakeable, you mean a single person working by themselves can not then yes. If your talking about an alliance, or even an empire working on a single persons fleets, no, i doubt it. For 500k fleets (including MS tech), 637T, amongst an alliance of 30 people, 21T each. To defend against such fleets for a single person (since what alliance would build up only 1 persons planet so the alliance can't claim it back) is 1250k defences. For this, you need a mind blowing planet, costing a total of 100T for 1 person.

Neimenljivi wrote:You also only calculated how much it costs you if the planet is the biggest size possible

To have a planet over 500k, you need the size i used. But lets say you only have 500k, for arguments sake...
10k defences/hit = 700b - Repair and damage costs, 140b - 560b more.
5k defences/hit = 350b - Repair and damage costs, 140b - 210b more.
To compensate costs of fleets (lets say 200k for 15% minimum) which would cost 4.4T
At 10k/hit, 8 hits to be cheeper. At 5k/hit 21 hits.
Oh thanks Neim, that's less then before, i like it

Cant you see what this brings to the game?
Cant you see advantage that big $$$ spenders have already?

This updates fill further extend the gab just like MS techs did.

I guess this whole thing is pointless,updates will come if we like it or not....but i am sure that this wont make game better.


.....after all i can benefit to....ill just build my self huge Income planets that will be practically be untakable,become inactive and just sell naq for $$$

Thats how i see future of this game and the turns that it is making

I'm just defending my viewpoint. Reducing fleet efficiency would allow other players to be able to have the defences the money spenders have. increasing fleet capacity would just mean ALL non-spenders would ONLY be able to protect 1, MAX 2 planets.

Also, if you plan to sell resources for cash, your better off farming people, then letting your own income do the work (since you can only protect it properly for 4/7 days)

Its not stopable now, but i think selling resources for money should have NEVER been apart of a "free" game.

Sarevok you just admitted that the only way to steal the planets that ONE person built up by himself is by having an alliance build someone's fleets big enough to TRY and take it. Don't you think that alone proves the point I'm trying to make?
I have big planet and big fleet, and I'm "complaining"

If you don't want MS and want only planets then why did you build your MS up?

~N