StarGateWars Forums

I agree that turns should be limited in some way....there's simply no skill in the game anymore. Before the market (which there's no way to get rid of now) people had to actually plan wars....now if you're bored you can just run off a few K turns at some middle ranked player no problem.

There should be some kind of limitation on turns so that an element of strategy and tactics returns to the game....atm, people just waste their lives away raiding and massing everything in site.

However, the only down side with limiting the number of turns is.....MULTIS.....as soon as people can't get turns off the market they'll set up an account at their firend's house and use it as a turns reserve. There would have to be some kind of limitation on how many turns you can give or receive a week to....which would really peeve you warmongers off.

Destruction1 wrote:If the big players get so fed up and leave in their droves why do the small players need incentives to catch them? They won't be here to catch.

The game isn't stale...... I intend to try to catch the big guys.

But If I had to wait in front of the PC for 6 hours to get enough turns to hit someone because I couldn't afford the over the top prices the rare turns were generating then I'm going to go and find something else to do instead. If you can't afford to attack and you spend your turn based income in 1 minute.......what do you do for the other 29 mins till you can stratigically aquire another UU level upgrade. (Always assuming you make enough a turn to increase your UU production once a turn) If the big guys making 84bill naq a turn and your making 40mil naq a turn who is going to get all the turns? And what do the big guys do? They sit on the turns so no-one can attack them because they have bought all the turns. And then they hit the small guy to get their naq back.

The point is you wouldn't need to be able to afford teh over the top prices for rare turns - you could sell your own for over teh top prices and use the naq to build until you are in a position to start buying them.

And, you're missing the point entirely - the game was so much better before all these turns were available, before teh market, before raid, becasue there was more thought needed to play - it wasn't simply a case of:

Buy Turns
Raid/Mass
Buy Turns
Raid/Mass
Buy Turns
Raid/Mass
Buy Turns
Raid/Mass
Buy Turns
Raid/Mass

as it is now.

Things had to be planned properly, resources saved etc. The game is at a point now where people are just obsessed about raiding and turns (ultimately stat building). I've been here since the beginning (well, week 2) - so trust me, I know. And, although many of teh bigger players are not saying it, I've talked to a few recently who agree with me and who are saying teh game is getting boring.

If the big players do leave - that doesn't solve the problem. It only alleviates it temporarily.

And need does NOT drive the market, at least not in teh sense you are talking about. People need turns, but because they are in unlimited supply, the price is relatively low (and false). Removing unlimited turns would produce a true value, to apoint where turns would not become the most valuable commodity, meaning teh market could realistically fluctuate.

And, you have your argument back to front - attacking, raiding, massing have only been possible to the extent we now see them BECAUSE of the mass availability of the Attack Turns. It is the availability of the turns driving these activities, not the activities driving the market!

Teal'auc - i hear what you are saying - but all this massing etc only occurs because it can due to teh mass availability of turns. If they weren't so available, then people wouldn't want to attack so much. Nobody is talking about stopping anyone doing anything. And if the big players do not need to raid or farm as much as you say - then why do they do it so much? You all seem to be glossing over the main point - that big players will always want to buy turns - if not for raiding/farming, then for massing people who have dared attack them.

BenjaminMS - smaller players will not need their turns so much because they would be able to sell their's for a LOT of naq. yes, they may need to get market SS - or they could buy/get somebody to buy SS.

A lot of people are saying - thi would solidify the position of thsoe at the top - yet your arguments are always countered - give me some real evidence!

Sleipnir is right - you had to think about what you were doing previously - now if somebody hits a big player for a legitimate naq attack, they just buy 10k turns and mass you back. The big players would not be able to do this under the proposed change - not unless they were willing to spend a lot of their naq to buy AT at prices that could virtually be dictated by those they are buying them from.

Strategy - they would have to consider whether such big retaliation is worth it for a single naq attack.

Sleipnir - intersesting idea!!!!

Wolf please respond to munchy's posts, about how this would stop small players from being able to grow at a much quicker rate then most larger players. (he grew at a faster rate when his army size was much smaller then he even grows today, because he was able to raid, sell uu for more naq, raid etc....was able to do this with very small army size, and just with TIME and effort he grew very fast)

now all he can do is buy uu cuz of time restraints and he grows much slower

it would take alot of work, but it is possible for a very small player to start with his 2000 turns and just turn that into ALOT of uu by raiding and selling uu getting more turns and raiding again etc....... I believe the top players will be able to keep there position of strength easier if turns are changed in your way..........it is a fact the strong always have the ability to wield there strength in this game no matter what you do........

this change would limit small- to medium players

make it harder for small players to recover from a bad ascension (now they can raid back there army the list goes on)

why not further restrict the large.......punishing the weak that have the time to put in alot of effort would make this game stale because there would be no possibility for a new player to gather strength to compete with top players which is possible now, since I know of 2 players that have grown to become top rank players and started alot later than most that are where they are......even stronger then me even tho they started over a year later.......you know why RAIDING.......

i think there should be a way to kill miners or lifers, that would make the game real interesting

Calqulon wrote:i think there should be a way to kill miners or lifers, that would make the game real interesting

There used to be - you used to be able to kill UU, until a lot of players said it was unfair because it meant that all their hard work was ruined.

311 - I have read Munchy's posts - but there are only so many ways I can counter teh same argument. Frankly, we are in this situation because of the introduction of mass availability of turns and raid - now, a lot of people are not going to be happy if a change like this was implemented (AND I AGAIN STRESS I DO NOT CLAIM IT IS PERFECT) - but so what? People complain when every change is introduced. Bottom line - people only use so many AT for raiding becasue they can - if they couldn't it wouldn't be a problem - and we wouldn't have the situation we do now.

My only other suggestion, which I do not want to see, is to RESET main - yes, RESET, let those who have SS etc keep it, and allocate new army sizes on a scalar based on length of time played, army size at time of reset and number of ascensions. But get rid of the things that are dragging teh game (and teh community) down. Hell - I'd probably complain about it - but the simple fact is NOTHING is being done about the state of teh game - and something NEEDS to be done!

But I bet as long as my backside points downwards, the biggest players (even though they would end up with the biggest armies anyway) will complain about it, especially those making real $$ from the game.

What really annoys me though is that quite a few of you jump up and say "no, rubbish idea" , yet apart from 1 or 2, none of you propose anything better - and ANYTHING is better than what we have currently.

i am for further restricting larger players in some way

with more extensive plagues.......or having troops rebel in some way when too many get into 1 place for 2 long.........

I think we should work on restricting the HUGE players, and allow the small players free range, thats my 2 cents. and that is a suggestion

I would like to think a person that starts today, would be given the chance to grow QUICKER so they can compete.........

Maybe we should implement time based restrictions so that the longer you have played the more you are restricted on how you grow I dont know

But on I do know that if your suggstion was implemented it would hurt the potential that a small player could be MORE then it would help them.

Wolf359 wrote:

Calqulon wrote:i think there should be a way to kill miners or lifers, that would make the game real interesting

There used to be - you used to be able to kill UU, until a lot of players said it was unfair because it meant that all their hard work was ruined.

311 - I have read Munchy's posts - but there are only so many ways I can counter teh same argument. Frankly, we are in this situation because of the introduction of mass availability of turns and raid - now, a lot of people are not going to be happy if a change like this was implemented (AND I AGAIN STRESS I DO NOT CLAIM IT IS PERFECT) - but so what? People complain when every change is introduced. Bottom line - people only use so many AT for raiding becasue they can - if they couldn't it wouldn't be a problem - and we wouldn't have the situation we do now.

My only other suggestion, which I do not want to see, is to RESET main - yes, RESET, let those who have SS etc keep it, and allocate new army sizes on a scalar based on length of time played, army size at time of reset and number of ascensions. But get rid of the things that are dragging teh game (and teh community) down. Hell - I'd probably complain about it - but the simple fact is NOTHING is being done about the state of teh game - and something NEEDS to be done!

But I bet as long as my backside points downwards, the biggest players (even though they would end up with the biggest armies anyway) will complain about it, especially those making real $$ from the game.

What really annoys me though is that quite a few of you jump up and say "no, rubbish idea" , yet apart from 1 or 2, none of you propose anything better - and ANYTHING is better than what we have currently.

I apologize Wolf, I was under the impression that you were looking for discussion relating directly to this topic, I didn't know that you were looking for other, alternative ideas to the problem.

On that note, I would like to clarify the problem, and ask if my interpretation is correct.
-You believe that the unlimited amounts of turns in the game has rid the game of all stragedy by allowing for unlimited massing runs.
-By eliminating market produced turns players will not be able to be so 'mass happy', and the price of at's would rise, thus encouraging small players to sell them.
_______
My counterpoint:
-By eliminating market produced turns there is little chance that any new player will be able to catch up. As it is now by raiding their lives away they can.
_________
I tried to make both sides as simple as possible.


Now you want an idea/compromise?
How about a new resource? Currently we have naq, uu's, turns, and arguably covert turns(though they can't be traded, they do generate).

Why not have destruction turns?
They would be essentially the same as attack turns, but their sole use would be destruction(rather obvious). Unlike attack turns they would not generate on the market, and if you wanted(though I am sure this will be argued), they could not be traded.

Now if this was to be done then some changes would have to be implemented into the current way battles and causalty/weapon damage is calculated. Destruction attacks would not serve to give the attacker/masser any resources, but they would do just what their name says. They would kill defense units, motherships, spies, and damage weapons.

Now if this was done attack turns would have to be tweaked. In my opinion it would be fine to leave it as it is on the attackers end of things...meaning they would still loose the same amount of units/do the same damage to their weapons as it is currently, but the damage to the defender would either: a.Not happen at all(even under successful attacks for naq/uu) or b. Be extremely minimal(on something like fraction of 10 of what it is now).

Under the second senario attack turns could still be used to mass, but the losses on the attacker would be extremely high in comparison to the defender, and it would take many more attack turns than it does now.

Using the first senario attack turns would do no damage do the defender, and thus only 'destruction turns' could be used for massing purposes.

Downside this idea:
-Right now people who currently do not watch their account closely are quickly crushed by the occasional farmer...with this idea they would probably take very little damage, and thus they might care less about being extremely active.
-Means more stat builders, because it is doubtful that people would waste their limited destruction turns on people who just sit there.
-More complicated.
-Might mean less wars and more statbuilding, but no more than if the market produced at's were to disappear. So some might actually count this as less random massings, and thus a good thing.

Upside:
-Less random massings
-People can still raid all they want, and thus grow depending on how active they are.
-Promotes the tactical use of destruction turns, and one person probably wouldn't be able to mass an entire alliance.
-Because destuction turns wouldn't be market produced, all players would have a fair share of them. If they are tradeable then small players could probably make a good amount of naq selling them.


Remember, you asked for an idea

I did indeed! (and I'm glad that you obliged - although it is a long post and I am extremely tired at the moment and didn't completely understand it (even after reading it twice) - it's probably not the post - it's my tiredness!!

I promise to read it tomorrow and give you some thoughts.

But here's another thought in the mean time: What if a Parallel Universe was created - this would essentially be a mirror of main, but with a few tweaks. All things that are in Main would remain, except:

- The market would be a player derived market where the players dictate the prices and what they sell (including AT).

- No artificial production of AT in the Mirror Universe (sounds like Star Trek! ). I have no problem with artifical production of naquadah and even UU - these are physical entities, and so can be reproduced - but an AT is a non-physical commodity, which I took to represent the capability of an army to participate in battle, and to be able to take part in battle you need to prepare and bide your time. How can you purchase readiness?

Ascension would remain as is - with the same Ascension server for both sides of the mirror.

The snag is - you can only have an account in one of these Universes - you can exist in Main, or the Mirror Universe, but not both.

The way I envisage it - once setup, everyone currently in the game at the time has the option to transfer to the Mirror Universe if they wish (this option will ony be open for a limited time) - once they do, their account is moved across, with a few tweaks - I don't want people carrying 10s of thousands of AT across there - so when you move across, you start with 1000 AT - for everyone. The rest of your account is transferred as is (but maybe not planets - might have to have a think about that......). Naturally, you will not drag your officers with you, and you will not belong to an alliance - because initially there will not be any!

Once you move to the Mirror Universe for the first time (!), you are committed to stay there for a minimum period (2 weeks, a month?). Once this predetermined period is up, you are given the chance to transfer back to Main for free - with similar limitations imposed. The idea of this is to give you a chance to see if you like it - if you don't, you get to go back.

You will note I said 'for the first time' - what I am proposing is that it is possible to traverse the divide between the two mirror universes - but it should not be easy! You would have to reach a certain level in something - maybe in G&R? Or maybe a new points system, based on experience and knowledge (just pulling ideas out of a hat) - it could even be that you get Experience Points (XP) and something else (Acknowledgement Points (AP)?) which is awarded to you for certain actions - or by other players (you would only be able to award points to a single player once), and it is a combination of these 2 that allow you to cross the void so, to speak.... I really don't know - I'm thinking way out the box right now (probably due to the fact I'm falling asleep here) - but what I believe I am trying to say is that your ability to do this should not be solely dicatted by your strength, power, ability to raid/mass, your alliance, or even how many friends you have - but other players would be able to award points to players for certain things (still thinking about that). To make it fair - players in the same alliance cannot give points to each other - and you can only award a certain number of points per week, and not more than one to the same player. Once you award a point to someone, you cannot give them another.

Also - both games, although connected would be blind to each other - and it would not be possible to create an account in the Mirror Universe - you must traverse the void to get there.

Okay - I'm stopping there - for now - because I can feel myself rambling on (and I've just dribbled on my keyboard! ).

I am willing to come up with anything that will help people decide to stick with SGW, because as it is, a lot of people are leaving / thinking of leaving because of the way the game has gone in recent months. A lot of those people have played teh game for a long time and are among the most well known in thw community. That must tell you something?

EDIt: The reason I have suggested something like this is because - according to the poll - it seems to be split almost down the middle (currently YES = 22 votes, No - 18 votes), which would indicate to me that opinion on this matter is split right down the middle and half of teh community are unhappy about it.

Mayeb I will put it forward as a separate suggestion..... I'll see what the response is first.

Goodnight all.

Sleipnir wrote:Now it's becoming more of an RSI generator. Sit there and do the same thing all day and you'll eventually be at the top.

I like that description to much not to quote it.

At this moment the main problem I see with this whole suggestion is that even though AT would be worth more it still wouldnt be able to allow new players the option to catch up with the players at 50billuu and over, as they gained their rank in many ways due to the ability to have an unlimited supply of AT.
I hate to say it but I agree one of the only things to do would be to make either a new server or reset this one to some extent. Though I do like the idea of having raiding/trainable AT available to buy and the "destructive" (war) AT for actually hurting peoples accounts which is available in a more limited supply which would actually give a reason for alliances to be made larger inspite of the inherent problems a large alliance can cause (ie the number of bad eggs being allowed in increasing), this is a viable alternative and probably the one most likely to be accepted by the whole community that will actually benefit the game to some extent.

If you wanted limited turns, ASCEND!

If you want me to be all powerful for ever vote for this update.

I would love it coming in then i don't have to worry about a thing.

Wolf359[ EPA ] Incarnate of the TOLAH 5,598 6,498,549

That's not very high for someone that been playing
http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=6423

A long time.

Sleipnir
[ TH3 0RD3R 0F CH405 ]
Prior of the INDU 4,374 2,639,002
http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=4729

hmm an older account!

As for people growing, well i will loan out naq/ turns for people to start growing more rapidly, i see that if they are willing to put the time in to improve their accounts then that's ok by me.

Defining Stats building.

the building of stats ( in main part the number of units in your accounts)
This is Helpful and if as an allaince your member aren't doing all that they can to improve themselves by getting more uu so that they can fight a more long term wars. Then what's the point in having them.



http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=55544
THE BL1P *peace
[ The Order ]
Living God of the AJNA 11 50,854,942


http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=48489

pcarmy
[ THE DARK DOMINIUM ]
Living God of the AJNA 21 50,218,554


http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=48299
Legoless
[ Ω Allegiance ]
Living God of the AJNA 35 86,016,941

PSICOLIX
[ Dirty Dozen ] 3,194 57,998,86
http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=41438


There are others, but it's a bit boring looking for them.


Now if you look at there ids they started what a year later then you. HMM maybe this raiding thing is a nice bit of war preparation.

In the end it comes to this, who's the future of this game! Who's know the problems, see as i see it i'am ok whatever you do, current raw UP of 115k, and raising need it for my next ascension. But kill raiding off then it won't matter cause then i can just sit pretty and thumb my nose at 99% of the game, cause they won't be able to catch me. Now they have a chance if they CHOOSE to work for it.

I can only speak on behalf of myself regarding this issue.
But to be really quite honest I think more imbalance in the game would exist by limiting them too much. You have to think about some things.
The game limitations are that are in place as far as raiding, max army size, and max number of ascensions. All of these items are in place to help stunt the growth of the "big guys" and to allow others to somewhat catch up even if only by the means of army sizes. Mostly the bigger accounts either farm with those attack turns, sell them off for naq, give them away to teammates, or use them in the event of war and what not.

So turns being more limited will just stunt the growth of many trying to catch up before Admin increases UU limits and Ascensions beyond 10 again. We all know that will happen eventually and as more and more people get to those barriers the chances of that occuring increase.

Just like in any game you have different devotion and dedication levels of players. Some come and play and quite. Others seek a meager existance, others look to turn a profit, some just like to start wars, others are hardcore with 1 thing in mind to be the best.

It exists in every game period. The more time spent the more you get out of it. The less time spent the less you get out of it. Strategy of the old days is gone to an extent yes. But strategy still exists, anyone that says it doesn't should sit back and think about this game. Everything you do is strategic. Why do you buy covert levels, defense, offense, UP, or ascend.

Over the past 20 Months for us old school people there have been changes to a lot of things. Some good, some bad, some that we just had to deal with. Why do we still play? The Community? Sure. Team Relations? Sure. Friends? Of Course. But we all play because obviously there is strategy left, we all have goals we want to meet, relationships we want to keep.

Everyone no matter who they are have the same chance with an open market place to grow. Those that want it take it. Those that seek a meager existance don't. The opportunity is there for the taking.

Limiting attack turns will only add strategic value when it comes to war planning on a Team Level to ensure you have enough to finish the job. This however throws off the balance of the game somewhat as it is not about who plans and uses strategy to get the most active people on their teams. It comes down to who can get the most members to generate more turns per day.

The only true way to truly bring a balancing effect to the game would be to use a skill level type event. More or less grouping people into areas of their own skill level.

While change is always good as I like a challenge to come up with a new strategy for my team I think any major changes need to be looked at with the utmost scruitny before even being considered. Long (very long as some have noticed and for DD members a somewhat shorter than they are used to seeing from me) Story Short. This is not the best avenue of change to the game as a whole. For both bigger and smaller players alike.

Summary
A Update like this does a few things
Gives more power to those with the income and units to be able to pay outrageous prices for goods.
Gives the ability of smaller players to sell at a much higher cost.
The people in the middle will be the ones hurting the most.
Not to mention the fact that turns strickend too much would change the game landscape on a team scale to those who have massive numbers instead of smaller groups of highly active people.

Change is good yes, the strong will survive yes, But a change (any change) needs to reflect the good for the game. Not certain groups of player levels one way or the other. Admin does have serious proposals infront of him that would do what you speak of. But I can assure you none of which will be fun to code in.

high empty wrote:Wolf359[ EPA ] Incarnate of the TOLAH 5,598 6,498,549

That's not very high for someone that been playing
http://www.stargatewars.com/stats.php?id=6423

A long time.

LMAO - getting a bit personal aren't you? It may have something to do with me being a part time player (I spend significantly more time on the forums than I do on the game - and haven't really PLAYED properly since the first quarter of teh year) - losing interest because of the crappy updates that make the game mind-numbingly boring that even a conversation with my labrador would be more interesting! I also have a life outside of this game (funnily enough).

But the best point to your last comment is that this has nothing to do with peoples current power or how long they have played - it is about improving the game - which the evidence so far suggests that at least half the community are unhappy with. And you have yet to state satisfactorily how changing the current situation would make you more powerful. I have stated how changing it could . And again I stress, just in case you missed it earlier - I am just making a suggestion (2 now - the second of which does not affect Main at all) that is by no means perfect, and I welcome any further suggestions that would improve the situation. What I do not want to see are any further destructive comments (and you can take that from my modding persepctive too).

Wolf, i'am stating the reality of the situation. If you DON"T put the time in you don't get the results. Think about you have kids. If they don't study they don't get better. What does it take to get to Carnegie Hall. Well it takes Practice.



at least half the community are unhappy with


Well i see you and Sleipnir and 2-3 others. I DON"T see HALF.

As for the suggestion, i'am learning towards the limited miners. Aslo certain other limits. However i don't feal that it's for the best of the game to have a turn Cap. to be honest removal of turn generation wouldn't phase me 1 bit. At the moment i go thur about 1000 turns a week. So having less turns is a problem but not really for me. I"am looking to keep the game interesting. See if the ascension cap is lifted then i'll ascend. That in is self is going to cost me 23 mill uu at the moment and that number keeps raising.

high empty wrote:at least half the community are unhappy with


Well i see you and Sleipnir and 2-3 others. I DON"T see HALF.

Check the poll - it has generally been neck and neck all the way! - hence the 'half' reference.

Personally - i do not really care how many turns a person can hold - I simply want them to be no longer artificially generated in the market. Believe me - I am not doing this for any personal gain - I do not play enough anymore to make either the current or the proposed suggestion worth my while - I'm doing it becaue I genuinely believe it will be better for teh game as a whole.

I know it will screw people up initially, because they will have to adapt to a new way of playing - and some won't like it, just as I, and others, didn't like it when mass AT (and raid) became available - but we carried on playing - mainly because we enjoy the community. But things are coming to a head now and long standing people are leaving because of this very situation (and not just weaker ones). I also know that some of the most powerful people in the game are considering quitting because they are finding the current gameplay monotonous and without challenge.

The amount of time you invest in this game was never meant to be a major factor in success (although still some sort of factor). People were never meant to spend hours and hours at a time in front of their PC massing/attacking/raiding. That is why it was 1 turn every half hour, producing 1 AT. That way, skill and tactical thinking, making the right decision on when to attack or retaliate, knowing how to save AT and mass your enemy at the right time, were key to the success of the game - i.e. when it was a GAME, and not just a loop of cyclic monotony.

However - I have produced another suggestion - which I am now going to post in its own thread.

Market going dry is a bad thing, that would only really hurt the small players while the big rich players keep getting fatter.