StarGateWars Forums

TheRook wrote:well they can only taint 1 person as there vote for that week, it is a rough idea so could be tweaked to 200 votes thats a small population of the game... and then it would be quite tough for a large empire to get all of its members to vote.

How many Empires have 200+ people

TheRook wrote:or make it so strikes are only 50% effective with 0(3) defence and dont get support from planets

unless they have at least 15% of the defence (planet bonuses not taken into account with the % required)they have as strike they will only get 50% strike effectiveness, and 20%+ for planets to provide support.

a 1 trill strike would then require 200bill defence... so they will have additional costs...

Mathlord wrote:He fixed super losses recently anyway by dramatically reducing the effectiveness of 1 turn attacks at killing supers. Sure you lose defense weapons, but it takes a TON of turns now to actually kill defense supers.

Lithium wrote:i dont understand why some want to ban the sniping tactic? so an allaince can sit on a small one? or when an epire strike on a small allaince, rubish.

snipers are the product of the easy life that empires offers , if u accepted the empire style then why not the sniping way

Lithium wrote:cmon guys snipers are part of the game did any of u thought what froced these ppl to be snipers?

Sarevok wrote:He removed 1AT hits all together. And that will still allow for the supers to be freely killed.

MaxSterling wrote:

Lithium wrote:cmon guys snipers are part of the game did any of u thought what froced these ppl to be snipers?

Fear of losing stats is what forced these babies to be snipers. They're still acting like they have a 5m army size and have no skill to show for their 3-4 years of playing the game. Just too busy crying about how unfair things are and too proud to just surrender. Sad thing is, they do the same thing to me and they can't use the excuse that I bought my account or bought resources with $.

Sniping is viable for a new player learning the game... not a veteran of the game that thinks they're actually good at it.

Sarevok wrote:He removed 1AT hits all together. And that will still allow for the supers to be freely killed.

I think that was the wrong thing to do. 1 AT hits are extremely useful to find a decent raid target, especially if you're low on covert capacity. Like we keep arguing... if you make a defense last longer, there's no need to remove the 1AT hit because attackers will need to use more ATs to mass down a defense, then.

GeneralChaos wrote:

TheRook wrote:why not add a 'Tainted' button... once 100 people class someone as tainted (clicking a button for them) they then have trouble selling weapons at a good price...

Each player would get 1 tainted vote per week (like a MT/trade) that applies to the person for the whole week...

Once a person has 100 votes of being tainted he is kind of treated like an outlaw and finds it difficult to do business with the universe

this way the population of SGW can punish those who are snipers and they will have a negative impact on their accounts for playing in such a way

but could also be used in large scale wars as a tool of weakening the biggest strike holding person as they can then get caught with lots of strike weapons and either take a large loss selling their weapons off or take the risk of losing some to being sabbed...

This is just a rough idea thought of now... but you probably get my point of just punishing the sniper accounts and it wont negatively effect anyone who just plays the game normally.

I know where your idea is coming from, and its not a bad idea, just way to easy to exploit, imagine this update, then take another FUALL Vs TJP etc, lol everyone would vote on each other instantly,

Sarevok wrote:I would say this, instead of the current updates, something like:

All attack weapons are 3x the cost of previously (keep in mind att and def are 2x as strong though).
Also, def weapons can resell for 90% of their initial value,Defence weapons sell for the same rate as previous, while attack weapons sell for just 10% of their initial value.
The logic here is that massing is costly if you want to 'hit then hide' (Sell your attack weapons to avoid sabotage), while a good defense is always in demand.

Bold is my addition, and strikethough is subtractions.

BMMJ13 wrote:Only problem is what about those "Snipers" who have large attack planets, big motherships and high covert levels. They can easily lose a lot less then those who everyone is calling snipers, yet by making weapons more costly you increase their benefit. So not only are defenses 5x more expensive for the same power, but benefit from mothership and planets are the same and you can be sabbed out quite easily. The only thing this update seems to do is make those with heavily built accounts that much easier to stay at the top.

Weapon Costs, Sabbing, Planet Defenses (Massing, 50% bug, and Cost to build)

These 3 things mean that with a good mothership, covert level and planets, you could basically take on anyone cheaply since it severely hinders those who do not, even more so then it is possible already.

renegadze wrote:@ Max you can always spy, but yes it's going....finally

As "Forum" is online atm.....

Do we have a latest as to when we can expet to see Any/All of the updates?

Brdavs wrote:So the admin has to recognise just one fact.
...
enemeis of the leaders of the house to be booted from the house when they come in conflic with them.

Brdavs wrote:In both cases I`d reduce ingame bonuses as much as I could ...

Brdavs wrote:Question is, do you want that result? It`s only gonna empower those allready in (or close to) power.

Belinsker wrote:I think houses should work differently. It should be you can create an "empire" if you like. Alliances in the empire then pledge their alliance banks to one alliance, who they vote as the leader. The leader of this alliance could then pay for stat bonuses.

1tril: 0.1%attack, 0.4%defence, 0.3%covert, 0.2% AC(or similar).

GeneralChaos wrote:Real quick fix for the defense argument,

You must have a defense of 50% of your attack at all times, for your attack to work, and to stop the snipers who would take the loss, you cannot sell weapons off once bought.

On another note can J a s o n please explain what he believes to be balance, as im fairly sure that adding all these bonus's etc to the game is far from balance.

GeneralChaos wrote:Id be happy to see sabbing set that you can effectively sab away 40%-50% of a persons weapons.

Wepwaet wrote:

Forum wrote:A probe attack type would be wonderful or conversely have spying not tied to covert turns...