StarGateWars Forums

Lithium wrote:remove alliance repair at all , that just prevent a successful massing and limit allie ppt in 3 hrs of max 12 hrs per week.

If you do this, Just remove the whole Alliance bank system.

allie repair is just a bug , wit 2b ppl repairs smth worth even 5t

OK - think I got it

I am ok with 4x3hr PPT instead of 12x1hr PPT -- this does put some advantage back to the masser, as its easier to time attacks at larger increments.
done.

I have divided alliance repair to def only (60/day) and all weapons (2/day). I figure if I am adding features, and can keep old features at a toned down level, great...more features!

This also allows the two values to be set independently...

works?

Forum wrote:OK - think I got it

I am ok with 4x3hr PPT instead of 12x1hr PPT -- this does put some advantage back to the masser, as its easier to time attacks at larger increments.
done.

I have divided alliance repair to def only (60/day) and all weapons (2/day). I figure if I am adding features, and can keep old features at a toned down level, great...more features!

This also allows the two values to be set independently...

works?

60 vs 2
Dont like it.
It is TOTALLY unfair to any Masser, No one is gonna mass with that, I know u are trying to make money, but how fun is a game gonna be if u have to spend trillions just mass anyone admin? And the defenders don't have to spend anything but UU loss. People quit complaining that this is a defensive thing. What perks are u gonna give the attackers, u already made it unprofitable to sell your attack weapons. This game revolves around massing and stealing naq.

Your gonna see massive defenses and no one is ever gonna try and take them down and then this game is gonna die
I have decided I'm build me a 60t defense. I won't have to log on for weeks because I know my weapons will be repaired by my alliance mates.

Deadliest Wes wrote:60 vs 2
Dont like it.
It is TOTALLY unfair to any Masser, No one is gonna mass with that,

Deadliest Wes wrote:Your gonna see massive defenses and no one is ever gonna try and take them down and then this game is gonna die
I have decided I'm build me a 60t defense. I won't have to log on for weeks because I know my weapons will be repaired by my alliance mates.

Ok - this only works for those in alliance to start. So you have to look at fair for not in allinace. How does getting free repairs of attack weapons on a non-alliance def weapon (no alliance repair) make it fair?

The goal of allianace repair was not free massing. never was. it was 'help allinace member being attacked' ...

If anything I can reduce the 60, but that is per day... so if you keep up a masisng, it will disappear quickly....

I appreciate you like the 'free' attacking, but all this will do is make it so that the 'minimum worthwhile naq' goes up a bit... it will not stop massing. It will not make attacking unfair, nor stop it. It will just up the minimum to make it worthwhile... yes? no?

do you really think 60 def repairs + 2 full, (versus 480 full repair before update), will stop attacking and cause only huge defenses? I cannot see how it does that.



what numbers would YOU suggest?

Ok everyone can make an alliance and wait 5 days and get free repairs.

again - it was 10 per turn before the update or 480 per day. now it is 62 ...
i fail to see how it can be WORSE now than before...

Deadliest Wes wrote:Ok everyone can make an alliance and wait 5 days and get free repairs.

It's not worse. The "everyone can make an alliance, wait 5 days and get free repairs" is a 'new' point of critique in DWes' reactions.

Forum wrote:again - it was 10 per turn before the update or 480 per day. now it is 62 ...
i fail to see how it can be WORSE now than before...

Deadliest Wes wrote:Ok everyone can make an alliance and wait 5 days and get free repairs.

ok - have gone 5/50 on a bit more thought...
better than 2/60 ... still should not cause the game to create only defenses...
is that too many def repairs ? too few attack? Too many attack?
thoughts on the "*RIGHT*" numbers can be discussed. I am more prone to listening to logical arguments and ideas than 'sky is falling' type ones

have you forgot, if u attack someone too many times they phase... 50 is way to many. I am here trying to make the game equal. Not trying to give you doomsday scenarios

and its not 62 to
its 60
and 2.

uuhhmmzzz oke..

All together.. thanks admin..

2 per turn?

2 or 5 or 60 per day is the new style --not per turn (allows blowing the load at the start of the day, or metering it throughout... new strategy aspect.. can have fakie massings to draw out the repairs fr the day, etc.)

hmmm... if that is the largest issue...
i wonder what would happen if with each weapon repair the 'phase count' went up a bit...
I could also reduce the 50 to like 30 ... but from the complaints on the OTHER side of the argument, going from 480 to 10 (or 50 or 60 ) was too big a change...
and the 'farm everyone, repair for free' was not a good thing for the little defenses getting hit by huge defenses.
I would consider a 'under 100 defense' special rate of repair before going back to the free hits on small guys...

Deadliest Wes wrote:have you forgot, if u attack someone too many times they phase... 50 is way to many. I am here trying to make the game equal. Not trying to give you doomsday scenarios

Forum wrote:hmmm... if that is the largest issue...
i wonder what would happen if with each weapon repair the 'phase count' went up a bit...
I could also reduce the 50 to like 30 ... but from the complaints on the OTHER side of the argument, going from 480 to 10 (or 50 or 60 ) was too big a change...
and the 'farm everyone, repair for free' was not a good thing for the little defenses getting hit by huge defenses.
I would consider a 'under 100 defense' special rate of repair before going back to the free hits on small guys...

Deadliest Wes wrote:have you forgot, if u attack someone too many times they phase... 50 is way to many. I am here trying to make the game equal. Not trying to give you doomsday scenarios

Admin, no disrespect.. isn't this kind of balancing something to use the "Beta environment" for? To trial-and-error this one in your production environment is somewhat .. tricky.
Just saying.. it might be a smoother ride if you pulled up Beta to have this one tested for a while and use the statistics you get from there to decide on the exact figures?

It's a good idea. But this trial-and-error might not be the most effective way of getting the final solution to this one in.