StarGateWars Forums

im against it.
havent herd yet why it was implemented and what its aim is, i belive its to limit heavy farming, but big farmers wont stop due to a rise. the prove is the server war, it started wit at's at 300-400b/k and ended at +600b/k

if limiting farming is the key then lowering the income generated might work better

Well its to limit massing i would think, farmers will you there ats more for farming now than just randomly massing
i havent looked at what exactly the update it, i will later after some house
As i said before the unlimited amount of ats in tis game is one of the things that have destroyed the game

not exactly sure it is an update....

You do NOT know yet if it is an intentional update or a simple glitch.


Thus a discussion is pointless.

Offensive Bias wrote:

Hoochivette wrote:Someone with an army size less than 5mil, are they expected to ever catch up now without spending cash?

They are expected to catch up after spending a similar amount of time on the game as the 'end game players'. Maybe a bit less due to the prevalence and abundance of resources, but definitely not within a few months after starting to play.

exactly...

what is the logic of anyone being able to catch up within a few short months to those who have been playing for years? none, thats it... there is no logic to that...

we have no doubt that jason will adjust the $$ market to fit with the regular market soon...

when people farm less, resources available to farm/raid go up, so a player will have to farm/raid less for the same result..
also, when ATs are in low supply, it will suddenly be worth it to sell ATs to the market for those unable to track down farms/raid targets...

complaining wont fix anything... try putting yourself in Jason's position...
how eager would you be to do something if all you got was countless accusations and complaints?

Zeratul, the 10k AT For $10 rate on the ingame black market IS already adjusted. It was if I recall correctly 13k AT for $10 before the market reset.


If this really is no glitch but an intentional update, it is the worst update ever as it smoothers game play if you are not willing to buy your AT for $.

Doesn't mean we can't though

I'm undecided atm. I can see advantages for and against.

For:
Would limit the available AT, resulting in less use of AT purely to destroy stuff, and instead, to build ones account. Instead of 10K At being only 0.01% of the AT available on the market, it becomes 0.1%. Meaning the attacks would in essence need to be 10x more effective.

Against:
This won't limit those whom buy AT from the in-game black market. It will limit how many can, but not whom. Those whom spend $$ on the game, will still have the advantage of getting a hold of AT from there, regardless of the cost in actual game resources.


I think it could be achieved differently if defences were ALOT more effective then they are now. Rather then making the cost to mass someone 10x more (by increasing AT costs), make defences MUCH more effective (I’m talking like +65% needed to damage), as it would mean mindless massing can still be done, but at a cost equal to what the cost would be now, with limited AT generation. Or make it such that defence units provide a minimum defence value themselves, for example "Handheld Shield Device 20" exists now. But the ability to buy a shield, with say 10 power, but can not be destroyed apart from sabotage or killing the unit holding it

i bought ats about 2/3 weeks ago from the game and got 13k for $10 so the amount you get for your dollar has already dropped nearly 25 %

Zeratul wrote:
exactly...

what is the logic of anyone being able to catch up within a few short months to those who have been playing for years? none, thats it... there is no logic to that...

Where is the logic of playing at all if you didn't start at the same time as the oldest players? You'll just be nothing more than their whipping boys with no hope of ever changing that. Except maybe using the suddenly all important Delete Account link

I think people are getting confused thinking any update is better than no update. Consider this, you see a person with a broken leg. You're not really able to fix it. Dont take a hammer to the leg simply to show you're doing something

Cause is in General section

well i tho just to place a poll tp count pro/cons and a bit of discussion wont hurt.

i think this move reflect to inflation of prices which ruins the game economy in general.

in RL, little countries are being told by foundation like FMN etc not to play wit prices and to stop inflation, in order to have a balance they dont rise salaries , it makes ppl consume less untill they fiz their economy.

but here the situation is one side doesn't care for the other. so admin reduce the at's and seller rise at will. and its the activity who is affected after all

Hoochivette wrote:

Zeratul wrote:
exactly...

what is the logic of anyone being able to catch up within a few short months to those who have been playing for years? none, thats it... there is no logic to that...

Where is the logic of playing at all if you didn't start at the same time as the oldest players? You'll just be nothing more than their whipping boys with no hope of ever changing that. Except maybe using the suddenly all important Delete Account link

I think people are getting confused thinking any update is better than no update. Consider this, you see a person with a broken leg. You're not really able to fix it. Dont take a hammer to the leg simply to show you're doing something

I have to agree with Z, What incentive is there for the older players to stay if they been here 5 yrs and a 6 month old account can stomp them in the ground?

Fact is the new comer HAS the advantage. The game is new and exciting to them where someone who has been here 5 yrs is bored and sick to death of it. Its called the cycle of life, the older players leave the game allowing the best of the newer players to rise up and take their places.

Now I have no issues with it taking a new player 2.5 yrs to do what took others 5 yrs, but a 6 month (or less) account competing with a 5yr old account make the game pointless by the same measure that you argue For the new accounts.

Seriously... stop living in the god damn past!

These are not the times where 10k UP was considered godly. The game has progressed and moved on... and so should you. Of course it's easier for someone to grow nowadays. The game has progressed. As players play longer, the resources they produce increases. The more resources produced, the more stolen. Which in turn grows new accounts faster.

What kind of half-assed union way of thinking is this? I'm a lazy ass doing nothing but banking my turn income and training my UU from UP because I've played this game for 5 years and have godly resources. Who are you to come along and farm and raid for 24 hours/day and have a comparable account to mine? Get over yourselves you union lackeys.

If you wanna stay ahead, then you should put in the effort as well. Stop resting on your laurels.

Pros and Cons...

+ More strategy involved in massings by players that don't spend $
+ Market prices will increase
+ Old school players can reminisce
+ My planets are now safer from people that don't have $ to spend.

- Perg is at a standstill.
- Main players growth is reduced, thus giving more advantage to those that spend $
- AT rates increase... who has the ATs? The players with $. Main players still fall further behind.
- $ spenders now dominate the game because the average player has no possible way to compete without spending their own $.
- Overall activity reduces by everyone without $.
- Wars are won by those who have the most $.
- GW is no longer a free game if you want to compete.

The game already has fewer ATs available on the market compared to a year ago. In 2008 we had 700-800 players logging in daily. Now we have 200-400 of the most active players with a few people that only login to bank PPT naq to sell for $. Now you want to reduce the activity of those remaining 400 players and give little to no chance of a new player to compete?

Have Jason load an old backup on the beta server for you, if you wanna go back to the old ways.

deni wrote:How is a new guy supposed to catch up if they cannot raid due to the lack of AT?

This game survived for that long only because there was an opportunity for newly joined players to raid and compete with older players. With the lack of AT, their only way for them to catch up is to use $.

I find it interesting that the ones who do not play the game are the most vocal supporters of the "abundance of AT is killing the game"- theory

How is the new guy supposed to catch up, with empires/alliance enforcing a "1hit -> mass" policies?

They see you have 50b naq out, with a 200m defence, they have a 300m strike, so take the naq. They have 1/4 of their account in defence/covert, to defend their income whilst their not online. They awaken in the morning, to find their account decimated by a 1hit -> mass empire/alliance, and figure "there's no point in playing, I’ll never be able to catch up if I loose most of my stuff for attacking anyone" and quit.

Lore wrote:Fact is the new comer HAS the advantage. The game is new and exciting to them where someone who has been here 5 yrs is bored and sick to death of it. Its called the cycle of life, the older players leave the game allowing the best of the newer players to rise up and take their places.

However, they also don't have a monstrous income, monstrous UP, monstrous attack, un-takeable planets, monstrous MS

MaxSterling wrote:He's thoughts

I highly doubt that. But lets assume that is true.

Shouldn't the numbers of players be the same then? More resources produced, less AT keeping it equal? Yet as you claim, there is a 50% reduction in active players

Lore wrote:I have to agree with Z, What incentive is there for the older players to stay if they been here 5 yrs and a 6 month old account can stomp them in the ground?

Fact is the new comer HAS the advantage. The game is new and exciting to them where someone who has been here 5 yrs is bored and sick to death of it. Its called the cycle of life, the older players leave the game allowing the best of the newer players to rise up and take their places.

Now I have no issues with it taking a new player 2.5 yrs to do what took others 5 yrs, but a 6 month (or less) account competing with a 5yr old account make the game pointless by the same measure that you argue For the new accounts.

A new comer has no more of an advantage than anyone else that puts in the time and effort. The only way a new player can stomp an old player in the ground, is if the old player isn't doing **Filtered** with their account.... banking and training.

The old player reached the plague... build your MS or a couple of kickass duals.

This update appeals to the lazy ass old school players that don't want to put forth any time or effort to staying at top. So they want to slow everyone else down. It's as simple as that.