StarGateWars Forums

Posting for Flashus- (he can't remember his log in details for here)

Lifer Suicide Kills Attack Units
1. i think the main reason for this is the targeting of sniper accounts, but there are those who are doing ascensions and need to protect their unit from slaughter for the ascension costs.
2. all armies/wars consist of some sort of sniper activity.

so here is my little suggestion with a bit of variation on others already put forward.

1. a new RACE made available to those wishing to become sniper accounts, this option will be only availbe 1 time for free. these will suffer significantly higher losses on attacks and the get
0% def/convert bonuses even when ascended to Unknown.
-20% bonuse to att when fully ascended to Unknown.
only 2 market turns per week
cannot recieve NAQ from any player unless they have less then 150Mil AS

2. Losses from this new attack should be more in favour of the defender rather than the attacker. current suggestion vary about the ratios.
Mercs 1:5
Normal 1:3
Supers 1:1

if there are no mercs
normal 1:3
Supers 1:1
but with added chance of looting 25% bank deposit

if there are no mercs/normal
Supers 1:1
but with added bonus of looting 35% of bank deposit

3. if total AS drops below 150Mil they are decended from Sniper race

4. to re-ascend to sniper race costs 100mil UU

this puts the onus on a sniper account to stay acitve and not just hit and run to bank their NAQ, sit and wait till the next war.

Personally I have always seen the Lifers as the old and decrepit of the realm. The old super skinny and smelly riches to rags citizens. I think the only thing they should be good for is trading them off to increase UP instead of keeping them around or chopping them up into bits and making more ammo out of them. Finger Bullets for the win.

so those with higher percentage of lifers can kill more people. How does this help? since the people that you are trying stop will usualy have more lifer units anyway.

Thinking about this, it will require another small update to work though,

First make it that a war declaration setting lasts 7 days, NOT 24 hours.

Now make it that each player must be set to war so WAR/WAR

Chances are that the player who masses the defense will end up with an auto war setting, that they cannot change for 7 days, this then allows the defender to either suck it up, or declare war back, mass target, and then destroy that persons attackers,

This will prevent bigger players randomly picking on smaller accounts.

The war setting needs to be set to 7 days, preventing the usual sniper tactic of massing, getting auto war, setting PPT, changing it back to Netural in 24 hours.

This small update would allow the new update to work without the ability for $$ players or big players to dominate even more over the smaller/non $$ players.

auto war lasting 7 days will turn very deadly , and it wont help much the small account retaliating because of the cost to mass a heavy account built.
its best that auto war relation shall be discussed in another thread due to its importance.

in my opinion Lifers should not kill supers as it doesnt fit at all in the Admin suggestion of using Lifers.
if its to prevent players to hide units in strike as its randomly used then it shall be limited only to strike units and only when all ac-units are killed. the cost as for now shall be the same as killing ac-units. this way who will be afraid of losing strike untis wont train them and so far will limit this hide option and wont give to lifer any more power then they have.

Lithium wrote:auto war lasting 7 days will turn very deadly , and it wont help much the small account retaliating because of the cost to mass a heavy account built.
its best that auto war relation shall be discussed in another thread due to its importance.

Actually, no, its brought up in this thread as an extension to the idea carried here.
And I think adding the war set for 7 days is a marvelous idea.
In like, the war set is needed to be able to lifer the targets attack units.

The one attacked has some time to build back up and fight back more on his or her terms, at least benefit from the war set within that week if possible.

well seeing as some people disagree and some agree with this why not take ideas from people in the post put them together and have a 1 week trial and see what happens can always take the update away

GeneralChaos wrote:Thinking about this, it will require another small update to work though,

First make it that a war declaration setting lasts 7 days, NOT 24 hours.

Now make it that each player must be set to war so WAR/WAR

Chances are that the player who masses the defense will end up with an auto war setting, that they cannot change for 7 days, this then allows the defender to either suck it up, or declare war back, mass target, and then destroy that persons attackers,

This will prevent bigger players randomly picking on smaller accounts.

The war setting needs to be set to 7 days, preventing the usual sniper tactic of massing, getting auto war, setting PPT, changing it back to Netural in 24 hours.

This small update would allow the new update to work without the ability for $$ players or big players to dominate even more over the smaller/non $$ players.

I do not think these things are even an issue in the game nowadays, as per recent history updates and ideas being pushed for now are merely for an advantage in an altercation or war. It is far far too late to think about neutralizing a "picking on", to pick on smaller accounts all one needs is small stats to do so, a war/war set for 7 days because you will not lose much. To go to this degree there needs to be a ratio set whereas accounts in the A group cannot touch accounts in the B group and vice versa, but this is a topic for another discussion.

7 days war set will only fully help snipers , as they need to mass only once/week.
an account can be used to mass whole alliance.

Lithium wrote:7 days war set will only fully help snipers , as they need to mass only once/week.
an account can be used to mass whole alliance.

Doubtful, as snipers usually work in small groups, or on there own, at the moment a sniper could mass an alliance go on ppt reset war setttings, and be protected by NOX, and still have there attack safe,

7 day war, removes that protection from everyone they attacked and had a war setting with, meaning they can have there defense and ( if war is returned ) there strike massed down too.

As it stands bigger will completely dominate the small, so admin might aswell remove the other updates that hurt bigger players, such as, Plague and planet restrictions, as technically there obsolete now.

GeneralChaos wrote:

Lithium wrote:7 days war set will only fully help snipers , as they need to mass only once/week.
an account can be used to mass whole alliance.

Doubtful, as snipers usually work in small groups, or on there own, at the moment a sniper could mass an alliance go on ppt reset war setttings, and be protected by NOX, and still have there attack safe,

7 day war, removes that protection from everyone they attacked and had a war setting with, meaning they can have there defense and ( if war is returned ) there strike massed down too.

As it stands bigger will completely dominate the small, so admin might aswell remove the other updates that hurt bigger players, such as, Plague and planet restrictions, as technically there obsolete now.

well its quite hard now to a put sniper on the run without affecting the game for many others.
Snipers were never small accounts , in army maybe but not in setup and currently u can have a sniper at cov 38 ac 36. i ve used that setup and i know what damage it can do. more over u know that 7 days isnt enough at there are 4 ppt to use straight and massing in between.
now asking 9 days auto war is quite out of the context or even disturbing. one would have to schedule a life following this game and for what ? because he attacted smone more then 20x15 ats. for that little an account shall have 7-9 days war set and get massed to ground 0 each time he can build smth. its too much for that little. it ll meke the stronger even more stronger.

today we have as many snipers as semi actives due to lacking game interest.

if lifers will be used vs strike units then that might help limiting sab/cov snipers as they would have to train them back as miners and losing 1/10 in lifer. is it any big lose ?? not really as lifers would kill strikers so far just increasing a bit the cost but at this point of the game its pointless.
everything is killable and the only units that cant be killed will be used to kill smth else, full circle ENJOY

I like the idea that when someone has a 0 defense, they lose a % of their attackers. The % going up when there isnt anything build for awhile? Also the defense build should be a % of the strike. Which is only reasonable. (10 mil supers - 3 mil super defenders (or normal attackers/defenders))

I personally dont like the idea that 10mil super attackers are protected by 3 mil normal defenders. Or should that be an option?

When i read more and more, lifers should remain where they are now, only able to kill off acers and nothing more.

ƒëmmë ƒatalë wrote:[b]Mercs 1:5
Normal 1:3
Supers 1:1

if there are no mercs
normal 1:3
Supers 1:1

supers should be able to protect themselves more then mercs eh?

seriously.....

Fine if you do it, should be same success rate as lifers.
1to1 a/c 3/1 attackers 5/1 supers

just too easy for people to get rid of lifers already, dont give em more excuses, but if this must be done, make it those ratios.

A lot of people complain about sniper accounts, but snipers are only around because bullies get too big of a head and think they own this game and make ridiculous "rules" e.g you cant farm us, but we can you etc.

Update is good, shouldn't need to mass a defense, and should be 1:1 on supers.