Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:24 am
Being able to AC someone through his defence with LESS(or no) losses if your strike is 10x (or some other number) bigger than his /her defence.
StarGateWars Forums
These are the forums for the GateWa.rs family of text-based space-centred PBBGs
https://talk.gatewa.rs/
Ac through defence.
Page 1 of 2
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 7:07 am
I like this idea, means people have to train up a defence to protect their spies
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:15 am
sorry guys i cant agree with this one.
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:32 am
Hookoo2 wrote:sorry guys i cant agree with this one.
Constructive...
But no, this would give a stupid advantage to the aggressors who could take down somebodys defence and spies without giving the defender a chance if he didnt know the hit was coming
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:49 am
Well , that's why I set a certain multiplier on it
As you know an attack can't hurt a def if the def is 3.33 times bigger.
So why should your anti coverts get damage when your enemy def is (a.e.) 5 bill def and your strike a few hundred bill.
Or even worse when the defender his def is less than a bill , but he has a nice covert lvl and puts a lot of spies.
Why? because he knows that they won't be touched because of his measly 1 bill def.
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall")
As you know an attack can't hurt a def if the def is 3.33 times bigger.
So why should your anti coverts get damage when your enemy def is (a.e.) 5 bill def and your strike a few hundred bill.
Or even worse when the defender his def is less than a bill , but he has a nice covert lvl and puts a lot of spies.
Why? because he knows that they won't be touched because of his measly 1 bill def.
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:28 am
I totally agree with this idea,
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:22 pm
dastupy wrote:Well , that's why I set a certain multiplier on it
As you know an attack can't hurt a def if the def is 3.33 times bigger.
And if you take into account with blessing, you can hurt a defense which is 6.666* times bigger, then i'm saying no. If you cant mass 1b defense, to then AC for free, then i don't think you should be allowed to save effort and AC through a defense.
I agree with the concept, your reasoning, i do not agree with.
dastupy wrote:Or even worse when the defender his def is less than a bill , but he has a nice covert lvl and puts a lot of spies.
Why? because he knows that they won't be touched because of his measly 1 bill def.
Does that mean you support the idea, for being able to attack attack units? When those people ALSO have a "token" defense of 1B?
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:48 pm
Sarevok wrote:dastupy wrote:Well , that's why I set a certain multiplier on it
As you know an attack can't hurt a def if the def is 3.33 times bigger.
And if you take into account with blessing, you can hurt a defense which is 6.666* times bigger, then i'm saying no. If you cant mass 1b defense, to then AC for free, then i don't think you should be allowed to save effort and AC through a defense.
I agree with the concept, your reasoning, i do not agree with.dastupy wrote:Or even worse when the defender his def is less than a bill , but he has a nice covert lvl and puts a lot of spies.
Why? because he knows that they won't be touched because of his measly 1 bill def.
Does that mean you support the idea, for being able to attack attack units? When those people ALSO have a "token" defense of 1B?
Gonna have to side with Sarevok on this one, but I would like to see some work done on sabbing so these tolken defenses could be removed
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:26 am
Easy. If their atk weaps/def weaps ratio is 3:1 or 'better', you can always sab it away. 
Done it enough, saves precious AT. 
Edit: about the idea.... mmm... sorry, no. Can't agree with it.
Done it enough, saves precious AT. Edit: about the idea.... mmm... sorry, no. Can't agree with it.
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 2:03 am
Sarevok wrote:dastupy wrote:Well , that's why I set a certain multiplier on it
As you know an attack can't hurt a def if the def is 3.33 times bigger.
And if you take into account with blessing, you can hurt a defense which is 6.666* times bigger, then i'm saying no. If you cant mass 1b defense, to then AC for free, then i don't think you should be allowed to save effort and AC through a defense.
I agree with the concept, your reasoning, i do not agree with.
Well if the person is on nox/crit and is online that is not gonna happen and you just waste lots of turns on a 1 bill def what is rather silly.dastupy wrote:Or even worse when the defender his def is less than a bill , but he has a nice covert lvl and puts a lot of spies.
Why? because he knows that they won't be touched because of his measly 1 bill def.
Does that mean you support the idea, for being able to attack attack units? When those people ALSO have a "token" defense of 1B?
I won't side that because normal attack soldiers always was a storage for people when they went offline and didn't want anymore lifers.
Or when holding uu for a mate or...
So that would ruin some of the gameplay this game has.
Unless if only attack super soldiers are able to get killed.
Lore wrote:Gonna have to side with Sarevok on this one, but I would like to see some work done on sabbing so these tolken defenses could be removed
With sabbing you are already able to sab token defenses, but most of the time those guys are on crit what improves your amount of spies send and mostly they also have a lot of spies what enhances your losses.
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:43 am
dastupy wrote:I won't side that because normal attack soldiers always was a storage for people when they went offline and didn't want anymore lifers.
Or when holding uu for a mate or...
So that would ruin some of the gameplay this game has.
Unless if only attack super soldiers are able to get killed.
Then hold them in a broker, and get the person to reject, it takes 12 hours for auto-accept of a rejected broker, or you can accept them when you want. Also, a broker lasts for 2 days if your holding UU for someone anyway.
In my experience, I've NEVER known someone to store UU in attacks, because if they try to raid/farm/attack, they start loosing their UUs. Which would mean they'd have to untrain them somewhere ELSE anyway, and if they left them as UU, then they may get caught "with their pants down" and raided whilst raiding/farming/massing...
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:55 am
Sarevok wrote:dastupy wrote:I won't side that because normal attack soldiers always was a storage for people when they went offline and didn't want anymore lifers.
Or when holding uu for a mate or...
So that would ruin some of the gameplay this game has.
Unless if only attack super soldiers are able to get killed.
Then hold them in a broker, and get the person to reject, it takes 12 hours for auto-accept of a rejected broker, or you can accept them when you want. Also, a broker lasts for 2 days if your holding UU for someone anyway.
In my experience, I've NEVER known someone to store UU in attacks, because if they try to raid/farm/attack, they start loosing their UUs. Which would mean they'd have to untrain them somewhere ELSE anyway, and if they left them as UU, then they may get caught "with their pants down" and raided whilst raiding/farming/massing...
Just give some "active" "inactives"people a spy (people that grow on up and income.)
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:46 am
I can only farm, and am active, and I've NEVER trained UU to attack units to keep them "safe" 
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 8:51 am
Sarevok wrote:I can only farm, and am active, and I've NEVER trained UU to attack units to keep them "safe"
Then you are
a) Not in a war.
b) Rather ignorant.
Re: Ac through defence.
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:18 am
dastupy wrote:Sarevok wrote:I can only farm, and am active, and I've NEVER trained UU to attack units to keep them "safe"
Then you are
a) Not in a war.
b) Rather ignorant.
Ah good, the root of your reasoning. You can only see war, and war situations. War means massing. And if attack units could be massed (like defense an covert, and everything else), then it would basically inconvenience you...