StarGateWars Forums

Okay i have been thinking, because of admin's new adaptation with the game about developed and race custimization i was thinking why not take this one step further?

This will makethe game more suitable to people's game styles.

Well here is my idea:

Why not make game races even more adjustable.

At the moment you have completely fixed bonus points that you acquire from ascension. Well why not have them changeable in various ways. So instead of having 30% across the board of attack, defense, covert and income. Allow yourself to change these ascension points around to fit the type of game style that you adopt in game.

For instance with LG+1 (30%bonus to all stats)
Yo can alter that to
40% strike
20% income
40% cvert
20% defense

However because this is quite dependant on the player have certain "caps" to stopping having everything in one stat.
Make it so that you can only have up to 70% n one stat considering that you have 56% bonus's with level 23 ascension.

Well what do you think? Duno if it has been suggested before so just posted itz

Um until Defence is more equitable with attack (which it is getting there) I'd say no.

23rd ascension already has a VERY large bonus without needed to adjust it further, and planets make you specialise in what you want. Effectively if you want a further 20% attack bonus, you go and get attack planets and there you go, bonus without altering bonus.

If we didn't have planets and if Defence was a bit more equitable with attack, i'd probably be more inclined to look at this suggestion. As it is, while I think it's a nice suggestion I don't think it's required.

Tekki wrote:Um until Defence is more equitable with attack (which it is getting there) I'd say no.

23rd ascension already has a VERY large bonus without needed to adjust it further, and planets make you specialise in what you want. Effectively if you want a further 20% attack bonus, you go and get attack planets and there you go, bonus without altering bonus.

If we didn't have planets and if Defence was a bit more equitable with attack, i'd probably be more inclined to look at this suggestion. As it is, while I think it's a nice suggestion I don't think it's required.

Yes 23rd ascension's have very large bonus's, for a reason they have havve sacrificed trillions of naq and UU for this reason. Well if they want to increase their strike or what ever stat in question with bonus's they will also have to lose out on other stats to compensate for this loss. It is just developing the game further to fit more to people's game style's.

Tropic Thunder wrote:

Tekki wrote:Um until Defence is more equitable with attack (which it is getting there) I'd say no.

23rd ascension already has a VERY large bonus without needed to adjust it further, and planets make you specialise in what you want. Effectively if you want a further 20% attack bonus, you go and get attack planets and there you go, bonus without altering bonus.

If we didn't have planets and if Defence was a bit more equitable with attack, i'd probably be more inclined to look at this suggestion. As it is, while I think it's a nice suggestion I don't think it's required.

Yes 23rd ascension's have very large bonus's, for a reason they have havve sacrificed trillions of naq and UU for this reason. Well if they want to increase their strike or what ever stat in question with bonus's they will also have to lose out on other stats to compensate for this loss. It is just developing the game further to fit more to people's game style's.

Yes, but for the masses, so what if they get 0% bonus on defense? They rarely have more then 50B, and that's just to cover their covert units. Whilst, if they did add 70% to offense, as Tekki said, would make defenses even more useless then they currently are.
My reasoning:
Attack can damage up to 3.33x larger then their own power, adding 70% means they can damage up to 5.66x larger, without blessing.

I do like the idea, the ability to personalize where you'd like your bonuses, would be great whilst on PPT, maximizing your income. But being able to make offense more powerful, i have to also disagree with the idea

[

Yes it would make offense even more powerful but it makes ALL stats more powerfull depending on where they increase their bonus's. But then they would have to sacrifice their stats in ther departments to compensate for the loss. It would all dependant on how the player has chosen to donate is ascended bonus points to.

You could also complain if someone put the max amount of bonus's in defense making it even harder to mass, no the same with covert and sabbing.

It will just make the game more versitile in people's tactics making that a more decisive role in the game as if you leave your defense bare, then thats your fault for having a smaller defense overall.

BUT, offense can damage a defense which is (for easy of math) 3x stronger. So, 70% bonus to offense, is in effect, 210% more defense you can take down. Whilst you can add 70% to defense, offense would STILL get (in effect) 140% MORE power from it.

If this was to be done, IMO, 1% for attack = 3 "ascended points", and 1% for defense = 1 "ascended point"

Sarevok wrote:BUT, offense can damage a defense which is (for easy of math) 3x stronger. So, 70% bonus to offense, is in effect, 210% more defense you can take down. Whilst you can add 70% to defense, offense would STILL get (in effect) 140% MORE power from it.

If this was to be done, IMO, 1% for attack = 3 "ascended points", and 1% for defense = 1 "ascended point"

that would be fair, cancelling out the fact that a strike can attack a def 3x bigger by making the increase 3x the points

solmyr wrote:

Sarevok wrote:BUT, offense can damage a defense which is (for easy of math) 3x stronger. So, 70% bonus to offense, is in effect, 210% more defense you can take down. Whilst you can add 70% to defense, offense would STILL get (in effect) 140% MORE power from it.

If this was to be done, IMO, 1% for attack = 3 "ascended points", and 1% for defense = 1 "ascended point"

that would be fair, cancelling out the fact that a strike can attack a def 3x bigger by making the increase 3x the points

Yeah that does make sense..
But make that from say the original bonus point spread, so if the spread is 56%. to increase that even more it will cost 3x the amount.
If thats what you mean it sounds good...(unless theres another way to add up ascenson points)

Tropic Thunder wrote:

solmyr wrote:

Sarevok wrote:BUT, offense can damage a defense which is (for easy of math) 3x stronger. So, 70% bonus to offense, is in effect, 210% more defense you can take down. Whilst you can add 70% to defense, offense would STILL get (in effect) 140% MORE power from it.

If this was to be done, IMO, 1% for attack = 3 "ascended points", and 1% for defense = 1 "ascended point"

that would be fair, cancelling out the fact that a strike can attack a def 3x bigger by making the increase 3x the points

Yeah that does make sense..
But make that from say the original bonus point spread, so if the spread is 56%. to increase that even more it will cost 3x the amount.
If thats what you mean it sounds good...(unless theres another way to add up ascenson points)

yeh tese points would have to be implemented after 'naturally' occurring ascended bonus.

solmyr wrote:

Tropic Thunder wrote:Yeah that does make sense..
But make that from say the original bonus point spread, so if the spread is 56%. to increase that even more it will cost 3x the amount.
If thats what you mean it sounds good...(unless theres another way to add up ascenson points)

yeh tese points would have to be implemented after 'naturally' occurring ascended bonus.

Why would it? I think it'd be nice to be able to customize the bonus you get for ascending. Though perhaps a default bonus, like 2% for first 6, and 1% there-after. PLUS, you get like 4 points for every ascending up to 6, and 1 every one there-after.
For 23 Ascensions giving you 41 points to distribute. On top of the bonus you already get for your ascended level. But perhaps a slight increase also. Like that of MS slots.

By this i mean. If you put like 5 points on each area, you'd get (for example) 5% on each. But above 5% (for arguments sake), it costs you 2 points up to 10%, then 5 points 10%-15%(or 20)

Sarevok wrote:By this i mean. If you put like 5 points on each area, you'd get (for example) 5% on each. But above 5% (for arguments sake), it costs you 2 points up to 10%, then 5 points 10%-15%(or 20)

I like this idea, but maybe you just get your ascension level times 2 in points (so level 1 = 2 pts, 2 = 4 pts)

then each upgrade costs double, so 1 = 1 pt, 2 = 2pt, 3 = 3pts ... similar to stat training in pretty much every RPG?

that way you wouldnt be uber overpowerd as you would always have a weakness if you poured it into full attack.

Actually, i would say in reverse.

fourtwozero wrote:

Sarevok wrote:By this i mean. If you put like 5 points on each area, you'd get (for example) 5% on each. But above 5% (for arguments sake), it costs you 2 points up to 10%, then 5 points 10%-15%(or 20)

I like this idea, but maybe you just get your ascension level times 2 in points (so level 1 = 2 pts, 2 = 4 pts)

then each upgrade costs double, so 1 = 1 pt, 2 = 2pt, 3 = 3pts ... similar to stat training in pretty much every RPG?

that way you wouldnt be uber overpowerd as you would always have a weakness if you poured it into full attack.

Only thing with level=points. Attack would receive MORE of an advantage (being able to damage 3x its power). Which is why a few posts back, i said if this was done, that attack should cost ATLEAST 3x more then defense points

oh yeah, maybe attack takes 3x points? so level 1 = 3, 2 =6 ? something like that?

Yeh, but then for covert, you'd need it to be like something again. And if it was lower then defense, then it would be like:
Covert: 1pt/%
Defense: 2pt/%
Attack: 6pt/%