StarGateWars Forums

Well, as i'm sure MANY of you are aware, there has been a recent large drop in the number of available AT on the market.

From what i can gather, this is to prevent the random massings etc that happen with large quantities of AT. However, this also cripples the inactive farmers, slowing everyones growth to a standstill.


So, i want to get a poll, and which way people think Jason should so with reguard to this. Should he keep the current lack of AT to reduce the number of random massings, or should he simply make defense alot more effective one way or the other.


Please vote, and if you choose "Other option" please state why.

more at's with more effective defences

lower the amount of AT but not as much and also increase effective defences

Do anything but lower at that low.

There is a plus side to this update, so I'll state that first. People will have to choose who they mass and a lot more selectively. makes random massing less frequent. End of good side.

Bad side:
1, new accts are dead in the water. Raiding is the KEY to rapid growth. at the rates AT are at now raiding is hard. Which to a degree it should be. But now AT rates will go through the roof.

I won't be suprised if average at cost is 1tril/K soon. At that cost raiding is obsolete! Might as well remove the button completely at that point.

2, How do you mass a 5 Tril def, with no AT? you'd need 4-5 players. Or all giving at to one acct. So now wars are obsolete, at least in any real sense. Cause the cash players will build to a point that's untouchable, not cause it can't be taken. But it's imposs for non cash players to gather the AT needed.

3, A cash alliance can now get 3 top spenders together, and they all drop 200 usd on same week change[and there are those who spend this!] And the that alliance owns whole server for a week.

4, Lowers overall activity that's possible. why would you not want players to play?

I say this as a cash player myself. I spend quit a bit on AT each week[admin, I'm sure your bank has statements for the transfers of my money from card to your acct, if this is in question], I should love this update. And as a greedy player I do! But as one who wants to be able to use my acct, meaning having ppl to play against, This update is badddddd.

Sarevok wrote: However, this also cripples the inactive farmers, slowing everyones growth to a standstill.

Err I WANT the inactive farmers to be dead!

On the raiding, while it will make raiding obsolete for a while a new equilibrium will form as the uu build up again in the accounts. The problem is, I don't think we have the inactive large UPs to really support this and with ATs still being on the market for $$ it does tend to imbalance everything still.

Kaps1 wrote:Do anything but lower at that low.

There is a plus side to this update, so I'll state that first. People will have to choose who they mass and a lot more selectively. makes random massing less frequent. End of good side.

Bad side:
1, new accts are dead in the water. Raiding is the KEY to rapid growth. at the rates AT are at now raiding is hard. Which to a degree it should be. But now AT rates will go through the roof.

I won't be suprised if average at cost is 1tril/K soon. At that cost raiding is obsolete! Might as well remove the button completely at that point.

The principle is not to have someone who played 2 or three monthes catching up with someone who played 2 or 3 years. That's what rapid growth implies.
As I've said somewhere else, it took me about 2 years to really grow up from 10mil to about 240mil+. With vacations inbetween total of 3 monthes vacation. Without raiding, or using cash. I don't see why newcomers have to be able to grow 3 to 5x quicker than I did.

2, How do you mass a 5 Tril def, with no AT? you'd need 4-5 players. Or all giving at to one acct. So now wars are obsolete, at least in any real sense. Cause the cash players will build to a point that's untouchable, not cause it can't be taken. But it's imposs for non cash players to gather the AT needed.

Like it used to be a.k.a. strategy and not have single player being able to mass several trills defs by him/herself or mass alone a 15 players alliance?

3, A cash alliance can now get 3 top spenders together, and they all drop 200 usd on same week change[and there are those who spend this!] And the that alliance owns whole server for a week.

Better to have $$ spenders "own the game" than snipers who never spend cash to support the game who could also "own the game. Lesser of two evils ftw?

4, Lowers overall activity that's possible. why would you not want players to play?

People would learn building their account another way?

I say this as a cash player myself. I spend quit a bit on AT each week[admin, I'm sure your bank has statements for the transfers of my money from card to your acct, if this is in question], I should love this update. And as a greedy player I do! But as one who wants to be able to use my acct, meaning having ppl to play against, This update is badddddd.

Given there's other ways to grow that are of course not against the rules...this update isn't as horrible as some think.

Tekki wrote:

Sarevok wrote: However, this also cripples the inactive farmers, slowing everyones growth to a standstill.

Err I WANT the inactive farmers to be dead!

By this you mean people whom farm inactive accounts? Or those whom are barely active and farm other accounts?

I want just to add that the update is not final yet. Consider it as a live test.

Btw, admin meet is on friday

deni wrote:Btw, admin meet is on friday

International this week ftl
As in, a my gf's relatives house for the weekend. Kinda don't want to be leaving them high and dry whilst i attend a meeting lol

Legendary Apophis wrote:

4, Lowers overall activity that's possible. why would you not want players to play?

People would learn building their account another way?

Thing is, it's way to slow

Assume a 1m UP, and a income of 10b/turn that never gets farmed.
That's about 2mUU/day. That's 3.5 months to get to even the buying limit. Also without: building their MS, ascending, getting some planets, getting covert levels, being massed, etc

Once they get to that size, then they start ascending, which take another 3 months. So 6.5 months before starting to compete. But competing without a MS, without planets, without covert levels

Sarevok wrote:

deni wrote:Btw, admin meet is on friday

International this week ftl
As in, a my gf's relatives house for the weekend. Kinda don't want to be leaving them high and dry whilst i attend a meeting lol

Legendary Apophis wrote:

4, Lowers overall activity that's possible. why would you not want players to play?

People would learn building their account another way?

Thing is, it's way to slow

Assume a 1m UP, and a income of 10b/turn that never gets farmed.
That's about 2mUU/day. That's 3.5 months to get to even the buying limit. Also without: building their MS, ascending, getting some planets, getting covert levels, being massed, etc

I've spent over two years building my account, I don't see why someone could build theirs same as me in 5 or 10 times less amount of time.

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Sarevok wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

4, Lowers overall activity that's possible. why would you not want players to play?

People would learn building their account another way?

Thing is, it's way to slow

Assume a 1m UP, and a income of 10b/turn that never gets farmed.
That's about 2mUU/day. That's 3.5 months to get to even the buying limit. Also without: building their MS, ascending, getting some planets, getting covert levels, being massed, etc

I've spent over two years building my account, I don't see why someone could build theirs same as me in 5 or 10 times less amount of time.

Its impossible already. Ascension takes a month and a half. Not including the requirements to GET to G&R and to pay for the ascension (especially the first, unless you get 1k G&R 2x over

Sarevok wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Sarevok wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

4, Lowers overall activity that's possible. why would you not want players to play?

People would learn building their account another way?

Thing is, it's way to slow

Assume a 1m UP, and a income of 10b/turn that never gets farmed.
That's about 2mUU/day. That's 3.5 months to get to even the buying limit. Also without: building their MS, ascending, getting some planets, getting covert levels, being massed, etc

I've spent over two years building my account, I don't see why someone could build theirs same as me in 5 or 10 times less amount of time.

Its impossible already. Ascension takes a month and a half. Not including the requirements to GET to G&R and to pay for the ascension (especially the first, unless you get 1k G&R 2x over

Being in top 1700 isn't that hard considering massive amount of zero defs. Being in top 1000 is harder yes.
I did it this way as well, and mind it...MS were to be rebuilt on every ascension when I did it.
So I'm slighty laughing about fact that game would be hard.

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Sarevok wrote:Its impossible already. Ascension takes a month and a half. Not including the requirements to GET to G&R and to pay for the ascension (especially the first, unless you get 1k G&R 2x over

Being in top 1700 isn't that hard considering massive amount of zero defs. Being in top 1000 is harder yes.
I did it this way as well, and mind it...MS were to be rebuilt on every ascension when I did it.
So I'm slighty laughing about fact that game would be hard.

If for the top 1700 you want 1G&R/turn, then ascending will take you just over 4 months.
And growing to 270m army size will take you a further 3.5 months.

Sarevok wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Sarevok wrote:Its impossible already. Ascension takes a month and a half. Not including the requirements to GET to G&R and to pay for the ascension (especially the first, unless you get 1k G&R 2x over

Being in top 1700 isn't that hard considering massive amount of zero defs. Being in top 1000 is harder yes.
I did it this way as well, and mind it...MS were to be rebuilt on every ascension when I did it.
So I'm slighty laughing about fact that game would be hard.

If for the top 1700 you want 1G&R/turn, then ascending will take you just over 4 months.
And growing to 270m army size will take you a further 3.5 months.

As it should be?

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Sarevok wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:

Sarevok wrote:Its impossible already. Ascension takes a month and a half. Not including the requirements to GET to G&R and to pay for the ascension (especially the first, unless you get 1k G&R 2x over

Being in top 1700 isn't that hard considering massive amount of zero defs. Being in top 1000 is harder yes.
I did it this way as well, and mind it...MS were to be rebuilt on every ascension when I did it.
So I'm slighty laughing about fact that game would be hard.

If for the top 1700 you want 1G&R/turn, then ascending will take you just over 4 months.
And growing to 270m army size will take you a further 3.5 months.

As it should be?

If you weren't to be attacked ever in that time.
I'm all for it taking time. But what does it cost to get to a 1mUP, and what does it cost to get a 10b/turn income.

In any case, it's not really what the thread is about.