StarGateWars Forums

Personally, I've always considered a good old bashing to be one of ratios, but I know there are many other considerations into massing. I like to ensure each member of my army has killed the as many as physically possible, once upon a time I would have spent hours working out scenarios and the best way to mass people. Recently a friend of mine laughed at me when I said, does anybody now still count numbers?

I didn't realise how in the minority I am, it seems that the destruction of your enemy is the ulimate target, even if it is inefficent. I saw somebody taking spies as low as 1k per 15ats...I nearly swallowed the bonbon that was stuck in my gob...I still will not kill under 30k spies per hit!

The only thing that will change my opinion to this is online and w/o NOX, in this circumstance, it's winner takes all, I won't give my opponent a chance to get back up. Which ultimately results in him giving up, allowing me to take the goodies

Just curious, what does everyone else contemplate whilst massing...I think I can already predict a bit of a trend, I think I know who are the all out killers and who are the long term efficency savers!

In my game there are different massing scenarios that would dictate the type of mass. An all out destroyer mass tends to demoralize ( too strong a word..but the point is there) certain players. If there is a massive target that needs destroyed it is most certainly the most challenging to do it proper by ratio, but as defensive set as the game is you have to scrap that and just destroy it especially if challenged or threatened and a player thinks that big def will remain. All in all I mass for ratio. In a war I will kill spies to below 20k as a general rule.

Hate mail = successful mass.

His def=0, = Mass.

Im with you on this one FM i still try to work out the best/ least costly way to mass, i like to see them lose way more than i do, usually by the time i work out the best way there on ppt though

Andy! wrote:Hate mail = successful mass.

Hate mail = bad opponent


A good mass in my books is that everything within your capability that can be destroyed is gone

I still count numbers....I am the mathlord after all But numbers are really ancillary to the outcome of the battle, especially in live battles. I can kill triple what I lose, but if I'm the one zero'd at the end then I lose...it might be a Pyrrhic victory for my enemy, but it's a victory nonetheless.

depends on my abilities and stats versus theirs...

cuz i be noob.

more later.

Field Marshall wrote:I didn't realise how in the minority I am, it seems that the destruction of your enemy is the ulimate target, even if it is inefficent. I saw somebody taking spies as low as 1k per 15ats...I nearly swallowed the bonbon that was stuck in my gob...I still will not kill under 30k spies per hit!

higher covert the more you need to kill or in other words lower you need to put them

covert LVL = power per spy
39 = 3,400,610
38 = 2,404,594
37 = 1,700,305
36 = 1,202,297
35 = 850,153
34 = 601,149 about the average


30k at lvl 34 equals to about 18 bil power
the same powe at 39 is 5,303 spies

so in answer to your question yes it's still about numbers how low can they go

Jedi~Tank wrote:In my game there are different massing scenarios that would dictate the type of mass. An all out destroyer mass tends to demoralize ( too strong a word..but the point is there) certain players. If there is a massive target that needs destroyed it is most certainly the most challenging to do it proper by ratio, but as defensive set as the game is you have to scrap that and just destroy it especially if challenged or threatened and a player thinks that big def will remain. All in all I mass for ratio. In a war I will kill spies to below 20k as a general rule.

I agree with Jedi Tank. Massing is most often a tool of diplomacy.

However, it's also worth noting that some people mass for their own satisfaction. Perhaps because they enjoy the process, or perhaps because they enjoy the idea of destroying something. These people are about as far removed as you can get from the people who play this game like accountants. A good mass, someone once told me in an MSN conversation, jokingly I hope, is one where you need a tissue afterwards.

if by the end of the Mass process, you didn't use all your resources. (not talking about $$ spender)

What's massing?

The best mass is getting the best kill/loss ratio - anything else is just plain inefficient, and often shows a lack of preparation/game knowledge. A disregard for losses can demoralise an enemy, but it does so even more if they lose 10 times what it cost you to attack!

However, the best kill/loss ratio may still be where you lose more than them - if they're online, repeatedly alliance repairing/ppting, etc - then it becomes a contest of who goes down first - in which case the best mass simply becomes who gets zeroed first.

But, yeah, I would normally "analyse" the quality of a mass afterwards by: kill/loss ratio, taking into consideration other factors like, difference in c/ac lvls, ms, and whether online or not.

RepliMagni wrote:The best mass is getting the best kill/loss ratio - anything else is just plain inefficient, and often shows a lack of preparation/game knowledge. A disregard for losses can demoralise an enemy, but it does so even more if they lose 10 times what it cost you to attack!

However, the best kill/loss ratio may still be where you lose more than them - if they're online, repeatedly alliance repairing/ppting, etc - then it becomes a contest of who goes down first - in which case the best mass simply becomes who gets zeroed first.

But, yeah, I would normally "analyse" the quality of a mass afterwards by: kill/loss ratio, taking into consideration other factors like, difference in c/ac lvls, ms, and whether online or not.

Would have said the same thing, I always consider best kill/loss ratio.

The ULTIMATE mass is having one enemy mass another through your own machinations. I've had that lovely scenario QUITE A FEW times and every time it's been enjoyable. Sure it's fun to mass big defences and so, but if someone wants to kill a defence, eventually it will go. It may last longer if the defender is online a lot, but everything falls. But being the 'puppeteer' is far more fun. No resources needed!