AT Planets

[Field Marshall]

+1 AT per turn planets?

Discuss.

[xDaku]

or +2AT

or even +3 AT

This would be an update I'd love

[Heisenberg]

Thiink it was requested a while ago. But yeah, I agreed back then and agree now.

[minisaiyan]

would destroy all markets

[xDaku]

would destroy all markets

Not really, turns from market reset recently went up yet the prices for ATs has still been rising.

[Heisenberg]

Yeah, and you could easily make those generated by planets personal turns. Cause really, people won't have AT planets to sell the turns generated by them. Will be farmers who use them.

[Juliette]

The idea is idiotic, disregards all ideas of game economics, ruins the P2P market (arguably not a bad thing), and provides people with a way to gain a decisive victory over others without any effort (none but purchasing these planets).
1-3AT per turn? 10 of such planets, 10-30AT EXTRA per turn? Are you insane?

You realise that 10AT per turn (FM's minimal suggestion) is .. excessive?


If an AT planet is brought in play, the same restriction as on a triple is required. Additionally, more restrictions are required, as upgrading such a planet should not be possible. 1AT a turn is the max you can safely award players (as it is also the optimal bonus from Alliance House) .. any more is excessive and extreme overkill.


No wonder people 'like' this idea, for the same reason they will like Eisen Feuer's 'gimme free stuff' idea, it is the same thing, asking for game changing things.

[Field Marshall]

If an AT planet is brought in play, the same restriction as on a triple is required.

Fair, 3 max negotiable?

[Juliette]

If an AT planet is brought in play, the same restriction as on a triple is required.

Fair, 3 max negotiable?

I take it you disregard the extreme advantage a single extra AT per turn offers. (As was illustrated when the farming records of the AT-house were compared to regular players.)

3AT a turn is overkill. 1AT is decent enough and worth a few $.

[Field Marshall]

If an AT planet is brought in play, the same restriction as on a triple is required.

Fair, 3 max negotiable?

I take it you disregard the extreme advantage a single extra AT per turn offers. (As was illustrated when the farming records of the AT-house were compared to regular players.)

3AT a turn is overkill. 1AT is decent enough and worth a few $.

3 x 48 = 146ATs

...how much is that in naq?

...then consider, the 1t income planets?

[xDaku]

Overblowing the turn-economics of this game now? C'mon.

This will only benefit people who use the turns for farming/raiding for the most part. Don't see how giving active non-cash players more to work with is a bad thing. And making them personal turns is a good way to counteract any problems.

Seriously, 146 ATs a day isn't that much more. In farm hits, at 15AT per hit, that's about 9 hits more.

I promise you, 9 extra farm hits won't hinder the economy.

[Field Marshall]

Overblowing the turn-economics of this game now? C'mon.

This will only benefit people who use the turns for farming/raiding for the most part. Don't see how giving active non-cash players more to work with is a bad thing. And making them personal turns is a good way to counteract any problems.

Seriously, 146 ATs a day isn't that much more. In farm hits, at 15AT per hit, that's about 9 hits more.

I promise you, 9 extra farm hits won't hinder the economy.

Unless you hit 2.5t each time

Then they are much better then income planets

[Juliette]

If an AT planet is brought in play, the same restriction as on a triple is required.

Fair, 3 max negotiable?

I take it you disregard the extreme advantage a single extra AT per turn offers. (As was illustrated when the farming records of the AT-house were compared to regular players.)

3AT a turn is overkill. 1AT is decent enough and worth a few $.

3 x 48 = 146ATs
...how much is that in naq?

In my case, 2.8T according to my recent farming-only records. Blame Rookie Central if I am incorrect.

...then consider, the 1t income planets?

The 1T income planets are excessive. These abominations will be removed.

@xDaku: You disregard the volume of hits each turn change entails. Sure, one or two people hitting a few more is no issue whatsoever. Twenty becomes an issue. Two hundred (as Jason tells me, this is the figure attacking at each turn change) becomes excessive. Either you understand and agree, or you do not, and either is fine.. but you know the way Jason thinks, as I do, and you realise your argument will not be regarded favourably.

[xDaku]

The number of farms won't increase, just the number of turns. With that in mind, the number of hits per turn won't necessarily increase drastically. Actually, it won't, at all. Not drastically atleast. It's a big difference, number of turns vs. number of hits.

The number of hits possible over an extended period of time will increase, and that's actually not too bad for the game. All that means, is the prices of turns go down just that slight bit, if even that, for a small period of time before bouncing back. Not drastic at all.

Again, keeping in mind, recently I believe it's 4.5k (possibly more, I don't remember the old count accurately) possible turn increase that was added per player to the game. It's a small increase, but the prices of turns still stayed relatively the same.

They dipped for the first week I believe, but as displayed by the current market the change in prices didn't last too long. Nor did it affect the game too much, if at all.

[Borek]

Just do not see the need for these at all, it's not like turns are hard to get. Seems like a waste of time to code them in, i can think of a lot better uses for Jason's time than some fluff planets.