StarGateWars Forums

The idea put forward for descended battles is that a players defensive capabilities will slowly be drawn down in proportion to their life force reserves (against maximum). So they less LFR they have the less personal defenses will be seen in battle, after all you should become weaker if you have less life force....
The effect will not be permanent of course, if you refill your life force reserves (even natural refilling) will make the defence increase.
This is effectively the legit thread to this possible update, a vote I guess. The other question is limits?

If no one cares then I won't . Guild I know you do....

Sol wrote:If no one cares then I won't . Guild I know you do....

I'm too puny to care. Assuming I eventually experience CER/TOC puberty this sounds like an ok idea in theory. You are planning to start small and adjust from there I hope.

Sure why not

People care bud, but not many visit the forums nowadays.

wont make much difference to those who's accounts are practically undecendable, ie a hit on them and their LF refills at next turn anyway.

Sniperwax, you should care.. its accounts like yours this would effect the most

fem fatale wrote:wont make much difference to those who's accounts are practically undecendable, ie a hit on them and their LF refills at next turn anyway.

Sniperwax, you should care.. its accounts like yours this would effect the most

I'm at risk of being descended presently and I'm still at risk of being descended under Sol's proposed changes. The big fish are not at risk now and could potentially be at risk under the changes. It seems like this change applies to us all but them more so in that sense.

Not logging into ASC for days and days at a time has big fish potentially drowning under these changes where little fishies already live in that reality but not days and days try hours if not built sensibly

Think I originally suggested capping the reduction at 35%, but that is probably too little. Maybe you should not cap the reduction in effectiveness at all, and base it purely on the percentage of max life force reserves available. If the max damage cap that a 'direct attack' can do remains (2/5th's of max life force reserves), then after a point, the small accounts will see no difference in the time it takes to descend them, and the larger accounts will become easier to descend as the number of attacks against them builds up, reducing their defence effectiveness.

Ofc if your super active its not gong to make any difference in the end, as refilling life force reserves will negate any reduction.

I like it Sol, it'll probably make me log on more often and start playing again.

Vote + 1

One of the thinks that I do like about Ascended (At least in theory, I am just quietly farming and building up my covert)

Is that the planet size attack limitations means that the big boys really are in a league of their own.

I am sure that there are players at the top of the charts who, even if they smashed all their own planets away have enough fleets and charisma that they would outgrow me again the next turn or so anyway.

It a nice instantiation of league tables, to keep players of differing power separated.

So this is all about the less than non decendables being able to fight.
Personally I am against it.

I am speaking from general principles rather than personal experience, the only descention I have been involved in was me beating up on an inactive, back when I was raising up the achievement ladder.

I don't like positive feedback loops, even temporary ones. If you can already beat up on someone, how does the game play benefit from being able to beat up on them more effectively after getting the first hit in?
<plays the advocate> Makes first strikes more attractive.

So three cases.
1 Big beats little.
It's only a matter of time, If little is not more active then they are dead.
2 Equals fighting it out.
Most active wins, This change just increases first strike advantage.
3 Little beats big
Might be some advantage here, get in a few hits while they are offline, and maybe you get an edge.


Descending someone is a less than 0 sum game, on both sides. Everyone looses, no one wins.
So it is a political/morale tool.

At my level, my cache is much larger than my reserves, which is larger than my LF, not to mention I have some AP up my sleeve and turns, A successful descention attack on me, just means that I didn't bother logging in for too long and someone cut my throat while I slept.

The resulting vendetta would have both players becoming more active (but add revenue is not a significant part of this worlds economy?) and a scene reminiscent of my first Judo grading. (she was far too heavy for me to shift, and I was far to nimble for her to throw)

It is a minimum of 3 three hour attack sequences? Anyone active can achieve a defense for that. So it turns into a long slow attrition to find out who has the least in reserve.

Whomever misses the 9 hour login, or runs out of LF/reserve/catche/Turns to farm into DMU then to LF looses.

Not sure how this proposed change would alter that system.

But then I am not sure if I understand how the system works, either at my level or for those in the large gap between myself and the undecendables.

It's worth testing

I cant see anything that will change the game play, its not hard hitting.


I think we should not be able to refill our "Ascended Life Force Reserves" by using our cache. Logging on and 1 click of the button ur safe. Something needs to be looked at that.

Or, we increase the power of our ToC again.


We need to bring descension back in to play, with a big bang.

Now days its about who got the biggest Command Star.

byrne_1 wrote:We need to bring descension back in to play, with a big bang.

Now days its about who got the biggest Command Star.

There will always be favoritism in one (or on some occasions two) stats, has been CER, then TOC, now CS.

@cwalen; little ones can only do so much, if they hit too small then the enemies natural regen will kick in before any defence personals will be seen to decrease in the following attack.
As for the polar opposite, big on small, you can just limit it down to say 20% of the attackers TOC before the defence isn't seen to decrease.

Although bare in mind this effect will be global, if a big person launches a few descension attacks on a player and a small person follows up, the larger person may not see lowered defence personals, but the smaller person will.

I like the idea. Go for it.

byrne_1 wrote:We need to bring descension back in to play, with a big bang.

+1