StarGateWars Forums

Okay, I've always thought it to be obnoxious that there is no breakdown of weapons at all in this game.

Well, to start off, we should really have four types...

Defense (armor, personal defense weapons) <-- lowers casualties, very little "strategic" and plain damage
Assault (machine guns, staff weapons) <-- does more "strategic" damage as these weapons are great at obtaining & holding ground
Precision (Sniper rifles, death gliders kind of) <-- takes out enemies before you take fire from any other kind of weapon, does very little "strategic" damage
Heavy (Bombs, grenades...) <-- kills the most guys, and has a 1:1 ratio of damage to "strategic" damage

These are brief descriptions, and I will have more in general after this.

Tauri off weapons
- pistol - 5 raw power - Defense
- p90 - 10 raw power - Assault
- Sniper Rifle - 20 raw power - Precision
- Grenade - 30 raw power - Heavy
- Plastic Explosive - 140 raw power - Heavy
- Mini Nuke - 600 raw power - Heavy
- x302 craft - 2000 raw power - Precision (it gets kills before you get killed)
Tauri def weapons
- pistol - 5 raw power - Defense
- P90 - 10 raw power - assault
- Personal armor - 20 raw power - Defense
- Strategic Sniper Rifle - 30 raw power - Precision
- Defense Turret - 140 raw power - Assault
- Refined Defense Explosives - 600 raw power - Heavy
- Satellite laser - 2000 raw power - Heavy

Goa'uld off weapons
- zat - 5 raw power - Defense
- Long-range Staff Weapon - 10 raw power - Precision
- Staff Weapon - 20 raw power - Assault
- Jaffa Explosive Grenades - 30 raw power - Heavy
- Staff Turret - 140 raw power - Assault
- Naquadah Bomb - 600 raw power - Heavy
- Death Glider - 2000 raw power - Precision (it gets kills before you get killed)
Goa'uld def weapons
- zat - 5 raw power - Defense
- Jaffa armor - 10 raw power - Defense
- Staff Weapon - 20 raw power - Assault
- Strategic Sniper Rifle - 30 raw power - Precision
- Staff Turret - 140 raw power - Assault
- Planted Naquadah Bomb - 600 raw power - Heavy
- Orbiting Hatak - 2000 raw power - Precison

Asgard off weapons
- Handheld Teleporter - 5 raw power - Defense
- Asgard Beam Weapon - 10 raw power - Precision
- Wide Range LightRay Weapon - 20 raw power - Assault
- DNA targeted Teleporter - 30 raw power - Precision
- Neutronium Bomb - 140 raw power - Heavy
- Gravity Manipulation Device - 600 raw power - Defense
- DNA Targeted Multispectrum Disintegration Weapon - 2000 raw power - Heavy
Asgard def weapons
- Clone Warriors - 5 raw power - Assault
- Handheld Holographic Projector - 10 raw power - Defense
- Communications Disruptor Field - 20 raw power - Precision
- Asgard Sensors - 30 raw power - Precision
- DNA Configured Shield and Matter Disruption Field - 140 raw power - Assault
- Naquadah enhanced Neutronium Bomb - 600 raw power - Heavy
- Time Dilation Field Generator - 2000 raw power - Defense

As for Replis and ascendeds, PM me and I'll add them to the post.

STRATEGIC DAMAGE
Strategic damage counts towards who wins a battle. That's all.

DEFENSE WEAPONS
Defense weapons subtract half of their value from the opponent's Strategic damage, and all of their value from the opponent's actual damage.

ASSAULT WEAPONS
Assault weapons add double their raw power as strategic damage, and half as raw damage.

PRECISION WEAPONS
Before the battle begins, for 1 turns worth of time, precision weapons attack opponents randomly, and completely disregard all defense weapons. Precision weapons contribute 1/5th of their raw power as strategic damage, and their raw power as raw damage.

HEAVY WEAPONS
Heavy weapons add double their raw power as plain damage, and half as strategic.

The player with the most strategic damage at the end wins the battle, but does not obviously take the least casualties or weapon damage.

As far as the actual formula of damage done to enemy weapon damage & killed troops, I'll leave that up to forum

UPGRADES
Each weapon type can be upgraded (by percents) to increase their specialty but lower their non-specialty. For instance, precision weapons could do an extra % of damage before the battle really begins, but lose that % as strategic damage, and once that reaches 0, take it from raw damage. Each upgrade would cost roughly 5 mil naq.

I know this is a giant change, but how do you guys like it?

the weaker weapons look very tasty to my spies ^.^

but i think this idea is not so good...

i guess what this is the worst thing i saw today...Well im tryin' not to be maen to

Shizune wrote:the weaker weapons look very tasty to my spies ^.^

but i think this idea is not so good...

Hmm... Didn't think of that.

Basically, I just think its kind of lame that the only used weapons are the best... even on quantum, after a week or two!!

I mean, what's the point of even having more than one weapon?

As for this being the worst... I personally didn't take offense to that. Lucky you... But seeing as I don't know you, I don't think you know me, and it would have probably been best to not to try and get to know me this way... Be glad I'm not like, say, JIX.

Well... I see people saying they don't like it, which is fine with me, but anyone want to share... I dunno... why? Personally I think it would be a great idea, and actually promote strategy, for once. I mean, right now the only real strategy we have is

1. What areas to focus on (not that hard)
2. What race to be (see number 1 for easy choosing)
3. Whether to buy UU or build up UP
4. When to turn on/off your realm alert level (once again, an easy choice)

Adding this would definately make the game more strategical... And I have always thought that this game needs a weapon/battle reformation. I mean, seriously, when in real war is "who does the most damage" at all relevant to who won the battle?

If you look at the battle of Bunker/Breed's Hill, which happened right before the American Revolutionary War (for all you non-americans) on June 17, 1775. the americans may have lost, but there is a quote from some british officer going something like "Another few victories like this one and we'll lose the war!" The final casualties were 449 yanks, and 1054 british soldiers. The rebels only fled once they ran out of bullets...

Anyway, winning a battle has nothing to do with how much damage you did, and if you don't believe me think of this.

There is a big forest about a mile away from a naqudah refinery center or wherever someone keeps his naq. At the edge of the forest, a force 10x the size of the defending army comes and camps in the edge of the forest, not moving, simply killing guys left & right. Since this army not only has cover, but superior forces, they rip apart the enemy. However, a choke of, say, 50 feet lies between the forest and the naqudah... The defending forces concentrate most of its guys there, and has plenty of mini-guns there just hidden behind cover.

If that wall is too thick to easily breach, a stupid general would probably say, "Charge!" and go through the choke. However, suddenly the situation flips... it is the defenders with cover & if they have weaponry like that, every soldier who attempts to break through the choke will get mowed down before taking a single shot.

After a little bit, the general would retreat to save his forces and at least make the battle worth it casualty-wise. However, this would also result in gaining no naquadah.

Technically the battle was a defeat. However, it could easily be argued that the forces would have done "more damage" in a Gate Wars battle, and therefore have won.

Sorry to make anyone read another long post, but I just believe this really should be how it is.

Although I like it, I really do.... it won't happen. It's a change to the essence of the game, not to mention is really difficult, and I don't see Forum having the time to code and test all of that... good idea though.

Yay, a not bad reply!

Yeah, I would agree that it is unlikely to come into play.

Only very strong support would do that... and by the looks of things...

If the admin chooses to add this, though, just email me and I will be more than willing to help!

Knighty-Sai wrote:Be glad I'm not like, say, JIX.
.

ha ha...


dont like it pure and simple its a waste of time for forum and for you who posted it.

after a big steal of betwee 500mil-3billion would you want to waste that few more minutes trying to figure out the right balance of weapons?.no you would'nt

plus they would be far to easy to sabb

it would'nt bring strategy to the game it would just fill the armoury page with alittle more names



bad idea waste of your time posting it



~JIX~

sorry, no offence m8 - but i'm gonna have to agree with JIX

This kind of thing has been suggested before (and rejected)

Common Suggestions, No. 1.

Wolf359 wrote:This kind of thing has been suggested before (and rejected)

Common Suggestions, No. 1.

...

This idea itself? No way...

As for new weapons, I only changed the names for realism's sake...

Seriously, you don't think I would post all this just to suggest new weapons out of the blue?

Is it all that bad an idea? Not at all. It probably won't be implemented, as it doesn't really agree with the overall dynamic of the game (which as you have pointed out, is a certain degree of simplicity), and would demand perhaps too much work be done to get it to fit into this game.

I know it's probably academic but if I were to suggest any improvements they would be:

Why bother creating different strength weapons (within the race choice); why not just have 1 (maybe 2 - weaker and stronger) for each kind of weapons with the same or similar strengths (allowing for individuality between races). This would serve to allow people not to encumber themselves with the useless and sab-easy weapons just to improve one of the stats (assault/heavy etc.).

With regards to race individuality, you could tailor the power of each of these assault/heavy etc. stat weapons again, so we can lump Tauri with best assault, Asgard with def, etc.


Overall, not a really bad suggestion deserving of all its criticisms. Just maybe a bit over-ambitious.

Norman wrote:...Just maybe a bit over-ambitious.

You got me there!

Yeah, about sabbing, that would be a problem. The only thing I can think of is having a "sab defense" for each weapon type...

Say, heavy weapons have double there raw power in "sab defense"
Precise weapons have half their power in "sab defense"
Assault weapons have double
Defense weapons have half.

And maybe make sabbing do no more than damage weapons, and destroying a few.

Yeah, we definately need to work on that...

Ultimately the goal is to get and keep the most ppl playing.

The reason why this won't be implmented is because making the game more complicated is only going to deter ppl from starting it, because they won't get it right away.

I think atm, the game is fairly intuitive, and easy to get into, so there will be no changes.

Knighty-Sai wrote:

Norman wrote:...Just maybe a bit over-ambitious.

You got me there!

Yeah, about sabbing, that would be a problem. The only thing I can think of is having a "sab defense" for each weapon type...

Say, heavy weapons have double there raw power in "sab defense"
Precise weapons have half their power in "sab defense"
Assault weapons have double
Defense weapons have half.

And maybe make sabbing do no more than damage weapons, and destroying a few.

Yeah, we definately need to work on that...

Could do something like that, but if say all the weapons (or big weapons) of each stat were similar in power, say within a range of 2000-3000, then the situation wouldn't be too dissimilar to the current sabbing situation. The smaller weapons (if they were to exist) would of course be easier to sab, but may be more cost effective if you were picky about your targets. Having two tiers of each weapon I think would be better than having the different stat weapons spread all over the shop, and forcing you to buy 200 of Stat A Weapon to get the same effect as one Stat B Weapon.

Again, although I recognise this discussion probably looks odd and unnecessary, I see no harm in playing out this hypothetical situation.