StarGateWars Forums

I suggest having either a set number of mercs for the game, and as the number available to hire gets smaller, the price goes up. Or, the more you have, the more naquadah per unit they are to hire. Or simply make them always available, at the same rate...


A second Idea, is making the 25% rule actually work. I know I had purchased more than 25% mercs on the quantum server, without any problem. Currently, my fighting force is like 15,000 and I have over 5,000 mercs...but I've have 5,000 mercs ever since I was around 6,000 fighting force. So...

what are you talking about... the 25% rule does work...

it isn't 25% of the army that you have, it is 25% of everyones armies combined...

be glad they lasted as long as they did, you can thank the couple hundred accounts that aren't active and have exactly 54 untrained for alot of extra mercs.

you should have got them while they were around... that's why I just picked up 150000 of them or so the other day

how about if the merc had an upkeep cost?

Surely a Merc would need to be paid on a time basis, not a 'one off' basis.

So....lets say a Merc costs 3000 to put on your books, then 10 Naq (as example) every turn (30 mins)

If you dont have the income to cover the cost it is taken from your Naq, if you have no Naq it is taken from your secret temple stash and if that still doesnt cover it the mercs leave and become free agents.

How does that sound?

if a change in mercs is made it should be a modification to the 1/4 rule. it 1/4 of your total forces. so if you have 100 troops 75 have to be your men and 25 can be mercs.

i agree with that.
i reckon that sould be the limit

also, i liked Magno's idea about mercs costing naq (a salery). that may deter playing from buying loads of them making merc share fairer!

What about if you have 100k troops, 25k of which are mercs, and you lend/give somebody 10k untrained - should you lose the mercs which are now in excess of 25%?

i think instead of limiting everyone's ability to have mercs since i have sent men to people and then needed to buy mercs to attack or defend i think that there should be a set rate at wich u can buy mercs like only 100 a turn that way the 1000's of mercs would be divided up amongst more people

scben wrote:i think instead of limiting everyone's ability to have mercs since i have sent men to people and then needed to buy mercs to attack or defend i think that there should be a set rate at wich u can buy mercs like only 100 a turn that way the 1000's of mercs would be divided up amongst more people

not a bad idea

Wolf359 wrote:What about if you have 100k troops, 25k of which are mercs, and you lend/give somebody 10k untrained - should you lose the mercs which are now in excess of 25%?

Yes. Otherwise you can train troops. Then buy as many mercs as you want. Then untrain and lose none of your mercs. They should return to stock when they are lost in this way so others can hire them again.

Sleipnir wrote:

Wolf359 wrote:What about if you have 100k troops, 25k of which are mercs, and you lend/give somebody 10k untrained - should you lose the mercs which are now in excess of 25%?

Yes. Otherwise you can train troops. Then buy as many mercs as you want. Then untrain and lose none of your mercs. They should return to stock when they are lost in this way so others can hire them again.

first i thought the number of mercs u could have was dependent on the size of your army as a whole. also training and untraining men is stupid since u lose all the naq from training them. i also think that u shouldn't lose your mercs if u send your men out.

scben wrote:

Sleipnir wrote:

Wolf359 wrote:What about if you have 100k troops, 25k of which are mercs, and you lend/give somebody 10k untrained - should you lose the mercs which are now in excess of 25%?

Yes. Otherwise you can train troops. Then buy as many mercs as you want. Then untrain and lose none of your mercs. They should return to stock when they are lost in this way so others can hire them again.

first i thought the number of mercs u could have was dependent on the size of your army as a whole. also training and untraining men is stupid since u lose all the naq from training them. i also think that u shouldn't lose your mercs if u send your men out.

Probably it was originally but I think it would be better if it was based on trained units only (would it really stop the merc overusage if it was based on whole army?).

Maybe it is using naq training and untraining but I don't think you could call it wasted if you are getting more mercs who'll free up your other troops to bring in more income.


J.G.G.

reason why i brought up the whole army thing is now that forum has stopped trained units from making naq the idea is that now the mercs will take care of the attacking and defending in mass quanties so that the majority of your men can remain untrain and be used to produce naquadah. or maybe im wrong for thinking this.

The problem is now that only a few people are getting mercs. If they cost something more than just naquadah (such as needing a sufficiently sized trained army to accomodate them), then they couldn't be hoarded as they are now. That and I think it would be more interesting strategically for people to have to sacrifice some of their income to protect the rest, rather than rely on mercs.


J.G.G.

scben wrote:i think instead of limiting everyone's ability to have mercs since i have sent men to people and then needed to buy mercs to attack or defend i think that there should be a set rate at wich u can buy mercs like only 100 a turn that way the 1000's of mercs would be divided up amongst more people

Actually this is a really good idea. Perhaps even a better idea if combined with a more frequent merc spawn. Instead of 1500 mercs of each kind spawning each 30 mins 50 could spawn each 1 min. This would also help ensure that everbody interested in the mercs had the opportunity to buy some