StarGateWars Forums

# mods This is a feeler, of sorts, and i'm trying to get imput so i can put together a reasonable list to forum, as he's told me he would think about changes to them, aslong as the details were explained step by step so that the coding is easy. What i'm hoping for is that a few people will take this as a chance to review my broad purposal, and refine it, throw in a few more ideas. Things like that. So removal of spam, and the odd ( densing of the topics) would be nice, please don't remove content.



@ forum
Anyways to the point of my pm, since you gone and removed mothership from the ascension equation, you gone and made fleets just a tad bit more affordable to get, and keep. So i was wondering:

1. could you possibly double the effect of the defences
2 half the cost.
3.Or make it so that ( your fleets can protect your planets( remember these can be massed easily) ( your fleets protect the planets, and the attacker fleets need to break thur them, the remain of the attacker force then goes onto hit the planets with their reduced strength.
4 or joint link the planet defences
A percent of the planets total defence is used to protect it's the system of planets )25-50%. The planet that is being protected would need to have atleast that amount of defence power so that it could be added, much the same way UP planets work
5. Change the min percent of fleets needed to hit a planet defences and damage them, i would suggest anywhere between 50-75%.

6. Change the random variable from 5-25% to 1-5% of the planets total defences, as at the moment, the range is far to wide.

7. ( a side bug) At the moment you still lose defences even if your defences give back totally loses, which means someone could mass a
planet with 1 fleet.


*2.

Planets in general.

I like the idea of adding slot opitions on planets making them better places to waste resources, and more valueable to be taken out in a war.

High Empty wrote:1. could you possibly double the effect of the defences
2 half the cost.
3.Or make it so that ( your fleets can protect your planets( remember these can be massed easily) ( your fleets protect the planets, and the attacker fleets need to break thur them, the remain of the attacker force then goes onto hit the planets with their reduced strength.
4 or joint link the planet defences
A percent of the planets total defence is used to protect it's the system of planets )25-50%. The planet that is being protected would need to have atleast that amount of defence power so that it could be added, much the same way UP planets work
5. Change the min percent of fleets needed to hit a planet defences and damage them, i would suggest anywhere between 50-75%.

6. Change the random variable from 5-25% to 1-5% of the planets total defences, as at the moment, the range is far to wide.

7. ( a side bug) At the moment you still lose defences even if your defences give back totally loses, which means someone could mass a
planet with 1 fleet.

Allowing the mothership to survive ascension isn't going to cause a problem in the game with fleet sizes because unlike planet defenses, fleets are exponentially more expensive. It's the same reason we don't have players with level 40 covert and anti-covert. At some point, the cost of upgrade outweighs the benefit.

Could someone potentially build up to 100,000 fleet slots over a long period of time? Possibly. Could another player put 100,000 defense facilities on a planet? Sure, already been done, and for a helluva lot less cost. Cost difference: 50 trillion naq for 100,000 fleet hangers giving a fleet strength of just under 58 billion. Planet, on the other hand, even at large size, could get 100,000 defense facilities for a cost 5 trillion naq and have a defense strength of 300 billion which the 58 billion fleets would still be unable to mass without taking devastating damage. Planets have had (and still have) the edge.


1. Fine, as long as you also double the strength of fleets.

2. Fine, as long as you make fleet slots non-exponential in growth, like planet defenses. Alternately, you can choose to make planet defenses exponentially more expensive like fleet hangers.

3. Don't have an opinion either way.

4. Would have to think about it. Sounds complicated to implement.

5. 50%+ is insanely high unless you reduce the cost of adding fleets or significantly increase their power. As it is right now, 300 billion defense on a planet isn't (relatively) that hard, however, 150 billion fleet strength is nearly impossible. This would essentially make planets unreasonably untouchable. Everyone needs a nemesis.

6. Again, too high. Every action in the game needs to have a comparative reaction otherwise you have imbalance. If you make planets essentially untouchable (as many are already under the current set of rules), you cause no point to having a counter-balancing force with fleets. If planets were meant to be a permanent fixture on your account, why not simply give every player one planet a week until they reach 10 and make them all untouchable?

7. Even a single ship can do some damage (Luke Skywalker + Death Star = Big Bang). It may be a suicide run, but it's still possible. Anyway, the idea of massing down a planet with a single fleet becomes moot when the cost of turns comes into play. If you wanted to take a (relatively) weakly defended planet of 30 billion down to 15 billion and you destroyed an average of 5 defense facilities on each hit , you'd burn through 15,000 turns doing so. At a current cost of 40 billion naq / 1K turns, that is 600 billion naq. Cost of the planet defenses at above average size would be 250 billion naq.

Allowing the mothership to survive ascension isn't going to cause a problem in the game with fleet sizes because unlike planet defenses, fleets are exponentially more expensive. It's the same reason we don't have players with level 40 covert and anti-covert. At some point, the cost of upgrade outweighs the benefit.

Could someone potentially build up to 100,000 fleet slots over a long period of time? Possibly. Could another player put 100,000 defense facilities on a planet? Sure, already been done, and for a helluva lot less cost. Cost difference: 50 trillion naq for 100,000 fleet hangers giving a fleet strength of just under 58 billion. Planet, on the other hand, even at large size, could get 100,000 defense facilities for a cost 5 trillion naq and have a defense strength of 300 billion which the 58 billion fleets would still be unable to mass without taking devastating damage. Planets have had (and still have) the edge.

Yes, someone could get that much, more to the point, ( it's been done)

Now that that someone has invested 50 tril naq into fleets, they can mass anyone( not just 1 players planets, but ALL planets) So your not looking at the right cost.

In an allaince war, i have 20 members all giving 5 tril, there 100 tril to go into fleets, I only need 1 player to have that fleet power, it's not like planets where it's all spread out.

As for your suggestions, you haven't really changed anything! period. why didn't you just say, no i like them the way they are can save me some time lol. And yes i know my numbers are a wee bit high, however it's just a start. So when you get to read, this, ok well i know you can right now how about you start thinking ( helpfully, well atleast to me)

High Empty wrote:Yes, someone could get that much, more to the point, ( it's been done)

Now that that someone has invested 50 tril naq into fleets, they can mass anyone( not just 1 players planets, but ALL planets) So your not looking at the right cost.

50 trillion naq investment wouldn't even allow you to mass 300 billion defense planets, or maybe only barely so. That same 50 trillion naq spread across 10 planets would give... 300 billion defense on all 10. Massing down even a single one of those planets with 100,000 fleets equipped would take thousands and thousands of turns and billions and billions of naq in repairs.

High Empty wrote:As for your suggestions, you haven't really changed anything! period. why didn't you just say, no i like them the way they are can save me some time lol.

I suppose this is a valid point. I guess I don't see what the problem is. Planets strength is already lopsided compared to fleets and these suggestions make it even more so. As for me (or anyone else) helping to come up with a solution to a problem, you really didn't identify a problem. You only made a series of numbered points on how to further imbalance the planet/fleet aspect of the game.

What is the issue that you're having that you hoped to solve with these suggestions? Maybe then I can provide a more informed dialog.

At the moment, you can keep piling onto planets more and more defences, but you only need 10% of the investment into fleets. THERE is no safe point for planets, and right now it's very easy for a group of people to mass any one planets. Mabye what i should be suggesting is something else.

That the number of turns that it takes to mass a planet be tripled, it's not really making it impossible to mass, it's just making it more expensive.

As for the defensce on planets, i have a 300bil, planet and i've seen the defence results as low as 250bil. Can anyone mass my planet yes, is anyone likely to no. However do i really have anywhere else to spend my naq, i suppose i could always just sell it for $.

So what i'm suggesting to you is that you find a reason for me to invest in my planets, Yes i suppose i could afford to go get a 1tril defence on each of them, and yes they will still be able to be massed. Point remains, that once someone ANYONE has a fleet that can mass a 300bil defence... a 1 tril defence, then all those defences on every account just became useless. I'm just attempting to slow the attacker down, that's all, and since i'm likely to be the attacker. who knows

Give me a break .................

If there is an update that is needed it is to make the fleets MORE powerful

FLeets cost LESS

planets have a far greater advantage currently, dont even start

forum said at the START

planets are NOT MEANT TO BE PERMANENT...THEY ARE MEANT to be lost eventually

so just stop it, stop trying to ruin the game so you can just sit back and stop playing and just sit on your un-massable planets

i woude like to see it changed to 20%.

means if you have less than 20%, you lose all the fleets.

I woude like to add This:
Ascended players shoude get a BONUS in the defence of the planets.

ALLOW MSes to mass planets plain and simple and remove that stupid 1 planet a day sometimes ppl do need to feel the utter defeat of just loosing a planet

High Empty wrote:At the moment, you can keep piling onto planets more and more defences, but you only need 10% of the investment into fleets. THERE is no safe point for planets, and right now it's very easy for a group of people to mass any one planets. Mabye what i should be suggesting is something else.

That the number of turns that it takes to mass a planet be tripled, it's not really making it impossible to mass, it's just making it more expensive.

As for the defensce on planets, i have a 300bil, planet and i've seen the defence results as low as 250bil. Can anyone mass my planet yes, is anyone likely to no. However do i really have anywhere else to spend my naq, i suppose i could always just sell it for $.

So what i'm suggesting to you is that you find a reason for me to invest in my planets, Yes i suppose i could afford to go get a 1tril defence on each of them, and yes they will still be able to be massed. Point remains, that once someone ANYONE has a fleet that can mass a 300bil defence... a 1 tril defence, then all those defences on every account just became useless. I'm just attempting to slow the attacker down, that's all, and since i'm likely to be the attacker. who knows

your a engineer right? if so theory is hella different from piratical and this is just one of those situation .

whos actually going to rob ur planets, very few ppl who actually can and fewer that will take your planets

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

and unless you've got 100 mil army, it ain't broke, just another attempt to monopolize the game

1. no, they are fine the way they are.
2 nope, they cost less than an equal power of fleets at higher levels
3. sounds like an ascended being attack on ascention. it does sound interesting(and something similar appears in my structures suggestion)
4 don't really like it (but again see my suggestion for a similar idea if you like it)
5. i do like this one, but 50% is as robin said "insanely high"

6. i agree, but 1-5% is too small 5-15% would be ok

7.

robinindahood wrote:Even a single ship can do some damage (Luke Skywalker + Death Star = Big Bang). It may be a suicide run, but it's still possible. Anyway, the idea of massing down a planet with a single fleet becomes moot when the cost of turns comes into play. If you wanted to take a (relatively) weakly defended planet of 30 billion down to 15 billion and you destroyed an average of 5 defense facilities on each hit , you'd burn through 15,000 turns doing so. At a current cost of 40 billion naq / 1K turns, that is 600 billion naq. Cost of the planet defenses at above average size would be 250 billion naq.

Like in everything in this game , the big ppl have to wait for the small ppl to catch up , thats why you only need a smal % of the defence amount to mass a planet..
The ppl actually playing the game better then others get punished.

Draleg wrote:Like in everything in this game , the big ppl have to wait for the small ppl to catch up , thats why you only need a smal % of the defence amount to mass a planet..
The ppl actually playing the game better then others get punished.

the other option is to Bias the game towards the Majority (ie better players) and make it unplayable for new guys. then we can all watch the the number of active account slowly die off.

as it is the average player cannot hope to keep a planet against the likes of Omega, DD, DDE or TLE. if you have enough covert look at the planets these guys have, Duals, huge UP and income planets with defenses that are TOTALLY impossible for the small to medium player to attack let alone mass.

and now you guys want to make them even more untouchable. if the huge guys of the game want to fight between themselves then fine, but don't punish the small guy. he has it hard enough already

no i believe most players are thinking ahead so if a war ever hits there way and some alliance decides to take planets, they have a counter measure for it.

yes they are thinking ahead. I know of several guys who already have in excess of 300 bil defense on their planets. apart from the likes of Svarun, Blahh, High Empty and STI who can buy enough fleets to even damage them let alone afford the cost of hitting them.

this will make members of the superpower alliances even more untouchable for the average player and further upset the server balance. As I stated earlier, there's nothing wrong with the present system.