Forum - Space Odyssey MMORPG - a massive free online space game

Upon receiveing feedback related to the attack signatures beeing given while you do a remote assault and the relation with kamikaze attacks, meaning that someone can stalk the target and use swarm fleets to destroy the other commander fleet, I am asking for suggestions on how to improve the system.

Should we lower the % lost by the defender to take the counter / attack sig even more? Or maybe something else...

Basically, we need something to make it fair on the victiom of the attacks, as well as the attacker...

Please suggest, I will consider all options.

Thank you

I'm not sure on the % but possibly tie it to the fleetpower instead of total power.
I would also like to see counters being unable to warp off.

well make an attack or board weather successful or not count as the counter no matter where it comes from.  and a Scout able to not only see the base but the first fleets of the enemy.

I like the idea of the defender of a counter attack having a 0% chance to warp away.

Ok, so far we have:

- Make the counter target unable to Warp away
- Take one counter for each attack


Good ideas so far, still waiting for some more replies.

Thank you

Not warping sounds good,

Except for that I think the counter should have exactly the same rules as for getting one, as a galaxy attack will not give a counter if there is not 20% destroyed etc, keep that the same as for removing a counter.

For main server ever remote assault gives a counter so every remote assault counter should vanish after one try even if it was a decoy attack.

uhm if you cant warp away when your getting countered what would stop me from reserving my main fleet and bait people to attack me with some weak ships then powereing up to 300% there power and totaly destroy there fleetstack?

counter on every attack sounds good wasnt it the same in the early days. just make scouting for secret bases not count unless you get ambushed else no 1 will ever raid a secret base again.

they attacked you and gave you the counter, then you strategically powered up and killed em. thats basically the advantage a counter should give, thats  if you could get a hit...(which now we will  :) ).
so basically use your brain...

also 100% for no warp on counters, as fro everything else i dont get it so let the other guys choose it.

regarding 0% warp on a counter I feel if you are tough enough to attack someone you should be tough enough to take the counter you know before you attack anyone that they may have boatloads of reserve ships so suck it up and take the hit it is war

well said basill

i support the part where there is no chance of warp on counter.
i have to chase someone on three different region for a counter which luckily i have enough turns to chase him/her around. but still i lose a lot more seg then him/her, don't know why tho.

Im opposed to the idea of no warp percent on counter attack for SOWARS. 

I believe this will be extremely bad for  the game.  Personally - I am in a position to gain from this idea - however I think it will be very bad long term.

My main reason is that it will discourage players from attacking.

Counter attacks will become much more effective than regular attacks - regular attacks can be very difficult to land at the moment, and are usually quite risky and costly - defenders have a "home base" advantage and also their regular chance to warp.

Also it is difficult to annihilate a defender with a regular attack, because they can warp away - so you need to adjust fleet power to inflict damage, but manage it to reduce warp percentage.  This means the attacker needs to do a lot of hard work and possibly spend a lot of credits to make to make an effective attack - the defender would then get the opportunity to leisurely annihilate the guy who put in all the hard work.

This would certainly discourage me from making attacks - better to wander around with a stack of credits in my bank hoping some fool will attack me.  It will also cause a lot of other issues which I wont discuss in the forums in case this actually goes ahead.

After extensive, and closed discussion, amongst my alliance, I'll have to withdraw my previous vote in favour of a zero % chance to warp from a counter attack. Removal of counter attacks entirely would encourage people to attack more, increasing the power of counters would discourage people to attack.

The happy medium it would seem is not a 0% chance to warp on counters. I haven't thought about removing counters enough however to vote in favour of that.

Counters are great as they are now, dont adjust them, keep them by the same rules as regular attacking.

well then seeing as this is a wars server make attacking better, easier to land and attack and a new attack that allows you to be able to get kill a ship in 3-5 attacks even if they have max marines and cash on hand.

I thought the system we had last round after the full attack bug fix was fair enough...

The current system is in the favor of Attacker because he can keep killing defender's Marines untill his ships bursts... But if the Defender tries to counter the attacker then the Marines he klled is also contributed to the overall Loss and the counter disappears..

The system we had last round was good enough so that the attacker has to think before he attacks..

but then that would not encourage attacking, this way you can try a counter, then wait till next time in you see them and do the same to them... board them till there ship explodes.

oh course FTP wants it left as it is. he never attacks and that will only put him in the positive position. i say leave full assault as is and leave the chance to warp there. but as for the remote attack. that's something different. there should have never been an attack signature with them attacks and only one attack per counter. example will be this. they track u down from warp signature from a remote attack. they power up to 4 times your power with enough kamakazi's to take out all 4-5 of your mission ships. u can't warp away. even if u could warp away they have a chance to succeed and with enough turns can keep tracking u until u fail to warp away.

Do I have to go to this discussion with you again?
I say keep them by the same rules as regular attacking.

Aka: On remote assault, counters should go by the same rules as the attack, except it will pass nebula. One attack failed or not gives a counter, so one attack failed or not costs you one.

On full assault, you give only a counter by destroying more then 20% or stealing soemthing (ake segments,creds,workers), so if you counter you should have the same changes on losing it as to give it.

Quote from my first post here:
For main server every remote assault gives a counter so every remote assault counter should vanish after one try even if it was a decoy attack.




And at your comment not attacking on WAR server I attacked allot, the discussion with Amagnon and Tzargoth is only about war server.

And I think I remember that I attacked you aswell, not knowing it was you, and I attack darkhorse alliance and some others aswell, so to start saying I never attack might not be entirely accurate. yes I attack less then some others do.. so?

"And at your comment not attacking on WAR server I attacked allot, the discussion with Amagnon and Tzarkoth is only about war server."

Hmmm .. you've never given me a counter FTP .. Still waiting. :-)

Was to busy hitting your members I guess think I only gave you a counter at the start of the round :P

Nah I dont have time to play SO WARS anymore it has to wait 5 weeks till university load is getting less again. I hope I will have enough time then, so congrats go to Rivaris for ruining my fun ^^

Ok, we have to open up the posibility of splitting Counters / Attack Signatures into separate things to make PvP better.

- Remote Attack gives Counters that are used only for other Remote Attacks
- Full Assault gives Attack Signature that can be used to track / attack the target in the Galaxy

Please share your toughts if this is a viable option to make the commander combat better.

Thank you and God Speed!

Sir Emi

this would mean, allowing ppl to click the rankings and attack you, correct? i dont mind just make sure max and min range for remote assualts are fair. meaning i wont get kamied.

Yes, this would make remote and full assault completely separate ways of attack...

As so many think 0% chance to warp is bad how about maybe droping it to 50% of normal warp chance on a counter ?

Its fine as it is - the current system for counter attack definitely favouring the defender - its difficult to get value out of an attack, especially when you know you are very likely to get countered.

Being wars server - you really want to encourage aggressive play - you want attacks happening - at the moment its very expensive to make an attack - and a counter attack makes it more expensive.

Theres already not much justification (cost / benefit wise) for attacking - dont make it worse.

Maybe basing the warp change on the power differance on the attack, means if I as attack am close to the other person in power warp changes will stay normal. But if I am only 1/1000th of the one I attack give the counter attack a better change of hitting back :) Means small people cant hide by being small. But will prevent people from powering up to counter someone with allot more power.

Thats the biggest thing I would like changed is so that you can't attack and put so many ships in reserve you can't be countered.

Nothing you can do about that and I can hit people 10x my power anyways. Except for making reserving impossible on the war server, that would be fun :)

that would solve a lot of problems with ppls alts atking u then reserving to like 100 mil power. ulf does that all the time and its really annoying.

ok how about this on a counter make the lowest possible warp chance 25% instead of 5% so that you might get lucky and hit that little guy who keeps annoying you don't change anything else in the formula except the lower cap that way it won't change anything exceprt for possibly hitting the low guy who insists on attacking you every day.

u mean instead of having 95% chance of warp, make it more like 75?

yeah thats what I meant I said it backwards lol