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

SO WARS / Full assault SO Main

- Counter-attacks are less damaging, every failed counter decreases 6 hours from remaining counter time

Does warping your enemy count as a failed counter?

No, but it may be possible to do it if necesary...

PLease include warps as failed counters.

The main issue is your opponent can powerup with cheap swarmers to 1,000 times your fleetpower and just crush you on the counter - if warps arent counted as failed attacks then it doesnt change anything - theres around 70% chance to land a counter off one days turns even when your opponent has 95% warp chance - but most players save turns or turn items for counters. 

Its just too risky to attack when the counter is so strong.

no
warps as failed counters would ruin the game completely.
amagnon, u have an 80% warp chance for me... im 2/3s of ur power.

perhaps compromise on warps = diminishing counters but to a lesser degree? say maybe 1 - 3 hours vs 6?

ya 3 hours sounds good
but this is already in play so im not sure if we can change it easily now.

or 8 hours or 12 hours diminishing and warps don't diminish the counter?

12 hours is way too much
i think 6 hours is good ftm. but there is no way that warps should diminish the counters. on the wars server, warp dirsuptors have greatly fallen behind warp stabilizers. i see people above me that have an 80% chance of warp. if they attacked me, i would basically have no chance of successfully countering them

of course if they happen to hit you within 6 hours of your logging out when you come back next day you have no chance at counter

Unless something was taken or destroyed then I do not think the Counter should be adjusted.

If warps dont contibute as failures then nothing has really changed - the whole problem is that players can powerup to 1,000 times your fleetpower and wait for the warp to fail off the 5%.

In effect the current counter system means your target cannot warp - thats the central problem.

Hm, what about a new range 1% - 99% warp evasion instead of the 5% - 95%?

[and if they do change it you can do it the other way around. power up to hit some 1 high ranking then drop down to little power so you cant get countered.

so no i dont think warping should count as a -6hours on attack since not every 1 plays this 24/7 you might log on and have 30min left on your counter then he warps and you lose your counter.

Or the warp chance could be based on wealth instead of fleet power.

Should be nothing to do with credits. Credits/workers are already over valued.

While there is no point in building bigger ships, having cash or generating it is more harmful than good beyond a certain point.

My economy has accelerated so much that it is almost pointless playing any longer.

Adjusting the warp to 1% and 99% is pretty good in and of itself - and would be a welcome adjustment - however it doesnt solve the problem entirely.

Someone can powerup a great deal on a counter - to like 90% to 95% warp chance - so if you dont include warps, the counter is always going to hit a lot harder (and with greater certainty) than the initial attack.

You would never plan an attack on someone and put their warp chance at 95% - no way. 

When your planning an attack - its not even worth going to any trouble planning unless youve got around 50% or less warp chance.  So you reduce your power - and spend a lot of cash setting up an attack to set warp evade to 50% or less.  Then the counter attacker can comfortably set warp evade to 90% or 95% and expect to land the counter attack - effectively hitting back a hell of a lot harder than the attacker.

Its just not balanced - attacking just isnt worth it with the current system.

hm, maybe the 1% - 99% combined with the rewards from salvaging destroyed ships in pvp...

This issue is also a fairly big problem I agree - and a good change to counter attacks would help eliminate the problem - I wont elaborate on that for many reasons.

However its worth noting that there is no cap on stash - and its therefore a potentially an unlimited source of wealth.  I posted an idea regarding cash only attacks on another thread - that was in part to address that issue.

I believe that some kind of stash cap is probably needed as well - and it needs to be related to assests that are "in play" in the PvP arena.  That automatically means segments - so some cap on stash thats related to segs. A reasonable limit might be 500,000,000 credits per segment.  That would put a cap of 500 trillion in stash on a player who held 10 million segments.  

I know some players may have exceeded those caps, but they shouldnt be that far above it - so this change wouldnt impact any current players too much, perhaps it could be slowly adjusted down over a period of time as player economies adjust - maybe coming down to 100,000,000 per segment.

Salvaging items be great but only on attack, counters will have their unlimited attempts within 24hr.

I think turn items, and credits be a better option as rewards. With the need to hunt for targets, the turn items be extremely useful.

Counters, failed or otherwise, will always be able to track your target. That in itself is a pretty powerful tool in the right hands. So its only fair to give the salvaging option to the attackers only, and not the counter-attackers.

Emi -

The salvage thing is good - but its got nothing to do with the counter attack system, its not complimentary to it in any way - its apples and oranges.

You dont need counter attacks at all - but if you HAVE TO HAVE them - then the counter should be balanced against the initial attack - which in my view means you just get to know where your attacker is - warp means fail - thats it.  

Even the -6hrs per failed attack, and -6hrs per warp is too much.  I only started on the thin edge because I know the view is so far from how it is now that its hard for players to accept.

But so many of the issues they see are actually related to this one problem.

The rules on SOWARS need to stop punishing attackers - or there wont be attacks - its as simple as that.  Without attacks, theres no PvP.

The counter system needs to count warps as fails - if it doesnt happen I believe anyone who gets into the top end PvP area (10+mil segs) will begin to quit because the game has failed to address the issues in this zone.

Im just about ready to quit from frustration over not even getting anyone to understand this issue - why is it so hard to comprehend????!!!!!

If A attacks B, but then B gets a free attack on A thats a lot harder - why the hell would A attack B?  He'd have to be retarded.

What about the counter still showing the location of the attacker, but the base still giving bonuses on attack, so remove the rule where the base support is negated and make the warp chances from 1% to 99%.

Would make bases a lot more strategic to have...

P.S.: The cap on stash / workers depending on segs for SO WARS is a very good idea.

theres nothing wrong with alliance members helping with counters. its a good tactic and is in no way exploiting since it gives the player a counter.

the system is fine how it is, i dont know what u guys are complaining about.

sometimes agressive players believe only in reseraching warp disruptors. maybe the aggressive players should only research warp stabilizers. the system is fine, the new update makes things better, the workld goes round  hi

well dont put on a caps in SOwars untill we found a something to make pvp pick up i dont want to grind missions 24/7 again just to keep my ecom giong.

base helping on counters might be nice but that would mean that the attacker would get a major boost in defence power, but you can warp some 1 from a base but if that would balance out is the question.

a yeah the Tag team buddy tactics some one trows a kami fleet at you wich can even be a Alt if hes in the same allaince i have heard some call it cheap some call it tactics and the ezy way to counter this is what every 1 hates you neb your self   0o

o and those attacks dont always give a counter  hi

if they do any damage and help the person originally trying to counter at all, then yea they give a counter.

buddy nebbing to avoid tag teams is sometimes tactical. if u are willing to take risks involved with it now, it could save u.

the attacking is balanced. i dont get why people dont   just make more attacks. i understand that they want more to fight for... ive suggested it before... gain 2/3s destroy 1/3s of the 15 or so % in a successful attack

On SOMAIN you can arbitarily attack - and keep attacking.  So the counter attack system was designed in the same fashion - this counter attack system is appropriate to SOMAIN - in no way is it appropriate to SOWARS.

IF there was a way I could just keep attacking regardless of my opponent warping - such as the rankings attack - then there would be no issue.  But on SOWARS, the attacking system was changed, but the same counter attack system was left in place - its not appropirate.

Riv,  everything should begin to cap out at the top - this allows other players to get up there over time.  You wont need missions - you will be hard at work defending your segs, and over time will have PvP targets.  Where you are now should be the most entertaining part of the game, filled with combat and strategy - theres so much interesting stuff that is already there - I want to see it all unlocked.

Your economies need to be checked - not expanded - I dont actually believe a cap is needed in the long term - but right now it is needed.  Your economies have run away because there hasnt been enough players to compete in the top bracket, but now you have opponents but we cant reasonably attack you because we would get crushed on a counter attack because you dont have to consider fleetpower - you can just turn all your wealth into attack power and chase around anyone who attacked you and turn them to ash.

Your economies are so big that even getting into combat frequently isnt going to be enough to drain your coffers to a point where other players can be competitive, so a cap is a reasonable way to check your economies for a while and allow other players a chance to get into combat.

Ive got no illusions - fighting AI even on fair ground is going to be extremely tough - but as it is now - you wont be attacked by me, and Id advise my alliance members not to attack. 

We can only sit and wait, and hope something changes.

The Counter system is fine, it works well. Do not change it.

What needs to be changed, is Credits/Workers/Segs contributing to Fleet Power.

Reduce/Remove Credits/Workers/Segs from contributing to fleet Power and we will attack ... I will attack.

As the game stands, I physically can not attack anyone. If someone attacked me they would automatically have a 95% warp chance, modified by Tech.

I am Number 1 on the Ranking, but effectively dead in the water ... Can't do a d**n thing.

Unless Credit/Workers/Segs are fixed ... then this game is pointless.

The counter attack system does not work - but it works for you.

The warp mechanic and the contributions of assets like workers and segs force players into equivilent power bands so combat is fair, and conducted between relativey equal players. 

To reduce the contribution of assets is to allow extremely powerful players to utilise all their assets to simply crush weaker opponents with impunity - that is in no way fair to players trying to advance - they are open to attacks from the most powerful players, what can they do?

If the counter system is changed - you will be involved in extremely challenging and interesting PvP.

Ok, one commander suggests that we change, the other that we don't change. Both commanders are high ranked officers.
We need a pool or something that we can work on to determine the best sollution, and a list of good and bads to each change, so we can determine the changes that need to be made.

So far we have the following options SO WARS only:

- warp chance from 1% - 99%
- base protecting commander no matter if counter or normal attack
- cap secret base wealth capcity based on segments
- receive 2/3 of captured segments while destroying 1/3 in PVP
- receive 1/3 of current amount of captured segments but don't destroy any segments
- diminish counter when the target warped away

I think each commander should have two votes, so you can vote for two changes.
The best two changes will be implemented.

If you have any other suggestions please write them so we can add them to the list.
The warp chance based on only fleet power is not possible due to the abuse it would generate.

I will then make the pool for voting.

God Speed commanders!

You should also add that warping counts against counters.Also change segs capture to 1/3 captured as before but zero destroyed.

added them thank you

emi...only 2 choices?

I like the 1/3 captured nil destroyed couple in with scavenging items/credits from the ships you destroy in pvp..
AND
Diminishing counters..
Perhaps diminishing not in way of losing 6hrs of the counter but rather tie 3 attempts for each attempt at counter. It would give basically, 1 chance for scouting, 1 for target to warp away, and 1 chance to hit.

Right now, I do not dare attack a target more than once or give multiple counters simply because I be utterly ruined on the multi counter.

I also like the economy pegged to segs idea too..

sighz.. :21:
All the ideas listed is pretty good.

u guys wine too much. the counter system and attack systems all work perfectly fine. if you know how to attack then you would. stop complaining. if u want to attack someone, do it. emi, please say that

doesn't mean that u added warping to the -6hrs left...

amagnon and nightguard especially. u have proven that u are good at attacking/defending, so why do you complain?

go mix it up with ai if ur bored. the system has been the same for a while, and the entire time it has worked well. the experienced or smart players could use it to their advantage. you are just trying to push for change so that it goes even more towards your personal advantage. the first name that comes to my mind should not be posted under this topic. :21:

tzarkoth, what you say could make the game more interesting for the top few, but it would drastically change the way it is played by the bottom few. as not everyone has gold acct, the ones with more cash and means of production would be at a closer level to those without. it would be a massacre

If you are going to change it I like these 2 best

- base protecting commander no matter if counter or normal attack

- receive 1/3 of current amount of captured segments but don't destroy any segments

Here are my thoughts.

Leave it as it is, make no changes.

or

Make ALOT of changes ... And ALL of the changes.

If you remove unlimited counter, then you have to address the Warp % equation as it currently stands so as to either not include Fleet Power generated from non Fleet sources or reduce the effect in such a way as to make it possible for the top guys to counter.

If you remove the unlimited counter, the top 4 Players, all in my alliance, and do not change the way Warp % is calculated then we are dead in the water.

Adding Salvage to attacks/counters for resources is cool, taking items and/or cash is not.

Making net segment loss ZERO is awesome ... Changing it to 90% Captured, 10% loss would be ok ... with Salvage ...

Bases protecting on Counter attacks ... Is perfectly fine.

Jessie -

Your missing the point - sure Im good at attacking and defending - but when countering your opponent doesnt have to think about fleetpower.  That means they can use the cheapest ships and raise their fleetpower as much as they like.

You probably dont understand, and may not believe that someone can raise their fleetpower to 200 to 1,000 trillion to counter attack you.  But thats a reasonable kind of estimate for the kind of counter that you might expect from certain players.

They already know your warp evade is going to be 95 to them - so theres no reason to limit fleetpower in any way.  If you attack someone, and then they counter you with 500 trillion fleetpower and you cant evade it - I just cant understand how anyone can think its fair and reasonable.

So far we have the following options SO WARS only:

- warp chance from 1% - 99%
- base protecting commander no matter if counter or normal attack
- cap secret base wealth capcity based on segments
- receive 2/3 of captured segments while destroying 1/3 in PVP
- receive 1/3 of current amount of captured segments but don't destroy any segments
- diminish counter when the target warped away

OK,

My primary votes -

Diminish counter on a warp, Diminish counter on a warp (2 votes - other things are nice, but thats the only thing thats really critical)

As for other votes, in order;

1.Cap secret base wealth based on segments
2.Warp chance 1% to 99%
3. Recieve 2/3 segs from combat, 1/3 destroyed


The base protection thing doesnt really matter much.  The bonus is only 100%, so thats a factor of x2 the counter attacker has advantage.

Its nothing like the 100x or more that can be brought against you if you cant warp away from 1,000 trillion fleetpower.

Just so my point is not lost in the clutter.

Leave things the way they are.

or

Make changes, but reduce or remove contributions to fleetpower from Seg/Worker/credits.

Only two options you need in a poll. Unless we can agree on them, it is pointless discussing the finer details.

Here's an idea for the warp/counter problem.Everyone starts with 3 counters per attack & can research increased counters.The 3 counters shouldn't affect play for lower players but will promote more combat at the higher levels.I know this could end up becoming unbalanced but it could be capped at say 50 max.

Feel free to approve or destroy this idea.

Nightgaurd I like your idea, just put the cap at like 20-25, or make it crazy expensive once you get above 10 - most people don't even use 50 counters right now as it is.

amagnon, that is where tactics come in. this game cant be all math, it would get boring.
that is the same reason why certain people in the game have not been touched; everyone fears their counter.

nothing more should be done to the attack system. if u want something else, maybe a new server with all ur ideas would be best, but like 42 said in one of the other topics, you cant change the rules so much after they have already been set.

You raise this point like it in someway supports your point of view, when in fact this is the basis of my entire argument.

They fear their counter because the counter attack is unbalanced.


What tactics are you going to use to survive a 1,000 trillion fleetpower counter attack that you cant evade?  Could you also explain what part of this game isnt controlled by mathematics?


You were one of the players raising the issue of neb abuse - and now thats been addressed - that was a major change, but you were in favour of it.  So you are contradicting yourself with the "dont change the rules" statement.

You cant understand why Im raising this issue, and why its so important.  Truthfully - I dont want to explain it in detail, and perhaps that is why you may feel like your not getting it.

Issues that emerge late in the game arent always apparent in the early stages - I didnt realise this was such a problem until recently. 

You arent as effected by this problem at your stage of the game.  The difference is in economy - what proportion of your assets are invested in your fleets, and what proportion of your income comes from stash interest.  At your stage fleets are a significant proportion of your assets, and stash income is a small portion of income.  So attacks on you can deal significant damge - because they damage your fleet and sources of income (workers, segments). 

If your fleet cost is insignificant , and your income mainly comes from stash - then you cant be hurt much by one attack - but you get a free counter attack that cant be evaded.

But if you're at that stage too, why are you worried about attacks?  :D

Because, if its a PvP game ... And a strategically minded commander cannot attack anyone because of 3 reasons;

1: You cannot attack anyone because your stash/segs/workers makes your fleetpower 10 times anyone elses.
2: You cannot attack anyone who has worked out that you may as well counter with 1000000000000000000000000000 ships as you have the same chance to land the attack as if you use 100000 ships.
3: Attacking anyone will only reduce their ships and/or segments by an insignificant part of their total income so its POINTLESS.

Diminishing Counters would clear up point 2, but without addressing point 1 it KILLS the most successful Alliance to date.

Addressing Point 3 is totally seperate and deserves it's own thread.

Tz - Point 1 is the main issue where we disagree, you think its a game mechanic issue, but its not- if point 2 is fixed, then the problem will disappear quite rapidly - I can guarantee it.

Point 3, I agree has now become one of the most important issues - its been a while evolving, but now stashes are too large and arent effected by combat.  Somehow linking stash to segments should produce the best solution.  Also its worth considering a cash only attack, or cash capture from successful attacks.

If the counter attack issue had been resolved earlier - then issue 1 and issue 3 would never have arisen - now we are paddling our leaking bark canoe upstream on sh-t creek with our bare hands.

Issue 2 and 3 now need to be resolved faster than immediately - otherwise the whole thing is out of control - the longer an answer takes the worse the situation is getting.

With all due respect, I'll not be a party to any changes that do not include fixing the contribution stash/segs/workers make to Fleet Power.

Look at the Ranking chart, and tell me how you think having 2 Trillion Fleet Power and ZERO ships is fair?

If the counter system is fixed youll realise you never had a problem in the first place.

Tzar has a point- counters or not counters, He simply can't attack because of his power level.

What tactics are you going to use to survive a 1,000 trillion fleetpower counter attack that you cant evade?  Could you also explain what part of this game isnt controlled by mathematics?

the part of the game that is not controlled by math is a player's actions. in simple terms, a commander has to have balls to make a daring attack. the more daring, the more potentially successful or potentially fatal. if you dont want to deal with a counter attack, amagnon, dont attack anyone. your problems should not be everyone else's.

im not contradicting myself at all. yes, i was in favor of the neb mechanics change, but i viewed that as cheating. counters are not cheating.

and you are proving my point. i know that what you are arguing for will help the top 10 and players like urself. but it will <I> only </I> help those 10 or so players. the other 200 or so that play regularly will be weakened by it.

Tzarkoth, i would love to be in your position. why wouldn't u just buy one big ship to account for 75% of your total power. in order to kami it, you would be warped... and to board it would be impossible without a significantly bigger ship.

amagnon, you are a very respected player, and i myself respect you greatly. but this update, including warps in diminishing counters, must not be made. if it were made, Infernal Cabal would effectively rule the galaxy for the time being. you all have not done missions for at least a week. you are all spending your turns on warp stabilizers. This excludes Chrys because she already had high stabilizers before she joined the Infernal Cabal. This is you attempt at overthrowing Armageddon Inc. Because you are unable to do so in a traditional fight with a balanced attack and counter system, you are trying to change the rules to suit you and your alliance.

if this update is made, then the game would no longer be worth playing.

Yeah apparently amagnon had an 80% evasion chance to someone less than 10% his power

Unless the warp is changed you will find no 1 to attack anyways every 1 is pumping out warp stab to raise there evasion 2 95% even if some is is 1% there power.

sure you can tech up disruptors not that it does much with a 100.000 power diffrence the warp evasion stays at 95% since almost every 1 has set there try to warp away always.

if you ask me and Sowars is a pvp server the first thing you do is take out the always try to warp and for my part take out the 10% 20% and 50% aswell so the lowest you can set it at would be 75%.

then you cap the stabs you can get to lvl 30 every 1 above that gets there cps and turns refunded.
then you cap disruptors at lvl 35 or 40.

or you just remove them both from the wars server its a warserver not the Sowarp server.

then you lower the dammage done by attacks so you dont destroy some 1 in 1 attack and add that bases help on counters.
also then you can make the change to 99% evasion when some 1 powers up 2 a insane lvl or even 100% for that matter if some 1 pumps out a insane FP.

but still nothing is giong to change if nothing is done about the warp tech and warp system and a few tweaks to the nebs still while were at it.

sure you can change the counter system only and it will be nice battles for some people while the top 10 gets totaly destroyed because they cant counter.

then 2 weeks later every 1 has major warp stabs and no 1 has time to tech up disruptors so then we got a entire sever full of players all having 95% evasion.


also a little edit why dont we pump all our cash in a single ship well then you have the problem of 1 entire alliance that can just take turns at boarding you draining all your credits and then capture your ship :)

slayerX,

there are many people to attack. i made an attack about 10 minutes ago.

1 ship works very well in attacks. ( :19: )

what you suggested is basically like a communist government taking over a capitalist nation. you want everyone to be effectively even in stabilizers. what should really be done is let the players sort it out themselves as they always have. no further changes should be made to the system. Laissez Faire for those of you who just did that chapter in History  :D

the system is broken i havent attacked any 1 since november because of it.

also if i were to buy a singleship i would raise my Fp by about 20tril  :19:

and whats ur name on the wars server?

Do an IP check and you know  :12:

Dutch boy  :))

ahh silly rivaris
i looked it up and there is a forum account under rivaris, but watevers  :P

More like 60 Trillion Riv ... But I am sure they get the idea.

ok. we get the idea that u guys are beasts. lets back to the topic of diminishing counters. (aka hell)

I think warps should not be included as failed attacks.  I've heard people say you could use p ships and bet on the 5% chance, but how much money would you have to spend to get effective swarmers?  Besides, people with extremly high warp stabilizer levels would basically be immune to counterattack.  The only way to make it work would be to nullify warp stabilisers and destabilisers for counter attacks.  Then if you had an equal fleet you would have a decent chance of sucessfully retaliating.

amagnon, the point is, we shouldn't have to change the game to progress. your ideas have all been good in the past, but this one i strongly disagree with.

I dunno... perhaps is its a matter of where you are at now. At jessiedogs position now, the system seems to be ok, but as he gets up there higher, he will see perhaps a change in the game. The current mechanics for combat (attack/counter attack) does not complement a never ending universe nor does it promote for PvP enviroment.

Riv, Tzarkie, Neph... they are paralyzed in a way, and anyone who rises up in range for their attacks loses out simply because they would have amassed huge wealth which negates anything you could do to them and in return utterly ruin yourself in the process. A transparent glass ceiling has appeared and as the game progresses, it will be more apparent.

the whole notion of diminishing counters(anybody guess what im gonna say?) seems utterly absurd to me. what a sissified idea. if you can't take a counter you have no business attacking. the whole notion of diminishing counters to protect attackers - am i alone in seeing how ludicrous, chimerical, and bottom - backwards that is?


                                                                :spider2:

ummm... i totally agree with losted

and i totally agree with losted and mobius.

chrys. if the ppl at the top are afraid of being attacked, why wouldn't they use their huge amounts of $$$ to protect themselves. they are the richest and therefore potentially the most well defended.

Its not fear...u missed my point.
Oh well. :wounded1:

Mkay, I am currently working on:

SO WARS - Secret base capacity depends on mothership segment numbers, the more segments you have the more workers / stash can be deposited.
- Any excess amount when the update is implemented will be deposited to the mothership like this: excess workers * 2 + excess stash.
- Once the max capacity is reached for each of the workers / stash excess amount is lost like this: e.g. max stash reached, then you lose worker production & interest, e.g. excess workers  reached, no more growth.
- The max deposit amount will be clearly visible in the secret base, and prob some indications of how much % is beeing used.

Anybody against the cap for sercret base please post and please provide arguments on why you are against it.
You may also express approval and provide arguments on why it would be a good change.

Thank you.

Previously, I was in agreement with limiting worker/stash to segments, but after evaluating what it truly implies, I decided that with the current system of 1/3 segs captured and 2/3 segs, this would prove a disaster.

Reason, On any hit, be it attack or counter attack, should the person succeed and with him brings trillions of ships surviving the attack, it would effectively destroy the person economy utterly to the point where most likely, simply because WARS server is never ending, there will be almost no way to recover. I doubt when you have 15-20mill segs then reduced to maybe 2-5mill or even lower segs after a very hard hit from the *koff koff counter chasing flaw koff koff*, you would shrug it off and say lets grind encrypts to recover that loss.

If a system in place such as remove all warp techs but in replace of that, a fixed segment loss assigned, eg. if i have 10mill segs, loss is 100k captured, if 1mill segs, 10k captured, 100k segs, 1k captured, 10k segs, 100 captured. Seg destruction is a waste. And also couple in something like the probes for alien encounters? how abt having encrypts give out PvP probes. 10probes required and once used, all players within a 3x3 grid centered on your current quadrant will be avail for remote attacks. It would give incentive for lower power people to hunt higher powered players and make it truly profitable for everyone. More importantly, I dun have to go star by star to find targets, and if I do find targets, I can be sure I have a high chance of hitting my target and not have him/her warp away, and with the fixed seg loss, anyone can recover quickly.

Yes, some may say why play if your worried of attacks/counterattacks. I agree, but with the current system, once you lose 3/4 of your segments (and with this new upgrade, your stash as well) on a flawed counter system, no one would want to risk attacking the bigger players simply because there is not going to be a reset and the loss on the counter will be too great to recover from.

noooooooooo!!!!
sorry Chrys, but i disagree (please dont 0 me  :P)

the wars server is meant to be different than the main server, we dont want to be more like it. the remote attack would completely ruin everything about the current wars server. if u only gain 1% of the opponents segs as supposed to around 5-6% then there would be no reason to attack either.


sorry emi, i disagree with the max stash stuff. if the top players are complaining that their money is giving them too much power, then spend the d**n money! if u can buy a ship that will raise ur power by 20 tril as Rivaris (so modestly) claims, then do it! you will be effectively invincible until someone can reach ur strength. no further change to the game is needed.

why cant we just play?!?

if your cash is giving you too much power(too much power? did i say that? these comments are getting positively surreal) buy a big ship or fleet of swarmers and reserve them, that will lower your power.  cheez you don have to change the game to do that.

y thank you losted  :)

This is a thread about Diminishing Counters and you want to hide a a change to the way secret bases work on page 5 where most everyone was against the change.

Do not change the Secret Base capacity. This deserves it's own thread. However, again this change negatively effects me more than anyone else. The correct place for battles on the SO Wars server is in the actual game, not on the forums. I spend more time looking through the forums to prevent random ideas from being implemented than I do actually playing. If you think you need to make a change to the game, post a thread with its own topic so it can be clearly found and discussed.

Chrys has the right idea, we need PvP probes. I can't attack anyone even if I wanted too, because I can never find anyone who I could possibly attack. Again though, wrong place to discuss it, start another thread.

tzarkoth - you should start your own topic thread about the base cap, that way every one will see it. back to dim counts. if you are going to put in dim counts, there is no point in having counters at all, so you might as well do away with them. the only way a dim count is even lop sidedly fair is to lock the attacker in place so there is NO WARPING AWAY from a counter. then you can cut the time on them and pretend its kinda fair.

I don't like the cap on bases because many of us at/near the top (and many lowers trying to catch up also)have based our economy on being able to recover with interest if the cap goes on when you are attacked you lose not only segs and maybe workers from negative growth you also lose credits in your base that could be getting interest.
As for dim counters I'm not real happy about that either because you get lowers buying a bunch of kamis and attacking you and you can't hit back at all sometimes even if you put all your ships in reserve you are still to high and if dims go in you will have a lot more lowers buying up kamis just because they know you won't be able to hit back.

Chrys - your over estimating the damage in segs a successful attack can do.  A successful boarding attack effects a maximum of 20% of your segs, of which 1/3 are captured and 2/3 of those segs are destroyed.

The PvP probes idea is a good one.


If you need a counter attack, it means you lost against someone who attacked you - so you lost, you are a loser.  Is this what you are crying for Losted - someone to help you because you are a loser?

But we say "Oh ok - lets not let the losers feel bad - lets give them an unavoidable counter against the guy who is 10x better than them at the game."  It will damage the better players expensive fleet because the loser can just use whatever useless crap they call a fleet and pump all available cash into it because they know it cant be evaded.

Counters should be removed entirely - then the only winners will be those who can land attacks - the losers will just have to fend for themselves.

If you can land a successful attack - then you are going to be winner, the other guy is the loser.

It seems everyone has lost sight of the fact that ONLY attacks create PvP.  With no attacks there is no PvP - counter attacks require no skill (at the moment) - is that why so many players rely on them?

Players who cant plan and execute attacks add nothing to the PvP element of the game, now they sit back and wait so they can counter with a broken system - take away the crutch, lets see who can stand on their feet.

This almost sounds like a valid point of view on the counters idea - however;

1.  The cap will slow the top end much more than it will slow you Basil.  Therefore your chances of catching up are enhanced.  You have 1.3 million segments - you arent even near the middle, let alone the top - your just under the high growth phase - which extends from about 2 million to 6 million segments.  You will struggle to understand these issues because you would have to extrapolate so much to even draw out the basic concepts.  Its not because your not intelligent enough to understand - its just you dont have the information.

2.  If you are suceptible to kami attack, then youve made an error - better to try and resolve your error than to assume there is no solution.  Fleet setup, base settings, technology and ship design all complement each other to protect you from kami attacks.  Besides kami's dont win combats - they just destroy ships - if it costs them more than it does you, and their economy is less than yours - then you win.

amagnon, for no reason should you be calling lostedchylde a loser. look at her accomplishments on this server and the main server in which she has won multiple top 10 finishes.

and no you dont need to land a successful attack to give a counter. you only need to damage a certain amount of marines or power.

amagnon, honestly you sound the like the loser here. you're crying to everyone trying to get more avoidable counter attacks so that you can attack people without being damaged. when was the last time you made an attack? i havent seen anyone in your range damaged... dont ask me the same: i made an attack yesterday, and the day before, and two days before that, etc

the cap on bases is a horrible idea, but make a new thread for it.

i hope you mean the cash in my base will be dropped into my hand.

ok so your putting this in basicly making every 1's ecom the same.
this basicly mean the top 5 will stop making any money.
wich means in 1-2 months the top 50 can catch up unless ofc i would only grind missions and act like this is the pve server.

i only got 1 question how would this change improve pvp sure like said above i can put my cash into ships and reserve them.
the bad thing is i already have a load of ships in reserve so i increase that to even more so i drop in power.

ok so i spend 1000tril on reserve ships i drop in power but then my credits go up again and i have to build a other reserve fleet and a other 1 and a other 1.

so finaly people catch up on me final some 1 in range i find some 1 i been teching disruptors and he still has a 75% warp change on me i need a scout report first ofc hitting some 1 blind is stupid and boom he warps. ok i return to my base no 1 hits me then i just sit in space with no base some 1 still doesnt hit me and why do you ask simple they dont want to touch me because they know i got so much fleets in reserve and a huge cash reserve.

ok then you might change the warp % to 99% max every 1 will be teching stabs. now teching disruptors wont work that well if some 1 is only a 100k under your power his warp % goes up even more if he out techs you with stabs so no 1 can hit any 1.

then you also got the option 2 always try 2 warp now i dont know how that is put in but i render if you attack some 1 the system checks like this

you press the attack button system checks defender warp settings always try to warp now i dont know the % of that but i render it will be 50/50

now if you get passed that there comes a other warp check i render based on your power and tech vs defender techs and power.
wich is why i think -6 hours on a counter when a warp is a Very bad idea. you need to get passed 2 warp away checks before you can even land a attack.

now that might change a littleif you  just take out the warpsettings on attack Signatures and just make the warp % still be based of warp techs and total power.

this would mean warp techs will have increased use and you would only have 1 warp check to see if some 1 would warp or not.

I didnt call Losted a loser - I asked him if he needed broken counters because he was a loser - anyhow, I was responding to these inflamatory comments in like terms.


If I ever promoted a change for personal benefit this isnt it.  I would benefit sure, so would every player who plays this game aggressively and knows how to land attacks - attacks are what make PvP not counter attacks.

And - of course I havent attacked anyone lately - theres no point.  Did I dream that Id made that the basis of my argument?

I guess I can always attack other players that Ive been leaving alone ..

ive made 4 attacks this week including one an hour ago. the system is fine.

emi,
maybe you could open the test server for like a week. everyone could have what they have now and we could try it amagnon's way?

ill never give into it unless i try it, and i might not even then

I don't want to catch up because the game was changed to slow/stop higher players from benifiting from their own hard work and everyone is sucepitible to a kami attack thats why it's called a kami attack and the fact that they spend more than it's worth doesn't replace one single item that I lose. I have no problem with your playstyle because it fits you but just because mine is different doesn't make it wrong.

Basil -

The stash cap will slow the top players - but its not intended to be put in just to harm them, its to give them a chance to stay in the game, and the cap applies to you also, so it should be a fair change for everyone.

the wars server sucks something needs to be done to make people easier to find.. or easier to attack, and galaxy attack, full assualt attacks should be kept on the wars server.. take it off main!

Jessie - when I was in your current postion I didnt see any problem either.


It will take around 1-2 months for players to adjust and learn - one week is not enough, and if it was on test, it would be just like me explaining it - except slower.

then y dont you explain it. when you keep calling me a noob and everything it doesn't help your point.

theres no way this will work amagnon. i just warped ur member 12 times in a row, not to mention a 75% chance of warp. a 3% overall chance that he would warp 12 times in a row which is really aggrivating. i would have lost my counter a long time ago, and u think that way is better. maybe if someone attacked you you wouldn't like it.

maybe on counters simply taking off the always try would work. you could leave it as warp if fleet is 10% larger.  amagnon, you think that it is unbalanced because you can muster up loads of fleet power on a counter. i recently tried to counter with less fleet power than the opponent and the opponent warped 14 times. thats what i am argueing against.

but imagine this for 1 sec, i attack you, successfully or not, and you get a counter. i reserve my fleets and buddy-neb. now you have 2 real options. reserve your fleet and take your 4 attempts to counter me, try without reserving. either way u basically have a 1/20 chance of getting me. so thats unfair to you and not against ToS.

i just dont see how it will work. i think warp stabilizers are the answer for you if you want to avoid being attacked/countered and you seem to have a lot. i just dont see your point

Jessie, you have a separate issue.

You tried to land a counter on someone and they warped 14 times.  Lower fleetpower and increase your disruptor tech - imagine you were attacking that player - you would have tried 14 times to land an attack.  Your disruptor tech is not sufficient - a new topic was started to discuss this.

The issue I have is that there is a flat 5% chance of being caught by a counter attack, which means your opponent can powerup to ludicrous fleetpower and land it on you regardless of the fleetpower difference.  Why should they have the privilege of that when you are so limited in fleetpower when trying an attack - attacks are not balanced with counters.

Jessie, imagine your trying to attack me - you know your going to have to cut fleetpower as much as possible - if by some miracle you got a successful attack, I can counter with 100 trillion fleetpower if I wanted and crush you.  You would have hardly scratched me - but I could zero you, not fair on you - landing an a successful attack on me would require a lot of effort and skill, for my counter I can just pull out all the firepower I can afford and hit you with it.

Zelox suggested making the max warp 100% rather than 95%.  I am in favour of that solution as well, 99% would be enough.

amagnon, if i hit you, there are many ways to avoid complete and udder destruction. sure you would take segs,  but i would bounce back.

100% warp for max is ok, but the max has to be significantly larger. also, 100% warp should not be able to be achieved by stabilizers, no matter how high.