Almost everytime I post a suggestion on the forums I reveal something - so I lose an edge that I could have maintained.  Why do I do it, I ask myself, when it not only doesnt seem appreciated or understood - but more - players like you try to twist my intent to make it seem self serving.

Your comments are just slanderous - theres no point arguing with you.

Yeah yeah - your right - I give up - its all a cunning plan to put me ahead.

In what way is this going to benefit me?  I sometimes wonder ...  This is extremly bad for me personally.

I suggest you click on my alliance and read what I put in there - I dont accept any unethical or selfish behaviour from my members, and I sure dont intend to set that example.

In the short term this may give the AI guys some incentive and capability of attacking myself and my alliance, so if this is purely driven by selfish reasons, why would I want that?  Also - why would the AI guys or myself go hitting players with less than 8 to 10 mil segs?  If they annoy us we might - there are a couple that have annoyed me now.

In the long term - as with all my other suggestions - it should benefit the game, individual players have more balanced choices and the game becomes a more interesting and competitive environment. 

And finally, and mainly - attacks become easier to land - so PvP opportunites increase for everyone.

The percentage change sounds easiest to implement Riv - Id suggest 4% per tech level.

High end guys are not going to be able to hit low fleetpower targets who tech stabilizers - but this will make combat more interesting with more valid targets.

As most players are beginning to become aware of how powerful stabilizer and disruptor etch is, and investing in it - I thought Id start this thread.

I didnt want to start this earlier - because a lot of players just werent aware of the power of the warp techs, and I didnt want to hand out strategy tips.

Rivaris has raised this issue a couple of times now on the forums, so Im sure a lot have already read about it at least - so it shouldnt be new to anyone.

If stabilizers remain cheaper than disruptors, then attacks become increasingly difficult - to a point where a defensive style player can be almost immune to attack - as thorough as neb ever was.  THis was one of my main underlying bitches about neb abuse - it wasnt even neccessary - purely by thinking and using the existing game mechanics defences can be made very strong.

However, as more players begin to realize and apply stabilizer tech - then the issue will continue to grow - attacks will get too difficult to land at all - and the server becomes (rather, it remains) PVE .

I would like to see the costs reversed, so disruptors become cheaper than stabilizers.  Often to make a successful attack you need more fleetpower than the defender - so this would allow slightly more fleetpower to be brought against someone in an attack.  The change would favour the aggressive players - and they are the ones who are going to make this server interesting.

I dont believe making them the same cost is going to be enough - most players will focus on defence first, meaning stabilizers will always be ahead of disruptors.  Thats just common sense, because they are one player making attacks, versus possibly a dozen able to make attacks on them - so defence is more important than offense purely on a probability basis.

I was thinking of starting a new thread on this Riv, guess I will now - most players are aware of the power of stabilizers and disruptors now.  Your suggestion mirros my own, except I believe the costs should be reversed - making disruptors cheaper than stabilizers.

Eliminating stash is too much - the high incomes allow a different style of game that is far more interesting than the conventional game that is played up until 10 mil segs or so.

If you eliminate stash income entirely you will kill off much of the games potential.

Mining facilities are only useful for generating cash at the start of a players career, after that the minerals become far more important than the small amount of cash they generate.  Biofarms are similar - they are useful at the start of the game - and become trivial fairly quickly.

If you want planets to be worthwhile, then they need to generate a lot of income.  Id suggest that they need huge resources to manufacture, but yield good returns.

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.

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.

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 ..

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.

Emi Posted -

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.

Thought Id start this as a new thread.

Emi - I think the stash cap and worker cap need to work independently, Im not sure I fully understand what your proposing - the language you have used makes it a bit tricky to understand.

Workers are already capped by segments - I believe that the way it works currently is fine.  When you lose segments you lose bio farms, and your worker growth goes negative - meaning workers begin to die off.  This is a nice way for it to work - it gives players a chance to recover segs somehow and work on getting their growth to zero or better again.

For stash, my suggestion is leave the interest rate as it is - but the interest rate will only apply to a certain amount of the stash- and that value should be displayed.

For example if you have 10 million segs, then your stash limit might be 100 trillion for example.  Lets say your adjusted interest rate is 2.5%, that means your income from stash is going to be 2.5 trillion a day.  But maybe you have 250 trillion in your stash - then your income would still only be 2.5 trillion per day.  In the secret base under stash, display the maximum stash available to gain interest - in this example, 100 trillion.

We definitely need a cap - othwerise you create accounts where players no longer have to care about segments and pvp attacks - because their stash is the only real source of income.

As for what cap to put in, its hard to say.  If you make it low - then those that had high stashes running over that amount get an advantage in that they had a bonus for a long time that others are not going to get.  If you make it lower, then the high players will get abig cut in current income, and lower ranked players can hit the cap faster.

So, seems a bit of either/or to me.  The cap will basically effect everyone equally, just that some will be effected immediatly and others wont be effected until later.

Some players have very large stashes at the moment, for example in excess of 500 trillion - the advantage they have already had from no stash limit will be like a cash bonus - the time it takes to stabilize will roughly be the same regardless of where the cap is placed - if its high, then the high end players economies continue to be very high, meaning a long time to catch up - if its lower then their income gets chopped, but the cash reserves remain and will take a long time to equalize.

I think somewhere in the region of 1 million segs = 10 to 50 trillion stash limit is about right.  If you wanted to balance stash and workers income, then it would be about 1 mil segs = 25 tril stash.

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.

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

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.