lol Skrymir...

You really dont know who i am... So keep your big mouth shut if you dont have any suggestions...

I dont even mind the current planet raiding/attacking, it will be much better for me next round...

AND

Who in right sense of his mind will attack a player who is double his FP and has much stronger ships and much more marines... UNLESS HE IS AN ALTERNATE OF SOME OTHER PLAYER AND JUST WANTED TO HIT SAME GUY...

But That will be against Rules for this game...

by the way it completed the same day but took around 4 -5 hrs longer...

The cloacked fleet can be seen by matching the subspace scanner tech.. I think this system is good and working properly

 Skrymir --

If you talking about realistic, then in rality whats stopping 1Tril FP guy attacking 10B Fp guy... Nothing.. But the rule still states you cannot attack anyone below 805 of your FP unless you reserve the extra ships..

This feature is to make game more fairer and to incraese participation... The same can be used on planets with different technique and combat penalty can be used to make it fairer..


Cam -

this is not just for Gaia planets, the same applies for other planets also... Even with 100% combat bonus, a ranked 50 player wont be able to do anything with Ranked 1 player...

The changes made this round to planets are good.. But there is a room for improovement especially in attacking / Conquering..


At the moment there is no consideration for plant attacking, Ranked 1 player can attack Rank 50  player's planet who is 1/10th of his power and can easily conquer his planet... which will result in the other guy's many days of efforts into waste.. The losses for Rank 1 player would be almost 0 considering his FP but for rank 50 player this could be 75%..

Although attacking is good and gives edge in PvP but there need to a safty nate for lower FP guys..

My suggestion is as follows..

1 - High total fleet power attacker attacking lower FP player's planet (below 80% FP) should get a penalty (att / def) reduction during attacking/conquering. The penelty should not be reduced by any commander bonuses.. also the penalty should depend on the difference in the FP of attacker / Defender..

For ex - Player X attacking player Y who is 50% of his FP, is 30% of the FP range.. So attacker X can have 30% penalty on his attacks / conquer..


This will ensure a fair play for both... If the attacker is ready to deal with higher losses then he can have planet...

This suggestion is in line with the recent changes done by Emi for attacking other players only from 80-200% FP..


2 - if a player looses his planet to other player, he can salvage atleast 25% of segments he spend on that planet..


3 - There should be some limit to attack and conquer attaempts per days...  for instance 3 attack and 2 conquer attempts per day.


I really think the first suggestion is very good for ensuring fair play.

I set the terraform to Gaia and it was scheduled to finish around 2 hrs back.. But whenever i keeps checking it just gets increased by 1hrs...

I just check 5 mins back and it was scheduled to finish in 1 min, when i checked back to see if its complete, it again increase to 1hrs...

This has already happenned twice.

Whats going on???

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..

O..ya... did not notice that... in that case any option is good...

This is  really good update Sir Emi...

Satan / Silence,

there are aways 2000 encounters throughout the gal... and if one encounter is completed succesfully, other is created at the same instance somewhere else in the galaxy... but i am not sure how their power is determined, its probably determined by the first player who finds them...

The main problem could be that most players dont do Supernova / Mothership encounters... and they might be taking huge chunk from the 2K limit... so if everyone keeps doing most of the segment encounters then ultimately the rest of the encounter numbers will also increase... Thats my logic.. could be wrong. But 2K limit and encounter refresh is correct..

Lamma - you are one who figured this out!!! and used it against me...  Good that i had lead ships into reserves then...


But i dont think this should be removed or 100 turns limit to be allowed... instead if the attacker is destroying 20%  of your fleet then the attack should be considered as Success and then counter to be reduced by 1....

this is becuase of some bug that the attack is still failing even if the attacker is destroying 20 -30 of fleet in full assult attack..

I dont think this is a Good Idea... Otherwise players will just attack others and once the attack is done, they will just reserves the fleet as taking them into active charge will be minimal...

for ex - If you have 80% resupply discount, the price is reduced to around 20% of original so 100 tril ship will cost around 20Tril or somewhere near that... and the charges for taking the fleet out of reserves is just 105 of the actual cost the cost here will be just 2tril..
which is highly affordable to any player...

If this is implemented, it will spoil the game as everyone will put their mission ships into reserves after attacking another player..

Yup, i liked that... but i would suggest having few more attempts than just 2 - 3.. there should be atleast one try to get 1 encounter from each category... like 6 tries daily..

But the fleet on second attempt could be a killer fleet... So that every commander will need to think before attempting a second try on any of the encounter missions...

this will make game more interesting / complex... Not sure how easy is to develop this and get implemented..

Noted... This idea was basically the result of players posting the 'problems with encounters' thread...

A lot of players finding difficulties to find encounters, this would give them some assurance and also the only 3 attempt limit will reduce the chance of everyone getting these encounters because if the encounter FP is more than 100% then it might take more than 3 attempt for 50% of the players to do these successfully and these 50% players will fail to do these type of missions...

So to do these you will stil need skill... but the main thing these type of missions will do is reduce the gap between Top 10 to Top 50... Currently there is huge gap from Top player to 20th - 25th rank player.. such missions will make sure tha gap is reduced..

Yup.. The time we have some weird rank 1 player who kicks all alliance mates to gain 25K points would be very disappointing.. Thats where my other suggestion on 'Encounter mission' comes handy... If every player is getting few confirmed encounters as explained  in 'Encounter mission' suggestion thread then we might not get a case where 99% of the FP in an Alliance belongs to a single player...