View Single Post
Unread 21 Sep 2010, 12:07   #57
Ave
Registered User
 
Ave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 936
Ave is a glorious beacon of lightAve is a glorious beacon of lightAve is a glorious beacon of lightAve is a glorious beacon of lightAve is a glorious beacon of lightAve is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Planetarion Redesign

Quote:
Originally Posted by Light View Post
Not really, as i doubt i'll be able to solve the problem in a way the community would accept.

The problem is that when you take the problem down to its basic roots, its that you need your fleet to survive in this game. From the defender point of view, why would you bother leaving your fleet home where some of it dies if the attack still caps gets max cap? and the attacker will always recall if they lose more fleet than the asteroids will repay in a short space of time.

Ive seen someone mention giving attackers salvage as a possible solution but then, all it does it make defending abit harder. Defenders wont just cover it the same as they do now, if the attacker gets salvage, they will send enough defence to still cause value loss and make the attack non-profitable.

If we then go to the extreme and make 100% salvage on both sides, then you basically make defending impossible and it needs to be a 100% emp/kill to stop the roid capture. Which would ruin the whole alliance/defence mechanic.

Another possible solution is implement random fire, so no matter the defending fleet.. the attacker would take losses. This would just result in the game being luck based on weither the defending planet moved their fleet or not. If we implement it with attacker salvage, then we have the same problem as impementing attacker salvage by itself as it would just negate the random fire mechanic.

While the game remains value based, then zero-loss attacks will always be much better than taking losses and people will only take losses when its profitable (And i seriously dont want to make the game XP based).

Im open to suggestions as im struggling to find any which would actually work without creating more problems or screwing people over.

As far as the waking up at 4am situation goes. There is no solution as its not a game mechanic, its simply when the players are deciding to attack. Prelaunch is a mixed blessing in this regard, it allows players to launch attacks at times they would otherwise be offline but it re-enforces the launch at 4am mechanic. If a group of players only wanted to be online till 24:00 or 8am, then that group of players would have to launch at 24:00 or 8am, which means that theirs now less attacking at 4am which means that you dont need as many people online at 4am to defend.

I see the point of prelaunch, that in theory.. it shouldnt matter what time zone you're in and living in australia shouldnt give you a huge advantage. However, prelaunch only further compounds the problem by allowing everyone to launch at those times which makes it a greater importance to be online at those times for defense. 100% of active players now attack at 4am, when without prelaunch that number could drop to 50% (a guess), meaning you only need 50% of the people previously to be online at that time.

Lets say if we take away prelaunch and 2 major alliances alter their launch times to 23:00 and 08:00. Now, it means that anyone solo attacking at 24:00 has a higher chance of landing due to alliances already sending out def fleets (and attack fleets) and it also means that someone launching at 09:00-10:00 also has a much greater chance of landing than previously. This automatically changes the defense times from 4-7am to 23:00-11:00. A much wider gap to come online and send a defence fleet for the casual user.

If Asc and Apprime are playing casual next round.. I'd love it if they both changed their attack times to something other than the middle of the night and see what happends. Would other alliances choose to change? considering the 4am attacking is no longer flaked by everyone else? (I say Asc and Apprime, as they're the two most likely to even considering doing it).
Salvage based on your losses (u get x% back of your stolen/broken ships) <- DoM style (battles accure)
XP to encourage those landings and when XP is turned as goods, u can rebuild the value loss along with the roids stolen. <- PA style (battles will accure)
Fleet morals to distract the value based playing, so it is costy to send just safe lands. <- SpM style (battles accure)

Also we can consider the cap % higher and mining % higher from stolen and owned roids to make it faster to rebuild fleet losses. Also it will still put importance to defence as you can grow fast for owning good amount of roids. In short when having roids is really profitable, it will encourage to land on those.

am at work now and dont have time to think further, but there is some keys for u to work forward
__________________
If the opponent resists, CaRnage there will be!
Ave is offline   Reply With Quote