Search Results

(Hidden Content) I hope there's no error. I made it at first glance. Here's an official list: utils.mucattu.com/iso_3166-1.html

Isn't 21 too late for such “extra”? May be level 19 would be good to force people to get there, but level 21 is not bearable. Think that this is not reducing a lot of consumption with recyclers: levels 20+21 only “reduce” deuterium consumption in recyclers by 25%. That means that to get some profit one should calculate if he's going to spend 24.000M of deuterium in recyclers alone to make worth the levels 20 + 21. Although it's possible that the numbers add up (for top 1-4 ranked fleeters) almos…

@Valent @Lord Katrosh The problem with that is that... what does that solve? Yes, it does add more complexity to the game, but still, it's just something that will not change anything, some people will get some benefit, but on the other side if the enemy researches the correct technology we are again at the starting point. I think that the main thing we have to aim to do is raise the bare minimum of strength of the moon vs. rips (by strength I mean everything that have been discussed here, more …

Okey, here's another suggestion: enable relocations only certain days, or limit the possibility of doubleclicking jumpgate in the first 24h after a new colonization (similar to the 24h cooldown after a relocation). Not honestly suggesting that, apart from the fact that it involves changing DM consumption which GameForge almost for sure won't implement, it's just to revive the thread. Any more ideas? Any answers from the developers? Any other proposed equations for moon destruction % or moon dest…

@JoKy It's true, three similar threads in just a few days hehehe and at least me, I'm from a different community. It's interesting because basically all of this ultimately boils down to the same “core problem”. I quote here something from the .org forum about this same subject. Quote from CoReTeX: “Can't say i care much about the change. I started vmode playing about 4-5 months ago, mainly because if i didn't, i'd just wake up to a bunch of mds and gated moons right in my system. Thanks DM. So y…

@Shole You could be more active on threads that try to discuss why people need not only the fact that vmode is at least 48h, but also an incentive to be able to fleet more securely than it currently is in fast universes

@echonia and how is that a problem? The problem with deuterium for larger fleets at later stages of the game is a big one. Pros for fleeters: Difference in number of recyclers they need to have / send to a battle = less deuterium consumption Cons for fleeters: miners would have fewer cargos than now (but may be they get more confidence and accumulate more resources in there, but this is just a may be), so cargo slaps would have smaller profit (the real profit of cargos is usually in the resource…

If I'm in Spanish ogame and click on ogniter link of a player in galaxy view I'm moved to en.ogniter.org/es/573/player/116872 while I would expect to be moved to es.ogniter.org/es/573/player/116872 which is in spanish. Could you correct that?

This definitely aims higher than my proposal of slowing moon destructions Right now I don't have anything to say, because this is a huge change and haven't really thought about it to invent something. In any case, just to add a few more things into the discussion, I haven't played anything but OGame in the last 7 years, so I don't know. How is this solved or approached in other games? People that play other games could explain what is done in those games to solve or tackle this problem. This wou…

The basic problem, I think, could be summed up in: OGame has much less players than it once had, with all the consequences that brings. Basically, almost any suggestion is in some way ultimately trying to bring back the activity and life to the game. That is due to many many many different variables, and of course, we don't know the key and even if there exists a key to “solve the problem”. There are other broader discussion here in Origin about that subject, with little activity, by the way. Th…

RiV- the problem is not survival. I really understand it's kind of easy: if you are capable of connecting at intervals smaller than 1h20min or so you have 100% chance of survival; of course not everybody can do that, but with the help of false activities and such, even disconnecting during longer times is possible with a high change of survival (not 100% though). That grants completely perfect nights without sacrificing sleep. The problem is not survival, is to have a decent quality time when aw…

I wanted to edit, but I lost connection. Although the equation is incorrect, and I haven't thought thoroughly, I think that changing the % of moon destrucion harms much more the smaller or less powerful players; by a great difference. As FuMAnChu says, the top fleeters have 10.000 to 40.000 rips, and they are the ones that can afford to loose them. Not only that, if the flight times is not affected yet, they still can pop your moon in less than 1h30min and that's the problem, even if they loose …

Well, to put things into perspective, here's something that I find more useful to understand the change of % in moon destruction. I (wanted a table that) shows the % associated with different number of deathstars, which is what I think important. The moon size is 8.944 which is the biggest possible one, just for reference. I (wanted to) show, 1 and 2 deathstars for comparison, then 6 and 10 which is what I usually see in my universe (it tends to be 10 deathstars per mission), and then a few more…

About the first part, we don't know how speed relates to flight time (read note below), could you please give the equation about Flighttime rather than Flightspeed? Which is what actually matters to the users overall. But, PLEASE, think about changing the overall speed of RIPs. That would be a major game changer, bigger than this proposal. RIPs would lose a lot of power, they couldn't be used as they currently are by people that have been years building RIP fleets: no moving resources at current…

Also, moons are not recognized, so if someone has a moon, if you click "get info of player" the list on the left will say that he has missing moons. And every planet of his that you visit in galaxy will "update" to not having a moon.

Quote from FuMAnChu: “That would create that Miners have one big defence/bunker/turtle. So they have less risk of getting attacked. The actual way is okay. I dont see that its necessary to have a feature like this. ” I don't think this would “create” that. We can already do this. And also, that's not really ideal since you wouldn't have cargos in every planet for an urgency. I don't think that's really a big problem. And, as you say “the actual way is okay”, yes of course, and “I don't see that …

The suggestions to the speedchange depend on what “system” is chosen. Once the method is decided, it's a matter of building the equations. Here are three examples. Given currenttime = current flight time of death stars in a particular universe, and fleetspeed = the speed factor of the universe. In the case of my original suggestion (to have moon destructions have a constant flight time across every speed) an equation would be Source Code (1 line)If we keep constant1 = 1, the time would be that o…

The button to send messages doesn't work in galaxy view. Only if you hover the name, and in the contextual menu you click Send message. But the main button for sending messages doesn't work.

Quote from NoMoreAngel: “Yep thats the idea. I would say that they can't do anything about it as soon as they are charging. As a 3rd player who wants to defend you would get a warning that it is possible that you loose your fleet within the x minutes because there are deathstars pointed at the moon. Same would go for the player who owns the moon. Everything that lands on the moon between the battle and the possible destruction will get destroyed with it then. Obviously this mark that the Moon is…

I will stop answering, I don't want to cope the thread with my replies. Lord_, what I propose is a change, this is precisely the suggestion, a change: if I enter an x4 universe, the moon destruction would have speed x2 (for instance). Yes, it's a change, and yes, until now if you entered an x4 the moon destructions would be x4 as always. But the change has its consequences. The idea is to debate the consequences, and if they may bring something good, even when they change the game. Take any fast…