Adjust bashing rule regarding the usage of IP missiles

Demonfreak · Aug 11th 2017, 7:01pm

A few days ago I myself was the subject of a ridiculous IP missile attack.

In a time span of less than 5 hours I have gotten 900 combat reports stating 30 to 40 IP missiles were fired at my planet per attack.

Now in regular universes it's considered bashing if you attack a planet more than 6 times per day.
This guy attacked me >900 times! with IP missiles.

I know officially IP Missiles do not count in bashing rules, but since the defender is not capable to defend against such attacks I think there should be a little change. Surely you can build AB rockets, but they are useless. Even if you have 100 AB's, if someone has enough resources, a nanite 7 or 8 and enough DM he/she can build 100 IP missiles every 10 seconds. Since there is no limit to how often these missiles can be used and the fact that the defender cannot do anything about it (unless he is coincidental online and can build AB on the fly). Since this is seldom the case, because any attacker will eventually notice the players on/of status, he can do whatever he wants.

Because I once decided to try out to be an "uber-turtle" I find it quiet displeasing that YEARS of work can be blown away without any options for me to do anything about it. It can go so fast that even after being hit, it's already too late.
I made a report to Malachae about this form of bashing, he said, and I quote "Yeah, someone with DM can obliterate an account quickly with IPMs. I understand it serves a purpose and leveling defense so one can safely destroy a fleet, but I can definitely see how it could be bashing. Write up a good suggestion there on what you'd like to see and see what the community has to say".

What I have witnessed was the action of just 1 person who had a personal (but unknown) vendetta.

Now don't get me wrong, it's not my intention to protect uber turtlers and they are hard to crack using regular fleet, although combined acs fleets can do lots of damage, so they are far from indestructible.
But against an IP strike? You can simply nothing do about it. And the irony is, attack someone often than 6 times per day and you get banned for bashing, even with moon destruction missions, while 900 attacks with ip missiles on one world is fine. That isn't right.

In Ogame you have a few playing styles, depending on how much time a player has, his or hers experience, and even the amount of money available counts:
You are either:
- A fleeter
- A miner
- A turtler
- A mixer (a mixer is miner & turler together)

If these unlimited IP missile attacks continue you chase away a lot of players playing Ogame as a turtler. Now turtlers are often ridiculed. They are 'scared', and they 'spoil the game', but the people saying this, mostly the fleeters don't understand that not everybody has the time to be a full time fleeter. You have die hard fleeters, these people are sitting more than 12 hours behind their desk doing fleetcrashes etc. No problem with that. Then you get the single person living by itself and having a job. So he has less time and decides to be a miner. And finally, there are persons who may even have lesser time (or simple not the means and the willpower to fleetsave every day), which build a safe house on 1 planet to collect the resources there to play the game, as any other player would do, but with a lot less stress and without fleetsaving. Now, why should these people be condemned? Fleeters say often very negative things about turtlers but in many cases they do trade deuterium with them. So they are not as useless as they think. Besides, respect each other. It's a thing you do in normal life as well. Whatever your friends and family are doing is their business.

So, if I a turtler spend years and years in building his account and it can be so easily destroyed by just one person, then don't be surprised they quiet the game all together. With the current amount of players we have in all the universes I say we cannot permit that. But I don't want to take away the IP missile attack option either, but the abuse must stop.

My idea is to put also a limit to the amount of IP missiles that one player may use on any other player each day. For example maximum 200 or 300 per day per planet. Still a lot of IP missiles which can do a lot of damage, but the defender has at least a chance to react to it, before his entire years of work is destroyed in a few hours (while he is sleeping). His damage can still be very big, but not like full scale destruction, unless the person attacking manages to call in a dozen friends and do 250 IPM attacks per day. That's reasonable and for a turtler may not be the most pleasant day but he has to admire the organization behind such an attack.

Besides, if the bashing rules applies to regular attacks and moon destruction attacks, both which could also be devastating if there wasn't a maximum put to it, why wouldn't there be a maximum for IP missiles? If a player wants to attack a turtler he can do it the ACS style, or rather, there is no limit to how many people could assist. In 2006 they did this once on the dutch server and because of this unusual action, they even named it after me: ogame.wikia.com/wiki/Demonfreaked .This is more acceptable, because it forces single persons to work together to accomplish this goal. Teamwork is required, and it also helps getting the motives of the person who wants to take the initiative. If it is just blunt bashing most people won't help, because it's considered non honorable.

Most defenders have no more than 100AB's, simply because the costs of the rocket silo, and a few levels higher don't help that much. So my idea is : Set a maximum of 250 IP missiles per day per planet to give the defender also a chance to do something. He can hit the attacker back, he can rebuild defenses, he can rebuild AB's, he can go temporary in v-mode if nothing else works, but the main goal is achieved; he does not quit the game. He goes on, buys probably some DM to fasten some building etc.

And doesn't that benefit us all?

250 IP Missiles per planet per player per day - please.

Petete · Aug 13th 2017, 2:17pm

I don't agree that there should be a limit, since if you limit the use of interplanetary missiles and you are a rocket bunker, you could not do anything against such people; Try to petar a bunker of 5 mrd and 300 edlms without missiles, if you can ... nothing that can not be what you say, if you shoot missiles and you are on with the AB are enough, a mixed player tells you.

TGWo · Aug 13th 2017, 3:15pm

Probably the only change that can be made (if it is not already so) is to consider bashing if within a few hours of the missile attack, there is no real attack on ships and there is no serious gain (in Practice limiting only attacks to do damages)

Petete · Aug 13th 2017, 5:03pm

this is imposible because what you said is relative, you can attack or no... maybe if you don't atack you can't use IP for a day...
but you can avoid the ban if you attack whit a 1 cargo ship... it isen`t vieable.

Demonfreak · Aug 13th 2017, 6:23pm

But you guys forget that if you group together with 10 or 20 players you can indeed destroy a bunker. And it's daily possible.

I try to find a level in which for both sides there are options to do what they want to do.

In this case, I wasn't able to defend myself. I cannot stay awake 24 hours a day and any attacker would notice very quickly when I am sleeping. And it's the devastation in combination with the use of DM (to speed up production) and the unlimited use of rockets that are so destructible for a turtler. And we are just talking about 1 person doing this. What if there are 3 persons? No big deal in a big alliance.

There is simply no way for the turtler to defend himself in this case, and that's unacceptable. You must have some means to defend yourself properly in a game. Not with a statement that you can build AB rockets, because 100 of those are nothing compared to what some guys can fire at you in such a small amount of time.

---

There is maybe another way, a new kind of reseach that allows AB rockets to be replaced automatically after been fire. I will work out the detail of this later since I don't have the time now
(Also this has to be balanced correctly).

Greius · Aug 13th 2017, 9:56pm

Hello! I'm Italian therefore apologize for my English, anyway I agree with you, but I got a worse attack than yours I'll explain right now. I am very passionate about the defenses I find most fascinating of the ships in my humble opinion and today I'm back to playing after a long vacation due to an attack that destroyed my ships, defenses and moon and this attack I received from a The whole alliance that has coalesced against me. I had a very strong defense so strong who joined against me and launched about 1700 missiles, even though I was awake I couldn't defend myself! It took me about a year to build that defense and I was destroyed in a few seconds without even seeing a light ship! I'm really angry and I take advantage of joining you. It is unacceptable, in this regard, I have proposed months ago, a defense that helps us to defend us from these missiles, alternatively I proposed a radical decrease in the force of these missiles, but none of the two options were made because they attacked me in the forum too ! Here game programmers should intervene and ban those defenses OR should make anti-ballistic missiles more useful,How to make them much more numerous, for example 1700! it's not right!!!!!! :cursing:

italian text

Demonfreak · Aug 14th 2017, 11:26pm

1,700 IPM's? You got off lightly, I got roughly 30,000. A calculation has made clear that the attacker must have used over 1.3 million DM to do this job.

So, with this in mind I don't think Gameforge is going to do anything about this. Probably the income of those guys using DM to destroy bunker outweigh the incomes of the players building the bunker.
This game has become too commercial.

I am still thinking about a possible "Automated Anti Ballistic Replacement Technology", or AABRT for short

But it have no clue where to start thinking about the costs, the research time, the amount of AB at certain levels that are automated replaced.
This game took years for developers to think through. BALANCING is key.

ckwalsh · Aug 15th 2017, 4:48am

Here's an idea: Modify the missile silo to allow allow exponential growth of the number of ABM's you are allowed to build, but linear growth of the number of ABM's that are ready to be launched against an IPM attack. Also, separate out the storage space for IBM's and IPM's.

I propose the following. Note that IPM's scale faster than ABMs, so it does not prohibit IPM attacks.

Missile Silo Level	ABM Build Limit	ABM Launch Limit	IPM Build Limit
1	0 (lvl 2 minimum)	0 (lvl 2 minimum)	0 (lvl 4 minimum)
2	10	8	0 (lvl 4 minimum)
3	20	12	0 (lvl 4 minimum)
4	40	16	20
5	80	20	25
6	160	24	30
7	320	28	35
8	640	32	40
9	1280	36	45
10	2560	40	50

For example, lets assume Defender has a level 5 Missile Silo, and 200 ABMs in storage. Attackers want to break through the defenses, and begin firing IPMs. For nice round numbers, lets assume the defensive structures can be destroyed by 150 IPMs.

The attacker could build a level 4 silo nearby, and send volleys of 20 IPM's at a time. However, the Defender's silo will block the all 20 in the first 10 waves (Lvl 5 * 4 ABM's/level = 20), and the next 150 will go through, costing a total of 350 IPMs. This matches the current behavior, if the player had 200 ABMs

Alternatively, the attacker could instead build a level 10 silo nearby, and send volleys of 50 IPM's at a time. With each hit, 30 IPMs get through (50 - 20 = 30), and it will take 5 waves of IPMs to wipe out the defense (5 waves of 50 (30 after ABM's)). This would total 250 IPMs.

TGWo · Aug 15th 2017, 12:34pm

Are you proposing that with level 10 you can storage 2560 antibalistic ? In this way ,becoming impossible to destroy a bunker.
You have to remember that this game will continue to exist and in any universe will be activity if players will be active and move ships. Bunker and turtle is a kind of game that don't give nothing at economy of universe .......... it is more or less as play alone.

So also if i'm contrary to the sneaky attacks, I am totally unhappy with the changes just to protect a game style that seems to me contrary to the vitality of the universe.

I think a better solution could be to put a limit at number of IPM that could be received linked with total point of ship or military points.

Also idea of an automatic (maybe one version free and a better version with official or DM) build of ABM could sound more interesting

ckwalsh · Aug 15th 2017, 1:49pm

TGWo wrote:

Are you proposing that with level 10 you can storage 2560 antibalistic ? In this way ,becoming impossible to destroy a bunker.

Yes, people can build more ABMs, but as an attacker you can fire a large enough volley where some are guaranteed to go through (as opposed to now, where a large number of ABMs means none go through).

If this concept is reasonable, another tweak might be to allow ACS missile attacks. Join a missile attack, and all launch at the appropriate time to hit at the same time, bypassing the ABM launch threshold. If someone has a lvl 15 missile silo they could defend with 60 ABMs at a time, but 6 people working together could each use lvl 4 silos to guarantee 60 IPMs go through (6 * 20 - 60 = 120 - 60 = 60). If the attackers are willing to invest up to lvl 8 silos, they can guarantee 180 IPMs go through in a wave (6 * 40 - 60 = 240 - 60 = 180)

2x was just a nice round number I picked out of thin air. If it's too high, but about 1.5x?

Missile Silo Level	ABM Build Limit	ABM Launch Limit	IPM Build Limit
1	0 (lvl 2 minimum)	0 (lvl 2 minimum)	0 (lvl 4 minimum)
2	10	8	0 (lvl 4 minimum)
3	15	12	0 (lvl 4 minimum)
4	22	16	20
5	33	20	25
6	50	24	30
7	75	28	35
8	113	32	40
9	170	36	45
10	256	40	50
11	384	44	55
12	576	48	60
13	864	52	65
14	1297	56	70
15	2919	60	75

Petete · Aug 15th 2017, 11:55pm

@edit by TGWo : I removed quote. No need to quote a complete message if it is directly the last you are replying.

Personally, it seems to me that the game is currently well, I have suffered the attacks of interplanetary missiles and I have had to eat them and that's it. If we do what you say to reinforce the anti-missile missiles, there is no god that tumble my moon because with that you have 100 kk of defense, dare to go without IP

Greius · Aug 16th 2017, 3:33pm

I've read everything, I'm pretty bizzy as a proposal because I think about it well, it is point and head and I explain why: the situation now is that if you have level 10 of the missile structure, you can build 100 anti-missiles Ballistics or 50 Interplanetar missiles, what you have proposed in my mind does not change the situation, we would only increase the amount, I instead propose a different thing, NO LIMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF MISSILE AND ANTI BALISTICISTS INTERPLANETED so we are happy both the attackers and the defenders , On a very similar game to that of Noirblack's name is exactly the same, as far as the missile structure is concerned, it will only increase the power of interplanetary missiles and the effectiveness of anti-ballistic missiles in blocking them by example:

If I have 300 ballistic missiles with a level 10 missile structure and I'm launching 400 interplanetar missiles but those who attack have a missile structure lower than level 10, my blocking missiles can block all or almost 400 missiles even if they are Lower because I simply have a more advanced structure that makes me more effective, vaguely imagining the scene, a mysterious missile that blocks an enemy missile, exploding, involving more enemy missiles, destroying more than one or (depending on the level of the structure) a missile Anti-ballistic locks 4 interplanetar missiles but this is only true if the defender is more advanced than the enemy, but if it is the enemy to have the missile structure superior to mine, then my anti-ballistic missiles against enemy missiles might be useless by blocking only one As it is now, or in extreme cases could not even block any missile because the difference between du And structures too high, in short, I would propose not to put NO CREATION LIMIT has any of the two missiles and would change the effect of the missile structure: that each level of the missile structure increases the strength and shields of the missiles by 5%, and So the strategy will no longer be the amount of missiles but increase its effectiveness with the structure and make it unbeatable against any attacking or defending enemy! If the level of the missile structures of defenders and attackers is the same, then the strategy will no longer be in the efficiency of its missiles but in the quantity! If you do not understand I will try to explain it better!

italian text

ho letto tutto, sono piuttosto bizzare come proposte perchè pensandoci bene, si è punto e a capo e ti spiego il perchè: la situazione che c'è ora e che, se tu hai il livello 10 della struttura missilistica, puoi costruirti o 100 missili anti balistici o 50 missili Interplanetari, quello che tu hai proposto secondo me non cambia la situazione, aumenteremmo solo la quantità, io invece propongo una cosa diversa, NESSUN LIMITE ALLA COSTRUZIONE DI MISSILI SIA ANTI BALISTICI CHE INTERPLANETARI così facciamo contenti sia gli attaccanti che i difensori, su un gioco molto simile a questo di nome Noirblack è esattamente così mentre per quanto riguarda la struttura missilistica servirà solo ad aumentare la potenza dei missili interplanetari e l'efficenza dei missili antibalistici nel bloccarli esempio:

Se io ho 300 missili anti balistici con un livello della struttura missilistica al 10 e mi lanciano 400 missili interplanetari ma chi attacca ha una struttura missilistica inferiore al livello 10, i miei missili che bloccano, possono bloccare tutti o quasi i 400 missili anche se sono inferiori perchè semplicemente ho una struttura più avanzata che me li rende più efficaci, immaginando vagamente la scena, un mio missile che blocca un missile nemico, esplodendo, coinvolge più missili nemici distruggendone più di uno ovvero (a seconda del livello della struttura) un missile anti balistico blocca 4 missili interplanetari però questo vale solo se il difensore è più avanzato del nemico, se invece è il nemico ad avare la struttura missilistica superiore alla mia, allora, i miei missili anti balistici contro i missili nemici potrebbero risultare inutili bloccandone solo uno come è ora, o in casi estremi potrebbero addirittura non bloccare nessun missile perché la differenza delle due strutture e troppo elevata, in sintesi, proporrei di non mettere NESSUN LIMITE DI CREAZIONE ha nessuno dei due missili e cambierei l'effetto della struttura missilistica ovvero: ogni livello della struttura missilistica aumenta del 5% la forza e gli scudi dei missili, e quindi la strategia non sarà più la quantità dei missili ma ben si aumentarne l'efficacia con la struttura e renderli imbattibili contro ogni nemico attaccante o difensore! Se invece il livello delle strutture missilistiche dei difensori e degli attaccanti sono pari allora, la strategia si trasformerà non più nell'efficienza dei propri missili ma nella quantità! se non capite cercherò di spiegarmi meglio!

Molle · Aug 18th 2017, 4:09pm

I don't see the problem with the bashing. The problem is that here a DM player will have a huge advantage over non-DM players. Sure DM should help you grow faster and so, but it should not be the case that you can make 3.000 IPR's within a coupple of hours, that is just ridiculous. Should the player have done this without DM, then for sure it would have taken a lot longer and one would actually have a chance of defending against IPR's.

Demonfreak · Aug 19th 2017, 6:28am

Still you people don't see it, that's why GF considers:

More than 6 times an attack on a player (who can move away his fleet or even scrap his defence) already as bashing. Only 7 times per day per planet is bashing

But then there comes some random person with an exceptional low rank, probably a multi account of a higher ranked player and drops 30,000 IP missiles and I have 900 combat reports in my inbox, and GF does not consider that as bashing. Then I am thinking, do they have a screw loose? Do they know how much damage those 30,000 IP missiles have done?

How the F##K do I have to protect myself from that?
I am pissed, not because of the defense which is destroyed, but by the simple fact I cannot do anything about it.

So I have seen here some good ideas:
- My idea : Limit the amount of IP missiles that you may fire at any given planet. Wanna blow up a turtle? Fine, do it in a group, so that no loners can destroy years of one players work
- Other idea I like : Make AB and IP rockets unlimited. So, the rocket silo only determines when you can build AB rockets and when IP rockets. To make it a little harder for IP lovers, make IP missiles need at least level 6.
- Last idea : Remove it completely from the game, the IP missile is too strong for it's good and it creates an unbalance. Ogame is a shipwar game, not a game firing rockets at each other. I doesn't fit.

Greius · Aug 19th 2017, 11:27am

Can I tell you I love you? Hahahahahaha long ago I had opened such a post, unfortunately I did not meet one like you who supported me, anyway you know that you have my support even if it matters little, and you are right, not about the 900 reports but on the fact that Defense is very unbalanced! Those who commented before you are sure it's a fixed attacker, but for those who like to build a bit of defense like us, that of missiles is something UNACCEPTABLE! :thumbdown:

Petete · Sep 1st 2017, 10:29am

Demonfreak wrote:

Still you people don't see it, that's why GF considers:

More than 6 times an attack on a player (who can move away his fleet or even scrap his defence) already as bashing. Only 7 times per day per planet is bashing

But then there comes some random person with an exceptional low rank, probably a multi account of a higher ranked player and drops 30,000 IP missiles and I have 900 combat reports in my inbox, and GF does not consider that as bashing. Then I am thinking, do they have a screw loose? Do they know how much damage those 30,000 IP missiles have done?

How the F##K do I have to protect myself from that?
I am pissed, not because of the defense which is destroyed, but by the simple fact I cannot do anything about it.

So I have seen here some good ideas:
- My idea : Limit the amount of IP missiles that you may fire at any given planet. Wanna blow up a turtle? Fine, do it in a group, so that no loners can destroy years of one players work
- Other idea I like : Make AB and IP rockets unlimited. So, the rocket silo only determines when you can build AB rockets and when IP rockets. To make it a little harder for IP lovers, make IP missiles need at least level 6.
- Last idea : Remove it completely from the game, the IP missile is too strong for it's good and it creates an unbalance. Ogame is a shipwar game, not a game firing rockets at each other. I doesn't fit.

ok, if you remove the ip, to compensate the defense will be repaired instead of a 70% 30%, I no longer like the idea right? Build a defense costs years, but build a fleet too and take it off with a blow and what do you recover? 15%, so I see that in the defense there is an incredible imbalance, the fleet if you break it a 15% recover and if you can defend a 70, it is not fair.

Spain: vale, si quitas los ip, para compensar la defensa se recomprondra en vez de un 70% un 30%, Ya no gusta la idea ¿no? construir una defensa cuesta años, pero construir uan flota también y te la quitan de un golpe y ¿que recuperas? pues un 15 %, así que veo que en al defensa hay un desequilibrio increible, la flota si te la rompen un 15 % recuperas y si puerdes la defensa un 70, no es justo.

Danimanza · Sep 3rd 2017, 10:32pm

Petete wrote:

Demonfreak wrote:

Still you people don't see it, that's why GF considers:

More than 6 times an attack on a player (who can move away his fleet or even scrap his defence) already as bashing. Only 7 times per day per planet is bashing

But then there comes some random person with an exceptional low rank, probably a multi account of a higher ranked player and drops 30,000 IP missiles and I have 900 combat reports in my inbox, and GF does not consider that as bashing. Then I am thinking, do they have a screw loose? Do they know how much damage those 30,000 IP missiles have done?

How the F##K do I have to protect myself from that?
I am pissed, not because of the defense which is destroyed, but by the simple fact I cannot do anything about it.

So I have seen here some good ideas:
- My idea : Limit the amount of IP missiles that you may fire at any given planet. Wanna blow up a turtle? Fine, do it in a group, so that no loners can destroy years of one players work
- Other idea I like : Make AB and IP rockets unlimited. So, the rocket silo only determines when you can build AB rockets and when IP rockets. To make it a little harder for IP lovers, make IP missiles need at least level 6.
- Last idea : Remove it completely from the game, the IP missile is too strong for it's good and it creates an unbalance. Ogame is a shipwar game, not a game firing rockets at each other. I doesn't fit.

ok, if you remove the ip, to compensate the defense will be repaired instead of a 70% 30%, I no longer like the idea right? Build a defense costs years, but build a fleet too and take it off with a blow and what do you recover? 15%, so I see that in the defense there is an incredible imbalance, the fleet if you break it a 15% recover and if you can defend a 70, it is not fair.

Spain: vale, si quitas los ip, para compensar la defensa se recomprondra en vez de un 70% un 30%, Ya no gusta la idea ¿no? construir una defensa cuesta años, pero construir uan flota también y te la quitan de un golpe y ¿que recuperas? pues un 15 %, así que veo que en al defensa hay un desequilibrio increible, la flota si te la rompen un 15 % recuperas y si puerdes la defensa un 70, no es justo.

You are right in your point about the cost of building a strong fleet and the disadvantages to rebuild it if crashed (which were balanced with wreck fields recently), but keep in mind that you can save your fleet and if you are good and have some luck , your enemies will not destroy it. but you can not do that with your defences. they are always there and a enemy with enough deathstars or IP's will take it.

Spain: Tienes razón con lo que comentas sobre el coste de una flota tocha y las desventajas para recuperarla si te petan (cosa que fue balanceada con los pecios), pero recuerda que puedes hacer fleet con la flota y si eres bueno y tienes algo de suerte, no te la van a petar. Pero no puedes hacer lo mismo con las defensas, siempre van a estar ahí y el enemigo que tenga suficientes edlm o misiles te las va a petar.

Petete · Sep 4th 2017, 9:35am

Danimanza wrote:

Petete wrote:

Demonfreak wrote:

Still you people don't see it, that's why GF considers:

More than 6 times an attack on a player (who can move away his fleet or even scrap his defence) already as bashing. Only 7 times per day per planet is bashing

But then there comes some random person with an exceptional low rank, probably a multi account of a higher ranked player and drops 30,000 IP missiles and I have 900 combat reports in my inbox, and GF does not consider that as bashing. Then I am thinking, do they have a screw loose? Do they know how much damage those 30,000 IP missiles have done?

How the F##K do I have to protect myself from that?
I am pissed, not because of the defense which is destroyed, but by the simple fact I cannot do anything about it.

So I have seen here some good ideas:
- My idea : Limit the amount of IP missiles that you may fire at any given planet. Wanna blow up a turtle? Fine, do it in a group, so that no loners can destroy years of one players work
- Other idea I like : Make AB and IP rockets unlimited. So, the rocket silo only determines when you can build AB rockets and when IP rockets. To make it a little harder for IP lovers, make IP missiles need at least level 6.
- Last idea : Remove it completely from the game, the IP missile is too strong for it's good and it creates an unbalance. Ogame is a shipwar game, not a game firing rockets at each other. I doesn't fit.

ok, if you remove the ip, to compensate the defense will be repaired instead of a 70% 30%, I no longer like the idea right? Build a defense costs years, but build a fleet too and take it off with a blow and what do you recover? 15%, so I see that in the defense there is an incredible imbalance, the fleet if you break it a 15% recover and if you can defend a 70, it is not fair.

Spain: vale, si quitas los ip, para compensar la defensa se recomprondra en vez de un 70% un 30%, Ya no gusta la idea ¿no? construir una defensa cuesta años, pero construir uan flota también y te la quitan de un golpe y ¿que recuperas? pues un 15 %, así que veo que en al defensa hay un desequilibrio increible, la flota si te la rompen un 15 % recuperas y si puerdes la defensa un 70, no es justo.

You are right in your point about the cost of building a strong fleet and the disadvantages to rebuild it if crashed (which were balanced with wreck fields recently), but keep in mind that you can save your fleet and if you are good and have some luck , your enemies will not destroy it. but you can not do that with your defences. they are always there and a enemy with enough deathstars or IP's will take it.

Spain: Tienes razón con lo que comentas sobre el coste de una flota tocha y las desventajas para recuperarla si te petan (cosa que fue balanceada con los pecios), pero recuerda que puedes hacer fleet con la flota y si eres bueno y tienes algo de suerte, no te la van a petar. Pero no puedes hacer lo mismo con las defensas, siempre van a estar ahí y el enemigo que tenga suficientes edlm o misiles te las va a petar.

Dani, I always speak in the case that the ip will be removed, it is now compensated by the ip, but some of the post asks to remove the ips ... then in that case would again be unbalanced the fleet in front of the defense , for that very reason I have proposed what I have proposed.

Spain: Dani, yo siempre hablo en el caso de que se quitarán los ip, ahora mismo está compensado por los ip, pero algunos del post piden que se quiten los ips... entonces en ese caso volvería a estár descompensada la flota frente a la defensa, por eso mismo he propuesto lo que he propuesto.

Demonfreak · Nov 8th 2017, 5:07pm

Molle wrote:

I don't see the problem with the bashing. The problem is that here a DM player will have a huge advantage over non-DM players. Sure DM should help you grow faster and so, but it should not be the case that you can make 3.000 IPR's within a coupple of hours, that is just ridiculous. Should the player have done this without DM, then for sure it would have taken a lot longer and one would actually have a chance of defending against IPR's.

No problem with "Bashing"? Why is not bashing not allowed with ships and moon destruction? Where lies the difference? In both cases if they are unlimited an attacker can destroy everything. With the current bashing rule fleeters cannot use their fleet to completely destroy another player in a wave of 6. With IP missiles, which can be fired endlessly everything is destroyed. Hell, you don't even get the 70% rebuild chance which you usually get when a fleet attacks.

Oh, another fact, it were 30,000 IPM's, not 3,000 in a few hours. A big difference.

I also like the idea to set the IPM and ABM loose. Just like regular defense, let the attackers and defenders (all players for that matter) decide for them selves how many of these things they will build. If you can build build 100,000 rocketlaunchers, why shouldn't you (just think in the real world) be able to build 1,000 or 2,000 Anti-Ballistic rockets. They are both rockets shooting into space, so as matter of fact that idea would be easier to implement, I think, for GF, to set no maximum to the amount of any type of rockets can be build. Maybe the time an AB or IPM is build can be reduced and making the level of the rocket silo itself a factor of how fast you can build either of these rockets.

Dor · Nov 10th 2017, 7:07am

if one planet is bunkered it makes it easier for someone to collect. bad for raiding. otherwise its only one planet that can not be raided. and it makes someone a nice honor farm.

The job of planet raiders is keep everyone collecting their production. Building bunkers is part of the game and should be balanced with other styles. They have to be killable. If defense is overpowered it hurts activity and makes mining boring and easy.

the counter to ipm is metal-based defense, RL. due to the high armor for cost. If there was no bouncing effect you could make a huge pile of rockets, it would never get IPM'd and would rquire so much total shileding to take on. yet if you got the fleet together you could smash it, few to no losses, in a acs uni. i dont understand bouncing effect. only works for rip and large dome. like rips arent powerful enough. it nerfs pure fodder defense, which i feel should be a thing : )

Adjust bashing rule regarding the usage of IP missiles

Adjust bashing rule regarding the usage of IP missiles

TGWo wrote:

Demonfreak wrote:

Petete wrote:

Demonfreak wrote:

Danimanza wrote:

Petete wrote:

Demonfreak wrote:

Molle wrote:

Share

Users Online 1