Protection of weaker user - First Discussion [closed]

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • OK, I read the whole IRC conversation except the end of second part.
    Az's idea could be acceptable : to base (if I understood well) the 5:1 ratio (or10:1, it would be better) on the defender's entire fleet and his defence. Still can't see the point in that, though. Because the result will be the same: if you get recycled... you have nothing to restart with except if you took the DF ^^ Benneb's idea is much more realistic : 30% of the fleet rebuilt (I'd prefer much less, but well, i'm not the only player :p), which appears at the defender's first connection in order to avoid multiple attacks which would make this profit only the attacker. Something to allow the player to say : "ok, i didn't lose all, i kept a few ships and i can still raid, so it's not the end of the world" instead of "oh, sh*t, i just lost all my fleet! f... it, i'll start over again at the next universe".

    The post was edited 1 time, last by jaip ().

  • Lord Demetrius wrote:


    Seriously...
    Do you imagine that the noobs will keep their fleet alive because of having 20% chance of escape ? Maybe one or two, but for the huge majority, they will be destroyed the next week
    You will just make fleeter strategy weaker than it is soon

    then if they will be killed anyway, because a top 300 the plane while I can not?

    then if they will be killed anyway, because a top 300 the plane while I can not?

    because these false morality, in the end a player who is in the top 1 comes to us by Mill Farm on the most vulnerable, if a player takes away the farm where those drugs if it is exclusively the top 100?

    will turn out, that the top 100 will all be there at the miner's points will be the most avantage, the only ones who will pay the consequences will be the crasher.

    but then because I can not attack a top 150, and he can attack me? okay then I can hang me to recover the stolen goods, always bearing in mind that I can not send more than 5 times its fleet, but to me because I am putting a limitation, you can not attack and that is that, while he is given the choice to attack or not?

    The day will come that I will have a plane for vacation, lose points against him, and despite all send up to 5 times its fleet, inter alia by reducing the gain ...

    obvious now that the Admiral if you buy all crasher, but I also believe many, many miners.

    disappointed with this new game that the GF is creating.


    This is no longer OGAM!

  • Dear members
    excuse my poor english.

    I do not understand how it is possible to be also not very lucid on a given situation. Your new rules are simply stripped of good sense. You want that players remain on the play but you do all to make them leave. You want to keep the new players to the detriment of old, it is stupid. Both should be kept. Your rules are in contradiction with a will to keep the players.

    Do you want to found a protection of the beginners?


    A new officer is a solution.

    The reconstructor of fleet. cost 100K d'AM.

    When you lose more (50/66/75%) of your fleet, the reconstructor of fleet allows you to rebuild (25/33/50%) your lost fleet. This one is available as soon as you want it, by activating the menu which is appropriate.

    Allows the beginners to be able to continue to play and large recycled not to give up the play.

    The community of the former players will be satisfied, the community of the new players too. The GF also.

    Put your new rules on trash !!!

  • If you re-build the 25/30% of your fleets, the game changes.

    If you have 2.000 fleets change less than you have 1.000.000 fleets.
    2.000 fleets ---> 30% = about 600 fleets
    1.000.000 fleets ---> 30% = about 300.000 fleets

    With 300.000 you can play, oh if you can play!!
    :D

  • I understand the fact Gameforge wants to keep the new users in-game, even after being raided by more stronger players, yet, they are going an entirely wrong way... as a matter of fact, almost a year have passed since I started thinking of "increase the population in older unis" solution, and tonight, it'll be introduced here, yet, for the publishers of the game, I'd like to state that it was always the best and easiest strategy for increasing the size of the fleet to hunt everything which is unsaved, especially under medium-sized planetary defenses, no matter the highscore of a player, and modifying it the way you want will create nothing but inability to properly raid high-ranked players. I've personally seen multiple cases when miners from top 20 didn't know the purpose of a Moon and had absolutely none. And even with the addition of Relocation option, nothing has changed in their playstyle - I mean, they aren't planning of reconsidering it at all, except they'll be happy to receive lesser scans on their road for deleting a useless turtled account (there's such a thing as ACS, you know).

    P.S. The overall rating of a player has nothing to do with his/her game knowledge & playstyle. ;)

  • Francolino

    Seriously, I have an extremely hard time reading your posts and believe you actually think this will Benefit Ogame as a whole.

    Not only are your replys fucking Illogical, they are just INGONRANT!

    You say that this will help low level players? MAYBE! But this will deal a giant blow to the ogame community. So basically you are willing to take an ENOURMOUS risk for a reward which is 100% hypothetical.

    How could you seriously try to disagree to a 95%+ Dislike for this autofleet save Idea.

    Not only are you mislead in your logic behind backing this idea up. You actually make alot of people feel like vomiting everytime they have to try and reason to your non-sense.

    Let me explain a few things.

    All this does is place a RESTRICTION on What you can send on a specific Target. WHERE THE FUCK IS STRATEGY INVOLVED IN BEING RESTRICTED?
    And here is my main point behind all of this Non-sense.

    Out of all the Lowbies you are trying to Help. How many of them Purchase Anti-Matter? Because I can tell you almost all current Anti-Matter users have no problem making it to the top 100 and most of them are actually ready to fight this CRAPPY IDEA that go on the Forums and express our GIANT Disapproval of this Update.

    Not only that, if this even sees the Light of Day on a New Universe, not only will that universe be the target of massive anti-play. (which lets be honest the newest Universe have proven to be ridiculously popular with the rules given) People will actually be closer to exiting Ogame as its future Seems DOOMED!

    I play on Ogame.fr, and let me tell you, our community had a 30 page response to this announcement and I haven't seen ONE SINGLE MODERATEUR ACTUALLY SAY THIS MAY BE A DECENT IDEA.

    Every single person (exept off course the 1 total moron of the forums) Has explicitly explained how terrible this Idea Is.


    OGame.FR is so disgusted by this Announcement, we are all fighting this as much as we can because this Means. DEATH FOR US ALL! (That is our Sentiment TRUST ME!)


    I have paid over 200$ on my Top 2 account in Anti-Matter, making me a Legitimate client and have been playing for over 7 years.

    Please stop saying there is not enough Targets. because the Reasoning Behind this, NOT EVERYONE IS A TARGET. THEY COME, THEY GO! BIG FUCKING DEAL!
    People that like ogame learn how to play and those who never learnt do it the Hard way.
    Even if players quit. I really think Gameforge should focus on its LOYAL AND ACTIVE COMMUNITY as oppose to the Quitters who wouldn't even care about this change in the Slightest Bit.


    Last Point before I go back to work.
    Ogame.fr Agrees Changing the "Green Rule" is not a bad Idea at all. But this ratio 1:10 is Absurd (Needs refinement but A GOOD IDEA)

    Auto-Fleet Saving = Changing the fundamental rules that Ogame has had since day 1, not only that, it is a Game RUINER in the eyes of over 95% of the active community.

    Honor Points is just silly but something players don't really mind and would adapt too easily.


    Please Consider the Overwhelming response to the Auto-Fleet Saving idea has receive. Because that single fact is actually Changing the game in itself.
    And its impact will affect all loyal customers/clients/players of Ogame in General.

    AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP SAYING THIS WILL ONLY AFFECT NEW UNIVERSES BECAUSE ALOT OF PLAYERS LIKE NEW UNIVERSES !
    It gives Life to old time raideurs and people who want to create new mineur/passive accounts.

    So you giving me that excuses don't worry, you're account wont be affected Is like saying

    Don't worry ONLY JAPAN IS GOING TO HAVE A NUCLEAR METLDOWN!

    I'm about to Make a Youtube Video about this Shit with some Epic Bashing.

  • spa856 wrote:

    Icho, please...no other Officers.
    Pay for the fleets? Very very bad idea.


    Ogame was free, in the future no (i'm sure).
    For moon etc you will need to pay....
    :evil:
    I prefer to have noobs paying an officer like the one Icho proposes than having this new f*** noob protection implemented (not in addition to). It's quite the same as the engineer officer where you loose 50% less defense (but only when you loose more than 50% of your fleet - based on number of invested resources, not number of vessels).

    I understand GF needs some money to maintain OGame. And normally, more players = more DM = more money.

    This stupid new f*** noob protection is actually showing the new GF's marketing strategy:
    1. noobs stay longer = more DM = more money (in the first weeks of implementation of this f*** release)
    2. but fewer "real" players (all "real" players will go to ogame-like or simply quit) = no action (no HOF) = dead universes = no more community = death of OGame = less money

    Icho's proposal is actually meant to keep the 1st point longer (so more money), but removes the 2nd one, meaning "real" player will stay.

  • Let's be honest if they wanted more money out of Ogame. Theyre are PLENTY of better ways then this.

    Not only would those new ways of making money be Much more profitable. Would be less RISKY

    Because this attempt to keep more new users playing, is actually looking more like losing current users.

    Risk vs Reward? All of us at ogame.fr say, this Risk they are trying WILL cost them Current users.
    And Plenty of them at that.

    The only other theory I can think of is that. The announced Merger of old Universes is proving too costly, and therefore they are trying to sabotage Ogame all together by implementing the worst change possible and therefore just dismissing the mergers all together (By delaying them further and further and further)

    Afterall let's not forget Fusion Idea started is over 6 years Old. (When server population reached around less then 40% of its initial starting point, which includes the 1-2 thousand players under 1.000 points)

  • Francolino wrote:

    Please calm down with your words and sentences - No one is interested to read all your * . It's your decision if you want to discuss or not.
    Francolino, if you were doing a good job, we wouldn't complain (it's not against you personally, but against GF, and you are the one who is between GF and us. Too bad for you)
    You never listen to the community. You take decisions without any advice of OGame players. You think as noobs for the noobs, and only for the noobs.

    This f*** noob protection is an example. Another one is that you will merge universes in a non-empty one.

    Francolino, it's your role to tell GF they are shooting in their feet, based on remarks by OGame community (and not only the french one, since most of them are complaining).

    When I read your post, it means that you cannot tolerate any negative comment. That's great! No discussion = no issue. That's a way of thinking, but not mine.

  • Example by an Italian player.

    DEFENDER:

    New value ranking = 513.000.000 resources


    If the striker go in "old style" (rapport 20:1)

    STRIKER: 900 RIPs
    New value ranking = 9.000.000.000 resources

    Battle on Fight at [0:0:0]
    Result | Attacker wins (100%) | after ~ 6 rounds
    Debris Field 85.500.000 Metal (0%), 53.700.000 Crystal (0%) ~ 6.960 Recycler
    Moonchance Chance that a moon arises is 20%
    Losses Attacker 0 Metal, 0 Crystal and 0 Deuterium
    Losses Defender 940.060.000 Metal, 624.060.000 Crystal and 149.500.000 Deuterium
    Theoretic Plunder 0 Metal, 0 Crystal and 0 Deuterium ~ 0 Large Cargo
    Real Plunder 0 Metal, 0 Crystal and 0 Deuterium (100% Booty)
    Needed Fuel 0 Deuterium
    Flight times 00:00:00 h



    If the striker go in "new style" (rapport 5:1)

    STRIKER: 250 RIPs
    New value ranking: 2.500.000.000

    Battle on Fight at [0:0:0]
    Result | Defender wins (12%) || Draw (87%) | after ~ 6 rounds
    Debris Field 401.996.100 Metal (32%), 315.651.600 Crystal (32%) ~ 35.883 Recycler
    Moonchance Chance that a moon arises is 20%
    Losses Attacker 1.225.000.000 Metal, 980.000.000 Crystal and 245.000.000 Deuterium
    Losses Defender 378.937.500 Metal, 251.526.500 Crystal and 60.277.000 Deuterium
    Theoretic Plunder 0 Metal, 0 Crystal and 0 Deuterium ~ 0 Large Cargo
    Real Plunder 0 Metal, 0 Crystal and 0 Deuterium (0% Booty)
    Needed Fuel 0 Deuterium
    Flight times 00:00:00 h



    I hope that GF see above, because for destroy the defender 250 RIPs are not suff.
    A defenser with a big bunker and a medium fleets is impossible to destroy with this rapport 5:1

    Do you agree?

  • Dear player,

    Please keep in mind that we are not here to read insults and be targets for your annoyance. We are here to inform you, answer questions and take care about a lot of things around Ogame. But postings like the last ones are out of any sense.
    If you are sure about all those details about me, why you are posting in this board ?

    Well, respect the onliest rule of this board "Be pleasant and supports OGame and this Origin board and team." and go on.

    Regards, Francolino

  • spa856 wrote:

    I hope that GF see above, because for destroy the defender 250 RIPs are not suff.
    A defenser with a big bunker and a medium fleets is impossible to destroy with this rapport 5:1

    Do you agree?


    Yes, everyone agree here.
    At the moment, defense is not added to calculate the ratio, but this problem is well known for the gamedesign and in discussion, to solve this problem with turtles. A sensefull solution is of course to add for example 50% of the defense in the calculation.


    Here a current quoting from WeTeHa about this problem board.ogame.de/board410-ogame-…dex16.html#post1884176205

    WeTeHa wrote:

    Grundlegend kommt leider immer wieder die Angst davor durch, oder durch fehlendes lesen fälschlicher Weise die Annahme, dass genau dieses System schon zu 100% in Stein gemeißtelt ist und auch auf jeden Fall in alte Unis kommen wird, so wie es jetzt ist. Das ist aber eben NICHT der Fall. Daher sind Diskussionen über diesen Punkt eben auch weder zielführend noch sinnvoll.

    Natürlich sind wir hier um über das System zu disktuieren und mögliche sinnvolle Änderungen aufzuzeigen, vorgeschlagen wurden ja schon einige wie z.B.:

    - höherer Verbrauch bei Flucht
    - Def (prozentual) mit einrechnen -> Add (a percentage) of the defense in the calculation
    - Bunkerproblem "irgendwie" lösen -> Solve the turtle problem in any other way
    - generell andere Verhältnisse -> Change the current setting (1:10 attack ratio, 1:5 escape ratio etc ...)
    - evtl. Schutz nur bis Obergrenze -> Give a limit for the protection feature
    - ...

    Wir sollten uns aber auch genau darauf konzentrieren. Überlegen wie man es sinnvoll anpassen kann, sich auf dem Testserver anschauen wie es mit unseren Ideen funktioniert und was wirklich noch geändert werden muss, und dann schauen wir weiter. Ich denke offen für derartige Änderungen haben wir uns durchaus schon gezeigt.


    Please - The details and settings in the news are the current settings for the coming test universe. It's told that they are used to find out the best settings - Means, there is NO final decison about any detail right now. The onliest decision is, that this new feature comes to new universes.

  • Other example (first old style, second 5:1)


    STRIKER:
    140.000 LF
    65.000 HF
    35.000 CRUISER
    16.000 BATTLESHIP
    2.600 BOMBER
    5.000 DESTROYER
    5.000 BC

    DEFENSER
    19.900 LARGE CARGO
    10.000 DESTROYER

    Battle on Fight at [0:0:0]
    Result | Attacker wins (100%) | after ~ 3 rounds
    Debris Field 250.685.100 Metal (206%), 199.710.300 Crystal (386%) ~ 22.520 Recycler
    Moonchance Chance that a moon arises is 20%
    Losses Attacker 121.617.000 Metal, 51.701.000 Crystal and 4.222.000 Deuterium
    Losses Defender 714.000.000 Metal, 614.000.000 Crystal and 150.000.000 Deuterium

    -----------------------------------------------------
    STRIKER:
    36.400 LF
    35.000 CRUISER
    16.000 BATTLESHIP
    2.600 BOMBER
    5.000 DESTROYER
    5.000 BC

    DEFENSER
    29.900 LARGE CARGO
    10.000 DESTROYER

    Battle on Fight at [0:0:0]
    Result | Attacker wins (100%) | after ~ 4 rounds
    Debris Field 281.933.700 Metal (124%), 208.465.500 Crystal (257%) ~ 24.520 Recycler
    Moonchance Chance that a moon arises is 20%
    Losses Attacker 225.779.000 Metal, 80.885.000 Crystal and 15.097.000 Deuterium
    Losses Defender 714.000.000 Metal, 614.000.000 Crystal and 150.000.000 Deuterium

  • I must say as a New Poster Here.

    This is not a ''Discussion''..... this is more like people making points about this issue and not really any response...

    There are many valid points the community has made, I am interested to have an answer.
    First question I would like to see answered by Francolino.
    Do you play Ogame?
    The reason why I think this question is really important is because if you do not play ogame then I can understand your point of view as a third party perspective.

    I understand why this is so contreversial. After several years of ogame, adding a new ''Rule'' is kind of unstable as a proposition.
    Especially because this seems more like a punishment for higher ranking players for accumulation resources (Points) and massive fleets.

    And the Previous Posts involving calculations with fleet crashes with no Defense, and RIP really show how this is painful for large hits.

    I think even with 50% of defenses calculated into the mix.... 5:1 is really unfair.

    Francolino you say that this will help keep new users around more could you please give a small example of how this would work?

    I just want to give my Input on this reasoning. With the response that this type of update is creating. Would you agree that this will cause many players to Quit? Basically creating a trade off. And possibly losing many long time players (In my opinion a loyal player has more value to a game then a new user who has not a high level of attachment)

    You said that you are here to answer Question in regards to this issue.
    I would really appreciate if you could answer my three Red Questions.     It would go along way since so far, you are the only OGame representative who has been actually defending this update I have read posts from. (all OGame moderateurs have been saying they disagree with this type of update I have seen on ogame.org and ogame.fr forums)

    Sincerely,
    Tim Darville.

    And Please for the purpose of creating a discussion I would also ask everyone to not be hostile in this ''Discussion'' thread.
    Let's try and reason without hostility as I think that works against the players cause.

  • I won't argue because there is no use.

    Polish community is absolutely against this feature. Main complaints about fleets which escape automatically, killing flights for resources and no adavantage of being top 1 because he can attack top 100 and inactive only which is completely dumb.

    And promises that there will be no changes of noobprotection in old universes - no one believes it now.

    One more thing from me - there will be no chance to destroy someone's moon makers or small RIP fleets used to destroy our moons on weaker accounts. I know that they lose protection when attacking stronger players but to that moment, they are secured so they can just go ahead and fly to destroy our moons before they lose it.
    We have no way to avoid it by prevention.

    Just remember that Francolino is the one who has to tell us about it and all hatred will come on him because he is a messenger.

    But he had nothing to do with it. We all know how GF makes decissions, do they ask someone? No, neither You nor Francolino
    Do you really think that we as a community had some influence on these changes. And what was written in GF statements before that and before many other changes - that they read our complaints and try to avoid problems BUT
    Constructive criticism is always very important for us even though these threads often space out. We take those into consideration but also have to keep our plan for OGame in mind.


    We don't talk here just for fun but we had nothing to do with it, we can't fight with GF. There are some thinks which can't be changed through negotiations - for example attitude.