Bring back the power of moons

    • Maybe
    • Fleet, Defense and Combats

    • 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 speed, no farming at current speed, and no attacking at current speed. Overall that would be a big change.

      Since the problem, as you stated, is “just” (in this case) destroying moons, I think it's feasible to explain to the users that just that mission will be affected. I don't think there's a need to change the overall speed (other than you having problems on the programming side); and it's even logical that moon destruction will be slower since it needs more energy (blah, blah, blah). It's only one mission which is problematic, not the whole ship.

      And about the moon destructions, I haven't really thought about that. It would be great to have just an example of current % and what they would look like, so we don't have to calculate ourselves.

      NOTE: I don't get what's the reason for this obscurity. In the past you gave the equations of the game, I don't see a reason not to give the official ones so people could play with them. Why this change? In the past equations were publicly given and helped many of us build our strategies.

    • Flightspeed and Flighttime change the same with the formula. But forget the formula written there, it is just wrong^^ Your 3rd one looks pretty appealing to me from the results.

      Results for the destructionformulas:


      Always calculated with 1 Rip. 1x is the same as it is currently ingame.
      The formulas on Owiki are used in all tools and resemble the Ingame results perfectly. You probably don't want php-code that you don't understand^^

      Origin Admin
      OGame-Tech Chief

      The post was edited 2 times, last by NoMoreAngel ().

    • For me the formula change is a good compromise. It will take care of the higher economy mine production and so you need more tries to destroy the moon. Because also the Rip destroy % is changed it isn´t that evil.
      So, still waiting for feedback :)
      It´s your chance!

      LG
      Being a QA is sort of like being a goal keeper. People only talk about you when you’ve screwed up. We are the silent guardians of game development, and they will never have to thank us.

    • JoKy wrote:

      For me the formula change is a good compromise. It will take care of the higher economy mine production and so you need more tries to destroy the moon. Because also the Rip destroy % is changed it isn´t that evil.
      So, still waiting for feedback :)
      It´s your chance!

      LG
      This is where all the noobs then creep in. "We will take care of the higher economy mine production." Have you seen the amount of huge miners in top 10 throughout every universe? I don't think miners need to benefit at all from such a change. Making the safest playing style even safer is a big joke.

      I still am of the opinion if you're in a speed universe and you want your 9+ hours of sleep the universe is not for you. PERIOD. The flight time is not the problem. The lifestyle and joining the universe is the problem. Join a single speed server and you will never get MD'd.

    • The change is not designed for miners, don´t try to think in: "hat is a fleeter featuer" and "that is a miner feature".
      It should be a change to be more fair for everyone and the idea area here is not that you start shooting on each other.

      We can make the change available in the next update (6.3.2) and test it on the livetestservers.

      LG
      Being a QA is sort of like being a goal keeper. People only talk about you when you’ve screwed up. We are the silent guardians of game development, and they will never have to thank us.

    • 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 values to see how the % evolves depending on the number of deathstars. And also a few big values to see how the actual 99% probability moon destruction in fast universes would be which is also common to see in speed universes (usually around 200 deathstars in a moon destruction).

      But, I'm being unable to do that myself, because the moon destruction equation that you provided gives results above 100% of probability. Could you please provide the table? And may be a correct equation (sorry if it's my mistake). I add an attachment as suggestion
      ---

      And JoKy, what equations of all discussed are you going to implement?
      Images

      • Captura de pantalla 2016-09-13 a la(s) 12.46.01.png

        56.8 kB, 408×387, viewed 370 times

    • The change of MD and RD with the formula NMA provided :)

      First step will be to enable it on the livetestservers, so you can also try out.

      LG
      Being a QA is sort of like being a goal keeper. People only talk about you when you’ve screwed up. We are the silent guardians of game development, and they will never have to thank us.

    • 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 more deathstars. This is a change that I think will harm much more the smaller players. Even if the % is changed (still to see the correct equation), I don't think it should be this drastic because, again, this is just making the difference between powerful players and the rest even bigger.

      The idea of this thread was basically to remove in part such difference / power so that those in the losing side of the universe will not be bashed and attacked with the same abusive system as this one; and I don't see that change of moon % alone helping towards that direction...

      Please, could you provide a correct equation? And also, think about this...

    • Testing this on live test servers is pointless, because no one really "plays" there, they just "test". The effects of such a change will only be visible in live universes where people actually play.

      Now to the ideas: Changing the speed of moon destruction missions seem to be a good idea, BUT it takes away very much of the pace of a speed universe. FSing gets safer, yes, and that's a good thing, but also things like mobiling in and popping a moon to lock a failed ACS defense fleet or something gets impossible as well.

      Lowering moon destruction %s doesn't solve the problem either, cause the problem the TC describes only really exists if you annoy big fleeters, who want to see you down at any cost. So they will just send more RIPs but in the end the little fleeter still has to wake up every 1.5h at night and look after his fleet.

      And this is actually why I changed my opinion while typing this post. At first I wanted to defend the idea that something has to be changed regarding MDs but currently I'm unsure. Because there ARE ways to survive as little fleeter without vmoding and without sacrificing fleet availability or sleep. The problem described by the TC only exists if you really annoy some big fleeters and don't have friends that protect you. So it is something you chose yourself. If you annoy others, you will have a hard time and should be ready to wake up several times at night.

      As a normal fleeter you can get multiple FS spots (double moon systems), block them out, split your fleet on all moons in your FS spots. So if someone really pops all your moons (which is hard with the bashing limitation), he has to lanx 4 planets if you have two FS spots or even 6 planets if you have three of them. Additionally you can make fake activity while sleeping so someone who's watching doesn't know if you check your account at night or not. So if you don't annoy big fleeters, someone who wants your fleet will think twice before going for all your moons.

      The only thing that comes to my mind is that there are big ass fleeters who are jerks and just looking for reasons to get annoyed and spoil somebody's fun.

    • So, since this is going on testservers, I feel like answering once more...

      I will go over a few points and things that were said:

      Minion wrote:

      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 speed, no farming at current speed, and no attacking at current speed. Overall that would be a big change.
      I am sorry, but this basically disqualifies you for a constructive disuccsion on deathstars. Your opinion is more than biased and in no way have you used any >objective or rational< arguments. Your statement can easily be reduced to: "Deathstars are overpowered, I hate them, because now, fleeters can raid my defenses effectively".
      The next point I have to state out is: Why are you playing in a speed server? You sound like someone who wants and needs 2x speed or less?

      Slowing the deathstars in speeduniverses basically makes speeduniverses useless. OGame is not about being unattackable, but more about figuring out a playstyle that either makes you unattackable or makes the losses acceptable.

      I cannot repeat myself often enough: Why would you open a speedserver to reduce or even propose a reduction of speed?

      ---------------------
      Now for the balancing part: Ripping a moon is hard enough. We have moon defense, which consumes huge amounts of time and rockets. We have the possibilty to save well, even miners. A fleeter has to carefully analyze his victim, it s not like: "I will rip this guy, because I can" and then you get a fleet for free...works 1 out of 100 times, maybe less...
      What you want is a safe haven, where you do not have to worry about anything.
      ---------------------
      Another point you might want to discuss:
      Players who have been building fleets for years >deserve< to have a military advantage considering numbers. If you are behind in numbers it is your job to be ahead in thinking and strategie...it s not the game's job to even out the odds, when you couldn't keep up...
      ---------------------
      Before going any further considering the update, I also want to state out that a lot of players have huge online times, meaning slower deathstars would make them even stronger => they would be back online before you could attack them.
      ---------------------
      Now for the new feature...Changing the probabilities for MoonDestruction or DeathstarDestruction might be interesting, however the way it is done now means the following:

      You need to >>have<< more deathstars before thinking about a MD. Your losses will be considerably higher if you have bad luck, resulting in stronger players owning the necessary deathstars for a moon destruction and a big enough force in fleet to rip moons like before ( less losses in attack => more win to even out your losses while ripping ). The weaker players however will not be able to:

      1. destruct a moon

      2. mobilize enough fleet to even out possible losses


      All in all I would consider this change annoying. It would put even higher focus on the deathstar while slowing down weaker players.


      Sincerely,

      Lord

    • I'm OK with the idea to change the speed of the deathstars while destroying moons, but keep it in relation to fleet speed of the universe. It shouldn't affect the single fleet speed universes.

      I don't think that changing the percentages of moon destruction is a good idea, for the same reason as FuMAnChu wrote above. Destroying a moon is already hard enough for "small" players. It's also the only way to kill a "good saver". Don't make it harder.

    • I will be direct as I can
      a) Are you guys even playing fleeter accounts
      b) Do you guys understand math?

      Right now if I want to rip a Moon with the biggest size - I need around 40x2 Rips just to reach an overall probability of 95%

      Let's take a simple 8500 Moon into account:

      How on earth is this too much? You need two people to be sure that the Moon falls. (or more rips - but ogame is much about efficiency)
      In most cases you need to destroy more than one moon.

      If we are talking about three moons, you can do it hardly with three people, as long as their distance isn't too far away. But there's a big chance that one moon stands and that you lose ~25 Rips => which is a loss of
      125.000.000 Metall, 100.000.000 Kristall und 25.000.000 Deuterium
      At this Point the Fleet you want to kill should be around the Size of ~500kk Met, ~300kk Kris => 800kk => Which is a decent fleet already, but the only size with a promosing win.
      The thing you shouldn't forget is that you have to click for hours on a deployment mission, which makes everything harder, more costly and time consuming => Most people won't destroy moons below 1kkk Fleet Size (in Ressources)
      The cost for the attacker is:
      Iraks or another person to get rid of the Defense
      25 Rips - Having over 50 to begin with

      3 People

      18 Slots each => 54 Slots (which is also lost Ressources for raiding)

      Time - this is a big factor already. probably the limiting factor for most actions.

      Deuterium - if saved Propperly the attackers need at least three hours to click the deployment mission => ~3-5kk Deut

      Being close enough - time wise and phalanx wise


      The current costs for the Defender:
      save propperly - at 5kk fleet ~1kk Deut

      Build 10k Raks so rips cant burst through - 20kk metal

      Time wise: ~15 Minutes so the attacker can't tell where you saved from

      Slotwise: 12 Slots overall - no Loss in Ressources, since you won't be raiding, thus you are saving

      Wow the Relation is bullshit already. This is if we talk about just three moons (deployment mission save). I usually have around 10-13 Moons which I can save from, if played right the attacker can't tell and ripping 10 Moons is already hard as fuck. - You can see that ripping 3 is already hard enough

      Let's come to your numbers - 8500 size in 3x Speed ~3.68%


      Okay let's try to understand these Numbers
      If I play alone - my Chance for moon Destruction is around 20%

      So a miner can play completly alone
      He can use the marchant to get rid of his deuterium
      He can buy M.O.O.N.S to get moons
      But as a Fleeter I will rely on other people for 100% after this change. Why's that? Why is the game considiring miners as better persons than fleeters?

      Adjusting to the situation I would need 18 Rips to get the same Results as before:


      18
      18 Rips per Person - for three persons thats 54 rips for a chance of 87% for 1 Moon

      at three Moons we are at over 150 Rips which is a cost of
      350.000.000 Metall, 280.000.000 Kristall und 70.000.000 Deuterium
      Putting the "minimum" Fleet size on ~1kkk Met, 1kkk Kris => 2kkk Fleet at least.


      Now tell me two things:
      In which relation is that?

      The cost/time doesn't change for the defender. The attackers have to have 150 rips in the first place - which is a decent fleet already + enough fleet to destroy the defender, enough recyclers, enough time to click and so on. This is in no relation to costs of proper saving.


      This change would force fleeters just to destroy standing fleets. For a very long time you couldn't punish mistakes which are made while saving and even in the late game its too costly to rip one person, especially if you have to play alone for unknown reasons (guys the game is kinda dead, finding enough people in range to destroy some moon is hard)
      It would mean that ripping a miner, which made a mistake while saving astrophysic ressources isn't profitable enough and yet there is a high chance of the moon not falling.

      Coming back to my questions at the beginning:

      a) I do. and let me tell you two simple things:
      We don't go around and rip every moon, its not efficient and doesn't work. We rip at around 1-2kk fleet size => You would push wit hthe change to the same limit => the change is useless and just harms fleeters and their win + takes more time to build up to the point of playing with moon destruction
      Also I've seen moons stand for over 18 attacks. We had two moons now with over 20.
      In my experience a moon "tanks" between 9 and 14 attacks - but it's still luck based.
      Ripping alone is nearly impossible. Right now the costs of saving properly vs the costs of destroying a moon and finding a fleet are already not balanced too well. That change is one more step to destroying the fleeter playstyle for unknown reason.
      You seem to understimate the work of getting over 50 Rips, enough fleet, time, people and phalanx first.

      It costs much time to find the saving mistake.
      Then you have to verify that the mistake is real and not just a one time thing
      after that you have to invest hours, to get rid of the defense, fly to the moon and so on.
      This all comes with the time factor of building a big enough Fleet to destroy the person.

      It feels like most people here lost a moon, lost their fleet and blame the game.
      There is nothing in the game to blame - you saved wrong and that's why you lost your fleet.

      I can show you a 99% save savemethod, which will fool every fleeter out there and make you untouchable for moon destruction, since a normal alliance can't destroy over 10 moons at one time. - There are just not enough players/fleet slots in most universes in most alliances

      b) You clearly didn't do the math behind. It makes playing as fleeter more hard and not efficient at all. I don't play just to farm standing fleets and not being able to punish mistakes takes the fun away.
      It pushes moon destruction to a way later time in terms of universe age. A time at which many people already stopped playing.
      Overall it takes more fun away than it gives.


      PS: Just don't forget one more thing: If I rip someone and he saved on deployment, on the way back he can get defenders - which means we potentially lose 70 rips for nothing.

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

    • Again

      Please don´t think in black and white, fleeter and miner. It´s just wrong, totally.

      The main problem I figured out based on the user idea is:

      In speed universes you get e.g. 4x more resources as in 1x. Sounds logic. For that it is (to come back to the math part) 4x cheaper to destroy a moon. Just because there is no change on the Moon destruction part at all. If you loose there 1 Rip or more ... who cares. That´s why some ppl loose 14 moons in one night. Deathstars are there so speedy and as mentioned before it is very cheep there.

      So there are currently 3 ideas?

      Change the speed of deathstars at destroy mission
      change the moon destruction %
      and make a change on the mission itself

      Did I miss sth.?
      Being a QA is sort of like being a goal keeper. People only talk about you when you’ve screwed up. We are the silent guardians of game development, and they will never have to thank us.

    • Can I get an example for an account that got 14 Moons destroyed in one night? And also the number of players, the number of rips and how the enemy was saving?
      If people go into x-speed universes, they can't expect to have only the positive things from it while ignoring the negative ones (if I want high production, I have to agree on the risk of losing my moons faster)
      The whole idea makes the game slower.
      Why do you want to make this game even slower. Did you watch the trends, which apps or games are ahead on the profit lists? There aren't too many games that are slow as ogame (still) is.

      The Problem seems that people don't know how to play.

      If I have 14 moons, I should have at least one system for deployment mission. Recall, before the rips arrive => you are save.

      Your post sounds like a change is decided. I don't understand why the option "don't change anything" isn't on that list.

      How about a fresh idea:

      Changing Moon destruction % depending on the biggest fleets in the Universe.
      There's no reason to fuck over 75k players (ogame.de) because ~120 players are huge and can destroy moons easily.

      My idea:

      We check the Top 5/Top 10 - caution, not #1 - because often #1 in fleet has a good lead and shouldn't be punished for it :pillepalle:

      So, if #5 in Fleet has 50kk in fleet points we either use your formula or just half the %. The next step is at 100/150kk and so on.
      This would help a bit to counter the huge fleets and not fuck over most people, who don't even reach 10kk Fleet.

    • A change is not decided.
      It is the main idea of testservers to TEST :)

      The idea also comes from a user not from the evil GF.

      So continue your discussion. Stop flaming and trolling on each other and take care of how you discuss.

      LG
      Being a QA is sort of like being a goal keeper. People only talk about you when you’ve screwed up. We are the silent guardians of game development, and they will never have to thank us.

    • JoKy, I guess you are mistaking in a point.

      1. If I register in a 4x universe, I willingly accept that everything runs faster. That's why I go there...I want to feel the rush, when time is running short because everyone needs less time to attack. Limiting Moon Destruction is counterintuitive to the idea of giving players faster universes. As you said: 4x = 4 times more ressources = 4 times more fleet != 4 times the cost for Moon Destruction because then 4x is useless.

      You can have more ressources and better mines faster than in a 1x universe meaning everything develops even faster...which is good...OGame was fun in 1x universes, but I personally stopped playing 1x universes the moment I first played 4x, it's just way more entertaining for me.

      I see this feature as a limitation...an unnecessary one on top of that.


      When Rigel.De ( 4x / 4x ) was still live my alliance and myself attacked a really annoying and misbehaving player. We were 8 players staying up all night. We attacked 12x4 on every moon ( 12 ) meaning we needed 18 slots per person ( minimum ). Additionally we had to get rid of defense on several ( luckily not all ) moons. In the end: 9 moons fell, we lost a considerable amount of rips, the main moon did not fall and the guy saved his transportfleets well.

      We went out empty handed. We invested a lot of time, fun, ressources and would do so again, because a) he really saved well and b) bad luck sometimes happens, but a cheap increase in "bad luck" is just...annoying. It took the guy 1 day to replace his moon...it took us a week to get the ressources back, which we invested.

      I really hope good saving stays the only >real< way to defend against a rip, because you >>can<< protect yourself in multiple ways.


      Considering the criticsm you brought up. Yes, I have seen a lot of tickets in which players complained about stronger fleeters, but most of the complaints could be easily solved and traced back on a - most of the times huge - mistake of the defender.
      Just as examples:
      - Did not save at all
      - Thought his/her bunker would make saving unnecessary
      - Saved without moon
      - Did save, but always logs in 10 minutes after the fleet returns
      - Only comes online every 2 days to collect his/her mine production and is mad about a highly placed fleeter farming his/her production
      - saved Moon -> Debris Field on own Debris Field or from the same moon all the time
      just to name a few

      => Maybe you can do that in 1x universes...you should not do that in speed universes.


      As long as you cannot tell me and/or explain to me why someone cannot defend against moon destruction by playing correctly, I will be against this limitation.

    • I dislike parts of this change ALOT.

      Not the part of slowing down RIPs a LITTLE when they go for a destruction mission...this might help everybody to secure accounts more.. but the part with the changed percentage of MD and RIPloss is just meh and in conflict with the feedback we got from users for years. I agree with Lord and Fumanchu onto this topic. They are both experienced and know how the rabbit walks :P

      Currently we have some very old and very big accounts which can RIP any account without any real problem.. He dislikes your nose? Get ready to lose your whole moons the next night and while you drop into the abyss highscore he will not move even one place.
      With the new system and those percentages NMA did provide you make this situation even worse cause you make ripping for higher players more viable while smaller accounts suffer more than ever before. I would even say you make it kind of impossible to RIP for those smaller players in general.

      Just think of those guys who have 1k RIPs and compare them with those who only have ~100. Those with only 100 will suffer ALOT from just a few RIPs being destroyed while those big accounts have no problem to send more RIPs to avoid the RIP loss. OGame suffers from a scissor system (Very high accounts which nobody can really overtake anymore) for ages and that is the reason why I wonder how you could find the idea NMA provided accountable... fears me alot to be honest. It is a contradiction to what the players complained about for ages and just makes the scissor bigger... one complain here should not negate and overrule all the complains from the past and turn the situation upside down. Good to see this discussion got a little more popular before it really got live.

      And I agree with Helpless - changes like that can not be "tested" on the testservers because this is something which influences the players on live servers. Sure you can test whether or not those percentages work and everything runs smoothly but not whether or not this feature is good..


      From Germany with Love. :beer:

    • RiV- wrote:

      Please think about that it's already possible to survive against big fleeters.
      Not if you sleep, work or have a life outside the game.

      It's a game...nobody should have sleepless night for it...not every time at least...and maybe this change will push more people to fleet..

      P.s. this new formula doesn't save who has big fleet, but al least will stop the mooncrash for nothing, there's people with four, five moon destroyed for a bunch of empty cargo...

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Lord Katrosh ().