Bring back the power of moons

I already explained how it is possible to survive without sacrificing sleep

I guess you are misunderstanding.
Most of the good fleeters I know are in V-mode because they want to be free of OGame when they are not playing. All of them like to play the game and after 1 or 2 days they want to have 1 or 2 days off, without having to do a single click, that s why they v-mode.

Considering the annoying part:
- players who keep calling you a "no-lifer" or "dumb" or even worse
- players who try to attack you with 1 ship to make the warning sign show up
- players who "steal" your earned debris by boosting recs

Apart from that: I wonder why so many complain about that...it never happened to me and I did not keep my head down while I was playing.

And exactly this was addressed earlier already. If someone wants to have a goodnight's sleep then a speed universe is not the right choice for you. Join a universe that fits your lifestyle.

How about simply reverting the VMode change. It enables the less powerful (in military terms) to be more flexible and they always have the choice to remain active or go blue.

yeah i read...split the fleet and activity...great ideas...

And exactly this was addressed earlier already. If someone wants to have a goodnight's sleep then a speed universe is not the right choice for you. Join a universe that fits your lifestyle.

When i started i was nineteen...ten years ago, what should i do? throw everything just cause i'm married, i found a job and started to appreciate sleep?

I strongly agree with the notion that moons are too weak at the moment
I wouldnt lower the chance of losing rips - it should stay the same at all speeds.
the desctruction percentage shouldnt get as low as suggested
for 2x/3x I would divide the percentage by 1.5 and for 4x and up by 2.0


to make up for the more difficult moonrips get rid of saving via colonize (eg. colony ships can only be sent alone)

good idea and fast implemention
I hope this wasnt the last time we saw something like that and this board finally gets used in the way it always was intended to be

The way you present it sounds like you would do fleeters, especially the ones that will destroy your moons, a favor by removing colony save. You're doing the exact opposite. First you make moons stronger and then you teach the uncareful ones to fleetsave properly, because deployment will be the only real viable option. If you bring up DF save now you probably deserve to lose your fleet .

So in your case, players would have to spend endless hours ripping a moon just to see every noob deployment saving anyway? No thanks. Why don't you deploy to begin with and keep everything as it is?

No, the time you spend is the same, simply you have to send an adequate numbers of rips.

Now is embarassing...

this must be a big joke

last months i lost my fleetsave moons 2 or 3 times with my fleet there and did not lost my ships! and i always sleep my 7/8 consecutive hours!

If you want Deathstar slower you must try 1x fleet speed universes. if you gonna play fast universes you need to take the risks of that, not only the benefits!

If you dont wanna lose your ships:basicly LEARN OGAME ,YOU WILL LOSE SOME SHIPS FOR THAT!

There are so many tactics to not lose your fleet after losing a moon:
you can switch your fleet save spot often
you can bunker up your moons
you can do good fleetsaves, (find someone to teach you that)
do long fleets, i always wake up 2/3 hours before my fleet save ends, this way i have time to prepare something if i lost my moons.

so many other ways to confuse the atackers, but you just want the easier, make impossible to put moons down, make the offensive part of game a waste of time!

if this idea goes ahead i will be one of the hundreds that will leave this game, then you can replace us with noobs and play Ofarmville with them -.-

keep going, you will destroy this game definitely

Lord Katrosh, please read this post and see why changing the amount of rips needed hurts smaller players more than bigger ones, or rather players with more rips.

Hi
I think the change of the mooncrash formula it's not a good idea (my nickname refers to that not to the bugfix and other features in the 6.3.2)
in the 1x fleet speed universe there are not mooncrash,because the rips are slow....the same in the 2x fleet speed universe,it's hard to mooncrah a moon,easier than the 1x fleet speed obviously, but still hard
in the 4x and 5x speed fleet it's quite easy,and maybe only in these universes the mooncrash formula has to be changed.What do you think??
I would like the mooncrash formula to be the same for 1x/2x/3x fleet speed universes or better for 1x/2x fleet speed (easier mooncrash than now) and a bit difficult for the fastest universes like 4x and 5x fleet speed ones (maybe the change of the formula could be applied to that ones only).
Otherwise, in my opinion, with this feature mooncrash will not be used again,too many losses of rips,the fleetsave will be impregnable with a careful defender.The deployment from moon to moon will be impregnable.I mean without many rips lost.If the defender has a big fleet and is also protected by a good alliance it's not good to change the mooncrash formula in my opinion.
Do you agree?

No answer so far

So most people seem to be against the changes suggested by the GF
The Thread starter wrote me private that he dislikes the suggested changes and hope they won't pass.

Can we discuss the idea of having a different approach later on, when RIPs really don't seem to matter that much (50kk + in Fleet)
Or is this idea also "bad"?

Now I know that the User who started the sugg here and others in many OGame Communities aaaand NMA and Me are GF. *note it down :D*

I think still we need a change in high speed universes to make it harder to crash a moon, just because the cost and the risk doing it does not scale.
Deathstars are way too cheap and reach target in short time, so players loose many moons and the main fleet during sleep. That´s maybe also a reason why many doing vmode saving.
It´s just a balancing issue.

We will remove the change and you can figure out a different solution for it

Continue discussing and working out ideas. As you can see, here on Origin you get direct feedback from the OGame Project Team!

Hint: A change can also be connected to a research or PREMIUM!!!!! *troll*

LG

ERMAHGERD GRAVITON RESEARCH!!!11

Well that guy had an idea, but the suggestions came clearly from your side

About a "needed" change. If I decide to play on a Universe with more speed - I gotta live with the consequences and not just the positive parts.

I really don't see the need to change it according to speed. It changes the game completly.

Good news JoKy Dealing with these issues in a static way will not work out.

The only real workaround would be to teach everyone to save correctly.

However, to start up a new idea...PLS DONT IMPLEMENT IT INSTANTLY...What about a really slow increase in Deathstar destruction chance if you try to rip a x-times weaker target.

Conditions:

- This rule only applies to players with fleets that are 1/4 or smaller compared to your own fleet.
- This rule only applies to players whose fleets are smaller than 20kk points!!!!! or even 10kk points....
- Moon-destruction chance is unaffected
- Deathstar-destruction chance will be multiplied with the following:

(deathstardestructionchance)*[1+(1.1-1.1*exp(-0.05*attackermilitarypoints/defendermilitarypoints))]

Looks like the following:






This would make it more expensive for stronger players to attack weaker players or rather to rip their moons, however THIS is FAR from >>fair<<. I've always seen OGame as a game where skill acutally matters...implementing something like this would decrease the importance of your own knowledge about the game.
This formula's advantage is, that it only changes the win a player can get out of an attack, it does not change the chances of success.

Just because I posted this, doesnt mean I want this to make it into the game. Please discuss in a constructive way.

What most people don't get is this: Every "solution" that includes a chance is not a solution. No fleeter will FS his >100M fleet if there is the slightest chance that his fleet will go down. These people don't keep their fleets for years for no reason. They keep it because they don't leave their fleet to "chance".

So the solution has to adress the "time" issue. Waking up every 1.5h to guarantee that the fleet survives is inhuman IMO. So we need to expand these 1.5h to something which is doable but not so easy that you can FS and go off for 8h+ without worrying about your fleet.

I've spent the past couple of days reading this thread, talking to friends and fellow OGamers about it and floating different ideas and what follows is the result of my pondering.

I want to issue the following disclaimer that I feel is important for people to know as they're reading this thread and my suggestions.

I am currently rank 2 in Quantum.org with a military score of 460m points and if I were to fs it would cost me 136m deut as of today on a 10% deployment mission. However, I choose to vmode because of this cost as well as the inhumanity of having to wake up like RiV- just mentioned to preserve my fleet. I can say as a fact fleeters at my level don't take ANY chances.

In regards to the current ideas:

The whole purpose of this idea was to make OGame more advertising to play on a daily basis instead of hitting the vmode button for safety.

So, with that in mind, here are my ideas. The following ideas are directly related to MDs and moons in general.

1) Reduce the amount of rips that can fire it's cannon on an MD mission to 1.
2) Don't alter any of the current % for moons being destroyed (in their current format(which is something i'm also going to address))
3) Introduce ACS MD missions so a friend can add a rip to your rip to increase the chance of your MD being succesful

4) Introduce a new feature of weapons tech that increases the chance of an MD by a small percentage*2
5) Introduce a new feature to graviton technology OR a new building on the moon*1

*1 6) This new building would be a shield that has the sole purpose of defending your moon against the destructive power of the graviton cannon. This building (shield) can be deployed only once in a 20 hour period from the start (the same way a JG functions) and this shield reduces the % of a moon being destroyed by a certain %

The % of this I haven't figured out but the idea of it would be to offer an increased defence option for your moon whilst you fs OR to outright block any graviton cannon. As previously said this would only be used once in a 20 hour period (not 24 hours so you have the flexibility of going to bed sooner or later depending on where life takes you if you wish to activate this before your fs)

The building/shield would be deployed instantly but would create a "pulse" that would be detectable by an aggressor if they looked for it. This pulse would occur within 1-2 hours of you deploying your shield (meanwhile the shield is active) so an aggressor can't pin down exactly when it was deployed (and when you fsed). This would function in a similar fashion to how the activity * works and how defenders can hide themselves by masking activity.

*2 The purpose of this is to not completely take away all advantages a higher ranked player has. This is meant to signify the development of their account but at the same time not completely put them in a different ballpark to everyone else so the % difference would function similarly to the way plasma technology now works for increased resource production. My initial thought was to have this set at 0.25%


This is a feature that is somewhat related to MDs but at the same time could be treated otherwise and I may make a new thread to support this idea.

7) Cooldown on defences being rebuilt on a planet/moon after an attack has taken place. I believe this cooldown should last in a similar fashion to the way JGs work so 12 minutes (for example) but to reflect higher shipyard and nanite levels I believe the cooldown period could be reduced.

The idea for this came about when I was thinking about how having a single rip for an MD would significantly nerf any chances of an MD on a defended moon (because defence builds back instantly and can easily block a 1 rip MD (or as many rips as there are being ACS'd). Then I considered the possibility of having a cooldown on defences being rebuilt so this could be avoided. As well as this I also considered the actual legitimacy of defences being rebuild in an instant. No-where else in the game could you get 700k rocket launchers for example coming back from a combat immediately and in a "real life" scenario defences wouldn't be rebuilt this quickly anyway. I also considered the way wreck fields and the space dock now works and how there is a cooldown period there so why not for defences too? The obvious drawback to this is that defence is dead and it can't block any followups etc but there are two counters I'd make to this. Firstly, in any other combat simulation or real life scenario if a series of defences were destroyed the pillaging/followups would occur as a secondary feature. This is still limited too as there is a bashing limit of 6 and defences still need to be destroyed. However, this would greatly enable my previous idea of having 1 rip MD runs and I believe it makes more sense anyway.


These are the current ideas I have and they continue to be discussed but I wanted to present them here too so they could be argued for and against and developed further as a result. As I mentioned at the beginning I believe the costs of flights need to be addressed too and this could be done via the graviton idea that was tested or other ways such as a reduction in relation to your hyperspace technology level as mentioned in a suggestion in .org and I believe .de too.

After having few discussions in private/on IRC, I think it is important to agree on the problem that needs to be adressed before we discuss specific ideas, because the different opinions on this topic result mainly from different views on the game itself. It would help if GF could give us their opinion on this. In my opinion, the problem that needs adressing and also the problem the TC is trying to solve is what I want to explain in the following:

We can distinguish between "mainstream fleeters" and "top fleeters". Top fleeters usually have more than 60% of their points in fleet and have spent years to build those fleets. This kind of fleeters are the minority in all universes. If it happens that they lose their whole fleet, they tend to quit the universe/get another account, because they lose the main part of their account and rebuilding those fleets takes months/years. The size of fleets I'm talking about here is >100M points in fleet.

Mainstream fleeters, however, have a more balanced distribution between mines and fleet and also they tend to stop building fleet when their fleets reaches a certain size. For this kind of players, their fleet is not the main part of the account and they can rebuild it quite quickly when they get crashed (even more so thanks to the WF), and this doesn't happen too rarely. The fleet size of these players is about 20-40M points in fleet.

In my opinion, those players which I describe as "mainstream fleeters" don't need any more protection. They can FS quite safely by having multiple FS spots (DMSs) and/or splitting their fleets for example. The probability that they actually get crashed because of MDs is quite low and this is enough to give them sufficient security that they actually FS. If someone then really bothers, MDs them and crashes their fleet, they can quickly rebuild. So a fleet loss is not necessarily a game breaker.

But it's significantly different with the so called "top fleeters". These players keep their fleets for years and that's not without reason. It's because they're dedicated players who do not leave their fleets to "chance". So it is obvious that these players won't FS like a mainstream fleeter and go off for 8 hours, no matter how low the chance of losing their fleet is. So there are only few possibilities for them to FS:

1. Being part of the dominant force of the universe and actually sleeping in peace.
2. Using vmode to FS and also actually sleeping in peace.
3. Waking up and checking multiple times at night to avoid MDs.
4. Deploy the fleet while you're online/awake/can check your account and recall before going to bed.

If you are in group 1, there is absolutely no problem for you. But if you aren't, for example if you sign up in an old universe and try to get to the top, you will have a hard time.
Now this is the part where I/we need the opinion of GF, so we can discuss solutions that fits their plans. In my opinion, option 2-4 are all flawed.
The problem with option 2 is obvious, I expect GF to be wanting their customers play at a daily basis and not every other day.
The problem with option 3 is that it's inhuman, especially in 4-5x speed universes, to have to wake up multiple times in the night for a game.
The problem with option 4 is that if you are working for example from 8am to 4pm, you have time from 4pm to 12am to play, but you have to send your fleet at 4pm on deploy and recall it at 12am so it returns at 8am when you're online again, only to FS it again until you're back from work.

So we need to agree or disagree on these problems first before we discuss any solution, because we can't find a solution for a problem we disagree on.

My opinion is as follows: Every top fleeter I know belongs either to group 1, used options 2-4 to become (a part of) group 1 or is still using options 2-4. So this needs adressing. Of course being a "top fleeter" needs time. But everyone who has enough time to make use of a fleet in the size of a "top fleeter" should be able to play this play style. If I have enough time, but can't wake up multiple times at night and because of this can't play this style, there is something wrong. For me, "having enough time" doesn't include "being able to wake up multiple times at night". Otherwise only students and people without a job could be "top fleeters". This is wrong IMO.
Now of course there shouldn't be the possibility to click just one button and be 100% safe. It needs something that is "hard" to do and "hard" in OGame means either "time" or "skill". Following questions need to be answered:
- Can we expect from players that they stand up at night to check OGame at all? Is this appropriate, considering most modern games make you invulnerable as soon as you log off, or at least don't provide the possibility to destroy years of work?
- Is it realistic to expect that OGame adapts to modern games and changes in such a radical way, that the possibility to destroy years of work while being offline is no longer possible?
- If we (have to) keep it as it is, would it suffice to reduce the amount of times somebody has to wake up? Would it suffice to give a player more time, so he has to only wake up 1, 2, 3 or n-times?
- Then, should years of work be destroyable if the fleeter doesn't make any mistakes while FSing?
- Can we think of a new FS method that needs skill, that is hard to master and has many possibilities to make an error while performing (even if you mastered it), but is 100% safe if done flawlessly?

I'd appreciate some thoughts on the mentioned problems and on these questions, especially directly from GF.