VM in top 5, plus issues/ideas

I agree with jessika. Fully, 100%.

Maru and Coll have no incentive to really join a fed as it lessens there ability to attack others. If the 5 member limit for declaring war was removed this would make it possible for individual marus/coll to pair up or act alone and essentially prey on larger feds.

in my opinion having smaller feds with full rights of war would make the game more interesting for all, especially since their would be outside deals to the rich empires to back some over others- like nations did for pirates before it was outlawed. And other interesting pairings could come up from any combination of races and play styles.

and to touch on the tb servers... as ive started to play them more i realize how little time it really takes so that if im playing rt for an hour i may aswell take 10 minutes and play the tb servers too; and new people might need to be reminded they get a ton of free start up turns from the artifact time things

real time and turn based at one time shared the same markets, it was not bad

Just thinking along the lines of it will increase player base in TB servers? Since developers spend time in putting mineral/food bots anyway, why not let these servers be self sufficient. More activity as well.

If they have both servers, they get to pick only 1 empire? (Though looking at ranks, a lot do play in multiple servers)

Really just tossing ideas for discussion, I am relatively new to thiis game...

And what exactly would such a "merge" mean for people that have accounts on both servers, exactly? Would they get special treatment in playing two empires at once? Or would they get a special transfer of all resources and spent research from one account into the other? What if the accounts are different races?

I ask these questions because I feel a "merge", in the conventional sense, would take too much developer resources (eg "Time" and "sanity") better spent in other areas.

How about merging normal/slow, as one, then and rt fast ultra, then do something similar to uc where turns are variable?

Personally, I don`t think that removing 100% fleet is the way to go for dealing with high PR VMers. The issue is that you often want to have a fleet for when your VM ends so that you aren`t a free win. I`d say set the fleet to a certain amount that corresponds to the base PR (no more than 10x base) that is either pre-determined, or is cut off what you have build at the moment. This saves people time so they don`t have to build defensive VM fleets if they`re in a rush, and it can`t be abused to build fleets fast (at least at RT speeds) because you have to give up at LEAST 3 days to build instantly.

a nice dirty project. sounds like EW is going to the red light district of GC :O.. .... so whats the word on is this going to be put into practice take away peoples fleet or wat

"end up supplementing an income below a certain housing infrastructure"

I meant above. I mean with a high enough housing infrastructure, a Guard could (in theory) decide that it`s more fun to remain explorable.

At the end of the day, it`s really hard to answer your question EW without doing a quantitative behindysis of theoretical incomes that could be obtained at different housing levels. Naturally, this takes a lot of time, which we already know is very valuable to EE and BW.

Instead of making EE or BW use up valuable time to try to answer this question that could be used elsewhere, I propose that you do a bit of quantitative behindytical leg work. Take the current formula for plunder and tax income and apply it to a Guard for a theoratical c1 of 1500 land. I propose using housing levels of 25 (newb), 50 (vet), 100 (expert) and 150 (godly). You would have two tables (current modifier vs proposed modifier). You would then answer the following questions:

How much income does a Guard make per turn with a 1500 land cluster with 50 loyalty at housing levels of 25, 50, 100 and 150? How much cash would this same guard make at these levels if they instead plunder this cluster, accounting for the cost of ore (15M credits)? How many turns would it take to reach this cash level if the guard had decided to simply earn the income?

Do this for both current levels of plunder, and levels of plunder after the modifier is applied. Several tables might actually be recommended for plunder modifiers of -75%, -50%, -25%, 0% and +100% (just for funzies).

Please use tables for actual illustration and then present your behindysis. If you do this, you might make an actual case for changing the plunder modifier for guard. :)

ANY plunder related income is not viable. There was once a time where the target list was so rich that even plunder collective was a thing (a reason, in fact, that my collective empire way back in the day had 20 housing research on it), but no longer.

As far as guards tho, we have to be careful that going a plunder route won`t end up supplementing an income below a certain housing infrastructure (what is not viable for other races could be extremely viable for guardian). I say set the modifier to -50% so that it measures up with Terran race and see how it goes.

Top 5 VM`ers are evil po.opy pants who must be stopped !

indeed i have

you`ve seen E class wigglytuff E class proposal thread

i see lol :p ... okay i`ll have to make do with the current set of ships then

i said Will Be not that they`re already done, most i assume will be done by GC public and sent to us for approval though i`m sure we have some old ones in dusty files some where

*Throws a N.Banana at Wigglytuff

new ships !!! :p i like new ships