Ok so first of all we want to address vming in the next few days on GC, what`s going to happen is VMer will be ignored as far as ranking goes, they`ll still be visible yet they will not count for as far as the top 5 bonus goes, also if someone VM`s you`ll be able to free yourself from your master without admin intervention
now what we want your opinions on are these issues
Should Vming kill a portion of your fleet, to stop VM building, we were thinking 50% but we`ll let the number be up to you guys we can do anything from 90% to 0
Another issue to stop chain VM we could make it so that your empire has to be out of vm for x amount of time before you can revm, we were thinking of 24 hours at the least, meaning 48 hours on the faster servers so that you`ll have to wait 24 hours outside of your free dp period for times over 7 days and of course 72 hours on slow and normal. We`ll let it be your call.
Please discuss these and lets try to agree on some numbers within the next few days
sorry forgot to add, we also want to know if you think the top 5 bonus should ignore those in dp as well since we`re messing with it we can make that happen
Edited by EphemeralEternity on 2016-04-05
we want your opinions PT I
Started by EphemeralEternity
· 05/04/2016 · 12:55 AM
· 81 replies
· 4 reads
If you get no turns when you come out of VM, then you are going to be in a seriously weak position and could loose borders etc very easily, especially since everyone seems to want to remove your fleet. The current 24 hours dp + turn generation and the end of a 7+ vm is fine. It`s not like you can build a massive fleet with only 1 day out of 8`s worth of turns.
Can the VM rules be different for the turn based servers? because the way this is going VM is going to be empire death on the turn based servers, except explorable empires.
Can the VM rules be different for the turn based servers? because the way this is going VM is going to be empire death on the turn based servers, except explorable empires.
As Pete has said, anything from 50-90% should work solidly. And of course top 5 should be only players out of DP.
If everyone doesn`t want Chain VM`ing to end, then I think I agree with KoB - You get no turns until your DP ends, not 24 or 48H before.
If everyone doesn`t want Chain VM`ing to end, then I think I agree with KoB - You get no turns until your DP ends, not 24 or 48H before.
Chain VMing should defiantly be allowed, no delay between activating different VM`s. Life happens and you don`t want to loose your empire because of it, especially on the turn based servers.
killing fleet when you VM, can it be limited so that say scouts and starbases don`t get destroyed?
killing fleet when you VM, can it be limited so that say scouts and starbases don`t get destroyed?
If you VM you loose 75% of your fleet fixing the top 5 issue and if you are in dp in the top 5 the top 5 bonus goes to the person not in dp
VMed chain is not an issue if it`s taking 75% of there fleet away people won`t be unless needed
VMed chain is not an issue if it`s taking 75% of there fleet away people won`t be unless needed
O
Omegian
Hmm, if the empire is a tax empire, that would be a valid point for a turn based empire more so than an RT server. Building only x amount of turns from no fleet for a tax empire would be a huge disadvantage for that empire.
E
Eroberer
vming without a fleet could harm a hoarder, just seems like it would be excessive....why not base it on a factor of base pr? limit vm to only say, x4 base pr. that way you`ve got a fleet to defend yourself when you come back but you`re not going to be mucking about the top ranks.
Good idea but an easier solution would be to not allow someone to activate VM with a fleet at all. This way no hoarding top spots and everyone will know its legitimate use of Vacation mode.
Top ten then. Twenty. Add a digit. Problem solved. 800mil is reaching a bit anymore though.
E
Eroberer
i think any vm should wipe out 90% of fleet... what happens if 5 buddies build up to 800m and you go 799 then vm when you`re at 6? seems like just basing it off top 5 would have a work around....
Every server reset, those in vm lose enough fleet to be knocked out of top 5. Also, make enslavement escapable from 2-3x instead of 10x.
I agree, endless VM is ok, like it has been said life happens and VM is necessary. Vming to escape counters and hits on a UW fleet isnt, those need to be dealt with as I feel those are more of and issue than someone who has a busy life. Top 5 VM, you lose 90% of fleet. Counters stay active through a VM.
Endless vm is fine. If you VM to protect your UW fleet then your fleet should be taken away. Also vm should go into effect like 24 hours after you activate it so that you can`t Vm to protect planets. Then you can take away the 24 hour after attacking rule. Abuse solved without punishing those who need vm for various reasons
need to increase commercial econ now due to ship costs increase
if you vm in top 5 it should remove 75% of your fleet, thus removing you from the top 5 and solving both problems? also just make it so when you vm for more then 7 days you come out of dp at the end not into a 24 hour dp with turn regen.
O
Omegian
Agreed with Pete`s sentiment
Also, please add, enslavers who vm lose all enslaved empires. It`s still being abused on turn based servers.
How will top 5 work for someone in DP who has a fleet or partial fleet that will be used to scout? I assume if there are 5 people above him or 4 he can attack like it is top 5? If that is the case, wouldn`t that make it top 6 for the split second he attacks?
Also, please add, enslavers who vm lose all enslaved empires. It`s still being abused on turn based servers.
How will top 5 work for someone in DP who has a fleet or partial fleet that will be used to scout? I assume if there are 5 people above him or 4 he can attack like it is top 5? If that is the case, wouldn`t that make it top 6 for the split second he attacks?
W
wingnut
PP nailed it.
I have the same opinion as stargaters and PP
A
Ankaar
Agree with stargaters on the counters. Would love to see a system in which VM also puts counters on hold.
I agree with PistolPete on this, all of these are good ideas except for the chain VM. Life happens, and it generally takes precedence over the game. The only other thing I`d like to see changed with VM is to incorporate some sort of system for dealing with counters in VM. I don`t like that you lose a counter when someone VMs a day or two after hitting you.
- Remove VM`ers from top 5 - good idea. If they stay visible in ranks, make it clear what is the "real" top 5 then, if possible.
- Kill fraction of fleet when VM`ing. Good idea. Anything from 50% - 90% could work. Just make it so that it can`t reduce stack sizes below 1.
- Stop Chain UW. I dont like the idea. Because i dont really think its a problem for the game. People have busy and less busy times, and I think it should be possible to to put this game on hold whenever needed.
- Kill fraction of fleet when VM`ing. Good idea. Anything from 50% - 90% could work. Just make it so that it can`t reduce stack sizes below 1.
- Stop Chain UW. I dont like the idea. Because i dont really think its a problem for the game. People have busy and less busy times, and I think it should be possible to to put this game on hold whenever needed.
Page 4 of 5
Reply
⚠
You must sign in before you can reply.
Sign in to the game and come back — the forum uses your game account.
Sign in to the game and come back — the forum uses your game account.