EphemeralEternity
2016-04-05 |  | we want your opinions PT I |  |
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 |
|
Global}{Galactica
99+ day(s) ago | I like it too.. especially the VM queue |
americanministry
99+ day(s) ago | Good work here. Should stop some vm abuse |
Asmodean
99+ day(s) ago | I like it. |
wingnut
99+ day(s) ago | Agreed. |
EnderWiggin
99+ day(s) ago | Literally all of that sounds good. |
EphemeralEternity
99+ day(s) ago | Alright I think we`ve reached the point where we can move forward on this, from what I see the general feelings I get are as follows and what we will try to do
First off Vming will not set your pr to 1.5k, there`s no need.
Vmed empires will be excluded from the top 5 bonus. All vmed empires will still be visible on the ranks and in the place where they should be on the ranks but the ranking numbering system will bypass them and their accounts darkened or some other system which will make it easy to show who is in vm at a glace, why do this so there`s no surprises when someone comes out VM and hits you and you had no idea they were there because their PR didn`t show
Slaves will be able to free themselves, the slave need only see their master in VM and no matter the pr press the button to free themselves and system will check and allow them to be free just as if the enslavers pr was 10% of the slaves.
Next PR loss, I think the general safe number should be 50% not so bad but annoying non the less, along with BW system of allowing you to be within lets say 6x of your base pr on rt and 8x of your base pr on TB without losing any pr along with the warning to drop to x pr or lose fleet.
Vming if BW can manage it will work like this, you can vm when ever you want, so if something comes up and you gotta go for a while right then and there. however if you`ve attacked anyone within 24 hours you`re vm will not kick in until after that 24 hours, you will be able to use turns up until the vm kicks in how ever if you attack anyone the VM queue will end and you`ll have to re initiate VM
while you are in vm you will be able to log in at any time and extend the vm yourself no matter how much time you have left on the vm there will also be longer time options for vm this being said there will be no measures taken to stop chain vming
also we didn`t mention counters since that`s a different area entirely but BW is going to look into it and we`ll see about making |
TranquilSuns
99+ day(s) ago | I factored food, not sure if bw sim takes goods into account so yeah might be off on that. |
TheBlueKnight
99+ day(s) ago | That is not clean income
All the income types listed below have additional expenses except guardians. After food cost miner as described below only be making a clean 5 million per turn not factoring in cg`s for any race |
TranquilSuns
99+ day(s) ago | Ok, ran a couple sims to help out.
Using food @10, 50k land.
Guard income sustains about 9mil fleet.
Terran (Agri)~7-8mil
Viral (tax)~6-7mil
Miner (tax)~15mil
So, was way off on allowable miner land, but I hope you kind of understand where we are coming from with this. |
Ankaar
99+ day(s) ago | I still dont get it.
How is exploring by land so different by exploring by planets that you need to change income and upkeep? |
Omegian
99+ day(s) ago | If you stralightline the land amount, say everyone gets a ceiling of 100k land to use, and after that you cant explore. You have to adjust incomes/ship upkeeps and possibly other racials to make it worthwhile. That is what I am saying. |
Ankaar
99+ day(s) ago | Im really confused why you guys think some races should be able to explore more land.
As it stands right now, every race can explore pretty much the same planet count. Assuming we are all keeping approximately the same size planet, that means we can all explore to about the same sized land.
If we change it to land based exploration, I would assume the end result would be the same - that everyone can explore to about the same land total we can now if we kept 8/900+ planets.
If all thats changing in this scenario is exploration being based on land instead of planet total, theres absolutely no reason that we would need to give some races the ability to easily explore more land than others - we dont currently allow some races to explore more planets than others do we? Other than maru and coll of course. |
Omegian
99+ day(s) ago | Then you have to straightline their upkeeps ank as well and not just their incomes. Income is part of the equation to a balanced race, ship upkeep and how the market affects that race`s income potential is also a factor (e.g a gaurdian w/o cgs versus w/ cgs) |
Ankaar
99+ day(s) ago | I think land should be kept exactly the same among races if this was how exploration was to go.
Keep land equal and adjust economy and income - which is basically what we have now - most races can explore to about 50 good sized planets quite easily. So lets say we make it land based, youll see 50k land done quite easily with about 70-80k done before exploring gets quite hard at most incomes.
If you make land exploring unbalanced, where one race can say get 150k and another can only get to 50k, even if their incomes even it out, then youll end up with a great income race taking a solid land cluster and just blasting off with it |
Omegian
99+ day(s) ago | Depending how the economies of each race is tweaked, their current ship upkeep, and other income potential factors, certain races should have more or less land than others. But that is another topic in itself since that is still being studied internally by the staff. |
TranquilSuns
99+ day(s) ago | Just noticed it.
Like I said it can be tweaked, and I just threw those numbers out there to start the conversation. miner are getting slain with their ship upkeep so I kind of took that into account as land goes (and there has also been mention of "fixing" their tax income as well...)
May have miffed guard a bit. If I`m honest, I have the least experience with the almighty guard. But just glancing at these figures, they should probably be at least doubled lol. |
Ankaar
99+ day(s) ago | And I responded to that when you posted the first time :P
Why would you allow one race to explore more land than another, outside of maru or coll? |
TranquilSuns
99+ day(s) ago | gordos I believe will be getting their nerf soon as well. Artis in general. |
TranquilSuns
99+ day(s) ago | I`m mostly in agreeance with you, though I know it would piss off a lot of people at this point. I posted this idea on an unrelated thread, but it kind of holds weight with this discussion so I will repost.
Miner explorable to 70k land, or 120 planets whichever is first.
Terran explorable to 50k land or 60 planets whichever is first.
Viral to 50k land or 60 planets whichever is first.
Guardian to 40k land or 30 planets whichever is first.
Marauder to 25k land or 25 planets whichever is first.
Collective to 15k land or 20 planets whichever is first.
These of course with the current economies in place would solve a lot of the issues that are brought to light so often. Also tweaking with the numbers could be done as these are just quick numbers that I thought up. Another thing is that with these thresholds, we could essentially get rid of scouts and have exploring be more of a research based aspect of the game. So that your next colony explored would depend on your land/colony count. From 1 turn-40 turns or something.
So there you go. Just a thought. |
Ankaar
99+ day(s) ago | Id be more than happy to have gordo`d planets be eliminated or nerfed so that hoarding is the more beneficial way to go - sicne it does carry more risk, and gordo`d planets dont carry any risk at all, then obviously gordo`d planets should be weaker.
nerf gordo`d planets to the point where hoarding is better. I want to prevent all means of hiding worthwhile planets from being taken. As long as people can vm, build up on day 7 and strike when theyre ready, Ill call it abuse.
As long as people can gordo 100k+ land on a single planet and hide it behind a dozen borders, Ill call that abuse as well.
Theres literally no point playing the game if you cant gain any benefit from hitting other players. |
