Archaeoptyrex
2009-08-13 |  | Which ships to go into battle? |  |
Well here`s a suggestion that`ll never be implemented?
Ever known a fleet, but in order to hit it, you have to disband a bunch of ships (e.g. queens)
Well .. maybe as a paid advantage -- let people select which 10 of their top 11 stacks of theirs they want to put into battle (the standard being the top 10)
As a safety -- you have to attack with at least 80% of your top 10 stacks worth of fleet.
This is to ensure people can`t just scout/abuse |
|
tolnep
99+ day(s) ago | what about 5 stacks that can be built under the bunker project that are for attacking only lower(300%) pr empires that can only capture 2 planets or less this bunker fleet can only match the 25% of the top 10 stacks and as for upkeep after the bunker fleet is built they go into storage so there is no per turn charge unless the bunker fleet goes into battle then you have the 10 turns and 20% of the upkeep for that particular fleet to balance it out for the lower pr empires there could be a project pre-emptive strike fleet that can probe a 300% higher pr empire with only 3 stacks and a +20% attack advantage (because it would be more like a suprise attack) this fleet would also be sheltered under normal circumstances or maybe new ships for this role also have the same 10 turn and upkeep money for this type of attack. I think archaeoptyrex you are helping redefine the game by thinking in this direction we need this kind of thought! |
Archaeoptyrex
99+ day(s) ago | you have to remember that there`s a particular purpose to this suggestion.
PR restrictions still apply ... by and large it`s a disadvantage to not take full advantage of pr range when attacking
This is mainly a small tweak so that you don`t have to waste ONE stack if you don`t have to |
PickledPepper
99+ day(s) ago | Worst Idea I have ever heard.
You want to be able to build say 20 stacks then decide which 10 go to battle...Oh yeah ababy put them thors on top, my strafez now rule, what you got pyth well meet mr Tyr...too much advantage if you get to pick which stacks go to battle. It is and should always be the top 10 |
VampireOfTheNight
99+ day(s) ago | Also would give an advantage to those who are good in battle VS those who just are pot lucky...
It really would promote skill =)
and would stop spamming! |
VampireOfTheNight
99+ day(s) ago | Actually, i was suggesting it be PR-less...
That way you don`t have to disband to hit targets lower pr... and can keep low build rate ships secure when you know they wouldnt be any good...
The idea of them pr-less wouldnt be such a big disadvantage keeping in mind, that you wouldnt be able to use the fleet.
It`s main advantage/disadvantage would be to be able to climb by 25% at any given moment... Prophaps make this, that what ever you lose in your top ten stacks (percentage wise, is taken out of your hangars)...
That way it wouldnt be possible to abuse by climbing millions when you have only a few hundred pr, and also it would make the 25% fair...
Think of it like this, you risk your hangar`s fleet but the advantage is, aslong you lose very little in an attack you can climb 25% of what you had...
This makes it possible to hold on to clusters after an attack when the other player is spamming ;),
and for defence allows quick retals when a battle against you is unsucessful...
It basically would make, fighting that bit harder and more skilled. It would make time and stacking very important. :p |
BadKarma
99+ day(s) ago | I see big fails on retals when that strafez fodder top stack was left out of their attack. This sounds like a very useful idea for a lot more reasons with the races that are not terran and Aminer tho.
Fun idea, maybe something to implement on DM server when that gets fixed :) |
ear614
99+ day(s) ago | how abou ths apon using on your enemys you get two couter on it |
bobbysindustrialpat
99+ day(s) ago | No making them pr-less means easily avoiding counters, making it a bit too powerful.
However on turnbased you often build to put in a hit, then wait for the inevitable hit from a fedmate because you ran out of turns. People use starbases to add a surprise switcharound of their stacks for people who use fleet intel. Well with this idea you could do it with useful ships.
Nice original idea imo |
Darkshot
99+ day(s) ago | Very nice idea, but I think it shouldn`t be pr-less as VempireOfTheNight said :) |
VampireOfTheNight
99+ day(s) ago | Nice idea :)
However being able to secure fleet, (not entering battle) does have an advantage as you would be able to protect e.g. your high stack of low build rate ships...
However the downside is, bigger base pr for no reason other than saving ships...
Here`s a suggestion Archaeoptyrex.........
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project: "Bunker" (some inital research/build cost)
Each time you use it, it costs 10 turns + some money (per stack)
Allows an empire to keep stacks in hangar`s (up to 25% of top 10 stack pr (total top 10 stacks pr/25% = amount of fleet you can keep in hangar`s). This means they are shielded from any attack (it doesn`t fight or defend). Effect is cancelled when you build more fleet.
The fleet in hangar`s is pr`less as not in use... However if you build, all stacks become active.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advantages/Disadvantages
Any player would be able to lower their fleet pr by 25% making battles without disbanding huge amounts of fleet possible :).
This also means faster jumps back to pr, making it more dangerous and exciting to be out of dp as you would have to watch those far higher than you normally would....
Also it would be possible to protect fleet, e.g. low build rate ships or your newly captured ships from entering battle when you know they would be no good... e.t.c.. |
MastaKilla
99+ day(s) ago | I think it sounds very interesting Arch! It would bring a new aspect to the game, so if its possible to implement I will give it a thumbs up. |
HoneyBucket{HH}
99+ day(s) ago | I think you`re on to something here. It seems easy enough to implement, it can`t really be abused, I see it as an all around good idea. |
Archaeoptyrex
99+ day(s) ago | along the same lines:
as attacker -- you should be able to select a choice of ships.
As defender, it`s reasonable to send out as many of your ships as possible.
However -- idea:
Project: "Bunker" (some inital research/build cost)
Each time you use it, it costs 10 turns + some money
Allows defender to keep one stack (up to 25% of top 10 stack pr) shielded from any attack (it doesn`t fight or defend). Effect is cancelled when the condition is broken (e.g. you disband a bunch of ships) or you build more of the selected stack.
This will allow empires to have some remnant scrap from mighty counters ...
This is similar to building 11 or more stacks ... except ... on turn base it might allow defender to protect some destroyers (as example) when turns are short |
HoneyBucket{HH}
99+ day(s) ago | I think this is a wonderful idea Arch. One of the best suggestions i have seen in a long time. Though i think the limit should be at least 50 or 60% of your fleet, but maybe more it`s hard to say. As a military commander and empire leader there is no reason why you should have to send every ship you have in your top 10 stacks into every battle just because they are built, this would add a realistic feel to the game. Plus it would allow for more continuous action in the ranks, as you could possibly attack again more easily and quickly, and it gives a small advantage to the attacker in some situations which would encourage attacking. |
