Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Eldrad]

It seems so long ago that i made a ToDo list for round 6, and now I'm doing one for round 7 and i do feel a lot more work could have been done... ok really I'm just starting the thread. Post ideas below. Please be concise, (you only get one post on this thread before i start ignoring you, if you want a real discussion post a real thread)

- Fleets page re-write. - DONE

- Fix Battle bug - DONE

- Battle Calc - add a function which lets you automatically fill in the ship values from your latest scan, and have attacker tech level default to your tech levels.

- Expeditions - Dark Blade nebula, as discussed elsewhere. - Pending delays

- Change rock capture to depend on defense. (see thread: Rock Capture) - DONE

- For subscribers: Add in email/text messaging features so that messages in game can be either emailed or texted (using a sms gateway).  - DONE

- Max button to be linked to upkeep cost of units, so it gives the lower of either the current max or the upkeep max. (with nice shiny outputs) - HAVE DONE an upkeep percentage system instead, so only one button...

- New login system to simplify multiple server logins. - DONE

-------

Delayed

- Longer attacks, (3 - 10 ticks) with smaller ship losses, and slightly lower rock stealing (so you attack for more ticks, and lose the same amount of ships overall, but gain more rocks).

- Galaxy projects: making alliance projects available to galaxy commanders.

- Alliance projects: make them do something more interesting than just giving out bonuses (apart from the ones which do) - Allinace Fleet is done, needs some more debugging.

- 15% additional rock destruction. (for every 100 rocks you would steal you now also destroy 15) (delayed pending review)

[L8u8k8e8]

Also adding a redesigned login system to the list. I'll be working on the login system and the email/text messaging systems here over the next few days and this next week.

[thyninja]

I liked the 3 tick attack option. Please don't change that ! =P

[Tommy]

- Change rock capture to depend on defense. (see thread: Rock Capture)

Something like this should be tested first, as it has potential to cause a paradigm shift in gameplay. Regardless, I'm against it. It encourages dumb choosing of when to fight a battle and the capturing is crappy enough already. (Missing R2.5.)

(And fixed your link. )

- 15% additional rock destruction. (for every 100 rocks you would steal you now also destroy 15)

Why this? If X wants to piss Y off or cause upkeep trouble, they can send a bomb now. What's the need to reduce total in-game pop?

(My surprising alternative suggestion: for every 100 rocks you would steal you now also steal 15 )

[Eldrad]

- Change rock capture to depend on defense. (see thread: Rock Capture)

Something like this should be tested first, as it has potential to cause a paradigm shift in gameplay. Regardless, I'm against it. It encourages dumb choosing of when to fight a battle and the capturing is crappy enough already. (Missing R2.5.)

(And fixed your link. )

Test round, i fear is unlikely.

If i tell you that i am instead increasing rock capture for attacks which are not defended (instead of decreasing for defended) will that make you happy.

also at the moment I am only planning on changing how the cap works.

[Tommy]

i am instead increasing rock capture for attacks which are not defended

I'm a happy camper!

[Nightstalker]

If i tell you that i am instead increasing rock capture for attacks which are not defended (instead of decreasing for defended) will that make you happy.

also at the moment I am only planning on changing how the cap works.

So as long as I put 50  hawks at home to be destroyed I will lose less population?

And what about this deploy option? IMO it needs some tweaks.

[Eldrad]

If i tell you that i am instead increasing rock capture for attacks which are not defended (instead of decreasing for defended) will that make you happy.

also at the moment I am only planning on changing how the cap works.

So as long as I put 50  hawks at home to be destroyed I will lose less population?

And what about this deploy option? IMO it needs some tweaks.

I agree it needs some tweaking.
Not sure what to do yet.

50 hawks will ahve a smalle effect than 1000 dischargers, ie rock loss will depend on the ratio of DP to OP.

So the more you defend with the less rocks you will lose. (with a curve going up to 0 where your Defensive points equals their Offensive points.)

[Nightstalker]

Perhaps a fleet that is deployed away from your own planet or galaxy has double the upkeep?

[Tommy]

That would make a lot of sense and make Eng 5 more valuable.

[aazereth]

i was thinking maybe like a mission for infl or somethin

[Parsona]

What about an attack delay thing. Like... set a fleet to launch an attack in so many ticks.

[L8u8k8e8]

What about an attack delay thing. Like... set a fleet to launch an attack in so many ticks.

It's been discussed before. I don't like the idea as I think it sets a bad precedent in making the game "auto" playable. I feel any action you take in game should be something you are doing then and there.

[Samus_Aran]

I second L8. Something to be said for waking up at 3am so you can launch your attack or advance your tech.

[Parsona]

i suppose i agree now that ive heard those points. its good you don't let a lazy man like me run the game >.<.