0 Members and 1 Guests are viewing this board.
- Dissenter
- Irregular
- 84 posts
- Reputation 44
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- I love 26horses Productions
Nov 16 2014 6:26 am
When attacking, I believe you should have an option to go in full speed, but lose a number of ships to space mines before engaging the enemy.
How I see this working is when a ship hits a mine, it destroys both ship(s) and mine. The numbers of ships lost would depend on the number of mines and efficiency, with a maximum of 50% of the mines being hit and destroyed, and the number of ships destroyed being based on planet efficiency.
Example:
Planet has 20 mines @ 150% efficiency.
Attacker sends 30 mrb, ignoring mines.
10 mines are detroyed, as are 15 bombers. Since the planet is at 150% efficiency, it destroys 1.5 bombers per mine.
The remaining 15 bombers engage the planets forces without being slowed by mines.
From there figure in seperate calculations for glider losses and damage to ms. Perhaps have a set 35k(?) damage per mine set off. The more ships an attacker send, the more likely they are to hit mines. Sending a single mrb through a minefield and it might get through untouched, if it's lucky. Would need a different calculation for how likely it is for ships to hit space mines. I theorize you would attack from one side of the planet, and would never hit more then half the mines in any attack. The amount of damage mines did and how likely it was they hit a ship could be based on planet efficiency and stealth, as well.
I'm sure people might not like the numbers involved, and they're open for discussion. I do think this should require high losses from the attacker if the planet in question has a lot of mines and/or high efficiency. I'm sure my numbers could use some work but trying to see how many people like this idea before putting any more time into it. If people like it and offer their opinions of what losses should be, I'll be glad to do new calculations to figure out what would make the majority happy, assuming Shadowing likes the idea, of course.
I think to when Apophis sacrificed 10(?) mother ships to destroy Herurer in a space-minefield. It only makes sense we should have the option to sacrifice ships in order to maintain a faster attack speed when facing space mines.
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Nov 16 2014 7:09 am
You need to remember that this is a game and cannot always be 100% realistic. People cannot be online all day everyday. And even if there is a major downside to rendering spacemines useless, fleet building players will not have a problem with taking those extra losses against someone. You need to keep in mind that some people in the 100-200k range have MASSIVE fleets while others have very small fleets and lots of stations and adv buildings to account for most of their networth. What is stopping them from just suiciding into someone smaller's fleet and .... game over. This idea is moving away from a skill game and back towards a wallet game. There was a time where you could attack literally from one side of the galaxy to the other in under 2 minutes. Literally.
It's just a game, not everything that works in real life can work in the game. People need to sleep and they need to work.
Also, spacemines slow things down and turrets destroy things. If you mix them together then you have to remove turrets. Shadowing has done that sort of thing before, he doesn't like things mixing like that.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
26horses Production