Reply to Thread
Return to thread view
Return to main page

Forum: SC Development & Design
Thread: Space Conquest TEST
Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-02-21 19:03:35

I have created the Space Conquest TEST server.

Everyone can create 2 empires there.

Please try it out and check if there is any errors.

This server will be used for testing new features before they are actually put into the game.

Everyone gets 5 ap per tick at the moment so it does not take too long time to get ap for testing stuff but on the other hand not is too much for comparing to the real game.

One of the suggestions for SCT was to lower the ap to 5 per tick so now you have a place to see if you like it.

Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-02-22 18:20:09
Cool. When do we suggest things for it?
Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-02-22 20:10:22
Now :)

But remember to put up a good argument for whatever stuff you want tested.

So far I have seen requests for personal coffers a gazillion times, they will most likely never be made. There is no point.

Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-02-23 05:33:47
OK then, how bout this one.

Leaving the coffers as they are but not allowing the number one empire on the list to access the coffers, So minerals are always recycled down instead of up, and if a number one empire gets to high on the list thru failed attacks, the chasing federations can catch them by feeding thru the coffers.

This also keeps the ladder nice and compact...and allows newer players and older ones have a turn at the top, no matter how breifly. encouraging them to stick around, coz they know no1 is obtainable for them.

:) Spart

Post by: exilim(25091)
2005-02-23 12:34:35
i like the idea of lowering the avalue of torps or make them more expensive..i noticed a lot of noobs using huge amounts of torps the last rounds with only a few ships.. that canīt be the way that pple learn the game when they see they get taken down by 200 ftrs 6k torp hits..

torps r useful and necessary for the game without doubt cause u can always take down the top even with the hardest or worsest board..
but with a bit less avalue it would make the game fairer and pple would learn how to build their buildings and that ships r useful..

so i would vote for torps giving a bit more score round 12points instead of 10 they r actual(including mins and power used for) And lower their avalue a bit

Post by: Opacus Mortu(61923)
2005-02-26 01:46:22
come on guiys, everyone has been sayign this game is getting worse, and this and that, but yet only about 5-6 ppl have made ideas about stuff we want changes, come on...if your gonan sayh how bad the game is, help make it better
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-02-26 05:48:58
well.. i like the game as it is..except for coffers... i want the old way back... but nobody will agree with me lool
Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-02-28 08:57:04
lol i want the old way back too.... with the exception of the top guy been able to access em....(just to make it fairer for others)
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-03-01 04:11:14
yeah top guy in fed or #1 by ranking.. hmmm
Post by: simstar(98)
2005-03-01 08:48:08
anyone else noticed that making the change spart and phil suggest will make it easier for a fed who play well together to take the top spot? In other words, it will make it easier for those in notorious to take the top if one of us others gets up there.... just an observation.
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-03-01 12:40:21
IF one of you make top being the key in that post....
Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-03-01 15:25:35
You just dont get it do u sim...currently feds are trying to feed themselves to take us down.... Its working really well isnt it.

We just arent feeeding number one, that and half the fed is over 1mill anyway. If we did feed, u have any comprehension of how over this round would be?

So yes, feeding rule changes would benefit us in chasing. BUT have u noticed we rarely need too? What it does do is give other feds a realistic chance, instead of one player stopping it all.

Our greatest competition came when there was feeding under the old non fed fleet rules.

ps (no.1 ranking phill, if it was the highest person in the fed, then u would feed him,,, then, your wouldnt be able to help fed member anymore
Post by: ShadowKnight(13560)
2005-03-02 01:26:15
Unless I misunderstand.... Then a solo fed would not be able to use the coffers?
Post by: aeldrin(34951)
2005-03-02 10:56:49
Howdy gang,

Shadow, the way Spart would like things set up is that only the person in the number one spot would not have access to the coffers.

So until they get to the number one spot, a solo fed can access the coffers.

So here is a question for you Spart. In your twisted kiwi world, is the person in number one completely restricted from the coffers? For instance, can't donate ships, mins, or power to it? Or is the person in number one just not allowed to take from the coffers?

Hope all is going well in the SC world.

Post by: Claymore(37218)
2005-03-03 03:11:37
This is going to raise some hackles, but what about doing away with the coffers and donating all together. If empire coffers aren't an option, I would just as soon see the fed coffers go too. You more experienced players chime in and tell me if this would stop the feeding dead and give other empires a shot at winning a round or two. I'm all ears. (Except for ma kilt and other essential tools.)
Post by: simstar(98)
2005-03-03 04:23:39
i agree with clay. Sorry but i have liked that option for quite some time now. Also seeing as there are so few of us playing sc now perhaps the max number of empires in a fed should change. Down to like 4 or so, maybe even 3, surely this would make the game more interesting. Of course none of the members of notorious would ever agree to this as they wouldnt want to be split up and risk not winning.
Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-03-03 11:33:30
to shadow, the coffers would work the same and a solo fed would be able to use the coffers, however when they reach number 1 on the empire list they couldnt.

Oh saw als, response, yes al thats right lol

as for answering ur next question al, the empire would be able to donate things to the coffers, just never receive or take it from the coffers.

in reponse to claymores, failed attacks feed number 1 empires, IF we couldnt chase people by feeding there would be even less movemnt than there is now on the ladder.

In response to sim, you dont think the two split notorious feds would work together to win? are we less dangerous in the same fed where we cant hit each other?

so no coffers and fed slit in 2, Ouch. You guys really think that weakens us? I cant remember the last time auctually used the coffers.

Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-03-04 02:32:50
what are coffers ?
Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-03-07 20:47:12
Hi All,

I have been trying to figure out what to do about this game :)

I think some of the reason that some people wants one thing and others think they ar crazy is partly because we want to accomplish different things.

Could all of you that have opinions about this please clarify what is it you want to change in SC instead of proposing changes.

Try to describe what happens during a round that you like and you don't like and what you would like to happen instead.

When we have a clear idea of what we want SC to evolve into we can much better make desitions on rule changes.

Post by: Opacus Mortu(61923)
2005-03-08 08:17:10
the end of the round time gets to me....idk if that can be changed, but i'm at school whent ehr oudn ends, so i can never make a official, "end of round run"
Post by: jddegraff(43958)
2005-03-08 23:28:32
Despite what i may say, this is a great game, and a great community of players.

But here is Sentires wish list to change sc....

1) Due to the unpopularity of the subject....coffers. do away with them and devise a personnel coffer to bank mins ONLY in (maybe a small amout of power). 10k mins should be able to jump-start any empire no matter how trashed the homeworld gets. Once you have the ability to move mins and power around this game, its way too easy to push scores to unobtianium. (So... notorious, how did thuggie go from last place in your fed to first to win the round? You guys dont feed, remember? I, for one am happy thug got his carrot, but you know.....thats exactly what this is about.)

2) Torp attacks. I heard a idea i think merits discussion, limit the number of torps that can be launched, by requiring a set ship to torp ratio. In the real world sense, a plane or ship can only carry a set number of torpedoes, ie: a plane can only carry 2 torpedoes. Why should it be that my 200 fighter fleet can launch a bazillion torps? I think doing away with the mass torp run would add to the play of sc, and be sct's salvation. it would make the use and cost of mine grids worth putting into play again.

just as a example, to launch say, 10,000 torps I'd need a fleet equal to 5000 ships. Based on hw size and score either I'd be attacking someone that spent some ap to build mine grids, or going against a huge fleet. Either way, my chances of success should be smaller than what 10k torps do now.

3) Shielders just don’t have any ooomf to them. I can build 2 torps costing 4 ssp, 4 mins , and 10 pwr for a score of 7, an attack value of 8, verses 1 shieder costing 3 ssp 8 mins and 4 pwr, for a score of 36, and a defensive value of 6. Hmmmm. Assuming power isn’t an issue, I am getting beat for half the cost by less score value. Start throwing some zeros to those numbers and the disavantage of the sheilders goes up humungiously. Maybe if the defensive value was higher, I could see the merit in building shielders, but as is they are pretty much free mins to an attacker. Same goes (to a greater degree) for star destroyers.

Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-03-09 09:29:30
In response to sentires.

No 1, We didnt feed thug, We merely ditched all our personal fleet into the fed, giving thug the fed fleet score and loosing our personal fleet score. When you accuse someone make sure you know what and how they did something :)

No2, which covers 2 and 3.
So you want to give the defender the advantage????
You really think thats going to aid anybody.

No3, in response to peter.

the problem later in the game is that only a certain number of people can reach the high scores set by some other players, so they feel a bit bad at the game and the players that are winning.
The downside of this is you can also spend 8 days at number 1 without seeing any action.

Some people also get upset at people making torp runs. ie 1k fighters + as many torps as you can muster. I dont really see to much wrong with these, as well, it doesnt take too long to kill someone that only carries 1k ships.

THEN the next thing that tends to happen is that no 1 empires get fed minerals via the fed coffers, and becoz the fed fleet is all fighters, people can feed with a little homeworld, whacked out fc and then the "feeder" isnt worth a whole lot of mins, and the exp from the fed fleet isnt worth it, so it can stop a whole run.

its also pretty easy to feed your no emp, then destroy the fed fleet created. while this is in the rules of the game, the problem occurs when you chase people above you and ur fed members try to send u more mins, the fed fleet score can bump you in range of online empires..

And last but not least. Pity the day we start to feed our fed members at number 1. then we shall see some moaning :P

Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-03-09 09:33:44
OH, and i want the end of round finished put on a rotating thing lol...... Go OPAC
Post by: simstar(98)
2005-03-10 10:00:32
Time for my opinion again. The way i see it now is that either the game is working pretty well as it is and all we need to do is make one or two small changes. OR the whole game isnt working. Fortunately it is the first thing that is true. Many of the problems people have with the game are always going to be there. If they werent it wouldnt be the same game. SC generally does work.

Then why you may ask arent there more players? The answer is simple, a lack of interest in a simple text based game. Two years ago when i started playing this game there were no where near as many text based games set in the space genre. Now we have a lot more space games that many people find on first impressions to be better than space conquest. Of course those of us who play sc know otherwise.
This is as i see it the real reason why there are now less players playing sc than 2 years ago.

What changes to i prepose then? Well ill do as peter asked and "describe what happens during a round that you like and you don't like and what you would like to happen instead". What i and a fair few other players dont like is feeding. What do we do......... First we tried to limit feeding by forcing folks to donate fed fleet with their mineral and power donations. This just tended to annoy most people. Peter is however very much against personal coffers. The exact reason for this i never did fully understand except for it being more his own opinion of what he wants in the game. So putting personal coffers aside in my mind the only other solution is not to have coffers at all. But then everyone will say "but then we cant rebuild" (whine whine whine) and in response to this i say, so what! So what if it takes you a little longer to rebuild your empire? It also means that if you do take down a top dog it is much less likely that they will get back on their feet as quickly. Of course this wouldnt be so much fun though. So i say we eliminate fed coffers completely but Lower the homeworld destruction %'s. One thing i am not certain on though is whether or not the % of destruction applied to homeworld also applies to mineral and power gain from successful combat, by this i mean the power and minerals captured. i think it is the same %'s. If it is then can we make them separate? Having mineral capture a higher % that homeworld destruction?

If we made just these few small changes i dont think any more changes need to made to the game. It works. It is just that there is one federation that has better communication and other skills than everyone else.

Also id like to appeal for 4 willing persons who wouldnt mind being organised by myself and perhaps taught a little of my knowledge about the game. Id like a nice active fed who i can communicate with next round. You may or may not have noticed my semi absense from the game this round, no real reason, just took a break:)

My million cents
Post by: simstar(98)
2005-03-10 10:03:26
Also id just like to add that i still may be right about it being 6 months before changes are made............ Its been 3 so far.......... But at least we may get to test out some changes before then:)
Post by: Opacus Mortu(61923)
2005-03-10 20:00:04
just a quick statement, the coffers are never gonan be changed, that came right out of peter's mouth, so we can stop asking for it
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-03-10 21:07:55
leave the coffers as they are, or bring back fleet not needed. if you remove coffers entirely all noobs or lesser skilled players will quit cuz they will always have to mine.
Post by: simstar(98)
2005-03-11 03:10:26
opac - peter never said that fed coffers wouldnt be changed, he said that he doesnt really want personal coffers.
Post by: jddegraff(43958)
2005-03-11 22:04:26
in response to spart:

thug recieved a TON of power from someone in the fed. hmmmm. maybe spartster forgets i get to watch over a notorites shoulder. again, i am happy thug won, but in a more open game, with the way he runs, he could have won without you guys anyway.

i am taking a break from sc. sorry opac, thanks for letting me in, but boot me if you want. i've got alot going on at work and home, and i cant devote the time to play seriously. maybe sometime in the near future we can try this again.
Post by: cajunman(67645)
2005-03-13 05:06:38

This particular part of the forum is stricltly for suggestions to the game..Peter would like to know what we like and dislike about the GAME not each others opinions..

Personally i think coffers are fine..I think if Peter limited the amount of minerals too and from the coffer to 10k per 24hr period i think this would end mineral feeding but allow enough minerals for each fed member to start his run..if all fed members are to run the same day then 2000 mins per player should be sufficient..this will force more mins to stay on the board bottom,top and middle..

Torps have an extremly high attack value..They are ruining the game..If the attack value cannot be lowered then they must cost the same as mine grids..What good are mine grids when you can buy almost 3 torps per mine grid and 1 mine grid is destroyed per torp..ridiculous..its like exilim said..the newbies see this and never learn the real game..

Bonus aps for donators should be moved to 150 per day...

from what i see torps and mineral feeding are the number 1 problem of the game...feds should be reduced to 3 players..this will even the playing feild a little as there are only a few feds that ever acheive 5 members..Notorious rules sc..They rule it so much that other players are getting discouraged and are not playing as much..this is because the torps are ruining the game also..i personally have been attacked by notorious with 200 fighters and 3-12k of torps in the middle stages of the round..this is obsurd..

You should be required to have a minimum of 1 bomber or star destroyer per torp purchased...Fighters should not even be allowed to carry torps..similar to donating mins and power to the coffers now...you can donate 10 mins per ship..you should not be able to build 60k torps with 200 fighters..as it is now thats what is happening...its ruining the game...

Peter..you have a marvelous line of games very addictive..Thankyou for efforts and i pledge my continued support..once again thankyou..

Post by: cajunman(67645)
2005-03-13 05:22:18
How about a premium donator level..$10 per month and you get 150 bonus aps per day..4 mins per hr ...something like that. this will help you Peter in your quest for bigger and better and will also encourage donating...
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-03-13 06:20:45
if your going to make suggestions (some are.. but most not) give a GOOD reason they should be implemented. a fed winning all the time is skill related not game change related.. even if the feds were spit we would still win by working together just like all you guys do when you rape us down.. except we would make good use of it. coffers need to stay as they are, or back to the old way. newbs will ALL leave if they have no source to rebuild. period.
Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-03-13 22:58:54
in response to sentires, yes we dumped power on thuggie, but i dont consider power feeding... so apologies for the mix up. I really only consider minerals feeding, as theres nothing u can build with power alone :)
Everyone in the fed dumped power on thug as they donated fed fleet. i do beleive however he would have won anyway since his score in the end was really higher than the power he had... ( i maybe wrong there :S)
Post by: sparkles(18049)
2005-03-13 23:04:18
Err whisper, peters last post on the site said in a nutshell, tell me what u dont like happens in the later part of the game.

Stop proposing game changes... or offering suggestions on what to change...

so ideas like "what if you made destroyers a special ship capable of withstanding a certain amount of torps etc."

should not be posted.... :P

Oh yeah, the idea of three member feds, Im not sure id like to choose fed members then, i guess we could alternative between fed notorious and fed notorious 1, and since we could feed each other, and no one could use coffers to chase the top guys down..... oh hangon... yeah THATS A GREAT IDEA, LETS DO THAT!
Post by: Opacus Mortu(61923)
2005-03-14 00:42:21
its funny how ppl have asked notorious to not fed till last day...but idk how many ppl realize this...but thats helping notorious, fi they dont fed up till friday, thats HELPING them!!! i think we should just take notorious down already...we coudl take them easy, let me go mine my 400 ap's and send 4 torps there way, they'll crumble under my force
Post by: cajunman(67645)
2005-03-15 09:10:50
spart you could have notoious 1 notorious 2 notorious 3 doesnt matter to me..Your still gonna have Whipser 1 on your head dancing the jitterbug...I bite and pull hair and Ill flip off your head and drop kick you in the nose..Then ill get mad...notice the small stature i use to represnt myself..Flea size..oh yeah super flea..HIYAH
Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-03-29 19:29:55
I have just read this thread and am slightly disappointed - it is my own fault though I did not make myself clear.


I want to know what you want to work differently during the round.

Like, newbies and others very often attack with 200 fighters and alot of torpedoes. This is a problem since it was not really intended this way and is a bit redicilous.

When I know all the problems like this you see we can talk about solutions.

Proposing a solution before formalising a problem is stupid and will make a lot of work for me which noone can use.

What will happen now ?:
- I will reset the test server
- I will modify torpedo attack value to 25-50% of what it is now
- You should then play for a couple of weeks on the test server and we will see how that change works

In the mean time you should try to formulate more game problems, NOT solutions. Start your posts by writing down a problem and after that you can optionally write a solution but that is not nessesary.
If there is a general agreement that something is a problem we can find a solution.

Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-03-29 19:39:17
I also desided to reduce Max Fed Members to 4 on the test server since there probably will not be too many doing stuff there and I would like to see 2-3 active feds testing the torp change.

Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-03-30 19:13:23
No comments at all :(

Post by: Opacus Mortu(61923)
2005-03-31 06:08:15
ur killing me peter, i'll go ou tof retirement for the sc test server temporarily to say wut i think about stuff......ur lucky i'm so leenyant(yah...thats spelt very wrong, i meant to spell it wrong) :-D j/k peter, i'll drop in and see if i like it better

Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-04-02 11:15:43

Actually I think this lag of comments must mean that players have either left or are satisfied.........

Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-04-03 02:18:15
Peter the changes make no difference to actual skilled players... we can own the board reguardless it seems. only the less skilled care for or really want changes. I like the game as it stands. Test with 1 attack power torps is actually a disadvantage to less skilled players and makes it easier for us to beat on them.
Post by: exilim(25091)
2005-04-07 04:13:42
i agree with phil that there is a big lag of skills..

the xp is still increasing way too fast cause the lag of skills is too huge.. my both empires got over 200k xp while the others highest xp is bout 80-120k xp and average xp is around 40-70k

there is some hope that pple finally get, that there is only one way to get a topplayer.. improve ur RUNS (homeworlds.. ur fleet setups and try to look at galreports and notice what is happening or happened(minfeeding xp-feeding.. scavenging.. what is a decent xp etc).
but an attackingvalue for torps only worth 1 is a bit too hard and there r only a few single players or only notorious having fun with this implement.

I think a torpavalue bout 3 would be make it even and fair or another idea would be avalue of torps higher than 3 but u canīt build more torps than u have ships

Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-04-18 21:39:18
I will try to change the test server game tomorrow, am too tired now.

I will set the torp attack value to 3 and modify the exp formula so exp have somewhat less influence.

Please try it out when it is done, will reset the server when it is working.

Post by: Bluebear(80853)
2005-05-14 02:31:10

I don't frequent game forums too often, but I appreciate a developer soliciting comments. Just noticed your thread. And, basically, you have an good game here.

You probably heard commentary on timing of the end of round before, but really it's not just "sour grapes."

IMHO, most people in the Americas have jobs and just can't expect to win this game. I've played long enough to realize it always comes in to a Friday morning showdown ... around 10:00 a.m. USA Central time.

Anyone in the US (basically an hour or two before or after 10 a.m. Central time), who holds a job (or even attending school) simply can't participate in that final rush to victory without taking a day off work or school.

Thus, your game has appeal to a very limited number of people in the U.S. (1) Those who are unemployed, and (2) those who can take off work Friday morning. Most ideally, you will create addicts, who sneak on to play and then get caught and become unemployed because of the gameplaying at work. Of course, those unemployed folks won't have funds to donate! ROFL...


p.s. - You didn't ask for solution, but perhaps an adjustment in the ending schedule would be possible? Close the game on the weekend, or at least move it to the afternoon or evening for your U.S. players occasionally? As it currently stands, playing this game on Friday a.m. will cost me very valuable time away from work that I really can't afford to lose. Presumably, others passed up the game who would have agreed. If I could count on being online when game ends, I would have donated already. Thanks for a great game, and good luck with it!
Post by: Bluebear(80853)
2005-05-14 23:29:56
Another problem with SC is the apparent ability of one federation to continually dominate the game. People with high skill levels and/or friendships will always want to play any game together where they can enjoy company and gang up on others. Ganging up in a fed is a very good idea when there are enough skilled players that the game remains competitive. However, I have played in at least 2 rounds now where this seemed to have a "chilling effect" on serious competition. Last round showed some player frustration as there were a lot of "suicides" into the player from a non-dominant fed who eventually won the round. The previously dominant fed lost due (at least in part) to an experienced player in this non-dominant fed "feeding" its top player. Interestingly enough, it seems a New Rule is now implemented to prevent such future "feeding" inside a fed .... lol ... I like a game where the admins pay attention - well done!!! Of course, since that feeding method won't work for the win anymore, perhaps it's time to examine fed formation.

5 person feds do seem a good number, provided at least 4 experienced members remain active.

But, is there any way you could encourage diversity and participation by putting a formula to the fed size?

Make preliminary fed joining on Thursday, and final formation on Friday. Perhaps you could limit fed size to either 3 or 4 players, unless at least 2 feds reach the next level of 4-5 players (perhaps excluding newbie fed members with under a certain hisorical or current game xp level)? This would no doubt require more code, and should not be made too complicated. It needs to be capable of simple explanation to newbies.

But, you could implement a 2 or 3 step fed joining/recruiting process with Thursday and Friday cutoffs, and perhaps even permitting up to 6 fed members if you get at least 3 feds wanting 6 non-nOOb members?

In other words, the idea here is not to discourage any dominant fed. What I am trying to do is explore ways that you could encourage participation, competition to gain xp, and perhaps eventually yield even more bigger and better feds. Admittedly, I have a lot less xp than the top 10 players, and apologize if this concept has already been beat to death in 2003... But, it does seem a reasonable concept for discussion in this thread.

Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-05-15 12:48:03
The round ending time have been discussed alot and is a problem I guess. However so far I have not seen a good solution to this problem except maybe letting a round take like 14 days and 12 hours so the end time changes all the time.

I don't like the fed suggestion, it seems overly complicated with no gain for the game.

Post by: jddegraff(43958)
2005-05-16 22:25:16
move round end to saturday. simplest solution. you cant please everybody, but this seams the fairest.
Post by: Wolverine(1)
2005-05-17 09:50:44
No, some players do not play in the weekend and therefore it would not be alot more fair than now.

Post by: Gorgon(27256)
2005-06-02 17:24:43
Hello.. Peter.. problems within this game:

1. No Game Manual in actual SC Game!!!!!
It has been mentioned that new players DONT KNOW how to play. This is correct.. they dont! It is frustrating sending them to the noob forum where they fiddle around clicking links which only really give either a general overview or piecemeal ideas. They need a button IN GAME which they can see a step by step process of how to do a first run as well as an extrapolation of game ideas. We have a huge amount of people leaving and most of them post in forum "how do I get more ap" or "I think that needing 200 fighters to attack is stupid, I only have 20". Perhaps even when they sign up to the game have a short sentence saying something such as "before wasting all your ap and achieving nothing read the manual which great players such as Spartapus, Exilim, and Gorgon have made for you"

2. Everyone trying to make game changes so that Notorious doesnt win.
People complain because Notor knows how to play this game and other people dont. This is a skill level thing and it seems stupid to try and penalise people JUST because they are good.

3. Feds are too big.
In my opinion, people gravitate towards good players. When there is only a total of 8 good players in this game one fed of five taking 5 of them creates difficulties.

4. Server game time.
This has already been mentioned and I think your suggestion to have round times at 14 days 12 hours seems to be a good one.

5. People constantly complaining about torp values.
There is nothing wrong with torp values - they are in perfect balance with rest of the game and how else do they think that anyone can jump a 3 million gap when necessary at the end of a round!?!?!??!!?!!

Post by: Gorgon(27256)
2005-06-02 17:49:17
Oh yeah something I may add to the torp thingy..

I think Peter that people dont give enough credit to experience. It doesnt matter how many torps you fire off if your exp is really bad. The only reason good players can make a 200000 ship empire fleetless in 1 or 2 hits is because they have played the game well to get to that point. Other players complain because they think that torps are such a big problem. The problem is that some of us know how to play the game well and are able to gain exp and therefore be more successful at end round.

Torps are perfect the way they are! They:
- allow sufficent score value that you can chase down a particularly high empire
- are cheap enough that you can collect enough minerals to build enough of them to hit a particularly high empire
- are cheap enough that if you lose a 30000 torp hit against someone they cant build a HUGE way out of range: any higher the mineral cost the higher the mineral gain of the defender if they win!
- they are expensive enough that you need a large home world (for power) and that you sometimes dont have enough minerals to bulid enough of them (even with your fed-mates helping you out)
- their attack value is high enough that people can still be taken down with torps without their attacker coming into range
- their attack value is also high enough that particularly high empires can be taken down (and minerals won from them) from below (without feeding them exhorbitant amounts of experience from ship losses)
- their attack value is low enough that you can still lose a 60000 torp hit against an empire which is in range and has a good fleet
- the 5% rule means that even when BB does a silly think like hit down on me with 80k torps when I only have 10k shielders I can still win.

I rest my case,
Post by: SkydiveMike(86286)
2005-06-14 04:45:18
Gorgon says "- the 5% rule means that even when BB does a silly think like hit down on me with 80k torps when I only have 10k shielders I can still win."

Best argument yet :-)

Everyone makes the point that an in game manual is necessary -- i don't have the game skills (yet) to write one, but I can certainly work on compiling the combination of the newbie guide in the forum and information from the skilled players into a real manual / guide.

So who wants to join the "game manual" federation?
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-06-14 14:26:21
WHY bother... no link will be made unless u bribe peter rofl
Post by: ndesi62(114339)
2005-07-16 07:18:24
Post by: ndesi62(114339)
2005-07-16 07:54:38
I say that:

1. if we wear down an empire enough, it should become ours

2. battles should be organized with all the ships on a field and you lead them in formations and stuff so victories come from your chess/videogame skills

3.you can get more land by from tribute, conquest, or purchase.

4. You should be able to choose between a dictatorship/monarchy, a Republic, or a Parliment/Monarchy

5.Instead of AP, you should need money to make buildings, buy land, pay tribute, pay commanders, and build spaceship parts. You could obtain it from:


b.mineral, & power stores



You shouldn't need money for attacks or anything.

6. Federations should have the ability to become nations. A nation would an almost total merging of Empires. the entire nation should be able to attack and defend itself. If there's a leader, they'd make all National decisions. Otherwise, the member empires would vote on National things like attack, form of government, nationwide projects, etc.

7.battles should have winners and losers based on who suffers the most losses.

8. Empires should gain tribute in the form of money, minerals, power, or land. the loser should decide the amount, with a minimum based on how many losses they had compared to the winner, while the winner decides the form.

9.There should be space stations.

10.There should be several kinds of minerals, each with different purposes.

Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-07-18 21:15:45
I say that sc test has become nothing but a waste of server space and should be erased... its not doing regular sc any good anyways...
Post by: Opacus Mortu(61923)
2005-07-19 03:59:44
peter doestn care about sc that much, we get a change every few months, (but i understand he's busy) but if this were VOW, everything we wanted would get granted, errr, i hate being a underdog

and ndesi, your dreaming 1) i dont like your ideas, 2)they'll never be put into space conquest, 3)i like the game how it is for the most part 4)your a noob, and dont have much say in this game (yes, i was a noob once, still sorta am, but i'm annoyed by noobs, GRRR THEM)
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-07-19 10:48:01
vow gets attention because its what pays the server bill... sc dont even come close to doing it... and he works a full time job now... time is also a factor.
Post by: Gorgon(27256)
2005-08-13 12:20:19
I say that:

1. there should be little icons for all the ships which look like little pink bunny rabbits

2. you should get more minerals if you are really bad at the game and then the good people cant win and the bad people can

3. you shouldnt get action points but you should get paction points instead. They are kinda the same but they do different stuff

4. When you kill an empire it should be dead and not come back and attack you again.

5. the ships that you build shouldnt die coz dying isnt politically correct.

6. there should be a "bing" sound everytime you click a link or press a button on your keyboard when you are playing SC. This would improve gameplay NO END!

7. People who are new to the game should get given a bonus 6 million minerals coz that would also improve game play.

8. game play should be improved

9. Battles should have winners and losers.. the people who win should be the people who arent very good coz that would be easier for me to win then.. Otherwise it isnt fair coz I keep losing.

10. In fact.. there shoulnt be any fighting.. The game should be played on diplomacy and trade instead. We should all try and be more generous than everyone else. That means that the more minerals and power you donate to someone the more points you get! Yeah.. thats an awesome idea! thats what I think anyway! Killing and dying bad.. Generosity and selflessness good...

11. there should be a nice background to SC like pansies and fluffy pink bunnies and stuff coz that would improve game play and make everyone like the game more and more.

so there! I'm right and you're wrong.. so there...
Post by: philldodilldo(22259)
2005-08-14 23:10:13
josh, its basically as u described now without graphics......
Post by: mael(88584)
2006-01-12 04:27:37
Im not sure...but it occurs to me that this thread has gone horribly, and irrepairably off course.
Post by: Doug the Designer(55)
2006-01-12 05:34:30
I'm not sure, but I think this thread was horribly, and irreparably old.
Reply to Thread

Total Users: 575
Total Forums: 20
Total Threads: 2082
Total Posts: 21689