Balance changes

1) increase/remove logistic for attacking

2) Remove or soften bash rule for Player over LvL X
  Reason for 1) and 2):
          To atk someone with big fleet or defence you have to 0 your own fleet several times atm.
          And thats only if the opponent does not save his fleet. What is actually the regular case.
          Frustration level is way to high for organizing a group atk and beeing left with no reward.
          Together with research ulti skill u should be able to at least catch something. If alone or (defence/fleet is to big) in a group atk /see also 6.).
          Also without removing it the research ulti is more or less senseless. How can u intercept a "small" fleet if there are waiting 10k blondis on the planet.
          Or any size of fleet that is outlimiting your max logistic points.

3) give scrap for defence (maybe only 30% survive plus more scrap)
  - Raiding a planet with defence is not profitable at all, not to say its more or less senseless, because most time you need a whole fleet slot full of war ships just to damage the defence.
    That means you can not send recyclers with first wave.
    Due to the auto-rebuild of defence even 2. or 3. atk cant be just recyclers. You always need a big percentage of war ships in the fleet slot.
    This could be changed by deleting max. logistics per fleet slot and defence giving also scrap.
    Also bashing rule prevents considerate interaction with players who build defence.

4) distribute scrap and scrap points from group attacks (for example 50% to main attacker, 50% distributed among rest. Thought for uneven distribution is to have more profit for the fleet skill. So they have its reward for not going infra skill.)

5) no time penalty on group flights (that you can time them)

6) Rebalance skill trees
  - Remove "All" button in Squad view to give bigger time window for intercepting fleets with research ulti skill tree. Maybe add Server time in UI. On highest lvl show all flights but one. For example aborted parking mission.
  - Nerf Infrastructure Skill tree (If relays would be gone, maybe removing the build time reduction is enough)
 

7) Change or remove Relays.
  - The relay system is way to static for a game like this. It is not PvP or even Ally vs Ally interactive.
  - its a win more option and has not much to do with time investment or skill atm.
  - Due to you mostly have to atk relays from opponents that you will not profit from and the ships have to stay at the relay, means the ships are "lost" anyway. There is not really much of a rewarding feeling.
  - Maybe "replace" a relay with the "taxing pirates" idea. There not only alliances have to work together but all players in a galaxy. You can scale them for weak, medium and high players and each one gets their own "hard to finish boss" like each week... (Maybe allow to "support" a pirate by increase his defenses)

Add a way for player with lower spy lvl to get intel from ppl with much higher spy lvl, For example send more probes for higher chance of  getting intel.
  Used probes are destroyed or have a chance to be destroyed
  i would suggest 1 probe +0 (0% chance of destroyed)
  10 probes +1 (15% chance of getting detected)
  100 probes +2 (30% chance of getting detected)
  1000 probes+3 (45% chance of getting detected)
  ....
  if detected all are destroyed (or maybe just 50-100% random)

Basicly i agree with that suggestions but i have problems with that removing of logistic points, i was thinking a long time about it.

In the end i made clear to myself the big difference between discovery and other strategy games and would like to enumerate them briefly before i tell you my idea.
The first and biggest difference is probably the possibility to destroy buildings and/or completely destroy or conquer planets of the enemy side.
The second difference is the, in my opinion, unsuccessful ranking system on which every player protection is based.
The third difference is the way the maximum attacking fleet is limited.

so first to point 2, because in my opinion it is most necessary to work on it, before you should dedicate yourself to other points, after that is done, changes to point 3 and then to point 1 are necessary or useful.

In the current ranking system, you level by exp that you get by building buildings and technologies. no one can take this exp away from you, not only that you rise in ranking, no it also limits the players that you can attack. I think the level should have no or little influence on the players you can attack, or by whom you can be attacked. This leads to the following problem: if you exceed a certain level limit you can still be weak, you can be killed by players against whom you have no chance. As an example I'll just take vevo and me: Vevo is "only" 15 lvl above me. His real strength would be 50 levels above me. Especially such strong players should get another chance to rise in the level than only through buildings. The foundation for this was laid when the skill points were introduced by scrapscore. So why not set the scrapscore as player protection instead the level and removing the ranking by level completely?

This would have the following advantages: Because I'm bad vevo can't attack me anymore, I should get better vevo can attack me again, as before of course there should be the possibility that I become attackable as soon as I attack vevo.
Another advantage would be, that you can "relegate" faster in the ranking and therefore get a better chance to build something up again, because (to stay vevo against me for example) vevo collects scrap scores much faster than to level by destroying me. He gets higher in the ranking, I don't, he can't attack me anymore until I have asserted myself against others and could catch him again in the ranking. However, the scrapscore should also increase due to pure resources stolen from active players.
I think this solution should suit just those who think the infratree is too strong.

After this conversion it should be in my opinion no problem to completely dissolve the maximum fleet points and exchange them for a maximum total fleet strength. This total fleet strength should be the same for every player and should be so high that it is not so easy to reach. The maximum fleet score should include both ships and defense. Here it would be necessary to find a reasonable balance. It should not be possible to make all your planets unassailable by defense AND to attack others. It should not be possible to make all your planets unassailable. For example: Player A builds a balanced defense on a planet with all his fleet points. Player B attacks with a balanced army with all his fleet points equal to this planet.  Player A wins, but has no fleet points left to transport resources from his unprotected planet to his protected planet, so player B will raid all unprotected planets. The more ships player A builds to get resources from his unprotected planets, the weaker his defense must be. At the same time the maximum limit of attacks and the 70% of possible resources stolen should be removed. And there should be the possibility to destroy your own ships and defense if you have completely miscalculated.

Now one can also consider whether it would make sense to destroy some or all of the infrastructure. I'm not sure, you might think of something.

So what would my changes do?
Active offensives are always rated higher in the ranking than inactive defensive ones.
To achieve something in the ranking as an active defensive player, you have to compromise and think about new tactics.
You can also attack other players alone without having to live with the punishment of group attacks.
Group attacks and defending friends remains useful.
Outstanding good players will have to fight with equal players in the long run.
A good player in the low level range will ascend faster than a bad player in the high level range.

I suggest a new protection system, since the old one does not make sense at a point you reach later in the game:

Until level 100 the current system can stay the same as it is (Based on exp instead of scrap score as a main component, because the exp is a good indication about the building capacities a player has (2 level 80 player should have about the same production, where 2 level 100 scrap score player can have a huge difference in the production)

After level 100 (either scrap score or exp) you can be called a veteran already and there is no need for any protection system (other than alliances, pacts and other social stuff). With that level everyone should be able to use their full capacities for either attacking or defending.

I am not a big fan of having a maximum fleet cap, because it stops your development at some point of the game (even if this is a high enough number)


For your ranking system I can agree, but both the scrap score and the exp level combined give a pretty good picture of your current overall ranking. Also they allow to see the skill points of that player (and it is pretty transperent)
I think there can be ANOTHER rank (like ELO or something like that) but I would keep both of the two we got atm, because they have a direct impact for the game.


The ablity to attack with full fleets will solve many of the problems, because it REDUCES the fleets we currently have (Example is Fanta... We had 10 attacker and a better tech plus better skillpoints and still lost against about 20% of his total fleet)

If we would have been allowed to send MORE ships then we would have been able to destroy that planet. The lifting of logistic limit does not impact smaller players at all, because they ussually have a small fleet that can be destroyed anyway (because they have less than they can send in one wave)

well i read ur comment i think 3 times, ur not wrong with it, but what will change if we only take the fleet limit away?
I think the only thing what happens, is that a few less player who are already able to deff u are not able anymore. So they will safe the fleet like any other do atm.
So in the end u waiting again for a chance, somebody is sleeping and you catch his fleet away when he isnt looking...

I try to implement a system, that take away this problem and animates to take part of fights, doesnt matter if attacker or defender.
I dont feel animated at the moment for two reasons: To lose my fleet costs more as u catch from one of my planets. Even if i try to deff i will get nearly no scrap points because the fleet is that much bigger, that i dont kill a lot.

If u have a better idea i have my mind open for it. Atm the take away of max fleet points will desperate u the same way as now, the only difference will be, u dont have a target u cant destroy (like now), but u dont will have any target.

So we need a way to make lose a battle great again (sounds stupid, is the only way to change this problem)

Quote:
well i read ur comment i think 3 times, ur not wrong with it, but what will change if we only take the fleet limit away?
I think the only thing what happens, is that a few less player who are already able to deff u are not able anymore. So they will safe the fleet like any other do atm.
So in the end u waiting again for a chance, somebody is sleeping and you catch his fleet away when he isnt looking...

As you say. It changes that u can atk player who have long grown out of the fleet limit size. Where u at the moment are only able to atk them by a group atk.
And as you may have seen even that is not really possible anymore on the Fanta example.
10 players were participating with a 9 hour flight time and we really badly. Why? because each of that 10 players is only allowed to send one fleet that is even capped.
What is the result? Players with big fleets do not atk each other. And even group atk will be impossible soon.

The take away of the fleet logistic limit is intended to reenable the possibility of PvP.

Quote:
I try to implement a system, that take away this problem and animates to take part of fights, doesnt matter if attacker or defender.
I dont feel animated at the moment for two reasons: To lose my fleet costs more as u catch from one of my planets. Even if i try to deff i will get nearly no scrap points because the fleet is that much bigger, that i dont kill a lot.

What do you mean`? U will not defend against a bigger fleet?
No of course not. Thats the way this game is intended to be.

Quote:
If u have a better idea i have my mind open for it. Atm the take away of max fleet points will desperate u the same way as now, the only difference will be, u dont have a target u cant destroy (like now), but u dont will have any target.

We will have a lot more possible targets.
But of course u a right. This suggestion is not a stand alone. Drop of "noob protection" and "Bahs rule" and improving the advanced spy report go hand in hand together with this suggestion.

Corni wrote:No of course not. Thats the way this game is intended to be.

i thought this game was used to be strategy and not hide and seek with extra functions? Because the way it currently works isnt really strategy and delete all fleetpoint limits at this point will just make it to hide and seek. Hide for bigger fleets, seek and destroy smaller fleets. That is really no strategy anymore.

Neoz Playstore wrote:Create a fleet of different ship types to surprise your enemies.

Thats the main reason i was playing the game and atm this keyfunction is not working at all. And i want to get this function back.

Timo wrote:i thought this game was used to be strategy and not hide and seek with extra functions? Because the way it currently works isnt really strategy and delete all fleetpoint limits at this point will just make it to hide and seek. Hide for bigger fleets, seek and destroy smaller fleets. That is really no strategy anymore.

This game and the game where our Dev got the idea to do it was always as you call it hide and seek games. For the tactics see next answer

Timo wrote:Thats the main reason i was playing the game and atm this keyfunction is not working at all. And i want to get this function back.

You can have a lot of tactics in hide and seek. Maybe you should try this gamestyle a little bit more before argueing that there is no tactics involved.
As an example i give u as you are mostly talking about deffing ur self: the ghosting of fleets.
Trick you attacker into thinking you only have a small fleet and a lot of rss on the planet by ghosting the main part of your fleet.
In almost every case the attacker will build up his attacking fleet according to you defening fleet also taking into consideration what you have on planets near by.
You call back ur ghosting fleet timed so that he can not see it / scan it.

Thats just one example.

For the ship collection we have a rock paper scissor concept.
So for example most raiding fleets are made out of fast ships like Hess or Vicis. Its quite easy to counter them...
So i also see here strategy.

Of course i agree that more different ships can help to have more strategy. And i am sure they will come. Its still an alpha ...
But i dont see this discussion still beeing on topic of fleet limit cap. So i will end here.

best regards.