contact
May 25, 2019, 05:15:38 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Pie

Pages: [1] 2
1
General Starfleet Discussion / Re: Conquest u2?
« on: November 05, 2015, 02:37:31 PM »
When do territories appear? or are they really, really rare and I have just not noticed them yet? :o

2
Conquest Universe / Re: hydro cost
« on: April 13, 2014, 08:34:37 PM »
to be fair, this is now an illiogical discussion..

I don't believe it is, as long as I can see reasons why a zero fuel cost is beneficial to the community as a whole, how is that illogical?

the drawbacks of 0%, 1%, 5% or even 10% hydro costs are these:

1) Players holding territories cannot defend themselves against the top players, having a high hydro output becomes their only defence.


Territories were designed to be attacked, they are supposed to be a major part of pvp - not become non-attackable because of fuel costs! + if they get attacked its a simple case of withdrawing, at no point do they hugely benefit top players because they are undefendable.

2) Fleetspot allocation is irrelevant, you shouldn't be where you are in the top 10 with anything less than AI20.


I was replying to Darth Metz.

... I'd drop all but 1 planet  and hold 8 to 16 terris easy and would worry about the hydro cost.

It would be difficult to benefit from holding too many as there is nothing to stop randoms landing hephs on territories and farming. Your reply seems to have missed that point.

3) Credit purchase WILL drop, that is a guranteed certianty.  I mean why would i now spend $40 per month if i did  not have to buy my feul? Most likely i would now only $15 - $20 per month.


Would'nt $15 - $20 per month be better than $0 per month for BFG?. Because once you can't afford fuel anymore are you really going to keep spending?

4) Higher level foundarys, ROFL have you looked at the cost? Seriously have you? Even merching at the rate of HS 54 i have to do 6 trades for foundary 39, and then 12 fodr founary 40.....Costs spiral out of control and 99% of the players (including me) will not spend $5 - $10 to upgrade a building.


I am well aware of the costs of Foundries. I was envisaging players upgrading to low to mid thirties but there will always be players that want to build higher and will convert hydro accordingly.

6) P modes will be less purchased, with 0 hydro for feeltsaving they willopt to fleetsave instead of p mode, again...I know of plenty of players who have said the exact same thing...ONLY reason they p-mode is because it is too expensive to fleetsave (expensive in terms of credits) Right now it is cheaper to p-mode than purcahse the merchant for hydro.

Players will always p-mode for convenience and to protect overnight builds yet to be forced because its cheaper than fuel costs seriously tells me somethings wrong with the game mechanic, do other unis suffer from this? or do they p-mode when they want to? I bet p-mode is alive and well in these unis.

Also, i don't think pie understands, this universe has an END......So, a temp fix could, and will most likely be a perma fix.

Of course I understand, I can see an end quite clearly. That is why I make these posts. With a zero fuel cost I don't believe it has to end, or as not as fast as the current set up will bring about.


Eventually, your numbers are not going to be supported by BFGs systems and then it is game over for you ( i am almost there, only permitted one more upgrade on a building, then i cannot upgrade it anymore)

So that building has reached its max level, why does it have to be 'game over' ?

In any regard, anything below a 50% reduction is an absurd request

In my opinion, anything above 50% is just as absurd, there is no solution to using a commodity in game that is essential to continued participation if that commodity continues to rise in a real world cost.

I'll make one request to BFG, if you are going to let this uni run its course and make no change, then just before you pull the plug, drop fuel costs to zero and see how it plays out.

Or have a hydro free weekend special.

That is all, thx for reading :P

3
Conquest Universe / Re: hydro cost
« on: April 13, 2014, 11:54:40 AM »
I still think hydro fuel cost should be set to zero.

Will it enable top players to freely roam the universe taking out any and all occupied territories?


Absolutely!
Its a war game and you have to defend yourself from such attacks, there is no fool proof method in place for destroying a player held territory fleet.

Lots of top players holding loads of Territories?


Maybe, but they have to put in the time to take, hold and collect and you are still limited by the amount of fleet spots you have, it soons gets a logistical juggling act and if you're willing to put the effort in, then why not? Though I can assure you hephs will be parking on debris fields everywhere and having a literal field day! Pretty soon you would realise that holding too many will just benefit your enemies (or your alliance, a good thing), so a balance would need to be found.

Will credit purchases drop to an all time low?


Nope, I don't believe so.
There is a very healthy unbalance of non-hydro ships flying around at present, that will inevitably get corrected as players realise how poor thier fleet compositions are and rush to correct that. Higher level foundries will get built to help with mass builds and people will still spend on p-mode.

My absolute main reason for zero cost though is it will bring back balance of what people are willing to pay, in its current form the costs are increasing which will inevitably lead to a dead uni, regardless of any percentage reduction ( A 1%,10%,50% reduction will only be a temp fix, it will still lead to what is happening now,only difference being the time it takes to get there) and with hydro purchase limits in place. We can CHOOSE to spend hydro on new ships or new builds and not be 'persuaded' to save/purchase x amount for fuel and above all, you can comfortably spend only want you want to spend, without running out of options.

Of course players who spend the most will usually end up at the top, but thats never really changed from uni to uni, what this will do is put the risk back into the game, I miss getting probed/attacked and have got complacent in my actions ( I even got caught in the downtime, most exciting thing to happen for ages and never even see it, lol)

Anyway, this is just my opinion on this, feel free to correct any blatantly obvious points I may have overlooked ;)


4
Conquest Universe / Re: conquest is fun
« on: April 09, 2014, 06:32:11 PM »
Hydrogen consumption: 12,778,564,071,671,992

thats my hydro cost just athena IN SYSTEM.......there would be very little chance anyone i attacked would have 24Q hydro sat about for me to recoup that loss.

It also means 4 trades (20k credits) to replace


and also would you not rather spend that on ships?


mmmmmm:D

5
Conquest Universe / Re: conquest is fun
« on: April 09, 2014, 06:29:18 PM »
well, i don't agree.....you know where i live so come hunt me down :)

removing hydro cost for fleet movemnts is not the answer.  Having a mechanism which can reduce it (without having to buy the commander) is the best way forward.

You can't just approach things from your point of view, you have to consider that BFG make so much money from conquest, they really don't give a shit about the issues they couldn't or didn't forsee.

not only have we learned of the SQL (big numbers) issue which will outright stop anything from being built once it reaches a set of big numbers......But, after i have now mentioned it, we are realising that that even merching will eventually not be sufficient.

Hydrogen consumption: 12,778,564,071,671,992

thats my hydro cost just athena IN SYSTEM.......there would be very little chance anyone i attacked would have 24Q hydro sat about for me to recoup that loss.

It also means 4 trades (20k credits) to replace

Whilst i agree bfg have to make their bread, they are making it by alienating their universe which provides them with the biggest income

of course bfg gotta make bread....not what I'm pointing out, hydro fuel cost relations to ore/crystal collecting is absolutely huge...the difference is somewhere in the exponential range...have not worked it out but its a no-win situation unless fuel costs are revoked...I'm sure its simple maths....and ok I~m now officially hunting Kru ;)...luv ya x

6
Conquest Universe / Re: conquest is fun
« on: April 09, 2014, 05:11:18 PM »
How about dropping ship hydro fuel costs to ZERO.

No matter what solution for reducing hydro fuel cost is introduced, it will STILL reach a point where it becomes IMPOSSIBLE to MOVE fleet.!!!

Hydro will still be a valuable resource as it will end up being used most where it should be used - fleet composition.


Seriously, think about this.


Its a solution to a problem that will only get worse, it enables this uni to live on indefinetly  - and not get closed in 6 months(?) 'cos bfg can't support it anymore literally because its broken -

we are very different here in conquest to other unis as we can see it short time scales the benefits/disadvantages of long term play...and this uni is screaming out for free fleet movement, without it, it dies...with it, it survives and we see war and survival and ....ya know , just what we played four years ago .......but on a technology front (very different to 4 years ago!) that allows for instant access to anyone, anywhere...i personally love the 8 minute attack times and keeps me interested but if it gets to a point that no one (no not you, lol)  is launching 'cos of fuel costs then whats the point?????


ZERO FUEL is what I truly believe the way this uni will not only survive but also attract some serious new blood and end up being the game it should be...




and if you lot don't agree then I'm personally hunting you all down, heh heh

7
Conquest Universe / Re: conquest is fun
« on: April 07, 2014, 07:35:03 PM »
How about dropping ship hydro fuel costs to ZERO.

No matter what solution for reducing hydro fuel cost is introduced, it will still reach a point where it becomes impossible to move fleet.

Hydro will still be a valuable resource as it will end up being used most where it should be used - fleet composition.

Just a thought ;)

8
Conquest Universe / Re: conquest is fun
« on: April 01, 2014, 03:49:37 PM »
wow, I don't even want to think about HS 52, I thought this build was insane, what with having about 6 trillion dios running and cargo's ferrying everything about, let alone having to up my thanatos count yet again as they're not cutting it with the MT's - and I don't even want to mention zeese, lol  ;D

9
Conquest Universe / Re: conquest is fun
« on: April 01, 2014, 03:20:03 PM »

AND, i still stand by my statement, that i have the ONLY account in conquest that has NEVER been pulled by anyone to progress my rank :D

Me neither, I started week one (can't remember if it was day 1) and have never been pulled (top ranked in my alliance for most of that time), currently in top 10 watching my rank slip while saving for HS 50 :D

10
Conquest Universe / Re: Research Lab
« on: March 28, 2014, 05:17:23 PM »
Wait... I've confused myself...I'm thinking that higher labs on planets should show faster times but if it takes total labs and displays that way then I'm wrong and what Kru is saying is correct, I'll go away now, lol

11
Conquest Universe / Re: Research Lab
« on: March 28, 2014, 05:13:00 PM »
I'm sure research times were reduced when adding a lab level, much the same way as adding a foundry level or shipyard level which increase regardless of bonus, otherwise it would be pointless building a lab to anything beyond 10 (as it stands now) if all you need to do is occupy a few territories to get bonus to 75%

12
Conquest Universe / Research Lab
« on: March 28, 2014, 04:45:02 PM »
Has there been a change to how research times are calculated?

I have 1 level 40, 1 level 36 and the rest are level 39. They all have lab droids.

When I'm occupying territories to take the bonus to 75%, the research times on all planets are identical, regardless of individual lab level.

A fellow alliance member has reported there is no difference between a level 10 and a level 30, once the 75% bonus is in play!

Please fix BFG! - Research times are way to long as it is, without losing benefits from investing (heavily!) in extra research labs.

13
Hired Guns Universe / Re: Game Bugs
« on: December 10, 2013, 10:19:42 AM »
Hi, I've just noticed on the resource vault a possible error with the hourly build rates.

The amount I'm producing is

Production
Ore:
81,070/hr
Crystal:
48,641/hr
Hydrogen:
32,428/hr

Time to collect is

Travel Time:
00:21:13

Amount ready for next shipment after delivery (+approx 5 mins)

Ore: 19,211
Crystal: 11,526
Hydrogen: 7,684
Total: 38,421

Unless I'm missing something, those figures should be close to what is produced in half hour, but its closer to what is produced in 15 mins.

A further snapshot..

Ore: 30,000
Crystal: 17,999
Hydrogen: 12,000
Total: 60,000

Page rendered at 10:11:49.

Ore: 31,359
Crystal: 18,815
Hydrogen: 12,543
Total: 62,719

Page rendered at 10:13:50.

so in 2 mins total ore produced  is 1,359

30*1,359 = 40,770 ore per hour, not the stated 81,070 per hour

Apologies if I'm missing something obvious or bad math, only on second coffee ;)

14
Hired Guns Universe / Re: Territories
« on: December 08, 2013, 08:37:46 AM »
The total number of territories in the game is based on the total number of players in the game. More players, more territories. They are intended to be conflict points.

Players using p mode to hold territories sort of messes up any chance of conflict. Its a game breaker for me, so I'm hoping its an oversight and will be rectified soon :D

15
Bug Reports / tear down
« on: December 06, 2013, 01:14:41 AM »
I am unable to tear down buildings on the territories. I am currently on an Alien Experiment and tried tearing down a couple of different buildings. It takes resources but the message states that the level is completed and no change occurs.

Pages: [1] 2