Zorg wrote:No one has felt any interest for the new massacre engine ?

To be honest, with the few tests I have run, I'm not seeing any significant differences other than a higher amount of RF with the massacre engine. This may be attributable to the ships I use in the testing, though.

Allow me to side track a bit, I was doing a bit of BC vs. Lunar simulation test on Speed Battle engine.

so factor into the cost, 240k metal for a Lunar and 170k metal for a BC, at (4:2:1 ratio)
every 100 Lunar will cost about the same as 141 BC

however when you run simulation, about 50% of the time BC loses the battle, isn't BC suppose to have slight advantage over Lunar? consider the rapid fire advantage? I am just wondering why it is set up this way

Zorg wrote:No one has felt any interest for the new massacre engine ?

Will have to wait until people start building RIPs and LGs.

It looks good so far. It's no longer click max max max.

It would be really helpful if you can tell us exactly what you tweaked on the battle engine.

I just hit the 100k point for the first time, and was immediately attacked by a player whose fleet was ranked #1.

He sent 8k BCs at me, and didn't lose a single one of them. Quite frankly, I don't mind that he destroyed my fleet that was there -- it gave me a 19% chance at a moon. But what I don't like is the fact that he didn't lose a single ship. That is well beyond realistic. I realize it's a game, but when you have people violating the spirit of the rules (ie. top players preying on people who JUST make it to the 100k mark), and an engine that works like this, it ceases to be fun.

so will we get new ship or not

http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/g343/Akatcuki/Peinxd2323555.jpg

Parakletos wrote:I just hit the 100k point for the first time, and was immediately attacked by a player whose fleet was ranked #1.

He sent 8k BCs at me, and didn't lose a single one of them. Quite frankly, I don't mind that he destroyed my fleet that was there -- it gave me a 19% chance at a moon. But what I don't like is the fact that he didn't lose a single ship. That is well beyond realistic. I realize it's a game, but when you have people violating the spirit of the rules (ie. top players preying on people who JUST make it to the 100k mark), and an engine that works like this, it ceases to be fun.

gack, lurp, %#$@, spirit of the rules!

Choke do you even play zorg don't see you playing anymore as for the guy with 100k points that's the game depends on your AWS how high it is hay if its lower than your attackers and your defense is weak he won't lose anything and on what server are you

An update to MASSACRE engine is also in the works. The upgrade will be similar to the one we made in Battle Engine 1.1. This will move Massacre Engine v1.0 to Massacre Engine v1.1 Our objective is to ensure that RF respects this formula:
Once this is implemented there as well, the difference between BE 1.2 and ME (Massacre Engine) will be ship to ship RF selection for ME and stack to stack selection for BE 1.2

We believe that ME will be better at the end of the day.
ME currently produces stable results but very explosive ones (huge damage). This is the reason we gave it this name and this is the reason that we chose not to copy it to existing universes but use it on a new universe.
With the following update in plans, we believe that this massacrous nature will come to an end, making it the most suitable choice for all universes.


Finally, whichever queries you have for the Battle Engine, please post in this topic. Battle Engine discussion must be public.

What will be the clear difference between the two

Stack to Stack RF versus Ship to Ship RF.

Again Massacre will produce more damage imo but not that much as it produces now.
Given that BE v1.2 seems to produce less damage than BE v1.1 it could be that ME v1.1 will be better than all (stable,reasonable results).