Sprog wrote:no need to tweak anything imo.........gives the little guy a chance against the big guns......if you don't like it then don't build sats .....if it's for the graviton then you should always instant build them when you have enough res etc

if sat destruction is the only way to get at us..you lost already n the new people will feel the wrath..i am big enough i can survive..starving your next wave pf food supply off is my target grp now

i had my grav. techs complete before i came oop. insta build the sats. I have used this tactic against Chosen. They popped all my moons but now that the tables turn they cry. It is not a tactic i would use so much if they had not popped all my moons knowing there was nothing i could do about it. Fine for the big guns to bully us but not the other way? i don't even use sats and i have no power issues. don't want to lose sats, don't use them.

easy to defend. just keep esp probe as well. this will reduce the chance of rf against sats.

big-fat-cow wrote: Top players, or should i say, top miners spent a lot of resource to build these mines, only to be crushed by a strategy that is un-defendable. and i stress this word, because no strategy in ZE should be undefendable.

the sat destroy missions are a ramdom thing on the rapid fire. lg had rf against sats probes and rips. if you put some of each then their is only a 33% chance of success every round.

This makes the past two posts about adding random ships and defence into the mix to slow the RF hard to agree with.

big-fat-cow wrote: if the battle engine is designed so that random stack is selected to be fired upon, how come the chances that LG killing sates are so high when you have 10 types of defense and 10 types of ships to be targeted on the planet?

My question is why does the LG have such high rapid fire against sats compared to all the other ships omitting the Deathstar? Wasn't to developed to counter Deathstars? not as a sat crashing specialist?

Saying "don't like losing sats, don't use them" is a hard sentence to swallow if you a multimillion points of mines to power, I'd assume.

Stempf wrote: the sat destroy missions are a ramdom thing on the rapid fire. lg had rf against sats probes and rips. if you put some of each then their is only a 33% chance of success every round.

In theory that is true,

so are you going to put a RIP on every planet? that makes you a even bigger target. not to mention, someone can just send 3 waves of 1 LG, or 3 to 5 LG in 1 wave. the cost is negligible.

big-fat-cow wrote:
if the battle engine is designed so that random stack is selected to be fired upon, how come the chances that LG killing sates are so high when you have 10 types of defense and 10 types of ships to be targeted on the planet?

first how much a noob are all of you old school players? rf only has random target selection against targets it has rf against. so a lg only has 3 targets to choose from not 20.

second how many times have you seen posts about how unfair it is for a big guy to smash a little guy just out of protection? how many times have you bashed the little guys sats when they are going for their gravity research? how many times have you sent 50,000 lg or bc after a target who has less than 1000 ships total? how many times have you destroyed little guys moons because you thought you might find their fleet that way? cry cry cry cry babies!!!

your in here wining because you had to spend 3 sec rebuilding 30k sats and lost maybe 8 hours production, but you have no qualms destroying 9 moons making that player loose 3 weeks of raiding resources to rebuild? cry me a river. build your sats back or build fusion reactors or quit picking on little guys so they dont come up with new ways to get you back.

Watch the flaming Stempf, I'm sure the top players didn't get to their rank from being noobs.

Stempf wrote: first how much a noob are all of you old school players? rf only has random target selection against targets it has rf against. so a lg only has 3 targets to choose from not 20.

I have trouble understanding what you'e saying here. Are you saying that the lunar guardian can only fire on three different targets in a battle? If so, that is very wrong.

I for one am not in here whining, nor am I a very big player. I also have never done this strategy and never had it used against me either (I don't use sats). But I do think it is a very legitimate problem.

no im not say it only can fire against 3 targets. im saying that during the first round it fires one time at 2000 points plus weapons research (wr) at the total defense shields. then rf comes into play. 1 lg can fire up to 600 more times at 2000 points plus wr at probes. or it can fire up to 150 times at 2000 plus wr at sats or it can fire up to 10 times at rips. Druing the rf round of battle those are the only three targets it will fire at. if none are present then the lg only fires that one time and that is it.

Well that was a lot to read and seems opinions are split fifty-fifty.

I say reduce LG power slightly or increase BC. So LG's can't completely wipe out BC with no effort.

I've had the 1 lg done to me and the person did MILIONS OR TENS OF MILLIONS of damage even though their ship was destroyed. It really didn't hurt me all that much in the long run. No, this was not a small person. This was a person on a relatively equal playing field in some ways.

So reduce LG please or increase BC. If you can't, oh well I'll just carry on.