Should you be able to go into vacation with fleet on air ?

Yes.
Total votes: 40 (75%)
No.
Total votes: 10 (19%)
I don't care.
Total votes: 3 (6%)
Total votes: 53

Re: Vm while active

#81
snave0110 wrote:How about we give same as minimum stay in V mode (3 Days) ?
flight duration more than 3 days still can be saved and will fall under exploits.

now lets focus on how many ways an attacker exploit this, and try to close those options so that its fair for both sides.
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.

Re: Vm while active

#82
Or, instead of complicating it, why not just block vmode if you have fleet in the air that is not attached to a moon in some way?

I'm pretty sure this satisfies both sides, if the victim is trying to VM to escape, the fleet will not be attached to a moon, so VM will be blocked. If it is a legitimate emergency VM, the fleet will be attached to a moon, so VM will be allowed. And if it isn't, well that's the players own fault as all fleets in the air should be anyway.
Image
When people ask me plz because it's shorter than please, i feel inclined to respond no because it's shorter than yes...

Re: Vm while active

#83
again this can be argued with the starters scenario, while starting the game normally u do not know anyone in game to borrow a moon to fs to. i know when i started i had no idea how to play the game and i used to fs from my main to an adjacent planet for fsing. I know this is not a full proof fleet saving but nevertheless it is still a fleet saving. with what u suggested Istal starters wont be allowed to vmode, just giving you a common scenario.
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.

Re: Vm while active

#84
Easily rectified. Enforce this rule only for players above to 10k mark. If you haven't learned by then, you aren't putting in enough effort.
Image
When people ask me plz because it's shorter than please, i feel inclined to respond no because it's shorter than yes...

Re: Vm while active

#85
well that can be the simple solution, but i think if we are changing the process then it should be a tactical tool rather just a regulation. in the blocking features u have more for the fleeters to play with and some really nice goodies for the game dev team to gain from if u know what i mean ;)

EDIT: not opposing just adding up a lil spice to the idea thats all, which ever is taken for development clearly solves the problem i must say.
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.

Re: Vm while active

#86
SPY wrote:well that can be the simple solution, but i think if we are changing the process then it should be a tactical tool rather just a regulation. in the blocking features u have more for the fleeters to play with and some really nice goodies for the game dev team to gain from if u know what i mean ;)

EDIT: not opposing just adding up a lil spice to the idea thats all, which ever is taken for development clearly solves the problem i must say.
I don't think giving the fleeters even more opportunity to 'do something because they can' is going to do a lot for the game as a whole. Making it a baseline feature is the only way to prevent possible exploitation and satisfy both sides at the same time.
Image
When people ask me plz because it's shorter than please, i feel inclined to respond no because it's shorter than yes...

Re: Vm while active

#87
I think that 5 days of real life is a whole lot for people to be locked out of VM. Example

4 days before I am to leave on a 4 week vacation to the amazon jungle I get locked out of VM for 5 days. That would make it a full month of unprotected inactivity by the time I get back to a computer. I doubt I would come back to Zorg Empire at all after something like that.

My point is that a VM lock out needs to be base only on the actions of the individual wanting to go into VM not the player chasing a fleet.
Those with nothing to loose have the most to gain. Long live the Miner!

Re: Vm while active

#88
i think u fail to see the point. the vmode lock is going to be imposed upon u only when u are being lanxed. that is ur fleet has to be moving from planet to planet. not stationary but moving. and if u are a good player u will add moon to ur fleet saves. and a player popping those moons is actually attacking you. and if u are caught in lanx that is u are under attack. when u are under attack there is no point but to work on evasive maneuver or possible come back with a ninja. that is a battle scenario. u are not allowed to leave the field with activating vmode.

so you see even if u are in a 5 day fleet save or take it 9 day, if u are not vmoding before the moon pop and lanx u really are in the game. and once u are caught you are in it for fight not in vacation. because if u would want vmode u would have done that long before. its all about timing.

as long as u are in game not vmoding u cannot deny that its an on going battle field.
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.

Re: Vm while active

#89
If this were to be implemented, how would you determine whether someone has been "locked" or not by a lanx? Would you be required to to leave the lanx window open? Could you just use this to keep someone out of VM indefinitely?
Forum Moderator: The Chill One ~ Gale Points: 52
Image
The only thing standing between me and immortality is death.

Re: Vm while active

#90
vmode lock can only be valid when the player send the attack from lanx hits. lemme see if i can provide an action sequence.

Lanx hit ->[lanx window containing option for vmode lock]->[select lock]->[confirm lock with an attack that is from lanx window.]

lock valid from the confirmation time stamp, till the defender fleet lands. only concerns the two missions, the attackers lock mission, and defenders lanxed mission that was caught.

this should not be much difficult as the original design of the game suggest that it was meant to carry mission types in the fleet menu as in the galaxy view while hovering mouse over planet or moon u see different type of mission selection (all tho they dont mean any thing except espionage mission).
Barbaric nomad causing P-A-I-N.
cron