DrLot [AZGD] vs Dire_Venom, evilbass, Dante [LSD] TD 1.915kk
Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2015 3:13 am
Please look at the following partial CR summaries.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 812.137.500 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 558.335.000 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 367.432.000 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 339.815.500 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 9.285.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 143.825.500 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 9.285.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 117.633.000 units.
All of the above listed attacks occurred through an ACS attack of 1-2 RIPS and a few espionage ships launched by LSD against a heavily defended planet. Please notice that in each case the defender, me, won each of the battles yet lost orders of magnitude more TD loss. This somehow makes no sense to me. Yet it is how the engine reports the results. As a result of this reporting loophole, it is not considered against the terms of the bashing policy for the attackers to launch as many attacks as they please against a single target time and time again.
The fact that the attackers 'lost' each battle makes this possible.
I would propose that the TD loss for each player be the determining factor in whether a player won or lost a battle for terms of the bashing policy. There are other strange factors that go along with the ACS report process in determining points on the attackers score board that also must be addressed.
I am open for a solid discussion on the matter. The events leading up to the conflict are immaterial to the discussion and will not be either addressed directly nor responded to by me.
DrLot
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 812.137.500 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 558.335.000 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 367.432.000 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 16.785.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 339.815.500 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 9.285.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 143.825.500 units.
The defender has won the battle !
The attacker has lost a total of 9.285.000 units.
The defender has lost a total of 117.633.000 units.
All of the above listed attacks occurred through an ACS attack of 1-2 RIPS and a few espionage ships launched by LSD against a heavily defended planet. Please notice that in each case the defender, me, won each of the battles yet lost orders of magnitude more TD loss. This somehow makes no sense to me. Yet it is how the engine reports the results. As a result of this reporting loophole, it is not considered against the terms of the bashing policy for the attackers to launch as many attacks as they please against a single target time and time again.
The fact that the attackers 'lost' each battle makes this possible.
I would propose that the TD loss for each player be the determining factor in whether a player won or lost a battle for terms of the bashing policy. There are other strange factors that go along with the ACS report process in determining points on the attackers score board that also must be addressed.
I am open for a solid discussion on the matter. The events leading up to the conflict are immaterial to the discussion and will not be either addressed directly nor responded to by me.
DrLot