An idea that was mentioned to me earlier seemed worthy of discussion.

"Alliance planet.
You as an alliance create it, upgrade it, defend it.
It can create resources that can be sent to help alliance members out."

I feel this could add some interesting teamwork to the game.
1.Everyone in the ally gets the red text on their overview when probes or attacks are in progress.
2. Members can add/take resources within the trade rules/milking/pulling. Easier to conduct trades when online times are separated.
3. A collective progression on mines and defenses

Just a few thoughts to start. I'd like to hear some opinions!

Credit goes to Odin, Reloaded, Valhalla alliance.

I like it, but is it a little too complicated?

After all, we don't want it affecting the dynamics of the game too much.

I would support Zorg’s suggestion of partial fleet regeneration after an attack. A lot of players quit or vmode after a large crash, and fleet regeneration might curtail this, make the game more appealing for newcomers, and further increase PvP in the future. It seems like a win-win for everyone, both players who crash and large fleeters.

I also support moonshot ships, as well as a lot of what Ephemeral said about moons and moon destruction missions. Giving all new players a moon to start would help them realize how important moons are and learn to fleetsave. I also agree that making MD missions require fewer RIPs but have a very very high backfire risk would be a good move (note: if this were done, I think it would be important to have a time period of a minute or so on either side of the mission where additional attacks by other players are impossible in order to ensure the defender actually has a chance to ninja, and the attacker can’t send a protective fleet in front of the MD).

I’ve come to the conclusion that higher player protection is also a good idea. By the time new players are targeted by the largest players they will have built up decent accounts and be more invested, and therefore more likely to stick around when they face attacks from them.

One thing I don’t support is the vacation mode time limit. I’ve had to vmode myself for extended periods and would have lost my accounts. I’ve also seen players return after months or years in vmode and this almost always really improves the game and makes it more interesting and exciting. I’m pretty sure many of these players would have left if they would lose their accounts due to extended vmoding.

Just a few things to consider.

A repair bay is a must have for a new version as well as npc targets if the game wants some new blood.

I love it because of simplicity and it's very good on mobile but the game mechanics need a bit more improvement to keep up.

Dekadence, can you possibly expand a little more on the Repair Bay idea.? ie, how it would work, would you have to place things in there yourself or would it be an automatic thing?

I imagined that the repair bay not only accessed fleet regeneration, but also queued the fleets to begin rebuilding. If the regen was instant, much like defenses, a relatively small fleet (300k) would expand into a larger fleet after several hits. for example:
300k fleet is attacked, 20% regen leaves 60k in fleet.
if a second attack goes through, it would be as if the fleet was originally 360k, and so on per attack.
If there is no bashing rule this can be done over and over to make small fleets larger in the end due to regeneration.
Now, if the repair bay comes into play, this could place a delay on the regeneration of fleet by queuing up fleets in the repair yard/bay which would rebuild the ships according to nanite and shipyard levels.

I am for partial fleet regeneration, to the tune of 10-25% as long as it isn't affecting the DF haul.

I think 24 hours after the crash, the ships should respawn at the origin to prevent follow-ups undermining the idea. A message should be sent to the player. Only thing is that it doesn't seem "realistic" from a narrative perspective, but who cares. The point is to have a friendly game design.

I am against the alliance planet, it seems really complicated to implement from a development perspective with a lot of open questions, and I like managing my own resource flows.

EDIT: I guess I'm not opposed to it, I just need way more concrete details about it. It would probably be the biggest change of any mentioned so far, certainly bigger than any lone new ship/defense structure and almost as big as banning inactives. What happens when the person who built the hub leaves the alliance? Do you raid your own hub to take the resources? Is there a pickup mission? Can there be a shipyard? Who owns the production queue of that? Can ships be deployed there? If so to EITHER, you need to manage a datastore of whose ships belong to which user for every single alliance hub. Is it one per galaxy? One total? Who can destroy it? Can death stars destroy it? Like yikes.

markd315 wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:46 pm

I think 24 hours after the crash, the ships should respawn at the origin to prevent follow-ups undermining the idea. A message should be sent to the player.

I think there needs to be some means of the defender manually approving the regen fleet... we wouldn’t want fleet to automatically regenerate if the player still hadn’t come back online after 24 hours (though this would obviously still be better than instant unapproved regeneration).

Another thing I'll mention is that you don't get to pick when defenses will regenerate. Fleet is already dominating defenses as far as tactical choices are concerned for most active playstyles. One of the only advantages of defense is the regeneration, so if you take that away then I'd say fleet is strictly dominant.

I’m remembering an old suggestion from years back: fleet IPMs. I would still love to see it introduced in the existing universes, but given that’s unlikely to happen I nonetheless think it is worthy of consideration and has some potential to add an interesting and more balanced dynamic to a new universe, giving even small players the capacity to do damage to a large fleet left unattended.