ACS attack is a must have. I thought Zorg Empire wants to compete in the scene? We will loose a lot of people without it, a lot. We also dont need a stinking vote...

Idego wrote:ACS attack is a must have. I thought Zorg Empire wants to compete in the scene? We will loose a lot of people without it, a lot. We also dont need a stinking vote...

Same here.
How else can we fight against the big guns who keep getting stronger and stronger.

just one thing i want to add, with the current fleet statistics and the available turtle shell that are there. with acs in no turtle is safe. so the game play style the turtles have been playing for last almost two years is going to be for nothing.

I am not turtle personally i do not like the style of game play. just thought ppl who are supporting ACS should take that into consideration as well.

That being said i place my support for ACS to be implemented. the reason i am saying this is because, when you have acs attack in your hand, you already have the acs defend in ur hand already. the game as expected to loose its imbalance will get its balance with having ACS defend in hand. In one hand u are given the power to strike and on the other hand you are already given the power to defend those strikes.

players who think they can defend their planets with those gauss, plasmas and whatever were wrong from the very first minute in all aspects. first of all why would any attacker even bother to attack e.g. a 100 million def planet? just to catch a million or two of ressources and loosing more while attacking? or lets imagine an attack with rips to avoid losses. its lasting 6-10 hours or more. furthermore the attacker has to fear an interception...

the only reason to launch an attacking fleet is to trash another fleet cause this is where the ressources are and then we are talking about xx or even xxx millions of debris. we have to pay xxx.xxx amounts of deuterium even before gaining anything. now counting ship losses, danger of interception while returning and opportunity costs of capital (merchant ratio 4-1 metal deuterium) and turtles are starting to smell.... (no offense intended).

but then the definition here is turtles dont build large fleets. no fleeter gives a sh1t about a turtle cause they dont have anything interesting. they should rather fear IPMs cause they will rip their def apart without making your own fingers dirty. so in fact: ACS attack is basically a feature for fleeters to fight other fleeters.

See Administrator post for timelines. We are constantly working on the game and we won't stop till all we have scheduled are done. These are a lot of things and it is going to be a heavyload winter.

As for ACS Attacka and turtles, this is our biggest problem that needs to be adressed. We do not want to eliminate strategies. As it is now, the strategy of the turtle exists. With ACS attack, we want to add strategies without eliminating old ones, especially in a universe with history where players have made their choices without the presence of ACS attack.

It is nice to see more people to post in the forums, especially about this issue. Truth is that the majority does not post and the more they will do so about this matter (and all the rest) the easier our choices will become.

If anyone has an idea or a solid general plan about the turtle issue, we are more than happy to hear it. An idea that just came to my mind is to make it so that shields do not regenerate in ACS attack missions only... or something like that. The purpose is not to prevent a shell from being damaged but to prevent the destruction of a shell "free of losses". Something along these lines although I am sure that some of you can think better ideas or evolve a philosophy/policy around this matter in a better way due to your superior game experience. Just try to see the whole picture I guess.

few things to point out.

1)

* Reply with quote

New version of Battle Engine

Postby Zorg » Sat Jan 09, 2010 5:34 am
We have created a new version of the battle engine which fixes some glitches and results in better use of Rapid Fire.

You can check the new engine here:
http://www.zorgempire.net/simulator2.php

All experienced players are requested to make some testing and provide us with feedback. Our will is to tweak any remaining issues and integrate into the game as soon as possible.

this was changed 12 months after game came out and 2 months to being given rapidfire to begin with..where was the concern for how this would effect game play and the stat of the ' turtle' then...

2)

* Report this post
* Reply with quote

Re: Discuss new battle engine here

Postby Zorg » Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:43 pm
Well, all the tweaking that we may need to do, has to do with rapid fire ratings for each ship. Death star right now seems all powerful so we might get some wimping on it before too late.

is now to late and whos fault would that be

3)
Re: New Ship: Lunar Guardian (Ex Zorg Frigate)
Deuterium building cost reduced to 15k.
We are thinking that Zorg Physics should affect the rapid fire against Death star

Base 2 + Zorg Physics level = 6 at Zorg Physics level which is required to build this. 12 at Level 10

What do you think about it ?

Final decisions after the beta testing.

by Zorg
Sun Mar 07, 2010 1:29 pm

Forum: Game Suggestions
Topic: New Ship: Lunar Guardian (Ex Zorg Frigate)
Replies: 96
Views: 1073

whatever became of this from not even 7 months ago


Using the logic everyone is putting forth here is that Extreme server will never see another improvement from new ship, rapidfire,acs attack,defense upgrade BECAUSE it will effect the way people have been playing and setting up for 2 years.

Everyones thinking is 1 dimensional and all they see is fleeter vs turtle when if the turtles do what they are suppose to there will be no need for anyone to acs attack them.This leaves the need for ACS attack for a new reason..Fleeter vs Fleeter..it allows for people whom someone could not take on alone to include a few friends and beat ...such as a stronger player vs 4 weaker ones.

The brainwashing of things are what they are deal with it ..is insane and leaves no room for improvements,and not just the cosmetic crap like Union of honor tab or adding things to a banner..Real actual improvements to game play and things that effect game play styles.

Forcing people to change and adapt is not a bad thing and a few forum trollers should not influence the way people actually want to see how they game should be played and how it is wanted to be played by many who refuse to join in discussions in forums because they don't want to get in a crying match with the forum trollers on why they are told their ideas are crap and should not be aloud in.

I am "FOR", on this one.
ACS Attack built.
Ok.

But why attach a turtle?
Just to crush him/her?
then what?

Well, lets say ACS Attack has been released. Why would anyone attack a turtle without a "GOOD" reason?
Even if you have 1000 Battleships, would you risk those just to crush 10000 Light Laser?
Even if you were to crack the turtle, what would you get?
500000 Metal, sure. But, have you calculated the deuterium costs before launching your fleet?

So, why is there a gaping between turtling and fleeting?

There's a gap because in of itself, turtling doesn't bring any income.

As I am a turtle the answer is simple.

" don't be profitable and you won't be attacked " This applies to all types of gameplay.

I am all for the ACS attack. I don't see how it will destroy shells in the game if you keep FS'ing, as there would be no profit.