Thank you ZE.. such a fast and decisive action.. great to see.. I would just like a little clarification on the MD side..

4 successful MD mission per 24 hrs ..this is fine however is this per attacking player. or in total ?

for example what if 2 or more players (not in the same alliance) decide to go for the same player.. each can pop 4 moons, or will it restrict to just 4 moons.. If this is the case it will make it almost impossible to catch a players fleet. As Istalris has pointed out an organised alliance can replace these four moons in a matter of a few hour or even minutes..?

I would like to suggest the adoption of the same rules relating to attacks apply. (5 attacks per planet/moon per play per 24hrs).. would translates to 4 successful MD per player per 24hrs.. This is still a dramatic improvement to the current rules..giving an equal chance for both hunter and prey..

Being restricted to the above each player would know they can not exceed this rule.. If its a total, how would any player know if some one else is also doing MD missions thus sending a MD mission..what would happen if this then exceeds the four..? They would be in breach of rules..but innocently until after the event..

I am just trying to be constructive in the formation of this new rule.. It would not be fare to receive a ban by error. Unless the game can prevent the mission from launching..? (also to prevent wasted time seeing how long these mission take)


Oh one last issue..is (i) inactive's should not fall within the 4 MD limit same as bashing rule exempt etc... If you are inactive then more than 4 mission per 24hrs should be allowed..please. Only fare.. Keeps players more likely to stay active in game..yes..


Regards Gozar

This MD stuff is coded Gozar, the game will not allow you to exceed the limit. At the moment it is 4 MD per player, so an alliance of a few organised individuals can still destroy an entire empires worth of moons in a few hours, no real change at the moment I think as any serious alliance will not just have one person destroying every moon in the first place. However, Zorg and his team are considering creating a script that will block any MD missions against players who have already had 4 destroyed successfully in that 24 hour period.

I wouldn't say it is impossible to catch a players fleet with this in effect, just means you can't throw the old RIP's around and hope you uncover something, you will have to actually hunt the player in question. Learn their habits, learn their times, get informants.. and only go after it when you are certain the fs is in the area of the few moons you can pop. Would put the game back in the realm of strategy rather than brute force, which is not a bad thing, right? People crashed fleets just fine in the 8-12 months MD-lanx was unheard of.

Wouldn't it be so much more interesting when there are loads of decent fleets flying around all competing with each other and making even the top players fleetsave?

ista said:

I wouldn't say it is impossible to catch a players fleet with this in effect, just means you can't throw the old RIP's around and hope you uncover something, you will have to actually hunt the player in question. Learn their habits, learn their times, get informants.. and only go after it when you are certain the fs is in the area of the few moons you can pop. Would put the game back in the realm of strategy rather than brute force, which is not a bad thing, right? People crashed fleets just fine in the 8-12 months MD-lanx was unheard of.

I was for long time trying to convince top players to stop the random MD, as I always believed in what ista is saying above.
Yeah , is true if a player have the maximum aloud colonies and uses only his Moons for FS, the hunter will have a 4/210 chances to find him,instead of using the method : Put fire in the wood and wait rabbits come out or throw some some dynamite in the lake and collect the floating fish.

Now the attacker need to spend time watching and studying the prey habits to find him. I am not sure if a hard code and a message as:

4 MDs already launched against this player, wait till Mds reach the target and try again, or

4 successful MD mission on this player the last 24 hours: Mission impossible.


is possible.

Another important thing, is the player points do not change if fleet on air, fleet built need to be always visible, I can hide my fleet and show 650 K points, so the 1/5 ratio is gone for at least 80% of ZE players.

I would to thank's and congratulate ZE DevTeam for the fast reaction, and that shows that the players should post all ideas to make ZE again the Top game it was once.

Thank you Tom for the clarification to date.. I will again advocate all the changes so far.. only for the betterment of this game.. PK and I spoke awhile back and I agreed with him then to only pop moons of his members that I knew/thought they where FS from.. I have never used brute force as I do not think bully tactics are good for the game.. I only ever attack with enough ships to do the job with minimal loss and low deut cost.. Have a big question to ask ZE which I will post in the appropriate place shortly.

Still would like to see a change in the MD missions on inactive moons same as for attacks on inactives.. as this is now scripted it is not possible in the current format. Can I ask ZE/Dev team to look at this please ( I gave a better explanation in my earlier post ).

This maybe not the place to say, however it has been mentioned here already but I would also love to see the implementation of the recalled deploy mission to fall off phalanx.. Would improve the game no end..

Once again great work ZE.. Can't remember a post receiving so much positive response..

Gozar2 wrote: Still would like to see a change in the MD missions on inactive moons same as for attacks on inactives.. as this is now scripted it is not possible in the current format. Can I ask ZE/Dev team to look at this please ( I gave a better explanation in my earlier post ).

i would like to endorse this along with the the trail of arguments this followed with.

Gozar2 wrote: This maybe not the place to say, however it has been mentioned here already but I would also love to see the implementation of the recalled deploy mission to fall off phalanx.. Would improve the game no end..

Recalled Deploy missions and the Phalanx
ista does have thousand hands and eyes it seems hehe

100k protection is great idea

as for the moons, make a higher chance rips could be destroyed or just refrain yourself lulz Big enough fleet gets going war will just be called so that bashing+MD missions can go unlimited anyways. self restraint is key to keep more player base with the firepower thats out there, was a time I raided out everyone around me all 20 planets, (i) for 50 systems both ways lol a let grow and raid crash later on policy has helped keep long terms players around my locations. the moon issue is more of a IB issue, of course a small guy will quit the game with such firepower not allowing them a moon ever, and most that quit are prob wiser for it seeing the imbalance and wanting no part of a game that so much is being implemented and coming that few can see all, and dictate

If its true that fleet points to show all times is to be "Fixed" with rip fleets in the game able to pop any moon, takes away any surprise a lower player could have had to pop up as a top fleet one day, if we cant hide what we have with fleets out there able to pop any moon enough said to the imbalance there if thats "fixed"

Current vmode doesnt help with keeping players, Id prob quit the game if a 2 mill point fleet of mine crashed by vmode...still waiting on a better medium to be implemented


the downside to 100k protection, it holds back the few players from raiding out superior players faster, so might lose the better player base to boredom so how about a option to leave protection before 100k for us few looking forward to getting out at 10k

First off, A+ topic here in terms of ideas, responses, implementation and all that.

Infectious wrote:so how about a option to leave protection before 100k for us few looking forward to getting out at 10k

Secondly, this sounds like a good idea to me: an option to leave protection early for adventurous individuals. Of course, they still wouldn't be able to hit those below them still in protection, but everyone above them would be fair game. You would also need some sort of indicator in galaxy view so that stronger players aren't caught unaware of the dropped protection.

Thirdly, I would like to express full support for Gozar's idea to drop the MD limit on inactives. It's only fair, after all.

KarrothMelu wrote:First off, A+ topic here in terms of ideas, responses, implementation and all that.

Infectious wrote:so how about a option to leave protection before 100k for us few looking forward to getting out at 10k

Secondly, this sounds like a good idea to me: an option to leave protection early for adventurous individuals. Of course, they still wouldn't be able to hit those below them still in protection, but everyone above them would be fair game. You would also need some sort of indicator in galaxy view so that stronger players aren't caught unaware of the dropped protection.

Thirdly, I would like to express full support for Gozar's idea to drop the MD limit on inactives. It's only fair, after all.

I agree .....but also added to moon destruction thread, I think should involve more risk, and calcualted as rip fleets grow. not set to a certain math, but evolving as rip fleets grow. honestly these players with rips in these numbers, have the infrastructure, and will to fleet big, moons since in this topic is also relevant, the % rip destroyed should be more than 1%. Players with these numbers have the infrastructure and capability to recover form such a loss without losing that much rank they could recover. However it would involve more risk and bring more balance to deter the player RJ that loves to pop any moon in sight, to risk it more to players that are known to have fleets to crash rather than any moon in sight of any noob even...... which I find funny RJ that you made this , when you pop any moon you can in your range just to do so. I propose real balance, and real risk

The current MD structure is not 1% of fleet destroyed, it's 1% chance of failure of the mission.

Answers:
-The limit is on attacker only.
-Script takes in mind possible moon destroy mission on air and limits where needed.

Regarding extra proposals:
-Putting the limit on defender instead of attacker would not work much. The best out of this idea was the limit of the rampage one player can go at.
-Possible alliance cooperation to destroy a target is fine. It is after all much more rare for 10 people to agree to destroy one person rather than 1. It is also something that would enourage teamwork something we are not ready to limit in anywat.
-Regarding inactives and not to have the limit there sounds like a small detail that will not necessarily help; It is better for a player to spend their 4 runs/24 hours on inactives rather than actives.

Ultimately endless moon destroy mostly harm the players who have invested in building up small diameter moons and have not been persistent to get better moons. It is ultimately a choice of strategy.