We would be happy to hear your suggestion in this department.

Our first ideas include:
-Maximum & minimum limits on players you can hit based on points.
-Maximum number of attacks one can launch against a specific player in a 24h zone.

amount of money you start with maybe? and make it 2 days for people that cant buy plus or something.

Newbies protection...
Players can't attack a new player within a specific time or maybe when they reach a certain point.
This would reduce players milking new players who registered, logged in once, then quit.

Limit on attacks? I think this would decrease overall gameplay.
How about placing a cap on resources that can be raided? Like 5% of a planets storage cannot be raided.

My suggestion is the following

Newbie protection.
2 days imunity from attacking and attacks
2 days increased resource production rates by 25%
2 days buildings time decreased by 25%

of course the % is up to the Game devs to decide but this way your will get new members in to the game and also give them time to learn the game.

Nice idea.

neoshagrath wrote:Newbies protection...
Players can't attack a new player within a specific time or maybe when they reach a certain point.
This would reduce players milking new players who registered, logged in once, then quit.

Limit on attacks? I think this would decrease overall gameplay.
How about placing a cap on resources that can be raided? Like 5% of a planets storage cannot be raided.

There has to be a limit on attacks like: one planet cannot be attacked more than 5 times a day by the same player or something similar.
YOu say that 5% of a planets storage should be protected.
5% is absolutely nothing.
Half of the resources stored on a planet should always be protected...
If not, that would completely ruin the gameplay and make weaker players unable to build anyithing.

A decisive win is usually established after 2-4 attacks me thinks...
The purpose of succeeding attacks are usually to raid and drain the enemy's resources.

I dunno I never reached 10% of my storage capacity.
But that's just me... Maybe this only works in the beginning.

The sooner we come to an agreement regarding the protection, the better for everyone. It is also hard to define 5% or 20% of resources. % of what ? You mean that the % of the resources the player had when the attack arrived? I think the current % is 50 but I may be mistaken. I will get back to you with accuracy once I get a reply on this.

As far as the general idea, is to limit number of attacks, as I said earlier. Here is an example:

Player A has 500 points
Player B has 400 points
Player C has 250 points

Rule 1: You can attack people with 50% more of your points and people with 25% less of your points.
Results:
Player A top limit:750 bottom limit:375 (Can attack Player B but not Player A)
etc etc

In general, we are not fond at all of this idea. Only perhaps with a big margin (like +-100%)

+++++++++++++

Rule 2:MAximum 6 attacks per player against a planet/ Maximum 12 universal attacks per plabet in the space of 24 hours.

Zorg wrote:The sooner we come to an agreement regarding the protection, the better for everyone. It is also hard to define 5% or 20% of resources. % of what ? You mean that the % of the resources the player had when the attack arrived? I think the current % is 50 but I may be mistaken. I will get back to you with accuracy once I get a reply on this.

As far as the general idea, is to limit number of attacks, as I said earlier. Here is an example:

Player A has 500 points
Player B has 400 points
Player C has 250 points

Rule 1: You can attack people with 50% more of your points and people with 25% less of your points.
Results:
Player A top limit:750 bottom limit:375 (Can attack Player B but not Player A)
etc etc

In general, we are not fond at all of this idea. Only perhaps with a big margin (like +-100%)

+++++++++++++

Rule 2:MAximum 6 attacks per player against a planet/ Maximum 12 universal attacks per plabet in the space of 24 hours.

you should be able to atac everyone who is stronger then you, and you should not be able to atac someone who has 25% less points then you.

something really nice would be to give player protection for seven days
35% more resouces
35% faster bulding and upgradin
and every full 24 hours you should make the bonus 5% less then it was yesterday, so thet in 7 days you reach zero bonus

maybe 7 days is to much but then 4 or 5 with 20% 25% bonus would be gread as well.

the main ideea with the diference in points is the best i think but we shell discus the number ore the porcents.

Mach-330 wrote: something really nice would be to give player protection for seven days
35% more resouces
35% faster bulding and upgradin
and every full 24 hours you should make the bonus 5% less then it was yesterday, so thet in 7 days you reach zero bonus

maybe 7 days is to much but then 4 or 5 with 20% 25% bonus would be gread as well.

I like the general idea.

However, I don't think this is how it should be done. I propose giving new players a choice: Either they get protection for a set number of days (5 or 7 sounds good), but at the expense of less resources gathered per day, say -25%. But, if they choose to spend their first few days vulnerable, only then do they get a bonus, of say +40%. Or at least don't give any bonus to them if they opt for protection. Otherwise, you're rewarding risk aversion and creating unrealistic scenarios, plus with protection and bonuses, new players have less of an incentive to interact with other players to be secure.

Secondly, I don't think this system should be administered by the game engine itself. It should be something you have to interact with others to get. So for example, if I'm a new player and I want protection, I need to find an older player who will be willing to guarantee my independence. In return, the older player will receive the aforementioned -25% resource cut. Whenever at all possible, make these interactions between players, not a player and the game.


Which leads to my final proposition: Treaties and some sort of political leverage or whatnot. Examples:

- Protection treaty. Player A signs a treaty with player B, ensuring player A gets protection from a fleet sent by player B, in return for which player A pays a set fee. To enforce this, at the time of signing, player B must allocate a war fleet to be sent, while player A must allocate cargo ships that will (until the treaty is unilaterally broken) automatically ship resources off to player B.

- Trade agreements. Player A and B sign a treaty stipulating the exchange of certain resources, after which allocated cargo ships automatically exchange them and ship them to the players at the pre-agreed upon ratio. E.g. player A agrees to exchange 2,000 metal every hour for 1,000 crystal with player B, and this is then done by the computer every hour which locks down a cargo ship for this purpose.

- Official war declaration. Haven't though much about the difference between this and random raiding, but it would make wars between alliances more interesting.

- Non Aggression Pact. Signed between alliances, it makes it impossible for either alliance to attack the other, ensuring there are no accidental attacks by members who are not aware of the peace agreement. Of course, this treaty can be broken, but it must be publicly done, at which point every member in both alliances gets a mail saying the treaty is broken.

- Mercenary treaty. Basically, player A pays player B to attack someone. To enforce this, both players must allocate their side of the treaty beforehand. e.g. player A sends resources, while player B sends attack fleet to whoever player A asks to attack. Similar to the protection treaty except it contracts for aggression, not defence.


I don't know what kind of changes have to be made to the game to allow this to happen, but treaties such as these would make the game MUCH more interesting and politically deep.