Hi there, I really like this new feature but would like it to be modified a bit.

After a player loses his fleet, he/she should get an option to rebuild the lost fleet for free ( 10x slower ) or rebuild the lost fleet with resources ( the old way with normal speed ).

The option to choose will be strategically very important. If I am participating in an active Alliance war, I would want to build my lost fleet as soon as possible, even though it costs me resources. Especially, if I have lost some transmitters or recyclers and found an opponent's planet full or resources and rubble field, I would rather build my fleet faster and make use of my opponent's absence.

Overall, the new features seem very good and I am excited to try the test UNI this weekend. You guys are doing a really good job. Keep it up.

Regards,
Srujan

I think that is a good point.

Another issue that I would like to see addressed is whether the fleet restoration is helping a lazy passive player or an active player.

For example, if the battle happens within 10 seconds of fleet arriving back, then that can be counted as an intercept. This is an active player who was unlucky because a scanner saw his fleet movements.

If a player is just oversleeping or for some reason does not log in while his fleet is on the ground, this is just bad playing skill.

Is it possible that the fleet rebuild time for an intercept (battle is less than 10 seconds after the fleet returns to the planet) is faster than the rebuild time for any other fleet loss? My suggestion would be 10x slower rebuild (and maybe only 60% restoration) for normal fleet loss, but only 5x slower rebuild for intercept fleet loss (and possibly up to 90% restoration).

One further idea - since the fleet lost in a battle will only have 20% rubble created, can we please have all types of resources in the rubble field? So all 4 types of resources, including spice and pig iron. 20% drop from 40% is a very tough pill to swallow for someone who loves the smell of destroyed spaceships... but having spice and pig in the rubble field will make it a little easier to accept.

As i see it, rebuild changes are good as for players who play active (interception of the full fleet still hurts but it`s not fatal now) and for players who play passive (now they loose less than earlier).

But i see a problem with reducing amount of rubbles. Yes, it`s absolute logical decision, it`s balancing amount of fleet and etc, but for attacker this change isn`t good as it seems. From POV of attacker every flight is correlation of risk (stable losses and probable losses) and reward. With these changes now the rewards of success are recude in half, yes, probable losses now a little bit less, but attacker still not gonna put himself in a situation, when interception are guaranteed. And attacker still have the same stable losses of spice on flight, and for top fleeters it`s a hundred millions of spice. Every time it`s a decision, build few thousand pheonixes/bs or make 1 flight.

Now fleeter have even less desire to make flights, because most of the flights are still for nothing (most players are still good and don`t let destroy themself easily), and now reward is reduce in half. If u want to make these changes permanently, u have to make flights cheaper. How are u gonna do it, it`s a different topic, but it had to be done just for the balance.

Perhaps is a good idea but the chance of rebuild the whole fleet is excessive prize even with the speed limit
I think the chance of rebuild about 30% is more fair with all the players that are doing escape fleet all days

die sogenannte flottenversicherung sollte nur für spieler kommen die nicht unter den top 50 sind,und -oder
.
als einspieler durch das uni reisen.

ob dann 30 oder 60% erstattet werden über einen zeitraum von xx wochen mag dann für mach einen
.
schon zu viel sein-
.
sie sollte auf keinen fall für spieler gelten die einen aks. fliegen. hier und auch bei weiteren atts sind die
.
möglichkeiten - und auch andere.- einfach zu groß nicht sauber und redlich ...zu arbeiten...
.
.

.

@rieddel

Für was denkst Du ist das ein Englischsprachiger Thread?
dafür das hier englisch geschrieben wird..
für deutsche kommentare ist der deutsche bereich vorgesehen..
bitte tu allen den gefallen und übersetze den text, damit ihn englischsprachige auch ohne den übersetzer lesen können..

What do you think this is an English language thread for?
for the fact that this is written in English ..
the german section is intended for german comments.
please do everyone please and translate the text so that english speakers can read it without the translator ..

Some thoughts on how things feel in the test uni with this fleet rebuild.

Firstly, it is good at promoting active play. People are taking risks and flying a lot, if they lose their fleet, it doesn't hold them back too much. This is a good thing. Part of this activity is also mixed in with the high speed dynamic too.

This is leading to one aspect of game play helping people grow more than skill. TIME. If they have time to play, no matter how carelessly they play (and sometimes with poor strategy), they can still keep growing at almost the same rate as the skilled players. All they need is time.

It might be best to bring a small adjustment to the balance of this fleet restoration. Instead of restoring 75% for all fleet losses, maybe only 75% for fleet losses where over 50% of the players fleet points are lost. So small losses where players recklessly try to steal someone's overnight res and get intercepted don't get restored, etc. Also, as someone mentioned in the German thread, there seems to be no victory for the defender. If you successfully ninja someone, they rebuild too easily as if their lack of skill has no consequences.

Added to this is the rubble being so minimal, strategic players who attack successfully (or defend successfully) can't grow much faster than the poor players because they don't get much advantage from collecting rubble.

An interesting strategy choice is fleet loss players who gather the rubble - they not only restore 75% of their fleet for free, but they can easily rebuild the other 25% from the rubble. It might be viewed as fun to deliberately crash their fleet and grab the rubble for a rebuild while they pop out to have a meal...

All in all, this is a good idea, but a small balancing tweak might be useful.

I would suggest that the test uni be extended by 2 weeks with only 1 small adjustment - change the speed to 5 times speed for that extra 2 week period so we can better see activity levels and also better test the scanner and specialization dynamics. At the end of this 2 week 300x speed, most players will have huge accounts, so there will be a lot for people to keep playing for in the extended 2 weeks at 5x speed.

Yes, I think a slight required cost in the rebuild (or for part of the rebuild) might help. If there are no (perceived) costs to recklessness or carelessness, the activity will drop as well once people get bored of playing with too little challenge. Finding something at least slightly difficult will add to engagement.

But I still think it is a positive change.

I like the idea of rebuilding fleet.
1. I would lower the reconstruction speed so that it takes longer to build, I don't know how long it would take in a normal universe
2. Increase the fleet loss to 50%
3. Once the player lost the fleet he would put a 24-hour attack protection, as a penalize for losing the fleet him and as a rest so he could not be attacked

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would also like to consider this idea.
It is essential to know when they spy on you and when they attack you.
And with so many msj I don't know if they are mine and how many msj of my enemies.
It would be very easy to put the "number" of msjs in green, and when an enemy spies on you or attacks, put the red msj. While this red message is not read or deleted, it will not change to green.

PS: How difficult it is to write in the forum while playing in the AUREA uni

Quote from pitbull

PS: How difficult it is to write in the forum while playing in the AUREA uni

Very true!!!

Well you could have like a Insurance policy setup where a player has to pre-pay with resource's for a percentage amount of his fleet. Where the player would have to have assigned a policy to the fleet amount before the attack happened or the policy couldn't be obtained if there were any attack runs happening towards any of their planets.

This would also allow for a easier system as you can have it that a players has 24 hours from attack to claim on the policy. After that 24 hrs if policy hasn't been claimed it is for forfeited. A there are any fleet loses of ship's in a battle a time stamp is set and you have 24 hrs to claim. And a new policy has to be pre paid for.

The policies taken out can be taken out for each ship type and a percentage amount of that ship type. Which is workout at time of setting policy. This would mean the system will only allow you to re-build for free the % of the amount for that type of ship from the policy that was set in place at purchase.

Just like an Insurance policy you would only be able to have 1 active on each ship type at one point in time. Once the policy has been set you have the set protection for that ship type at the % amount of how many ship's of that type you are taking the policy out for when the policy is purchased. The cost for the policies for each ship type is determined by a set % of the actual cost to re-build per 1 ship of that type. Of which tyhe system would have a time stamp for that policy bought which would have an expiry time on it.

The system would notify you 5 minutes before policy is to expire telling you what ship type policy is going to expire. Maybe a new Insurance policy page would be the best way to go with this idea. But have the Notification come up on the command central page.
Or
you have to pay a slightly higher amount for each ship type when you go to build that ship type. Normal cost and another Fleet Protection cost. This would mean you would have a slightly higher cost to the protected ship's. Only the % amount of fleet protected ship buy's will be re-inbursed by free build. All ships that are bought at normal cost would not be protected with re-inbursment. You would have to have somewhere stating to the player what % of that ship is covered by free build.

the second method would be much easier to implement then the first idea.

Have somewhere where you can see your total amount of your fleet telling you the % amount covered for each ship type you have paid for as protected ship type at point of building the ships. So you would have to have paid the Protection at time you build the ship's. As if you built any non protected ship type's they wouldn't be covered by fleet protection but would make a minus change to your fleet protection % for that type of ship.

This would mean if you bought say 50 Nixies at protection cost and 50 at Normal cost you would only receive 25% in fleet free re-build for that type of ship. As you get 25% because out of the 100% of the Nixies purchased you only covered 50% of that 100% of the Nixies. SO that meant you covered half of them therefore the protection cover was halved to compensate.

The above figure was chosen to show how simple the idea would be to go for Fleet protection idea.

This way a fleeter would more then likely have protected battle style ships why the miner would protect their Cargo ship's.

For ease of calculations with the system. The calculation of Protected % would be rounded to the closest amount to a figure ending with a zero. This is to make it easier for the computer to compute and we won't end up with the system being overloaded with calculations.

I think that when it generates the resource cost of the fleet it lost, it should gain the right to re-create it for free. the amount of rubble should remain the same. Spend fuel, be a target. and your opponent will be able to rebuild his fleet in a short time. It doesn't make sense at all. the risk is more than the reward to be won.

After considerable thinking about this new feature of Fleet Protection. You are handing out to players that don't use strategies all ready within the game. Some player's decide that they are going to just build a fleet without thinking of building the infrastructure for a quicker recovery when they lose their fleet.
A major strategy is to all ways prepare for the worst case scenario of losing your fleet. If a player has spent the time building the infrastructure needed then he will have the means to recover. Other player's seem to hold all their eggs in one basket. Doing so they have the infrastructure but not the means to recover as quick as someone who spreads out their capable loses. To me if players took more time to plan their game strategy. Then there wouldn't be a need for Fleet Protection at all.

Posted incorrectly post has been moved to correct discussion.

https://board.bitmeup.com/inde…Specializations/?pageNo=3

In general, this idea was very powerful and totally change the nature of the speed uni. I've played a few test unis, but this one was completely different. The players that lost their fleet did not immediately go into VM and rage quit. I lost my entire attack fleet and the next day had more fleet points than before I lost it.

The one struggle I would have in a slow universe where an attack and rubble collection took me a few hours to finish would be the smaller rubble field. 25% is not a great motivation to be aggressive. I think we might be creating a strategy to improve continued participation from unskilled players while dropping participation levels of skilled players.

I still think it is a great addition to the game. Maybe some small adjustments can be applied.

Maybe look at some way of improving a player's ability to slightly higher rubble fields dependent on such a thing as a skill ranking. This ranking would go up and down depending on successful and unsuccessful attack's. This would then as Fodsey mentioned about skilled player's dropping in participation because of the percentage level they receive in a battle. As these player's then would be attacking to improve their ranking to receive higher rubble field's. While lower skilled player's who continually lose battle's would receive a lower amount which of course wouldn't go below the 25%. But we would have to think about a top % amount a skilled player would achieve.