Reduce port shield costs

[Major.Arse]

reduce port shield costs by half.

pretty simple.


idea refined:

Do not "cut" the price of shields by half, ie; was 20credits per shield now 10 credits per shield.

Instead cut percentage of shield reduction (cost inflation) by half.
Instead of 2% shield reduction (cost inflation) I propose a 1% reduction (cost inflation) per reshield.

It costs more then 5 million on most perma servers to capture a normal colony.

This fact makes invasions not only very difficult, which i think is appropriate (in that invasion should be challenging) however, not exceedingly tedious.

The simple fact remains invaders like Omlow and myself can and will invade any colony regardless of shield cost. This propossal is to needlessly cut out the tedium that is involved in flying to the next closest port. Making us fly a few extra systems away will not persaude us to buy tokens for fuel. Most invaders are as good at fuel management as they are at dodging solar canons.

-Major.

I sincerly hope builders will see this as a simple way to make a fun experience for all players. If I come and take your systems, even if it took me an hour longer to do then it would have if cost did not inflate so fast. It is very difficult for you the invadee (just add to your firefox dictionary ) to recapture your system from me as I have "killed" your port. Sadly, a fun-squashing but effective strategy in today's sge.

The other problem with ports is: Newbies. they have no chance against large corporations. The team with more credits will win every war every time. Skill isn't nearly as important as it was only a few months ago.[/quote]

[omlow]

pretty much 100% agreement right here.

[Barefoot]

This thread officially has my blessing.

[Alphakiller1101]

so shields at 100% used to be 20.

now shields at 95% are 15, and shields at 99% are 1?

riiight...
I think it's fine =/

[omlow]

so shields at 100% used to be 20.

now shields at 95% are 15, and shields at 99% are 1?

riiight...
I think it's fine =/

we are aware of this. and they'd still be better cheaper.

[NARUTARD]

5m cost to invade 20m to build/defend?

[NARUTARD]

Well I don't support cutting the price of shields in half, but I would support (much)slower price gaining per shield the less percentile they have to buy from.

[Mel'Kaven]

the %'s on ports lower so fast your paying 1mil to rs after like the 5th rs, its almost unethical to mass invade now becuz ports are raped so fast.

[NARUTARD]

Yeah it was almost impossible to take one greenhouse back because of all the mine ramming and solar distracting; both ports that weren't 9 hops away were costing almost 700k at the end. Its absurd. The diminishing factor needs to be reduced not cutting the price in half. That would solve nothing.

[omlow]

5m cost to invade 20m to build/defend?

if this is correct then you are quite simply the worst builder in history, and if anyone questions this, they are also the worst builders in history, and you should all corp together to lose rebangs.

[NARUTARD]

5m cost to invade 20m to build/defend?

if this is correct then you are quite simply the worst builder in history, and if anyone questions this, they are also the worst builders in history, and you should all corp together to lose rebangs.

Sorry let me re-phrase that. Oh look a port that has 99% shields but they cost half as much now and an easy colony to invade. Bam. 500k to invade and 13 mil to build. How is that?

[omlow]

mathematically, the ratios are worse. took me a bit over 1mil to fully build and defend 2 now maxed cols on the Kepler mission. dunno how you build, but resources and defenses are exceedingly cheap.

[NARUTARD]

mathematically, the ratios are worse. took me a bit over 1mil to fully build and defend 2 now maxed cols on the Kepler mission. dunno how you build, but resources and defenses are exceedingly cheap.

1 mil to defend or 1 mil to build? And how long did it take for you to finish it?

[omlow]

all the necessary buildings were completed before UN protection was over. and at that point they had more than enough colonists in the military to destroy all invaders while i finished the rest.

probably about 500k to defend and the rest was just resources from nearby ports. but because im smart i used correct dome placement so it was quick and cheap, yet effective, to defend and i placed the colonies in a nice chuck of space that had ports galore. this is how to build good colonies.

[omlow]

so shields at 100% used to be 20.

now shields at 95% are 15, and shields at 99% are 1?

riiight...
I think it's fine =/

they also used to never go up. and when they did it was extremely slowly.

[Major.Arse]

so shields at 100% used to be 20.

now shields at 95% are 15, and shields at 99% are 1?

riiight...
I think it's fine =/

they also used to never go up. and when they did it was extremely slowly.

idea refined:

Do not "cut" the price of shields by half, ie; was 20credits per shield now 10 credits per shield.

Instead cut percentage of shield reduction (cost inflation) by half.
Instead of 2% shield reduction (cost inflation) I propose a 1% reduction (cost inflation) per reshield.

It costs more then 5 million on most perma servers to capture a normal colony.

This fact makes invasions not only very difficult, which i think is appropriate (in that invasion should be challenging) however, not exceedingly tedious.

The simple fact remains invaders like Omlow and myself can and will invade any colony regardless of shield cost. This propossal is to needlessly cut out the tedium that is involved in flying to the next closest port. Making us fly a few extra systems away will not persaude us to buy tokens for fuel. Most invaders are as good at fuel management as they are at dodging solar canons.

-Major.

I sincerly hope builders will see this as a simple way to make a fun experience for all players. If I come and take your systems, even if it took me an hour longer to do then it would have if cost did not inflate so fast. It is very difficult for you the invadee (just add to your firefox dictionary ) to recapture your system from me as I have "killed" your port. Sadly, a fun-squashing but effective strategy in today's sge.

The other problem with ports is: Newbies. they have no chance against large corporations. The team with more credits will win every war every time. Skill isn't nearly as important as it was only a few months ago.

[omlow]

so shields at 100% used to be 20.

now shields at 95% are 15, and shields at 99% are 1?

riiight...
I think it's fine =/

they also used to never go up. and when they did it was extremely slowly.

idea refined:

Do not "cut" the price of shields by half, ie; was 20credits per shield now 10 credits per shield.

Instead cut percentage of shield reduction (cost inflation) by half.
Instead of 2% shield reduction (cost inflation) I propose a 1% reduction (cost inflation) per reshield.

It costs more then 5 million on most perma servers to capture a normal colony.

This fact makes invasions not only very difficult, which i think is appropriate (in that invasion should be challenging) however, not exceedingly tedious.

The simple fact remains invaders like Omlow and myself can and will invade any colony regardless of shield cost. This propossal is to needlessly cut out the tedium that is involved in flying to the next closest port. Making us fly a few extra systems away will not persaude us to buy tokens for fuel. Most invaders are as good at fuel management as they are at dodging solar canons.

-Major.

I sincerly hope builders will see this as a simple way to make a fun experience for all players. If I come and take your systems, even if it took me an hour longer to do then it would have if cost did not inflate so fast. It is very difficult for you the invadee (just add to your firefox dictionary ) to recapture your system from me as I have "killed" your port. Sadly, a fun-squashing but effective strategy in today's sge.

The other problem with ports is: Newbies. they have no chance against large corporations. The team with more credits will win every war every time. Skill isn't nearly as important as it was only a few months ago.

i completely agree with this. when shields were 1 per shield and very slowly rose in price it was much more balanced, although a tad bit too easy. as back then it wasn't just the large corporations with their seemingly infinite cash from their many colonies who could significantly invade an enemy.

[Woots]

*Burns through 100 mill rsing*
"Oh crap, now I gotta go get money"
*Runs around for 15 minutes getting money*
*Comes back, port prices so ridiculous I give up capping and log*

[Mel'Kaven]

*Burns through 100 mill rsing*
"Oh crap, now I gotta go get money"
*Runs around for 15 minutes getting money*
*Comes back, port prices so ridiculous I give up capping and log*

I would never use 100mil rsing, lol I'd stop invading after 4th col then I'd take another sys with cheaper port... sounds like wooter has a problem with raping innocent ports...

[Woots]

*Burns through 100 mill rsing*
"Oh crap, now I gotta go get money"
*Runs around for 15 minutes getting money*
*Comes back, port prices so ridiculous I give up capping and log*

I would never use 100mil rsing, lol I'd stop invading after 4th col then I'd take another sys with cheaper port... sounds like wooter has a problem with raping innocent ports...

But ports are sitting there just waiting to be raped

[tekkamanblade]

just make shields a normal resource that you can trade between ports. this gives invaders the need to hire noobling trade routers and adds strategic depth of shifting shields away from your worlds towards the ones you want to attack.

[duece]

But then not every port would even sell shields. The amount of shields traded would be less than what is just bought at distant ports. There'd be no net cut in shield prices if it was commoditized.

[tekkamanblade]

the way ports deal with resources is wrong, especially in the case of tradeable shields. it should always be buying if its under 100 percent and always be selling if its above 0 percent.

[milo]

if you are talking about spending 13 mil to build a colony on a rebang you are wasting your money. i win rebangs and spend less than 5 mil the whole game and most of that is on resources. if you build right there is no need to rush buildings.

i agree with omlow and major here. the shield prices go up way too fast.

high inflation rates only help the folks who are already established on a server since they are able to buy from the ports longer than a newcommer since they got more cash. so if you like dead servers where 4-5 people own 90% of the planets then go ahead and support high inflation rates.

mabe instead of rebanging permas toonces should set the shield cost on the "dead servers" to something like 5 and have it be a flat rate. that would entice invaders from everywhere to come take a piece of the big corps and thus liven the server up.

[Major]

if you are talking about spending 13 mil to build a colony on a rebang you are wasting your money. i win rebangs and spend less than 5 mil the whole game and most of that is on resources. if you build right there is no need to rush buildings.

i agree with omlow and major here. the shield prices go up way too fast.

high inflation rates only help the folks who are already established on a server since they are able to buy from the ports longer than a newcommer since they got more cash. so if you like dead servers where 4-5 people own 90% of the planets then go ahead and support high inflation rates.

mabe instead of rebanging permas toonces should set the shield cost on the "dead servers" to something like 5 and have it be a flat rate. that would entice invaders from everywhere to come take a piece of the big corps and thus liven the server up.

and thats exactly what it did when shield prices were a flat 1 credit.

[BardockSGE]

if you are talking about spending 13 mil to build a colony on a rebang you are wasting your money. i win rebangs and spend less than 5 mil the whole game and most of that is on resources. if you build right there is no need to rush buildings.

i agree with omlow and major here. the shield prices go up way too fast.

high inflation rates only help the folks who are already established on a server since they are able to buy from the ports longer than a newcommer since they got more cash. so if you like dead servers where 4-5 people own 90% of the planets then go ahead and support high inflation rates.

mabe instead of rebanging permas toonces should set the shield cost on the "dead servers" to something like 5 and have it be a flat rate. that would entice invaders from everywhere to come take a piece of the big corps and thus liven the server up.

Look! Someone has a brain! Good job Milo.

[ArdRhys4]

It should take about 50,000 shields to lower % by 1 for top 5%, 45,000 for 91-95%, 40,000 for 86-90%, 35,000 for 81-85%, 30,000 for 76-80% and so on until it reaches 10,000 at which point it should lower by 1k each time.

[phantomdan]

I'd like the shield costs to remain the way they are now. Building is essentially more important than invading, as without building there would be nothing to invade. Therefore the scales should be tipped more in the builders favour then the invaders. Any knucklehead can cap colonies with a ton of cash, fuel, nukes, time on their hands. But not any player can build good. Making colonies less time consuming to invade wont attract new players. There was a time when invaders could invade and cap with next to no money, those days are gone. And besides, any "determined" invader always see's the job done, regardless of any factors, a fact none can dispute.

[Camaril]

I'd like the shield costs to remain the way they are now. Building is essentially more important than invading, as without building there would be nothing to invade. Therefore the scales should be tipped more in the builders favour then the invaders. Any knucklehead can cap colonies with a ton of cash, fuel, nukes, time on their hands. But not any player can build good. Making colonies less time consuming to invade wont attract new players. There was a time when invaders could invade and cap with next to no money, those days are gone. And besides, any "determined" invader always see's the job done, regardless of any factors, a fact none can dispute.

i find myself a "determined" invader (no comments please ) yet when i run out of money it doesn't magically appear out of thin air, i have to run around for another 15-30mins (again, no comments) to get money and then i have to go again, this process repeats until A) i get the colony (usually with no money in it) spending 30m to do it or B) it all seems so utterly tedious that i give it up and immediately leave that system seeing as the shields are around 1m for 6k shields.


Camaril - Save the Perma's

[Major]

I'd like the shield costs to remain the way they are now. Building is essentially more important than invading, as without building there would be nothing to invade. Therefore the scales should be tipped more in the builders favour then the invaders. Any knucklehead can cap colonies with a ton of cash, fuel, nukes, time on their hands. But not any player can build good. Making colonies less time consuming to invade wont attract new players. There was a time when invaders could invade and cap with next to no money, those days are gone. And besides, any "determined" invader always see's the job done, regardless of any factors, a fact none can dispute.

any knucklehead with time fuel and credits can build well.

-5 to reading skills.