The V mode

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • Agreed with @Kaldor. If you can't play without destroying someone's moon(s), you need to find a different game. V-Mode is essential and it does not need to be changed, but shortened instead in speed universes.

    Also, anyone saying that "people should be forced to stay out of V-Mode for any amount of time once they've de-activated it" should also find a different game. I like having the ability to turn on V-Mode the very next second after turning it off. If I can't turn on V-Mode at my will, then it's a useless feature and might as well remove it for everyone.

    And if you're so insistent on destroying others' moons to boost your ego, please let us turn moons to bunkers, so it can be a fair fight.
  • AMNeSia wrote:

    Agreed with @Kaldor. If you can't play without destroying someone's moon(s), you need to find a different game. V-Mode is essential and it does not need to be changed, but shortened instead in speed universes.





    Also, anyone saying that "people should be forced to stay out of V-Mode for any amount of time once they've de-activated it" should also find a different game. I like having the ability to turn on V-Mode the very next second after turning it off. If I can't turn on V-Mode at my will, then it's a useless feature and might as well remove it for everyone.





    And if you're so insistent on destroying others' moons to boost your ego, please let us turn moons to bunkers, so it can be a fair fight.

    It's their way of playing. Against GOOD fleeters that know what are doing, they are forced to MD because they can't get them otherwise.

    But now that you talk about "bunker" in a moon... How is that going to help? Sorry for asking this, it's been a while, quite a long while since I've MD'd on anyone. (It was only once and it was an experiment...)


    For example, you put 100.000 Plasmas in a moon, in theory you would need around 20k or more RIPs to win in 6 rounds. After those RIPs nail those Plasmas, won't they just easily destroy the moon? I used these numbers because this is Quantum and the big fish has 20k RIPs.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Grimm ().

  • A MD fleet must attack the defender's fleet at the moon and his moon's defense first. If a draw is the outcome (or total destruction of the attackers fleet) the MD attempt never takes place.

    Regards, version4









    version4

    JeB Jedi Bunny

    Long Live UNI 1
    Long Live UNI 17

    The post was edited 1 time, last by version4 ().

  • if they want it destroyed bad enough, its a simple thing to nuke any defence on the moon.

    i think they should cap the speed

    MDs should not be faster than a normal sleep period.

    if you've fleet-saved and done everything correct, you shouldn't wake up to find your moons gone and its game over.

    if the speed was capped at 7 or 8 hours, defender has a fighting chance.
    MOST HATED RANK #1

    TOP 1 (solo) x 2 (ACS) x 1

    TOP 10 (solo) x 3 (ACS) x 9
    Super Adv x 64
    Adv x 290
    Basic x 1711
    RIP KILLS 6518



  • Moon Destruction

    Rip Count149
    Moon Size8426
    Rips will be destroyed45.9%
    Chance of Moon Destruction99.9%




    Costs: Deathstar (Count 149)

    Metal Crystal Deut


    745,000,000 596,000,000 149,000,000

    Total res for rips 1,490,000,000
    30% debris field setting for server,

    So any defending fleets over 4,966,666,667 recurring, (without including res captured during the attack( or trade rates)) if hit by the attacker can be technically be profitable,

    there is less than 50% chance you rips dont come back,

    Now couple that with the info Kaldor posted above regarding the speeds to do a MD mission
    1:21:18 for cross system,

    I kinda understand why people would Vmode Fleets-save

    And remember this is a 30% Debris Field Uni, it only gets worse if you increase that percentage
    "In the End, We Will Remember Not The Screams Of Our Enemies, But the Silence Of Our Friends".
  • Narcotics wrote:

    Moon Destruction

    Rip Count149
    Moon Size8426
    Rips will be destroyed45.9%
    Chance of Moon Destruction99.9%



    Costs: Deathstar (Count 149)

    Metal Crystal Deut


    745,000,000 596,000,000 149,000,000

    Total res for rips 1,490,000,000
    30% debris field setting for server,

    So any defending fleets over 4,966,666,667 recurring, (without including res captured during the attack( or trade rates)) if hit by the attacker can be technically be profitable,

    there is less than 50% chance you rips dont come back,

    Now couple that with the info Kaldor posted above regarding the speeds to do a MD mission
    1:21:18 for cross system,

    I kinda understand why people would Vmode Fleets-save

    And remember this is a 30% Debris Field Uni, it only gets worse if you increase that percentage
    Imagine 70% DF uni
  • Grimm wrote:

    It's their way of playing. Against GOOD fleeters that know what are doing, they are forced to MD because they can't get them otherwise.

    But now that you talk about "bunker" in a moon... How is that going to help? Sorry for asking this, it's been a while, quite a long while since I've MD'd on anyone. (It was only once and it was an experiment...)


    For example, you put 100.000 Plasmas in a moon, in theory you would need around 20k or more RIPs to win in 6 rounds. After those RIPs nail those Plasmas, won't they just easily destroy the moon? I used these numbers because this is Quantum and the big fish has 20k RIPs.
    First, if they can't get them without destroying their moons, then that's their problem. Is that specific target really worth the obsession to end up resorting to moon-destruction?

    And as far as bunkers go, I explained my point VERY elaborately in another thread I created: Making moons more defendable.

    I think the current way moons are built and eventually destroyed is UTTERLY cheap. Fleeters have it easy because they never have to fight any moon defences. That's NOT a fair fight. The fleeter should be equally in danger of losing their DS (and no, I don't mean by the MD chance, I mean by actual fighting against defence). DS have an insane amount of Rapid Fire and moons have the Shipyard and resultant defences available, but they're impractical and wasted due to the slow speed of building defences, leaving moons excessively vulnerable.

    The moon destruction itself is not a problem. Problem is how easy it is to trash moons because building defence is impractically slow and therefore, anyone who sends enough DS has an easy win. Yes, turning moons into planet-like bunkers IS helpful, because it levels the playing field. The attacker should have to FIGHT for those resources, not just fire their one-shot Graviton cannon from the DS and finish the job with a huge loss to the defender.
  • There wouldn't be much problem with MDs in the first place, at least in Quantum, if there wasn't such a gargantuan difference in military power between RIO and poor little us.

    AMNeSia wrote:

    First, if they can't get them without destroying their moons, then that's their problem. Is that specific target really worth the obsession to end up resorting to moon-destruction?




    And as far as bunkers go, I explained my point VERY elaborately in another thread I created: Making moons more defendable.





    I think the current way moons are built and eventually destroyed is UTTERLY cheap. Fleeters have it easy because they never have to fight any moon defences. That's NOT a fair fight. The fleeter should be equally in danger of losing their DS (and no, I don't mean by the MD chance, I mean by actual fighting against defence). DS have an insane amount of Rapid Fire and moons have the Shipyard and resultant defences available, but they're impractical and wasted due to the slow speed of building defences, leaving moons excessively vulnerable.





    The moon destruction itself is not a problem. Problem is how easy it is to trash moons because building defence is impractically slow and therefore, anyone who sends enough DS has an easy win. Yes, turning moons into planet-like bunkers IS helpful, because it levels the playing field. The attacker should have to FIGHT for those resources, not just fire their one-shot Graviton cannon from the DS and finish the job with a huge loss to the defender.
    Yep, that's what I thought.

    So... Make Nanite available in a Moon? That would probably solve most problems with MD defence.

    I sure would start spamming plasmas and fodder on my moons if I could build them in a few seconds like I can in my planets thanks to Nanite. At level 10 Shipyard, a Plasma takes more than 30 minutes to build, and this in a 7x Uni... And you don't have many moon fields and they aren't exactly cheap either.
  • Smoke Nightvogue wrote:

    The thing both of you are talking about is not anyhow a solution for Moon protection in speed Universes, because of the way IPMs work. :) 2-3 miners providing such support for the attackers can succeed in practically getting rid of any number of defenses on the Moon.

    At least they would have to waste a few res. to actually destroy the moon... And not send a 1 DS wave to one-shot a completely defenceless moon. And we are talking about a single moon. A guy with 10 moons would be far more costly. This doesn't solve our problem in Quantum, since every miner and their moms aside from a few exceptions work for the growth of a single Alliance, but it will solve a huge amount of other newer and-or slower servers.
  • You chose to play in a 5x fleet speed universe.
    RIP's fly 5x faster.

    Blue shield is not a play style.
    I'd change the VMode (vacation mode) back to the old way. Nothing flying, building or researching to enter.
    Min 72 hours in VMode. (max at 6 months, without a check-in, deletion rules still in effect)
    48 hour countdown to next allowable VMode.

    I would be agreeable to a space dock like extension of the planet's nanites to its moon. (New nanite feature)
    Also phalaxes and jumpgates shouldn't use up moon base slots.

    Happy hunting to all.

    Regards, version4









    version4

    JeB Jedi Bunny

    Long Live UNI 1
    Long Live UNI 17
  • MDs are root problem of speed unis, without them being so easy, game would be much livelier. But I know that for many is hard to grasp link between cause and effect and to think 3 steps ahead. There arent 2345 new mega mergers along a way to spice up the old unis.
  • Nanite to the moon is the way to solve this problem. And in fact, it's the only way. It's the only way to make things balanced.

    It makes moon destruction not so ubber easy and at the same time not so ubber difficult, but the attacker HAS to at least WORK his ass to destroy a moon and THAT'S how it should be played, and the same applies to the defender who HAS to FORCE HIMSELF to waste Res. on Moon Defence and also on building Nanites. A Moon is a special "intem" in ogame and thus should be protected. As it is, no one will bother unless it's the "pay to win" way with building everything with DM, and seriously, no one will waste hundreds of thousands of DM to build a few defence structures, not even the most hardcore players aside from 1 or 2 exceptions, don't forget that you have more than one moon as well.

    I repeat... Without Nanites, at level 10 Shipyard(don't forget expensive moon slots), a Plasma Turret takes more than 30 minutes to build in a 7x Universe. You need 7 to draw against a single Deathstar. A single Deathstar crossing systems takes between 1 and 2 hours to reach your moon, in that time frame you'll have only built 4 measly Plasma turrets.

    How can ogame developers think that this is in anyway balanced??? Just how? It's completely beyond me... It's this and the Recyclers deut consumption. HOOOOWW can they think this is good as it is?
  • Grimm wrote:

    Nanite to the moon is the way to solve this problem. And in fact, it's the only way. It's the only way to make things balanced.

    It makes moon destruction not so ubber easy and at the same time not so ubber difficult, but the attacker HAS to at least WORK his ass to destroy a moon and THAT'S how it should be played, and the same applies to the defender who HAS to FORCE HIMSELF to waste Res. on Moon Defence and also on building Nanites. A Moon is a special "intem" in ogame and thus should be protected. As it is, no one will bother unless it's the "pay to win" way with building everything with DM, and seriously, no one will waste hundreds of thousands of DM to build a few defence structures, not even the most hardcore players aside from 1 or 2 exceptions, don't forget that you have more than one moon as well.

    I repeat... Without Nanites, at level 10 Shipyard(don't forget expensive moon slots), a Plasma Turret takes more than 30 minutes to build in a 7x Universe. You need 7 to draw against a single Deathstar. A single Deathstar crossing systems takes between 1 and 2 hours to reach your moon, in that time frame you'll have only built 4 measly Plasma turrets.

    How can ogame developers think that this is in anyway balanced??? Just how? It's completely beyond me... It's this and the Recyclers deut consumption. HOOOOWW can they think this is good as it is?
    @Smoke Nightvogue - @Grimm said everything perfectly. How is it that fleeters can have INSANELY powerful fleets with thousands of DS floating in orbit while you can't even build an equivalent defence on the moon? How the fuck is that even fair?

    I mean, I see all over the place, fleeters complaining for more, either more speed, or more DF, or less fuel cost or just more ways to take out targets without loss. What is the damn problem with a loss? Why do you only want a profit without working for it? Why can't you accept a loss? You want the defender to take all the loss while being at negligible risk yourself? That's BS and you should know it.

    No, MD IS cheap. It needs to be made NOT cheap. Sending a DS on an MD costs nothing, the fleeter has to bear virtually no cost and if they can send enough DS to destroy the moons, they CAN afford to rebuild the DS in case they're destroyed, but the one who lost the moon has a lot more rebuilding to do. No, fleeter profits NEED to be reduced, or more precisely - their INCENTIVES to destroy a moon need to be reduced.

    Building Nanties on the moon is the ONLY solution. Whether IPMs or actual ships, an attacker SHOULD NEED to fight the defender rather than just use a one-shot Graviton cannon. And if they can't - they can either learn to live without destroying moons or find a different game. Simple as that.

    Edit: I was reading a thread in the Quantum section about universe changes and saw the Recycler thing too. Yes, the Recyclers need to cost less. Practicality should always come before game balance. An unbalanced game is a lot better than an impractical one, and currently, the MDs and Recycler fuel costs make the game impractical for many.
  • I cannot agree with people who say an MD is cheap. Perhaps they have never tried to destroy a moon.
    There is no divine right that a single RIP will destroy a moon. Ok, sometimes it happens first wave but not often. Loss of a single RIP is 10kk res and most people send 5 waves and usually send more than one per wave. Yes, some return but some also self destruct when the shot fails. It is rare that all unsuccessful RIPs return to base.

    Usually at least a quarter do not return, and my philosophy is that if you cannot afford to lose all RIPs then don't send any. I write them off the moment they are sent and am pleasantly surprised when any return.

    There is a moon in Aquarius that is supposed to have survived almost 100 MDs. I don't know the details, but maybe they were all single RIPs, if so the chance of destroying the moon is around 16% whilst the loss of the RIP is around 46%.
    ~The strong take from the weak, but the smart take from the strong~

    U44/Quant/Jup/Betel HOF's = 575~ ~ ~480 Solo [10 Top 10] / 95 ACS [4 x #1 + 11 Top 10]
    ~~ RIP 7007+
  • Vulcan_558 wrote:

    I cannot agree with people who say an MD is cheap. Perhaps they have never tried to destroy a moon.
    There is no divine right that a single RIP will destroy a moon. Ok, sometimes it happens first wave but not often. Loss of a single RIP is 10kk res and most people send 5 waves and usually send more than one per wave. Yes, some return but some also self destruct when the shot fails. It is rare that all unsuccessful RIPs return to base.

    Usually at least a quarter do not return, and my philosophy is that if you cannot afford to lose all RIPs then don't send any. I write them off the moment they are sent and am pleasantly surprised when any return.

    There is a moon in Aquarius that is supposed to have survived almost 100 MDs. I don't know the details, but maybe they were all single RIPs, if so the chance of destroying the moon is around 16% whilst the loss of the RIP is around 46%.

    they are cheap on most unis, most unis now have high eco and rip numbers are much higher then before, sending 50-60 rips on md or even over a 100 to be sure the moon will go down means nothing when someone has 5k rips for example and taking down a big fish or a big cargo fleet is definetily worth losing some rips..
    regarding the v mode, staying out of v mode and waking up 5 times every night is pointless, also having a big fleet and having it in the air half the day just so you could recall it and have a good sleep is pointless when you dont have it available or you dont have developed moons to use it..
    speed unis are not for everyone, i switched to 1x speed and sleep tight every night now :D
    "When we are good they never remember, when we are bad they never forget."
  • Vulcan_558 wrote:

    I cannot agree with people who say an MD is cheap. Perhaps they have never tried to destroy a moon.
    There is no divine right that a single RIP will destroy a moon. Ok, sometimes it happens first wave but not often. Loss of a single RIP is 10kk res and most people send 5 waves and usually send more than one per wave. Yes, some return but some also self destruct when the shot fails. It is rare that all unsuccessful RIPs return to base.

    Usually at least a quarter do not return, and my philosophy is that if you cannot afford to lose all RIPs then don't send any. I write them off the moment they are sent and am pleasantly surprised when any return.

    There is a moon in Aquarius that is supposed to have survived almost 100 MDs. I don't know the details, but maybe they were all single RIPs, if so the chance of destroying the moon is around 16% whilst the loss of the RIP is around 46%.

    This is a bit of a TL;DR post, but PLEASE read before putting up dislikes. Logical dislikes are a lot better than non-explained ones. Thank you.

    @Vulcan_558 - Disagreements create diversity. Nothing wrong with that. :) Also, I agree I haven't tried to destroy a moon, but the fact is that you don't need experience to know things, definitely not something as numerical and statistical as OGame is.

    Yes, losing 1 DS is 10 million in resources. Anyone who can afford to send 5 waves of 2 DS each has already sacrificed 100 million resources. If they're willing to sacrifice 100 million resources, then yes, MDs are EXCESSIVELY cheap. And as I stated earlier (and also in the thread I made about making moons more defendable), rebuilding DS is easy. Just put in the order and the Shipyard obeys. Obtaining a moon isn't easy. A DS can be built with 100% guarantee, but a moon can NOT be obtained with the same level of guarantee, nor do moons come with a warranty.

    And when there are players with thousands of DS, MD missions become as cheap as buying peanuts. I mean, HOW the hell can you afford billions of fleet and call the loss of 10 DS as significant? That makes utterly NO sense what-so-ever.

    Maybe it's a big deal in 1x universes, but in speed universes, MDs are dirt-cheap and I can't disagree more with the people who say MDs are a big deal. No, they're not, and that's a completely statistical fact. Yes, we joined speed universes knowing what's in store, but that doesn't mean that we should be having to deal with people who think MDs are play-time.

    Any fleeter who commits to an MD should risk as much as the defender. Equal risk = fair. If the fleeter is unwilling to lose his fleet, then the defender is also unwilling to lose his moon. So why should be in the favour of attackers? Why should the defender have no fighting chance what-so-ever?

    Currently, having moons means literally handing the moons to attackers on a silver platter. If the moon can not be turned into a planet-level bunker, then the MD is cheap. If the DS aren't fighting an equivalent-powered defence and only firing their Graviton cannons to destroy the moon, then it's cheap. The fleeters can EASILY afford to replace their DS, but the defender can't replace their moons over-night (unless they pay, and I'm not talking about paid players), which makes it cheap.

    Unless the attacker stands to lose as much as the defender in a FAIR FIGHT (not dependent upon chance and random numbers) against equivalent defence, MDs will remain cheap.