Planet destruction

  • The only way this could be even *considered* is to allow the attack to happen only between players who are within let's say 10% military points of each other (not counting defense). This is the only way to prevent bullying. Whale accounts could destroy whoever they wanted otherwise.


    Even like this however, without the security of building something permanent in the game, manly players would quit.

    Fair.

    but it also creates a chance to acs defend ninja someone whale accounts generally arnt all friends and it creates a chance to hurt them.


    I by far am not a whale account im rank 500s in my uni im just trying to think of things to make the game more exciting

    EE.jpg

  • quite frankly I see more downside to this than upside...I don't hate the premise. I hate the fact that it can be used to break safe systems. Frankly I feel like this would end up causing more people to quit than anything else.

  • Destroying buildings, even or especially just one latest level, is quite similar to destroying the planet itself. In (semi) exponential growth of mine cost new level cost as much as all previous levels (i.e. level 44 Metal Mine cost almost as much as all mines from 1 to 43 combined). It's a semi exponential, because it's not like in Research where cost do double each new level.


    Because of that, even this is generally a bad idea. Destroying basically half of the planet buildings (in cost) is the same is destroying planet itself.

  • Destroying buildings, even or especially just one latest level, is quite similar to destroying the planet itself. In (semi) exponential growth of mine cost new level cost as much as all previous levels (i.e. level 44 Metal Mine cost almost as much as all mines from 1 to 43 combined). It's a semi exponential, because it's not like in Research where cost do double each new level.


    Because of that, even this is generally a bad idea. Destroying basically half of the planet buildings (in cost) is the same is destroying planet itself.

    yes this would hurt a player that is the goal but it's a war game and losing mine levels is prolly better then blowing up a planet.


    quite frankly I see more downside to this than upside...I don't hate the premise. I hate the fact that it can be used to break safe systems. Frankly I feel like this would end up causing more people to quit than anything else.

    I didnt even think of this problem thank you for bringing it up.


    But the way I imagine it would work is just like when you delete a planet a destroyed planet sit there for a few days giving you time to find a solution be colonizing it again or relocation

    EE.jpg

  • yes this would hurt a player that is the goal but it's a war game and losing mine levels is prolly better then blowing up a planet.

    Sadly, I must say I am slowly comming to agree with alex stukov. Intentional or not, this is becoming a troll post.


    OGame is not just a "war game", and even if it was just that, destroying planets or mines, i.e. basis of the game, would not create more possibilities of war (or just fleeting) but would, on the contrary, stop it in a quick fashion: either a player could instantly or in a very short time not just destroy all enemies, but deny the possibility of even being or becoming an enemy, or a game would become a every lasting "cold war." Both cases are not good for OGame nor for its gameplay. Precisely planets and the fact they are permanent is the condition that a player can resist, in a long game. And that makes "war" possible.


    If you cannot understand that, you eather play OGame wrong or you don't understand it at all.


    And if you have specific persons in mind that you want to "destroy" them with this mechanic, for which I suppose is the reason this came to your mind, I suggest you to play a different game.


    Cheers!

  • Destroying buildings, even or especially just one latest level, is quite similar to destroying the planet itself. In (semi) exponential growth of mine cost new level cost as much as all previous levels (i.e. level 44 Metal Mine cost almost as much as all mines from 1 to 43 combined). It's a semi exponential, because it's not like in Research where cost do double each new level.


    Because of that, even this is generally a bad idea. Destroying basically half of the planet buildings (in cost) is the same is destroying planet itself.

    I agree with this. That would destroy someone's hard work.


    Still, it's not a bad idea by Brickhouse. It just needs consensus of sorts if there could be solution possible. I see this not for lowering mega accounts ship numbers, rather for fighting bots.


    Maybe a certain amount of rips cause planet damage like destroying 1 level of everything from metal mines to shipyard level just by 1 level

    but the rips amount and % of chances better be fair enough

    not 500 rips % gives 50 % destruction then it won't be fair

    Thats a good idea instead of destroying the planet it takes everything down by 1 level but what If you could pick eaither mines or facilities cause the lose of a nanite would hurt a fleeter more the loss of a mne level i would keep it the same percentages as what i put in the first post for this one otherwise i just see conastant attempts at it


    Carbon gave excellent suggestion about destroying 1 level of shipyard, this has potential of catching bots easier.

    I just don't think it would be fair if mines are allowed to be destroyed, as explained by Xenomorph.


    So what I mean is level of shipyard you have on a planet is interlinked with the number of your ships you can set flying. The rest can't be moved if there is already fleet in the air (farming, expoing, gathering resources for instance) or if shipyard level is at zero.


    It's not ideal solution perhaps, but with others input, it could be.

    If it gets traction this thread would probably be closed by those who use bots, still Brickhouse was willing to bring polemic about issue he had and was open to suggestions. Well done Brickhouse!


    This pertains to any thread, tip for newcomers:


    If it gets out of hand, there are senior players who will oppose to an idea. In my short time on this board, I have perception of respectable veterans who's opinion I would agree and follow. There is good veteran player base in org community.

  • First thank you for the compliment and i think the shipyard reduction idea is better then a mine level loss i think we could take it 1 step farther and affect any facility building.


    I made this suggestion as a random idea I had im not attached to what it affects i just think rips should have more uses.

    EE.jpg

  • I agree, it's an idea. But it would fit something other then OGame, maybe OGame 2.


    Right now there is too much emphasis on resources in general, in other words, time investment (or DM, i.e. money, for better or worse). OGame is just linear waiting game, with minimal strategy that is somehow complex in its own way, but in the end of the day it's just time waster. Precisely because of that everytime you get fleetcrashed or something even worse, your time investment gets questioned and you realize it's not worth it. Until then, you are hooked. (Unless you want revenge, and only if you are even able to do that.)


    That's why, I think, implementing even more destruction in OGame would not be beneficial for its playerbase. I would argue the opposite, the game needs to make player's assets even more protected: RIPs shouldn't destroy moons so easily (universe speed should multiply the number of needed RIPs for moondestruction) or a player could build defense against it (you could not send missles on the moon, like it was before), players should in general be able to build up the defence that could not be destroyed in one night, players should have more ways to hide from bullies (one thing tgat comes to mind: hide from espionages, for example, destroyed probes whould not return spy reports, but if you send only one probe so you wont get spotted you would get only partial report), etc., etc. In general, players should have more control and more choises (something that Lifeform expansions does not fix, because it does not affect the gameplay).


    However, I could see something like you proposed in OGame 2, where buildings can get destroyed. But the first condition for something like that to work would be to not be able to build infinite amount of ships and/or defense. Let's say ship numbers would be limited by the Shipyard's level; all other ships would orbit around planet/moon and would constantly consume Deuterium. By the same token, mines and production itself would be also limited, maybe by smaller planet sizes or different scaling. Something like this would shift the focus of the game: from time investment focused to more strategy focused; i.e. you would quickly build up all necesarry things and you would be on the same playing field then veteran players – the decisive factor would be strategy and not time (or money) investment.


    And I generally do not find it difficult to see two OGames existing at the same time, one more grindy and other more action and strategy oriented.