According to picture ur not able to upgrade to Rune Forge lvl 6 (even lvl 4) because of lack of people. The step by step guide is wrong.
That's literally what I wrote in the first post and quoted for you.
Posts by Tirnoch
-
-
Is this guide proper and right?
I have Quarters lvl 42 and Farm lvl 32 and i cant upgrade Rune Forge to lvl 4 because its requiring over 23mln people.
I got Rocktal with Trader Alliance setup
Lifeforms FAQ
Yes, slot 7 probably doesn't have enough population to build a school. Use your brain.
-
I just wish it was easier to protect Defenses, otherwise it's very easy to spam these with DM and Defense bash anyone to oblivion.
Why would you need to protect defense? Defense is there to make you unprofitable. Usually people don't fire IPMs if there is no profit to make.
-
It's already pretty well balanced right now. So disagree with all ideas so far.
The only thing that's probably worth thinking about is increasing the limit of ABMs, since the limit is balanced for 1x eco, but not for 8x eco. Might be enough to just multiply the limit by the eco factor.
-
What's your Metal Mine production (just mine, no bonuses), and what's your crawler production?
-
If you want to sell 100.000.000 crystal for metal, you can get anything between 150.000.000 (3:2:1) and 200.000.000 (2:1:1) metal in return.
-
Since the Trader alliance class bug got fixed, here are the updated tables, also this time optimized for step-by-step build up.
-
You know this idea that miner owe fleeters something is ridiculous to me like if fleeters don't get what they want miners will pay for it. I am already being threatened by a group of fleeters and are forced to trade with them. And you do know that all fleerers are also miners as you do have mines and you benefit from anything miner get.
I'm genuinely sorry to hear that you've experienced such unpleasant interactions in the game, Woutiex. Being bullied or threatened into trading is not only unfair but also a toxic and unacceptable behavior that should never be justified.
I want to clarify that I wasn't suggesting that miners owe anything to fleeters. I apologize if my previous messages conveyed that idea. My point was simply that, in the interest of maintaining a balanced and harmonious game environment, it's crucial to ensure that fleeters have access to Deuterium without having to resort to violent or disruptive means.
I was just saying that fleeters need Deuterium, and if they can't buy it from miners peacefully, they might see themselves forced to get it violently by destructive means. I wouldn't want that to happen, which is why I'm asking the game responsibles to give fleeters an alternative source for Deuterium, i.e. Deut into debris. I'm not demanding anything from miners.
-
I appreciate your input, MikeGrinder6, and I agree that in an ideal scenario, players could resort to merchandising excess resources to meet their needs. However, this discussion extends beyond individual players; it's about ensuring that the game remains enjoyable for everyone.
Not every player has trillions of resources at their disposal, and when we talk about fleeters, we're addressing a broad spectrum of players, not just the top few. The ability to buy Deuterium plays a crucial role in fleet mobility and offensive capabilities. While the in-game merchant is an option, it typically offers unfavorable rates for purchasing Deuterium. In fact, it sometimes necessitates selling the entirety of your profit to reacquire the Deuterium spent on a single hit.
I wasn't suggesting that "deut into debris" would lead to fleeters farming planets. However, if they find it increasingly difficult to acquire Deuterium through regular means after the introduction of Lifeforms, some may resort to such alternatives. "Deut into debris" could help mitigate this by giving fleeters more access to Deuterium without having to resort to planet farming.
You are correct that Lifeforms will boost mine production. Still, it's essential to consider that it will also increase the portion of daily Deuterium production that miners need for their own account. As a result, miners might have less excess Deuterium to sell to fleeters, further underscoring the need for a balanced and accessible Deuterium source.
The goal here is to maintain a game environment where all players, regardless of size or playstyle, can continue to find enjoyment and satisfaction. Let's continue the discussion with this broader perspective in mind.
-
Also one thing I'd like to add:
With the introduction of Lifeforms, all players will initially need a lot of Deuterium. It's quite possible that the need for Deuterium will remain high due to the substantial costs associated with Lifeform features. This increased demand for Deuterium may lead miners to prioritize their own needs and not being able to sell it to fleeters, making it challenging for fleeters to source the vital resource. In the worst-case scenario, fleeters might have to resort to alternative means to secure Deuterium, and this could inadvertently push them towards planet farming miners. As many are aware, I've long advocated against planet farming, considering it one of the most destructive game elements that can lead to players quitting. "Deut into Debris" could provide an alternative source of Deuterium for fleeters, potentially mitigating this situation and fostering a more balanced game environment.
-
I'm truly grateful for the insights shared by King Rabbit and baal, and I want to stress our shared concerns regarding the "deut into debris" feature.
As we've discussed, the 70% requirement in polls presents a considerable challenge, and it's evident that the majority often leans toward a miner-centric perspective. This situation can be quite disheartening, especially given the potential imbalance it may create in our community.
It seems that the burden of making critical decisions frequently falls on players through polls rather than the responsible parties taking a more proactive stance in the best interest of the game and the player base as a whole. While polls may seem democratic, they can inadvertently favor one particular playstyle and disrupt the overall game balance.
As it has been brought up, I'd like to underscore the critical difference between "defense to debris" and "deut into debris." "Defense to debris" fundamentally alters gameplay by making players targets who previously had no reason to fear being attacked. This adjustment warrants careful consideration and, consequently, a higher threshold for implementation. In contrast, "deut into debris" does not fundamentally change how players are targeted or their profitability dynamics. It simply offers a more balanced focus on hunting fleeters while maintaining the core game experience for all.
Once again, I want to reiterate that my intention has never been to cast any group, including miners, in a negative light. Voting against perceived threats is a natural response, even if those threats might not be substantiated. What's vital here is for the responsible parties to take a holistic view of the game and the community, making changes that cater to all playstyles.
While I know that many agree with me, unfortunately I don't seem to be getting a lot of support from the community publicly which is why officials think I'm the only one advocating to turn deut into debris on without polls. While it might be a bit disheartening when the community appears divided, it's essential to persist in this conversation with the hope that we can collectively achieve a balanced and inclusive gaming environment. Let's keep the dialogue going with an open and positive outlook.
Thank you for your continued engagement and advocacy.
Warm regards,
Tirnoch
-
The Metropolis (human building) increases the bonuses you get from lifeform research. So you can increase your Expo results further with that building (or with the two Mecha buildings).
-
Sometimes it appears every 3 weeks, sometimes every 2 months, sometimes it can be even more. It's completely random
July 23-25: More DM on Expeditions
June 10-12: More DM on expeditions
May 21-23: More DM on expeditions
April 25-27: More DM on expeditions
March 18-21: More DM on expeditions
February 5-7: More DM on expeditions
December 31 - January 3: More DM on expeditions
It's not completely random. It used to occur every 4-6 weeks.
-
I want to ask, if I cancel Intergalactic Envoys (because it wastes me a T1 slot), can I search for life forms again?
No, you need it on at least one planet. And one planet is enough.
Another problem is that every attack prioritizes grabbing Food by default, and every time I change the order, my fingers start to hurt (because I have plenty of Food, which is not what I want).
Take note that while setting priorities, you need to set Food to priority 1, as that's the lowest priority.
(One may think that 1 is highest priority, but it isn't the case here.)
-
Tirnoch I read through your previous posts and think you may need to give miners a bit more respect. Yes they handcuff the minority in votes, but if they really wanted to do so the minority could easily destroy the majority and with packs these days they do not need the majority to keep flying. The points growth and pulling in uni 1 shows you just need a few good friends.
Hello MIKE20,
Thank you for sharing your perspective, and I appreciate the opportunity to clarify some of my points. Let me begin by saying that I hold no intent to disrespect miners or any specific player group. Every playstyle, whether it's mining, fleeting, or any other approach, contributes to the diversity of OGame, and all should be acknowledged and respected.
I want to emphasize that I hold no ill will toward miners for their voting choices. It's perfectly reasonable for players to express concerns about features that could impact their favored style of gameplay. What I'm trying to underscore in these conversations is the notion that while polls may appear to be a democratic approach, they may not always lead to the most well-rounded solutions for the overall well-being and equilibrium of the game. True democracy extends beyond a simple majority rule; it should equally protect the interests and needs of all player segments. The responsibility to ensure that all playstyles can derive enjoyment from the game falls upon the game developers, and it's a task we should collectively support.
OGame's strength lies in its diversity and the opportunity for players to approach the game in various ways. By thoughtfully implementing certain features as defaults, it's possible to create an environment where all playstyles can coexist harmoniously. The aim is not to suppress one group in favor of another but to strike a balance that allows everyone to find enjoyment and satisfaction in the game.
Thank you for your valuable input, and I look forward to further discussions on this matter.
Best regards,
Tirnoch
-
I appreciate some of these arguments but am also confused by them. Maybe the reasons for why Deut to Debris is beneficial are so obvious they don't need to be said, but if you're trying to convince people who would naturally be inclined to oppose it to accept it, then there needs to be more specific details. What are the problems with fleeting? Why is Deut to Debris critical?
For example, from a mining perspective, I used to turtle. When ACS came in, turtling became impossible because players could team up to crash through defenses individuals couldn't. This was a huge boost to fleeters. Now, the economy boost has led to fleets of literally 100k+ RIPs that largely invalidate such play styles too. The top fleeters can already profit off of basically any miner player they want without taking any losses during an attack themselves. Now, perhaps basing a decision on how top fleeters dominate the universe isn't fair. Ok, so why is this such a critical change for newer or mid-level fleeters? How does this change the overall universe in a way that might increase player retention and interest? These are the sorts of things that might change minds.
Thank you for your thoughtful response, and I appreciate your desire for more specific details regarding the "Deut into Debris" feature. Allow me to address your concerns and queries one by one.
First and foremost, I think it's essential to clarify that we are not discussing whether to add "Deut into Debris" to the game; it's already implemented in the game. The debate here is centered on whether we should have a vote on its activation for each server or whether it should be enabled by default, similar to how other communities have already implemented it.
You mentioned that this feature predominantly benefits fleeters, and you're absolutely right. Fleeters have had relatively fewer updates or enhancements over the years compared to miners. "Deut into Debris" is a step in the direction of providing more options and excitement for that player segment.
Maintaining an active and vibrant server is crucial, and that requires a balanced ecosystem of players with different playstyles. Fleeters play a significant role in adding dynamism and interaction to the game. Without them, the game might risk becoming more of a static Excel simulation.
Regarding your observation about fleets of 100k+ RIPs, it's important to note that this issue is distinct from economy boost. The influx of such powerful fleets is indeed a concern, and it's primarily tied to the ability to purchase resources with real money. This is an issue that should be addressed separately and independently of the "Deut into Debris" feature.
You also mentioned concerns about attacks, particularly those on main fleets. It's worth noting that such attacks are already preventable through fleetsaving, which experienced players commonly employ. "Deut into Debris" doesn't inherently lead to more players losing their fleets; instead, it adds an extra layer of potential profit for fleeters.
Regarding farming attacks on planets, typically, players don't have ships on their planets that cost deut except for Crawlers and Sats, which represent only a small fraction of daily production. Building defenses to protect your daily production remains necessary, and the addition of "Deut into Debris" doesn't significantly alter the amount of defense required. It's more about offering a balanced gameplay experience for all types of players.
In conclusion, the proposal to enable "Deut into Debris" by default is about fostering a more comprehensive and balanced game environment, recognizing the importance of fleeters, and ensuring the game remains engaging for all players. I hope this addresses your concerns, and I welcome further discussion on this matter.
-
Hello fellow OGame players,
I hope this message finds you well and enjoying your time in the OGame universe. I wanted to take a moment to address the recent discussions surrounding the "Deut into Debris" feature, which has been implemented as a server setting. The idea of enabling this feature on all servers and treating it as the default option has been the subject of debate, and I'd like to offer my perspective on why this could be a beneficial move for our community.
Firstly, it's important to acknowledge that the "Deut into Debris" feature primarily benefits fleeters more than miners. Miners might perceive it as a threat to their playstyle and, understandably, some may vote against it in polls. This is a key point to consider when deciding whether to make it a server-specific option.
Now, let's consider the player demographics. It's true that most players on the servers are miners. If we put this feature to a vote, it's highly likely that a significant number of miners will vote against it, making it challenging to achieve the 70% majority needed for the feature to pass. This raises a question about the fairness of such a system, where a majority could potentially dictate to a minority.
In game development, it's crucial to take into account all playstyles, ensuring that no group feels marginalized. Enabling players to vote on every feature can lead to situations where the majority (in this case, miners) might unintentionally override the preferences of the minority (fleeters). This doesn't necessarily contribute to healthy game design, as it may lead to an imbalance in catering to different playstyles.
Furthermore, it's important to note that the "Deut into Debris" feature doesn't fundamentally change how the game is played. It doesn't alter the gameplay, strategies, or tactics significantly. In light of this, making it a server setting might seem unnecessary, as it doesn't contribute substantially to the diversity of gameplay experiences.
Also, we must consider that this feature is already enabled by default on new servers. Over time, as servers merge, it is likely that "Deut into Debris" will become a common feature across all servers. The shift toward making it a default option for all servers could be seen as a natural progression.
One final consideration is that having a multitude of different server settings makes it increasingly challenging to merge servers efficiently and maintain game balance. It becomes more complex to manage and ensure that the experience is consistent across all servers.
In conclusion, while respecting the diversity of playstyles within our community, I would like to suggest that enabling the "Deut into Debris" feature on all servers and treating it as the default option could be a step toward streamlining the game experience. It aligns with the way the feature is introduced on new servers and facilitates server mergers and game balance.
Let's remember that our goal is to make OGame enjoyable for everyone and to create a balanced and engaging environment for all players. I invite you to consider these points when discussing the future of this feature, keeping in mind the collective benefit to the entire OGame community.
Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your thoughts and feedback on this matter.
Best regards,
RiV- aka Tirnoch
-
Only me?
Enable Deut into DF in all old unis
What are all these players expressing their support if it's only me?
-
On EN, players should have vote on this matter for their specs. If they already play with the specs they have now, they should have an oportunity to change it.
Ok so you want to make one of the few features that benefits fleeters a server spec for an arbitrary reason and have them frustrated because the majority of players are miners and they most likely won't vote for deut into debris? Seems like DE and GR know their community, but clearly you know neither your community nor the game.
Lifeforms, as aleady told, it's a game expansion, and not a specs.
My critique is exactly that: Why? Why is Lifefoms an expansion, why is Deut into Debris a server spec? What's the reasoning? I've asked this many times already but you still haven't answered this.
It's clear, nobody is fooling no one.
You said you "cannot". But you can. You just don't want to. So you were trying to fool us when saying you "cannot".
-
We cannot just implement a spec on a universe where they don't ask for it.
Greece and Germany did exactly that. When you added Donut Systems and Donut Galaxies, you did exactly that. So clearly you can implement it even if it isn't asked specifically for. I don't know why you're taking us for fools.
Besides, I'm questioning the need of making Deut into DF a server spec in the first place. Just why? Why don't you make Lifeforms a server spec and make people vote for it if they want to enable it? Why do you make Deut into DF a server spec? Why do you make new features into a bazillion new server settings? This makes merges hard and frustrating and it makes balancing across universes impossible. So far no one has answered me what the sense in making Deut into DF a server spec is.
