Announce News #786

by Lysandus

Back to Common Grounds.

Anisu2007-04-28 15:40:36
QUOTE(shadow @ Apr 28 2007, 05:16 PM) 402332
And I suppose if you are tired of raids / defences you should go rogue since you don't have to have a guild / commune. Point taken, thank you.

erm you pick to go on raids or defend, there are many people that will just ignore a raid on celestia or that will not go raid nil. There are many people that will happily continue hunting while guards in your city proper are killed off. So really your comparison is invalid, the nexus worlds go even further, don't want to participate then don't enter the nexus world, you won't even get killed as bystander then. You will ofcourse lose the nifty "overpowered' advantage of the construct, but then you never had them untill constructs came out.

The only problem with raids/defence is the player leadership forcing people to participate rather then leaving it open to the player's choice. And this same problem presists in the nexus worlds. Gods you'll lose a bit of power (that you recover in less then an ingame year) and a bit of gold. All orgs have plenty of both comms so people should really put this into proportion. Losing a skill = very annoying, your city/commune losting 60k power and 250k gold is the same as a player buying a health refill, they can normally afford it.
Xenthos2007-04-28 17:12:09
QUOTE(Anisu @ Apr 28 2007, 10:36 AM) 402323
unless they changed it without announcing you can fully cure a construct in one weave you are not beeing attacked + kegs each month (2 months before the weakening you invoke it and 2 months after you fish keg + one weakening sparkleberrying without opposition)

That is COMPLETELY inaccurate.

A keg heals 500 health per 24 hours. You can sparkleberry about 900 health in one weakening. Weakenings are two days apart. A Construct/Colossus has 10,000 health. Weakenings are just over two days apart. Thus, it heals about 1900 / 10,000 health in one weakening's time.

Further, I think it's always been this way.
Anisu2007-04-28 18:40:59
QUOTE(Xenthos @ Apr 28 2007, 07:12 PM) 402340
That is COMPLETELY inaccurate.

A keg heals 500 health per 24 hours. You can sparkleberry about 900 health in one weakening. Weakenings are two days apart. A Construct/Colossus has 10,000 health. Weakenings are just over two days apart. Thus, it heals about 1900 / 10,000 health in one weakening's time.

Further, I think it's always been this way.

by your figures it's 2900 actually, by my figures it's 5000, I'll ask Nydekion for the figures again though.
Xenthos2007-04-28 18:55:26
QUOTE(Anisu @ Apr 28 2007, 02:40 PM) 402351
by your figures it's 2900 actually, by my figures it's 5000, I'll ask Nydekion for the figures again though.

It's definitely not 5000. happy.gif
Ildaudid2007-04-29 00:26:20
Ok bombarding is nice, and seems to be well balanced, especially since the ship only can bombard one time, not 3 combateers bombarding from one ship. This makes armadas alot more realistic to use and can cause for ground and air assaults at the same time. Now you can choose where you want to fight, in the zerg ground fights... or the more delicate aethercombat?
Shamarah2007-04-29 00:49:04
Make the darknest worth building, plz. :/
Anisu2007-04-29 06:49:07
QUOTE(Ildaudid @ Apr 29 2007, 02:26 AM) 402412
Ok bombarding is nice, and seems to be well balanced, especially since the ship only can bombard one time, not 3 combateers bombarding from one ship. This makes armadas alot more realistic to use and can cause for ground and air assaults at the same time. Now you can choose where you want to fight, in the zerg ground fights... or the more delicate aethercombat?

There always has to be a ground force, aetherships can not destroy a construct (we tried it)
Unknown2007-04-29 16:08:20
Is that a bug or did they seriously make it impossible for an armada to destroy a construct? If it's the former, it's understandable, but if it's the latter, it makes no sense whatsoever unless "bombard" is an inaccurate description of what the ship actually does. Bombarding implies raining down physical destructive force on a physical target. Enough of this would undoubtedly destroy said target.
Catarin2007-04-29 16:23:46
QUOTE(blastron @ Apr 29 2007, 10:08 AM) 402540
Is that a bug or did they seriously make it impossible for an armada to destroy a construct? If it's the former, it's understandable, but if it's the latter, it makes no sense whatsoever unless "bombard" is an inaccurate description of what the ship actually does. Bombarding implies raining down physical destructive force on a physical target. Enough of this would undoubtedly destroy said target.


It doesn't make sense from a realistic standpoint. It does from a game mechanics standpoint.
Fain2007-04-29 18:21:03
Re: Not being able to kill the construct with bombard:

It was a bug that has since been fixed. Aetherships CAN kill a construct. Technically you don't have to set foot on the nexus world to beat the construct (though it is a bit unlikely).
Catarin2007-04-29 19:21:34
QUOTE(Fain @ Apr 29 2007, 12:21 PM) 402557
Re: Not being able to kill the construct with bombard:

It was a bug that has since been fixed. Aetherships CAN kill a construct. Technically you don't have to set foot on the nexus world to beat the construct (though it is a bit unlikely).


...really?

I'm not sure how that's unlikely at all actually heh. It's a heck of a lot easier to bombard than it is to set up a colossi and unlike colossi you can just scale up bombard to be very effective. It's also "free" to bombard. So attackers don't even have the costs associated with setting up a colossus. Given any sort of option at all (and you can make it an option if you focus on ramping up your aetherspace capabilities) why would people want to even bother stepping foot on the nexus world? Unless there was no resistance in which case more damage is always good.
Xavius2007-04-29 23:23:03
QUOTE(Catarin @ Apr 29 2007, 02:21 PM) 402566
...really?

I'm not sure how that's unlikely at all actually heh. It's a heck of a lot easier to bombard than it is to set up a colossi and unlike colossi you can just scale up bombard to be very effective. It's also "free" to bombard. So attackers don't even have the costs associated with setting up a colossus. Given any sort of option at all (and you can make it an option if you focus on ramping up your aetherspace capabilities) why would people want to even bother stepping foot on the nexus world? Unless there was no resistance in which case more damage is always good.


Because one of these days, someone will launch two fully armed ships with ten fully competent crew members and implode you like a weevil while your combateers are all off-balance?
Catarin2007-04-29 23:31:57
QUOTE(Xavius @ Apr 29 2007, 05:23 PM) 402611
Because one of these days, someone will launch two fully armed ships with ten fully competent crew members and implode you like a weevil while your combateers are all off-balance?


Er...what? What does that have to do with the idea that it's much easier and cheaper to bombard than it is to set up a colossus? Either side can field as many ships as they have capable crew for and unless you just go to bombard with one combateer, you still have two other turrets that wouldn't really be off balance? And orgs are already capable of and have launched at least two ships with ten fully competent crew members aboard so someday is today.

Even in the situation you're describing would you rather lose the conflict through implosion of your ship which costs you a hundred power or through destruction of your colossus which costs you a great deal of commodities AND a hundred power?