Superweapon

Admin wrote:

Admin wrote:weak / strong (i.e. kill 2% of something or up to 20%)
limit/ no limit on hits to one account
defendable / undefendable (if it's weak it would maybe suck if you could still defend from it anyway, your spies cannot go on missions if they are sitting in bunkers afterall)
only charging time to reactivate it or also financial cost

I have already tried to think about this a long time ago and never came to any good conclusion, maybe you can come up with something

Weak 5% / Strong 30%

Superweapon only can be activate once every 2 weeks. Probably we can make it an alliance building, where all alliance members can work together as a team and help invest in building it and invest in activation progression. The superweapon launch button rest in the leader of the alliance's hand.

Lets say, it takes 10 trillion of kuwal to invest in building a superweapon. It takes a team to do it, so it means alliance have to work together to spend the kuwal on building superweapon. I'm sure it is possible to make the alliance buildings.

Then for activation progress, alliance have to spend 1 trillion kuwal to activate it, but the superweapon must recharge every 2 weeks, even if it is activate.

Perhaps Superweapon addons will be also good idea, to add more alliance buildings and get more investing going.

Manleva wrote:I have to admit to being a little confused here.

A very expensive super weapon that has to require teamwork from a number of players that can be utilized in a limited way to attack one player and cause 1.2% damage is not really much of a super weapon especially when you consider that winning an assault mission will result in 4% loss to the defender.

I do like some of the concept behind the super weapon idea but I don't like the idea of it being used against an individual as I think that it is open for exploitation.

1. If it requires a Team to build and operate, how big is the Team?
As were an alliance based game the following questions come to mind.
2. Will it be limited to 1 super weapon per alliance?
3. If it takes an alliance to build and arm why not target is against an alliance instead of an individual?
4. What is the spread of costs required to build it i.e. does each alliance member have to provide the same amount of financing or would it be scaled across the alliance membership, or can just a few finance it?
5. When fired what % of alliance members would need to be online for it to fire?

1. The team is unlimit, you just need alliance to build superweapon, and it rest in the leadership's hand.
2. Yes 1 superweapon per alliance. Small alliance will struggle with investing in superweapon, that good, it avoid multies.
3. You can target enemy alliance member or neutral alliance member, but never works on your team members.
4. I suggested the idea of investing, every alliance members can go to alliance construction page and enter how much kuwal they want to invest in.
5. It doesn't need alliance members to be online, it depends on the leader if he/she want to nuke an enemy alliance member. But i recommend that before using superweapon, they need to discuss who they want to nuke, probably the strongest player, mainly aimed for the defense.

And about the war exp that you kill with superweapon doesn't contribute to any of you or alliance member war exp, but it does contribute to the alliance war exp.

I'm gonna bring the elephant into the room...

Exactly how will this screw with everyones PTR?

I was under the impression that all the "alliance Programs" got killed off due to PTR. (as it is explained so far, I would consider it an alliance program)

not for/against this idea per se,,, just not understanding the why we would want/need this atm,

I am guessing it would be a "tax" or a place for memebrs to put funds towards it

seaborgium wrote:I am guessing it would be a "tax" or a place for members to put funds towards it

so by PTR standards its the same as an account giving away resources, and if enough is given away can they be banned for it? Can it be used to "fix" the PTR of those who are way out there?

Since we are discussing something which it appears can only be built by an alliance and not sold it should have no affect on PTR.

However there then becomes a very big question of what happens when a member changes alliances. To be fair to the alliance the members contribution should be forfeit but again this can be unfair to the individual player.

there is also a question of balance as well since there would only br one weapon per alliance then alliance size will play a major roll.

As the amount of damage proposed is small I believe that the proposed cost makes it worthless as more damage can be caused with the current missions for less cost.

Having said all of the above i believe that there are still possibilities.

Cost of the weapon should be apportioned across all alliance members with each member having to pay their share thus making the cost per individual equal. Larger alliances will pay more for the weapon but the cost per individual players is the same.

All alliance members must pay their share. (I don't care where they get the Kuwal from but they have to make the payment for the weapon themselves) Cost per member can be discussed but needs to be balanced so that it is reasonable for the weapon but not so high to cause acrimony when players change alliances.

When a player changes alliance they forfeit their share which is apportioned across the rest of the remaining alliance members. Players who are booted from an Alliance take their share with them but it is held in trust until they join another alliance.

To be able to produce the weapon an alliance must have a minimum number of members e.g. 10. The weapon cannot be used against individual players but is used against an alliance as a whole and causes 1.2% damage to ALL of the Target Alliance members (including those on PPT and in Vacation mode)Te target alliance also needs to have a minimum number of members e.g. 5

Once built there needs to be an ongoing upkeep to maintain the weapon in working order.

In the above I have attempted to remove some of the more obvious exploits while also making the Super Weapon a viable option for use.
The most obvious exploits are the use of inactive accounts and multies.