Supply turns

Don't you think it is about time to change the policy of supply turns...I mean defences have grown...and so on...

suggestion?

Is there a defence out there that cant be taken before supply turns run out? Dont the weapons still fail long before suppy turns run out?

currently dont think you need more than 10-13 hits to mass a def, assuming your strike is similar to their def. one person can easily mass several people within a day (considering you need to retrain attack forces that die)

yes, but if I constantly farm using also my assassins spies and attack I lose lots of spply turns...and when I have post this I wasn't considering only to mass...also to farm...or it would be an idea to have the posibility to purchase them from the trade center...not?

im not too sure if being able to purchase the supply would be the answer.... i would have suggested raising the cap on ST's to 3k not 2k..... but thats just my opinion....
but when coming dsown to massing, i prefer to remove def, then switch to assasin / covert to remove the attack stats... so the question is would i have enough supply turns to go through massing of defence, then assasin then sab? cos if you wantd to properly mass someone you woudl only be able to mass 3-4 players max, and that would also mean you cant farm for repairs either....

castravete wrote:yes, but if I constantly farm using also my assassins spies and attack I lose lots of spply turns...and when I have post this I wasn't considering only to mass...also to farm...or it would be an idea to have the posibility to purchase them from the trade center...not?

yes that's precicely the reason why ST's are limited, in sgw it used to be that you could only farm with the attack turns you generated, you made 48 at's per day, you needed 15 to attack someone.
Here you make 96 ST's per day, and need 3 to attack someone, 32 attacks per day is very good.

I'll remind you that this is a strategy game,
It's made intentionally so that you can't live off farming alone, youre forced to have somewhat of an income.
If you wish to farm excessively to give you a significant boost to your income then be prepared to be left without any ability to retaliate should you get yourself into a war.
If you need to assassinate someone in order to hit them then consider the opportunity costs in your "farm profits".
There are no benefits without penalties

These are the basic principles on which I started to make this game. I will not retreat from them as that means abandoning my game.
I will not abandon my game as long as there are people who wish to play it.

I will never allow ridiculous situations to occur such as one person (or a small group of 2-3 people) who has no income whatsoever or anything else to be retaliated upon to be able to hold whole alliances hostage and be able to keep the upper hand. Pretty much forcing every player with no alternative but to play only one single way. Which is pretty much what's happening on every game i've played so far.

Keeping this in mind you're welcome to make any suggestion that will improve gameplay for EVERYONE. Want an update? Either it gives advantages to everyone to the same extent, or using it causes some penalties to the user

@ ragna well yes you solo can mass the defs of 3-4 people. Either you're against an alliance and you need an alliance of your own or you don't start battles you can't win.

yes, but this wouldn't be only in my advantage, because now you can also trade for kwal AT's and Uu's at the trade center...some might use it for trading, because for those that don't attack or assassin or sabb can generate more to trade more;)...but you're also right considering that it might become an advantage for massing...and that's the only reason to suggest this because I find it OK to limit them but, considering that most people have their way around with the AT's the supply turns might become the major need in the future...who knows???...maybe you'll consider it someday

supply turns being untradeable and become the limiting factor when farming excessively were created on purpose.
The idea behind them being untradeable was actually the only reason they were created, if i wanted them tradeable I wouldn't have bothered to go past the AT idea.
As that is the only way I was able to balance out massing vs farming.

Supply turns will NEVER be tradeable between players, and unless a good reason comes forward, i.e. I'm a greedy sob who wants money and would then let people buy ST's for $$, I will never allow people to RECEIVE ST's any other way than to wait for them to generate.


Anyways there's two ways the ST thing can be done. LOW recovery rate and HIGH reserve like now (2k reserve and 2 ST's per turn), or HIGH recovery rate and LOW reserve (i.e. 500 reserve and 8 ST's per turn). Then you can farm alot but you'd only be able to mass 1-1.5 people at any moment at best. Maybe something to consider should you ever come back with a real worked out suggestion

Admin wrote:

@ ragna well yes you solo can mass the defs of 3-4 people. Either you're against an alliance and you need an alliance of your own or you don't start battles you can't win.

lol you know me too well.....
i always start battles i cant win, it makes winning that much sweeter....

Ragnarok wrote:lol you know me too well.....
i always start battles i cant win, it makes winning that much sweeter....

well either you pick on n00bs, in which case the outcome was clear from the start, or you play a game I would not want to play

Possible suggestion:

Have the base rate at 2000 for ALL players - then have a bonus to supply turn max storage tied into the administrative efficiency system - so if you have a admin efficiency of only 80%, you do get a 20% bonus (400) to the 2000 supply turn limit - so could hold up to 2,400.

It means the larger you are, the more potential "projection" capabilities of your forces you have. Since you want to make this game as strategical and ideally realistic as possible, to put that into a real life perspective - you wouldn't expect a country like Iran to have projection capabilities (i.e. the ability to hit other countries in other area's of the world) similar to the United Kingdoms - and you wouldn't expect the UK to have global projection capabilities to match the USA's etc...

It means the larger a player is, not only the more punch they ll likely pack - but the longer they ll have the logistics (supply turns) inplace to sustain any punch - which i think is realistic. Tieing it into the admin efficiency or something similar will also mean you don't have a huge increase to the supply turn storage - i.e. i think you said the lowest admin efficiency can go is 40%? - so a maximum of 60% bonus to supply turn storage - 1200 extra storage bringing it to 3,200 supply turns storage.

On a individual scale, a larger player vs. a smaller player means the larger player will be able to keep going for just that little bit longer.... On a alliance-wide scale a alliance with a higher average army size (thus lower admin efficiency) for their players than their enemies will potentially be able to keep fighting/ inflicting damage for just a little longer than their enemies.

Its not too much to make a HUGE difference on the game - but it would perhaps help resolve the potential supply turn situation some people are complaining about, in a realistic manner - as well as even make admin efficiency a welcomed, or at least more happily accepted - means of limiting the larger players growth.

now finally a good suggestion

added on test server

I must say thats an intresting idea.

*goes to test server*

I would just like to say that is the fastest any admin has ever listened to ian.

good work martin

lol, you know ian does have simple and reasonable ideas every now and then XD

lmao. simple and reasonable yes. Text is a pain to read. LOL allways gives me a Headache
lol

why can we sell supply turns and we cannot buy them???
because i made a mistake a couple of days ago...... i sold supply turns .... and now i'm going to run out of them.... so..... something it's just not right

^SPEED^ wrote:why can we sell supply turns and we cannot buy them???
because i made a mistake a couple of days ago...... i sold supply turns .... and now i'm going to run out of them.... so..... something it's just not right

Because unless i m mistaken the whole point of supply turns is to prevent a single player ever being able to hold a whole alliance to ransom (i.e. he'd run out of supply turns very quickly and be a sitting duck)... if you have the ability to buy supply turns, this point becomes basically completely irrelevant.......

May i suggest a possible solution -

The problem here is the severe limitation the ST limit and generation posses to alliance wars. The current system means that its the number of people fighting and not their individual strength that counts as an alliance of 4 people can not hope to take on 20 even if combined the 4 are multiple times stronger than all 20 as they wont have enough ST to take down everybody

What i propose is this -
Every alliance generates ST as well. The amount of ST generated is proportional to the number of players in the alliance and also their size.
For example a person with armysize between 50k-100k generates 1 ST per 1hour which does not go to him but to an alliance ST bank which is controlled by the leader - (similar to the alliance banks in dunewars apart from its for ST)
Larger players generate more ST per 1hour so as to be in proportion to their size. So someone who is over 600k army size might generate 6 ST per hour. (I suggest you work out the ST generated according to average army size which will obviously change over time)
Further more you could code this bank to only allow withdrawals when the alliance declares war on another - so basicly it is a war reserve fund which can not be used for personal benefit.
In times of war the leader can co-ordinate the distribution of extra ST so that relative to the alliance overall size the ST reserves reflect their war capabilities.

I think this will be a great strategic addition to the game
As i wrote this i thought of a couple of amendments but ill leave it to everyone else to give a first response first

no

It would lead to alliance growth explosions and the number of active players is to small already mate. You would prolly wind up with 2 alliances in the entire game.

Lol im not suggesting you let it build up to 1000's and 1000's

Im suggesting a further sum relative to the size of an alliance which can only be accessed when war is declared and controlled by the alliance leader. This is to help strong alliance built on a small member base to fight huge alliances - Therefore if anything it will encourage more alliances

Hmm, having read hai-shalud's idea, i d like to suggest a approach simply from a individual perspective... I ll use RL to explain.

Earlier in the post i suggested a nation like the UK would have more substantial global projection capabilities (supply turns) than a nation like Iran, thus be able to sustain that global projection capability for longer. Hence the larger supply turn storage for larger players.

What i didn't touch on, is that in reality not only would a larger more developed nation like the UK be able to sustain global projection capabilities for longer - but they d be able to rebuild and create those global projection capabilities a lot quicker than a nation like Iran.

In the aderan wars perspective - simply put, not only should a larger player have a higher storage capability for supply turns, but aquire supply turns faster as well than a smaller player.

I d suggest tieing the base amount of supply turns a person gets as 2 per turn for anyone at or below the average army size. Then working out a formula which gives a supply turn bonus production per turn/ day based on army size above the average army size.

Perhaps 0.00002 supply turn extra a day for every 1 extra army size above the average? So a person 100,000 army size above the average army size would generate 2 supply turns extra a day. Somone 1,000,000 army size above the average would generate 20 supply turns extra a day (just under 20% extra vs. the base amount)

A possible further suggestion to this... is have this extra supply turn opportunity inplace based on army size - but have the extra supply turns not simply given freely. Instead introduce a logistics research, where a player can invest (much like they can for covert levels etc...) to get extra supply turns a day - but the maximum amount they can get depends on their size vs. average army size.

I.e. someone 100,000 above average army size can research up to 2 extra supply turn logistic points... giving them 2 extra supply turns a day. Someone 1,000,000 above average, can research up to 20 extra supply turn logistic points... giving them an extra 20 supply turns a day.

If you wanted, rather than research, you could make these structures instead, which are destroyable.....

Have the cost for these research/ structure similar like covert/ weapon levels - just starting cheaper.... lol

But, basically it could give larger players more flexibility for supply turns, but in the process implement yet another kuwal-sink into the game, tied into strategic aspects - and at the end of the day, if you introduced this as structures which can be destroyed, it would be a destroyable-kuwal-sink - bringing in another dimension to wars (i.e. target the enemies logistic capability structures )

Long post i know.... but wanted to present a reasonable case lol

well makes some sense but then again it'd probably be something you can turn on and off as building and maintaining additional infrastructure not directly related to your realm would require funds. So in return for extra st's you'd need to drain some income.

now the problems i see, but up for discussion as always. I'm not a big fan of static values, at least not in a neverending game.
Maybe giving 1 ST for every 20% above AAS looks good
However you need to get to pay some % of your daily subtotal income (after AE but before work modifier, commander, etc.)

The extra turns for the sake of server load would be only given out in bulk once per day, money being withdrawn from your bank.
still too sketchy for now though