Personally u need to keep the DF at the state quo to damaging for fleeter and raiders and milking rules to be lifted is a big worry once a few players pull away bullying for resources will happen why change want is not broken instead improve it better there are posts with ideas and u moving away support from abuse,bullying,rules breaking is a bit worrying when u still have a duty of care for your users of services a part from that sounds like going be a good uni
P.s what speed and map size (425*9)

I believe the reason they are changing a few of the rules is to give a chance to break away from the uniformity of all other servers. Although they are making a few extreme changes, I believe it is for the best. With a few adjustments and a little bit of compromise, I believe this could be a great thing for Zorg Empire.

However I am hoping to see a new addition to the start up guide. I believe we could have a set of goals where rewards are earned at each accomplishment. Here is an example:


Chapter one.

Every ruler needs a steady income to support the welfare of their empire. In order to maintain your resources, upgrade your mines. Remember to produce enough energy to sustain your improvement.

Metal Mine lvl 5
Crystal Mine lvl 4
Deuterium Synthesizer lvl 1
Solar Plant lvl 8

..:::REWARD:::..

Metal 25.000
Crystal 15.000
Deuterium 5.000


Chapter two

After many improvements to your mines, the time restraints began to grow, and the development of a robot factory would solve these issues. At the same time begin to research some technologies to unlock newer and better things.

Robot Factory level 3
Research Lab lvl 2
Energy Technology lvl 2

..:::REWARDS:::..

Metal 30.000
Crytal 20.000
Deuterium 10.000


Chapter three
Continue to upgrade your mines and reap the benefits of your space engineering skills.


Metal Mine lvl 14
Crystal Mine lvl 11
Deuterium Synthesizer lvl 8
Solar Plant lvl 15
Robot Facory lvl 8
Research Lab lvl 5


As your planet continues to grow, your mines become insufficient to support the demands required to upgrade your buildings. Due to this, your empire begins to call out looking for some ships to attack other civilizations who did not utilize their resources as recommended.


Cargo Ship 5
Light Fighter 5
Launch one attack on an enemy planet


.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Chapter 10

Now that you have met all of these requirements, the citizens within your empire believe you have been well trained, and are fit to be their new leader. Resources have been gathered to help set you on your way to becoming the best emperor in the universe!!!

..:::Rewards:::..

5.000.000 Metal
3.000.000 Crystal
1.000.000 Deuterium



I understand that these are not proportionate, and can use some adjustments, but I believe that this idea will help retain newer players, and will even spice things up a bit.


As for the universe name I vote for Gravity.

Thank you all for your replies.

-Missions can be added. Thank you for reminding this. They can act as a guide too.

-Regarding the DF generation and the increase over time, we are open to suggestions. Our point for this is mostly to nullify any cheating issues at its root. We could increase the rate. Rate must not be taken lightly though, the rate will be visible to each player profile tab. The bigger the rate, the bigger the "scalp" of the player. It will be an important element. To facilitate fleeters, we could decrease deuterium costs? Sounds better to me.

-Milking will not be an issue. First, since fleet gifting is the main issue, the low df generation will combat it at its root. For resource gifting the following apply:
a)It is rare
b)It is hard as it requires active "tools"
c)It will be visible with the movement history - The rest of the players will be able to serve "justice" to such players either by social pressure or real in-game action (war).

-Multiplaying will be forbidden. The only actual rule of the universe.

-The universe name will be descriptive of the universe, as always. We need the newcomer to be able to tell what the universe is about solely by the name. We will announce it a bit later as we are still undecided between two final picks.

Zorg wrote:Thank you all for your replies.
-Regarding the DF generation and the increase over time, we are open to suggestions. Our point for this is mostly to nullify any cheating issues at its root. We could increase the rate. Rate must not be taken lightly though, the rate will be visible to each player profile tab. The bigger the rate, the bigger the "scalp" of the player. It will be an important element. To facilitate fleeters, we could decrease deuterium costs? Sounds better to me.

Decreasing deuterium consumption would help, but only to an extent. I am still going to argue for the low DF generation in the new universe to be reconsidered. Reduced DF is still going to have a significant impact on fleeters; it still stands that the average crash will bring in roughly half the profit it brings in in the current universes, and that is assuming it isn't messy.

Most messy hits won't be profitable at all. It's simple math. Consider: 1k BCs currently cost 30M metal, 40M crystal, and 15M deut to build and generate a DF of 18M metal and 24M crystal when destroyed. Convert to metal at merchant ratios and that's a cost to build of 170M and a DF of only 66M. This means you can currently rebuild less than 40% of your BCs from their own DF. In other words, if you lose 1k BCs in a hit, you must crash over 1.5k of your opponents BCs simply to recover your losses. Now consider the effect the reduction of DF generation to 30% willl have on this. Now, 1k BCs will produce a DF of only 9M metal and 12M crystal (convert to metal, a mere 33M). You will now be able to rebuild less than 20% of your bc's from their own DF. Thus, you must crash over 4k of your opponents BCs to simply recover the loss of 1k. Whereas in the current universes players can inflict just over 1.5 times the damage that they take and potentially make a profit, in the new universe, in typical cases they will need to inflict 3 to 4 times the damage they take in order to make a profit. In short, it will not be worthwhile to hit a fleet unless it is much smaller and less powerful than one's own. Even a DF generation of 42% (which would take a full year without losing significant fleet to obtain) is pretty poor, as it will still mean you must crash between 2.5 and 3 times the number of ships you lose just to break even.

I think spelling out the change in these terms makes it obvious what the issues will be. Big battles where both parties suffer heavy losses are no longer going to be profitable or worthwhile and certain aspects of PvP (like profitably executing ninjas) will be more difficult. If you have to crash 4 times (or even 2 or 3 times, for that matter) the amount of fleet you lose simply to break even, well, big battles between similarly matched opponents simply won't happen, the true fleeter who makes profit from fleet crashes rather than raiding and mine production will become a dying breed, PvP will decrease, and, in my opinion, the game will become less dynamic and interesting.

Will the percent added to the debris field be nullified if the user enters VMode? Because who says a retiring player won't enter VMode for a significant ammount of time before retiring his fleet?

New name proposition: Infinity

Because of the infinite number of possibilties..

Could we get a eta? And as for the name suggest Skirmish/Tactical due to the different nature of the server. To combat fleet gifting I suggest rather than causing df to require a time period to increase cause it to decrease every time they are crashed instead. (Start at 70% and lose 1% for every 100m fleet loss without equal damage dealt (so if you lose 1.4b and deal 0 dmg you lose 14% if you deal 2.3b damage and take 2.2 you gain 1% maximum of 70%)

Doomranger's suggestion for DF generation might actually be the way to go. I would definitely be happier with that solution than with the current proposal. A starting point of 60 or 70% with a hard upper limit for DF generation of 70% and a hard lower limit of 30% with increases and decreases based on damage dealt or suffered seems reasonable and would help to minimize gains from multiple fleet gifting, though I am still concerned the elimination of the milking rule will create more problems than it solves.

I'm also wondering if there will be a way to accommodate moonshots from players more than 5x's stronger to new players. If there is no upper limit on player protection, this will be essential, especially for players who start once the universe is already established.

How that going work if someone gifting their fleet all they do is send in waves so person benefiting will get free resources and a increase df for damage dealt I would prefer zorg one which is a fairer one

A side question. Will the ships and buildings included in the generals server be included?

mickylove wrote:How that going work if someone gifting their fleet all they do is send in waves so person benefiting will get free resources and a increase df for damage dealt

Forgive me, but I'm not entirely sure what you're asking. If the concern is fleet gifting upon things like retirement, neither proposal for DF generation is really going to mitigate gains from that. The most valuable retirement fleets come from players that have dealt a good deal of TD and have gone quite a long time without crashing. The only way to mitigate gains from large retirement fleets would be to keep the milking rule and change retirement rules so both accounts faced some sort of penalty (instead of just banning the retiring account).

If the concern is not retirement but rather the same person gifting their fleet multiple times, Doomranger's TD proposal would work by making the gifter's fleet less valuable each time they lost fleet or gifted fleet to another player. Again, there are still issues, and I still don't really think eliminating the milking rule is the best idea, but I would nonetheless prefer a TD-based DF generation proposal over a time-based one.