Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Feedback → Supernova (Single Player Galaxy)
We know the change in Supernova was initially more significant than it was in Starburst. A few changes have been made, but now that we've had some more time...what are the player thoughts? What direction do we need to make adjustments in?
Sn is a issue that u need to find someone bigger then u to grab more then a few planets. I personally think players who's within 20% should be considered same size. Maybe see balance that if u grab more then 10-20% of enemies base planets morale start to cost more or something.
Sn is a issue that u need to find someone bigger then u to grab more then a few planets. I personally think players who's within 20% should be considered same size. Maybe see balance that if u grab more then 10-20% of enemies base planets morale start to cost more or something.
Hmm.. massea I think twenty percent is too small a handicap. I remember warming up by attacking you last round and I had to wait nearly entire round before you were in my range... that was before morale system. But now you wouldn't necessarily get attack once there's a green light from, overseers, all b/c you've explored such an offensive core when you were too small. It would just cost more too keep clean cores if that were to happen. Resolving premature conflicts because you were already cleared just at a higher price.
Masse wrote:Sn is a issue that u need to find someone bigger then u to grab more then a few planets. I personally think players who's within 20% should be considered same size. Maybe see balance that if u grab more then 10-20% of enemies base planets morale start to cost more or something.
Hmm.. massea I think twenty percent is too small a handicap. I remember warming up by attacking you last round and I had to wait nearly entire round before you were in my range... that was before morale system. But now you wouldn't necessarily get attack once there's a green light from, overseers, all b/c you've explored such an offensive core when you were too small. It would just cost more too keep clean cores if that were to happen. Resolving premature conflicts because you were already cleared just at a higher price.
Yeah because I joined the gal when someone already had 1 mil nw :-) having a "punishment" at 10-20% in sn also solves that issue.
There's no point in attacking because you can't take enough planets to make it worth it.
![]PW[ Forever](https://imperialconflict.com/forum/img/avatars/42357.jpg)
The big guys should fight the big guys and be scared of the small guys, it used to be big guys NAP the big guys and the small guys get farmed, this way everyone is a potential threat and you need to keep your wits about you, not logging off thinking you can't be touched because you've NAP'd everyone you want to. You'll NEED to NAP certain empires, and you'll NEED to not NAP others, time to learn the game again me thinks. 
The big guys should fight the big guys and be scared of the small guys, it used to be big guys NAP the big guys and the small guys get farmed, this way everyone is a potential threat and you need to keep your wits about you, not logging off thinking you can't be touched because you've NAP'd everyone you want to. You'll NEED to NAP certain empires, and you'll NEED to not NAP others, time to learn the game again me thinks.
Yup! The general idea has been to nap people close to you, frequently we'll have rounds when the top 4-5 fams are napped at EOR, so have to find other ways to gain planets. If you still do this, than yes you should stop attacking and focus on exploring. If you only want to attack people smaller than you you're more than welcome to do so, but plan on only being able to do 1 attack ever 3-4 ticks.
The big guys should fight the big guys and be scared of the small guys, it used to be big guys NAP the big guys and the small guys get farmed, this way everyone is a potential threat and you need to keep your wits about you, not logging off thinking you can't be touched because you've NAP'd everyone you want to. You'll NEED to NAP certain empires, and you'll NEED to not NAP others, time to learn the game again me thinks.
True I had to nap smaller families who were close b/c there activity was a threat. Others went inactive...
Mori, scorp, swagga all close neighbors who went inactive after exploring first wave spread. I practically grew slower b/c I had to raid certain families and.sign withstanding naps with others too survive. Most became to expensive too continue attacking... like X (NYC) & mori b/c they didn't grow. But weren't a threat based on activity.
Thing is new morale system is sweet for SB right now.
Large empires w/out good defense who aggress small active empires regret it quickly. Also larger ones who have grown the same proportion as smaller ones can't farm them as successfully as you'd see if there weren't the system. Gives a lot of less active empire chance too get their feet below them rather than stay back down on floor for entire round after one raid.
I've had too change strat based on this and the affect its had on more competitive players is what I'm trying to say. So aggressors early on tend to grow slower as a result and the timid ones who explode later do better.
I've played hc attack, ss and popper in the month time given. I can say pop took too long so can't judge given time in round length. But thumbs up twice! SN on other hand....
It will take 14 weeks for our fleet to reach this planet, and it will cost us 23708 cash. We will incur a 3% loss of morale. This morale loss may change by the time the attack is initiated, however.'
thats atacking the biggest player in the galaxy... much bigger than me. 33 planets? whats that going to do to him. nothing going to get in a retake battle right off the hop. This round literally seems pointless. I set up go to attack someone check my core first find out that theirs players in my area clear them out of moral done for the day its so god damn boring.
PLUS ** I started 4 days late those 8-16-24-32 planets i lost literally seem impossible to catch up.
Figure I should leave my two cents:
Morale system definitely changes the game. Some good aspects is it restricts farming and more protection for smaller empires. However, in a single player family system, there are good ways to exploit. If you're active/bigger, any tiny player can absolutely ruin you during expo phase before portals up. Really small players are very scary -- they can explore in your systems any time and if they keep track when you explore, they can really mess you up. I was also one of the large players opped early on about 15 times in a row . . lost a LOT of infrastructure (cash factories three times), and there is literally no way to fight back to the person. Both of these issues can be dealt with with multi member families and specialization. With just one person, it's very difficult. You can't keep one family member low NW to deal with piranha.
Another aspect -- it makes morale planets so much more important. I realize it's a random aspect to the game, but I currently have over 250 planets and NOT ONE morale planet (I didn't win the lottery. . ). I haven't seen one the whole round. I finally started asking around to see if Supernova still had morale planets. . Maybe we can all start with higher morale and don't have morale planets??
Attacking generally becomes more random: With any ops ruining morale, I could have fallen victim to laser traps, etc. It's really not feasible to get adequate intel. Also, if smaller players fight back with retakes, it is basically impossible to net any of the planets (you lose 30%+ per attack, they lose 3%).
To consolidate, I would propose: Starting higher morale, no morale loss with non aggressive ops (at the least), equal morale loss for each player if a smaller player attacks you first (or something like this. . .).
Just some ideas! As is, I haven't played IC in over a year and I don't expect to play next round.
i took some planets of a guy same size as me (170), due to nw losses on his side, figs mostly. my morale cost per hit went up from 13% to 36% no more then 10 planets has been taken. The formula doesnt scale well at this point i feel its far to much influenced by nw.
Clearing someone almost half your size from multiple key systems means 30-40% morale per hit.
You'll have no morale left after 3 planets. I guess you're just supposed to let them portal up in your systems.
Fun day indeed.
i took some planets of a guy same size as me (170), due to nw losses on his side, figs mostly. my morale cost per hit went up from 13% to 36% no more then 10 planets has been taken. The formula doesnt scale well at this point i feel its far to much influenced by nw.
Morale system influenced by planet size.
Can't we just get a nice formula we can use to gauge precisely how this works? I would love to play and experiment with its variables in my handy excel sheet....
@ sumeridan
Half morale planets I got taken from neighbors. I think I found only one in my actual territory. That's if they can infil you. I dont even check map system per system that often....
Well, in fact I have one morale now (on recent explore)! I'm just saying, if someone lucks out and has 5 morale planets whereas the person their fighting has zero -- before taking NW into consideration, they have double capabilities. It's a big deal -- and totally random.
Can't we just get a nice formula we can use to gauge precisely how this works? I would love to play and experiment with its variables in my handy excel sheet....
I'll put the question to the mod/dev team!
i took some planets of a guy same size as me (170), due to nw losses on his side, figs mostly. my morale cost per hit went up from 13% to 36% no more then 10 planets has been taken. The formula doesnt scale well at this point i feel its far to much influenced by nw.
Were you running his fleet...because that's a pretty steep jump
I don't know how different this morale overhaul is compared to how it was before, but I can totally see why new players are not at all encouraged to stick around for long. This morale system allows top ranked veterans 2-3x their nw to keep farming them. If this was my first round ever, I wouldn't want to come back next round just to get farmed at the very end.
I don't know how different this morale overhaul is compared to how it was before, but I can totally see why new players are not at all encouraged to stick around for long. This morale system allows top ranked veterans 2-3x their nw to keep farming them. If this was my first round ever, I wouldn't want to come back next round just to get farmed at the very end.
The old formula only took planet count into the equation and completely ignored nw, and while the ability to farm hasn't been lowered in Supernova as drastically as it is in Starburst, it's still significantly less than it was before the change. If you have suggestions on how to tweak the morale formula we appreciate your input 
I never got why it was based on planet count back then and now less so. Except back in the day (10+ years ago) I recall players had a bit more "honor" or were more interested in looking for a worthy and challenging opponent as opposed to easy and guaranteed victories. But I digress...
If anything, NW should be even more heavily weighted in morale calculations since planet count is in no way an indicator of a given empire's capabilities nor a predictor of outcomes from a conflict. It always seemed a tad bit arbitrary. If my NW is 3 times bigger than you due to my gigantic fleet, but we have comparable planet counts, you bet your sweet *ss I'm going to run your portals and start wiping you out in a few hours even if you try to fight back because 1) I'll loose negligible morale per hit and 2) I know for a FACT my fleet outnumbers yours. If I take out your military NW enough without draining your planets, I can get it down to where you will not be able to recover in a timely fashion and then I'll commence taking out your planets. I can't possibly lose. Have fun being under protection. Better luck next time, kiddo.
I tried to avoid exploiting this except when someone just insisted in trying to portal in my systems over and over again. But that's just my own restraint. Or maybe I'm just too old school.
I'm going to test this further this upcoming round. Stay physically small but carry a ridiculous fleet from the start of round--Overwhelming and virtually Untouchable. Best of both worlds. And the only reason I could get away with it--if I devise a plausible long-term economic strategy using MS Excel and Solver to sustain and grow such fleets with fewer planets--is because people have always thought planet count matters more, for some reason. Open season on large game.
So yes, I want that Morale NW vs Planets formula for nefarious planning purposes, lol. Unless lots more emphasis is placed on NW vs Planets, in which case, then this whole strategy is moot. 
I never got why it was based on planet count back then and now less so. Except back in the day (10+ years ago) I recall players had a bit more "honor" or were more interested in looking for a worthy and challenging opponent as opposed to easy and guaranteed victories. But I digress...
If anything, NW should be even more heavily weighted in morale calculations since planet count is in no way an indicator of a given empire's capabilities nor a predictor of outcomes from a conflict. It always seemed a tad bit arbitrary. If my NW is 3 times bigger than you due to my gigantic fleet, but we have comparable planet counts, you bet your sweet *ss I'm going to run your portals and start wiping you out in a few hours even if you try to fight back because 1) I'll loose negligible morale per hit and 2) I know for a FACT my fleet outnumbers yours. If I take out your military NW enough without draining your planets, I can get it down to where you will not be able to recover in a timely fashion and then I'll commence taking out your planets. I can't possibly lose. Have fun being under protection. Better luck next time, kiddo.
I tried to avoid exploiting this except when someone just insisted in trying to portal in my systems over and over again. But that's just my own restraint. Or maybe I'm just too old school.
I'm going to test this further this upcoming round. Stay physically small but carry a ridiculous fleet from the start of round--Overwhelming and virtually Untouchable. Best of both worlds. And the only reason I could get away with it--if I devise a plausible long-term economic strategy using MS Excel and Solver to sustain and grow such fleets with fewer planets--is because people have always thought planet count matters more, for some reason. Open season on large game.
So yes, I want that Morale NW vs Planets formula for nefarious planning purposes, lol. Unless lots more emphasis is placed on NW vs Planets, in which case, then this whole strategy is moot.
If we have the same planet count, but your nw is 3x higher than mine you'll lose roughly 17 morale with each attack/op you perform on me. If you started out with max morale (110), you could do 6 attacks, and then 1 attack every 3.4 ticks. There are 24 ticks in a day....[does maths]...if you only attacked me over the next 48 hours, and you started with 110 morale, you could do a total of 20.5 attacks in 2 days. Taking into consideration that with each attack you do the difference between our planet count and nw will grow, you won't even hit that number.
I'm trying to understand where you're coming from 
Planning numbers proves inequitable... You've got too include the variables for neighbors, star clusters (explorables) planet size etc... Real tactics use these variables and improve or disadvantage themselves based on those hidden variables. (Unless you plan on checking manually and methodically) Using such strategies are proven remedial. I like too size up and see if I'm the one planning on taking deep penetration or the one delivering it based on certain factors....
This has been a rather peaceful EOR for 99' compared to 01'/03'/02' and now 98'/96'. 96' were the titans for a bit there but indecisive earlier victories made by 01'/02' made it up. I see 03' suffered worse after the blocks and seeing as this is Chaos round deleting mid-round is disavowed....
98' most surprising come back. Seeing that scorp had RL matters that led him away from playing another underestimated pownage... same as some others I wont mention. But too stay on point they came back from a shakey sor and gave it too to families...
Well, in fact I have one morale now (on recent explore)! I'm just saying, if someone lucks out and has 5 morale planets whereas the person their fighting has zero -- before taking NW into consideration, they have double capabilities. It's a big deal -- and totally random.
Yes I gained morale early by farming inactive neighbors. (Which i might regret l8r on)! Interesting that if your fair player anyways (meaning you don't target below the belt unless provoked) you'd have a hard time fighting players of similar size and nw. Lucky for me I had the spares too fig run, hypno pops, or farm early spread because of this. Had thirteen empire move in on me sor. Only empires had ability to shove me good were carol and crimson. Others were less fortunate, not sorry to say, too bad most of active regarded/lethal players had RL problems. Might have turned out differently. Now I was McTegija do it again and too far away to exact any more revenge. As is Diego....
Imperial Forum → Feedback → Supernova (Single Player Galaxy)
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.