Space and ground battle sugestion: RNG

Hello.

I played this game a long time ago, and now friends told me it is on again; I Was very excited.

I would like to suggest the addition of RNG - at least on space battles, if not on ground ones as well. Battles are very predictable right now; Simulators had been built, and it’s simply less fun. Especially since “overkill” has been removed.

A bit of RNG (somewhere between -25% to +25% RNG on damage, calculated for a percentage of the ships participating in the attack (let’s say for 0% to 25% of them) would add more variation to the game.

What I’m saying is this: the first round of attacks: fighters attacking bombers; Choose between 0 and 25% (RNG1) of the participating fighters, and for the chosen fighters apply another -25% to +25% (RNG2) on the standard damage. Cause let’s face it: in a battle, not all privates are alike :slight_smile: Some are better, some do suck :slight_smile:

Thank you for your consideration.

Best regards,

1 Like

Overkill will be implemented again. Frosty already confirmed. Just FYI :slight_smile:

Not a fan of overkill, as it limits the amount of damage a smaller ruler/alliance can do to a larger one. Have already expressed my view on this.

I’d be curious to analyze those “simulators” and their accuracy. It took me 15k turns of alpha to generate a very accurate one. I’m pretty sure they are still far from the truth.

Being predictable is not a flaw imho. It just adds an element of strategy. Assuming that the battle system is properly balanced (right now, it is not).

1 Like

HahH still, you have 15k t advantage on me about it, and a non flawless one, while I still don’t have a clue hahahaha

I still believe the mechanics are correct (though Frosty seemed to imply it is badly coded). Its mostly balance issues that could be fixed by tweaks in the kill ratios and the target priorities

I’ve never understood a code without overkill. You don’t have to make it overwhelming, but the fact that 15 fighters who fly into a fleet with 4000 battleships, 10.000 cruisers and 100.000 fighters are still able to trade 1 for 1 in fighters is ridicolous :slight_smile: (imHo).

It’s difficult to write out an entire idea, but in such a battle the big fleet commander would obv just send a bts into battle and let the rest chill :slight_smile:

1 Like

I agree with you. Makes sense. There should be Overkill, as is in reality actually. It comes to mind a war between the Syrian tanks (about 1,260 old T-54 tanks mainly) vs. only 170 more modern Israeli tanks. It was overkill. 10 tanks of one type against 100 tanks of the same type will not get to do 10 kills, because they get “overwhelmed”. Sorry, I like tanks too :slight_smile: So Overkill should exist. I can’t imagine no overkill. Without it it’s just simple and boring 4th grade addition, subtraction, multiplication and division…

1 Like

I’m personally a (big) fan of overkill…

Whili says that overkill would limit the amount of damage that a smaller ruler/Alliance can do to a larger one. That statement is completely untrue. The only way smaller alliances/players can do MORE damage to bigger ones is WITH overkill.

Imho smaller players/alliances dont stand a chance without overkill as every fleet battle would always favour the bigger player/alliance in the long run, because they can rebuild faster.

1 Like

Very good and valid point. :+1:

It only works if the larger player splits his large fleet into small chunks. Which occurs as often as tap dancing unicorns.

Yeah, I’ve been having that discussion with whilli for a while. Imho overkill favors the more organized alliance regardless of size. A big alliance MUST split their fleet in order to take planets, if they just move everything together a smaller alliance can just go after them and retake. And as soon as the big fleets are split, it’s all about organizing and overkilling the small pieces. I’ve done that multiple times in wars where we’ve been severely outnumbered and outgunned in the past.