NB: i have simplified the start of the idea, by assuming no units die in battles. This is addressed further on where i explain how it can still be possible for units to be killed, depending on a fairness rating
-------------------------------------------------------------
I was just thinking about how many people believe there is an issue with how land is no longer the most important aspect of the game. Apparently it all used to be about how people could whore the most land. Now people get zeroed and it is quite a setback, and pretty annoying. There have been a number of measures to reduce the impact such as insurance and injuries.
So i got an idea of another way of going about it. It works something like this:
Someone gets attacked by someone bigger than them, eg RPG attacking Robo, but basically they're gonna get zeroed, or similar. Say the robo has 15 million RPGs and the Robo has 3 million Cybers, normally all the cybers would die.
What i propose is that instead of all their troops dying, they instead suffer 'permanent' 'damage'. So Instead of having zero Cybers, the robo still has 3 million Cybers, but they have a damage level of 98% (or 2% health). So for simplicity only 2% of the cybers fire. Then next tick the RPGs fire again and the cybers have 100% damage (0% health) and none fire (of course the Cybers could suffer 100% damage the first tick)
After the attack the damage on the units slowly reduces while they 'heal'. (say .5% per tick) So over two days (for example, im not doing the math atm
) they regain their full health (ie they have a 0% damage level). This way the attacker can quickly resend without having to face a fully healed army.
An issue is at what rate should heath increase? I though that it should increase slowly at first, and then quickly later, ie exponentially. I figured the rate of health regeneration could be given by: "health = (EXP(x/100)-1)*20" where x is the number of ticks. This would give:
Time (hrs)......health (%)
5....................7.00
10..................16.44
15..................29.19
20..................46.40
25..................69.63
30.................100.99
Now this could be inconvenient if someone wanted their troops now. So instead of waiting for their units to heal, they can pay to have them healed immediately. And the amount they would have to pay would correspond to the damage level.
So if the robo's 3m Cybers had 0% after the mid tick, the player could pay £330 billion to heal them back to 100%, just like how they would normally buy up last tick. Or they could pay half that (depending on how much money they have, what they want ect) so their damage is at 50% and only 1.5 million fire last tick Or, for example, they could wait till healed to 50% themselves, you could pay £165 billion to heal them up to 100%. Or they could not pay anything, and they would have all their units back in 1-2 days
Now this 'damage' would have to be shown in Haxors (or maybe another type of intel, available after haxors, and before spies). Of course the damage would also have to be different for each type of unit, due to different units survivability. You might not get it and think its complicated. But it wouldnt be hard to get.
So for the robo, his/her cybers could have 2% health while his PAs have 0% health. Therefore, when you 'hack' them you see: Cybernetic warriors 3,000,000 (2%) Psychopathic Android 1,000,000 (0%). From this you can deduce that 60,000 cybers will fire (or can be damaged) and no PAs. Now this might make those last second decisions take too long as you try and work out how many troops will fire because they healed them 20 seconds before end of tick. So while it can show the number of units, have in bold or something the number of units that would fire. Eg:
Cybernetic warriors 3,000,000 [60,000] (2%) Psychopathic Android 1,000,000 [0] (0%)
Now of course this means no one will ever really die, and bounty and insurance wouldnt apply the same, if at all.
But i also thought of how units could still die. I thought this could tie into the new 'fairness calculator' if done. So someone who is very fair and has a fairness rating of 90/100 (or however you want to express it) only 10% of their troops can die, while someone who is 'unfair' with a rating of 10/100 can lose up to 90% of troops. This % represents a maximum, not how much you would lose every battle
This way, you can get bounty for units you kill, so obviously, the lower their fairness, the more you can kill, and the more bounty you can get.
So yeah, thats my idea
Of course i expect a lot of people wont think it is a good idea/could complicate things a bit, ect but i just thought id throw it out there
Any ideas, criticisms?
-------------------------------------------------------------
I was just thinking about how many people believe there is an issue with how land is no longer the most important aspect of the game. Apparently it all used to be about how people could whore the most land. Now people get zeroed and it is quite a setback, and pretty annoying. There have been a number of measures to reduce the impact such as insurance and injuries.
So i got an idea of another way of going about it. It works something like this:
Someone gets attacked by someone bigger than them, eg RPG attacking Robo, but basically they're gonna get zeroed, or similar. Say the robo has 15 million RPGs and the Robo has 3 million Cybers, normally all the cybers would die.
What i propose is that instead of all their troops dying, they instead suffer 'permanent' 'damage'. So Instead of having zero Cybers, the robo still has 3 million Cybers, but they have a damage level of 98% (or 2% health). So for simplicity only 2% of the cybers fire. Then next tick the RPGs fire again and the cybers have 100% damage (0% health) and none fire (of course the Cybers could suffer 100% damage the first tick)
After the attack the damage on the units slowly reduces while they 'heal'. (say .5% per tick) So over two days (for example, im not doing the math atm
) they regain their full health (ie they have a 0% damage level). This way the attacker can quickly resend without having to face a fully healed army.An issue is at what rate should heath increase? I though that it should increase slowly at first, and then quickly later, ie exponentially. I figured the rate of health regeneration could be given by: "health = (EXP(x/100)-1)*20" where x is the number of ticks. This would give:
Time (hrs)......health (%)
5....................7.00
10..................16.44
15..................29.19
20..................46.40
25..................69.63
30.................100.99
Now this could be inconvenient if someone wanted their troops now. So instead of waiting for their units to heal, they can pay to have them healed immediately. And the amount they would have to pay would correspond to the damage level.
So if the robo's 3m Cybers had 0% after the mid tick, the player could pay £330 billion to heal them back to 100%, just like how they would normally buy up last tick. Or they could pay half that (depending on how much money they have, what they want ect) so their damage is at 50% and only 1.5 million fire last tick Or, for example, they could wait till healed to 50% themselves, you could pay £165 billion to heal them up to 100%. Or they could not pay anything, and they would have all their units back in 1-2 days
Now this 'damage' would have to be shown in Haxors (or maybe another type of intel, available after haxors, and before spies). Of course the damage would also have to be different for each type of unit, due to different units survivability. You might not get it and think its complicated. But it wouldnt be hard to get.
So for the robo, his/her cybers could have 2% health while his PAs have 0% health. Therefore, when you 'hack' them you see: Cybernetic warriors 3,000,000 (2%) Psychopathic Android 1,000,000 (0%). From this you can deduce that 60,000 cybers will fire (or can be damaged) and no PAs. Now this might make those last second decisions take too long as you try and work out how many troops will fire because they healed them 20 seconds before end of tick. So while it can show the number of units, have in bold or something the number of units that would fire. Eg:
Cybernetic warriors 3,000,000 [60,000] (2%) Psychopathic Android 1,000,000 [0] (0%)
Now of course this means no one will ever really die, and bounty and insurance wouldnt apply the same, if at all.
But i also thought of how units could still die. I thought this could tie into the new 'fairness calculator' if done. So someone who is very fair and has a fairness rating of 90/100 (or however you want to express it) only 10% of their troops can die, while someone who is 'unfair' with a rating of 10/100 can lose up to 90% of troops. This % represents a maximum, not how much you would lose every battle
This way, you can get bounty for units you kill, so obviously, the lower their fairness, the more you can kill, and the more bounty you can get.
So yeah, thats my idea
Of course i expect a lot of people wont think it is a good idea/could complicate things a bit, ect but i just thought id throw it out there
Any ideas, criticisms?
Last edited:
