Barraks and Hangers

Hey I got an idea

Want to balance the game so we don’t have these tiny attackers with huge fleets hitting smaller people?

Hangers and Barracks!

You need these buildings to have fleet, max fleet is based on the amount you have, each building supports 10 units of either ground or air let’s say.

We can make it even more interesting!

The planets that have those buildings are where the fleet is actually chilling, they can will defend those planets and in turn can be hit by destroy units, and with portals then they will def everything else as per normal. Makes more sense than having a fleet in limbo.

1 Like

If these count as buildings, then the bankers are going to go ballistic about it screwing up their ratios.

part of the balancing fun, hold fleet or hold income buildings? lots of new strat here

Not saying I am against it all. Still prefer playing more as an SS attacker than anything else. And I’m all for anything that ruins a banker’s gameplay.

I like it.

One of the bigger problems we have is the ability to create and sustain insane fleets. It’s what makes it possible for top fams to run away and become untouchable after the “race to the top”.

We talked awhile back about having fleet limited by population size, but this seems like it might be an even better idea. We’d end up having 2 types of pop: civilians (same as now) and military (your idea here).

I wonder :thinking: if we could even combine the 2 ideas and have “building units” really be a mechanism for converting population to military. As in, pop % goes down as your non-machine units are built, limited by your available hangars and barracks.

We could even do it the other way around, where unused units can be “retired” back into the civilian pop to increase your income.

Regardless, having a soft limit on unit sizes seems like an all around good thing. I’d love to flesh this one out some more and get it on #roadmap:to-do.

Are there any potential issues we can think of that might need addressing?

2 Likes

Bitchy bankers. :smiley: And every whiny player that is against change.

Honestly though, while it sounds like a pretty drastic change to the gameplay and strategies, it is a logical thing to implement.

The other idea of limiting fleet by population would be a mistake IMO as it would severely curtail the diversity of strategies. Everyone would have to be developing population instead of specializing as a farmer, miner, attacker, etc. Would make it extremely difficult if not impossible to be a low planet-count raider/infiltrator.

2 Likes

That’s a fair point, but wouldn’t the same happen if limiting by barracks?

1 Like

Similar but not quite the same. For example, I could still ignore population and focus strictly on military as a small raider/infiltrator.

Getting the right ratio of troops to a barrack and airpower to a hanger will be key. 10 per each is likely too low. But if you go too high, you run into the same problem as we have now.

Of course, how it all plays out in our mind now, versus when the new attack module is ready, is going to be quite different. If the buildings’ defensive numbers are finally rolled into play, that will change raiding. The turn-based and targeted attacks is also going to drastically change things.

In other words, LOTS of testing to be done to get it right.

Which brings up a related point about the Test v2 galaxy. It is down to 10 players right now, and I’m not certain how many of those players understand the purpose of the galaxy. Shares are minimal in there despite my ranting about it in forums and via in-game messages. Honestly, might not be a bad move to shut it down until the attack module is ready to test.

1 Like

More thoughts after a day of reflection on the idea. I still love it, especially for Infinitum. However, this is not something you throw into the mix of an already mature galaxy where players have 300% OB planets. It would need to be done pretty soon, or the backlash would be quite vocal.

In solo galaxies I do not see a lot of downside.

In team based galaxies, it would allow a pure attacker to be nearly unstoppable. That is as long as the attacker is able to keep his banker(s) protected from harm.

Bankers would have to balance defensive capability versus maximizing income on the same order as they did during the pre-core rounds. The wrench that could disrupt all this is the new attack module. If buildings have rooftop cannons then the need to build other military units may be diminished for bankers.

Timing. Balance. Acceptance.

1 Like

I think this would achieve the primary objective but would have other affects.

A couple of simpler ways of getting a similar result that have less side effects are:

  1. Each planet gives a military bonus of X%
  2. Tie fleet sending costs to networth and reduce the cost by planet numbers.

However all of these changes will make it even harder for a smaller/losing side as the planets they dont have/lost become even more important than they were before.