3socca1 wrote:
Would you know beforehand if a wreck contains a fragment? Because if you can only hold one Fragment and you attack a wreck that has a fragment what happens?
Also what about solo worlds and 2 man alliances? if you need 5 fragments and you only have two members how can you get enough for a relic.
Also I dont think this helps new players very much because most of the time there is only three or four active people in the alliance. This can mean those wrecks become useless. Also if relics can only attack relics, then do you need a relic to attack one or can you attack from anywhere. Also how does nuking come into play, If you try to move a relic to someones hive they will just nuke the relic and take it from you.
Also i dont see how this reduces subs. It would just give more incentive to have subs, because then you can get more fragments and get more relics and essentially just sit in your area with your 60 people and 5 relics.
I think it does not address the part of BD that everyone is ignoring. The fact that each world only two teams show up(at least on mars). Every era its only two teams going for the win. To increase competition you need to have more people trying for the win in each round. Makes the game harder and more fun.
No, you will not know what wrecks contain fragments. The wrecks will not be auto determined upon placing, they are set by a formula when someone lands on it. There will be a % change to get a fragment from a wreck. If you already have a fragment (since you can only hold 1 at a time) then the program will automatically eliminate the chance for you to get a fragment and you'll simply get a regular boost in resources from the wreck like normal.
As for the solo worlds - we did take into account that this makes solo worlds impossible. There was a few discussions about this.
1. Eliminate solo worlds or any worlds with less than 5 man teams
2. Change up the programming on these smaller worlds (very unlikely to happen)
3. Simply have solo worlds based on score and tick limit, not on relics.
As for the subs part, part of the reason we put fragments into wrecks was to make wrecks a bigger source of fighting. Now, sub empires would have to let their subs go for wrecks in order to gain a fragment in the first place. And how mad do you think a main alliance would be if they keep letting their sub go for wrecks and find they missed out and their sub members keep getting metal and workers? Fragments in wrecks will actually discourage subs because main alliances won't want to share. We will very likely take Simen's suggestion into account where the fragment find rating will be much higher at the beginning of the era as alliances don't have networks yet. This means everyone is pretty much on equal grounds and it truly becomes the luck of the draw to get a fragment. Then things will curb and slow down as alliances become established and networks are built. The big alliances will dominate and get a majority of the wrecks, however, how many alliances get amazing networks in the first 100 ticks? Because at that point, there won't be THAT many fragments left. Majority have been distributed most likely. You can't steal fragments from players, so you either bring them into your alliance so you can make a relic OR you wait until tick 300 for the fragments to start expiring and new one's to come into play. If main alliances decide to share with the subs a LOT, then perhaps sub abuse will happen. But no matter what we do, people will always try to sub abuse. Even if we make it extremely hard for subs to flourish, people get drawn to big groups. We can only try to curb the community. This isn't a HUGE sub ending change we're looking at, but we believe it could help. Not many subs like to be taken for granted completely.
And the only way to get more teams to compete is to break the mentality of 2 sides. Most people see conflict and think "I must pick a side!". This is wrong. If you don't like either side and have no reason to side with either, become a 3rd side. Make both of the other 2 sides fear that you'll make a move on the other if either get's an advantage. It's simply a mentality. It's not A vs. B, choose a side. It's A vs B vs C vs etc. Unfortunately, because our player count has been dropping, there's less people to feel safe making that 3rd side and instead, they pick 1 side and hope they win and stay protected by the bigger alliances.
kozak2011 wrote:
i think that you are finaly killing this game.
every era there is 10 -20% less players, old players are leaving game, new cant learn complicate rules so fast, old doesnt have time for this...
instead of fixing isues of game, you are making it more complicate.
go on, kill BD finaly with your new hokus-pokus, add some "black holes" , mega portals, quantum physics, interstellar time worps, tunnels betwean Earth 2 and Mars 3 ...
i am shure that spoiled brats like Malice who suggest this "Improoved Jump into more Chaos", who doesnt do nothing else in life then think about more useless improoves will be happy with this new improove, but you will keep loosing old players even faster, and new players will quit even faster then so far .
and BD will die .
1. This is not simply my idea. This was a collective effort between multiple staff members.
2. I do not know why you are calling me a spoiled brat? Seriously... where did that come from?
3. If you do not wish for change, then here is the very simple truth. BD is slowly losing more players due to the game being stagnant. The more people who leave, the more stagnant it becomes because less competition is around. Many left the game initially during the new client change BECAUSE it was said that the game became too simplistic. New Client has focused on making BD as simplistic as possible for newer players to pick the game up faster. This however caused those hardcore players looking for more complex game style to leave.
If you wish to criticize other's for suggestions, I would ask that you please make your own suggestions. You ask us to "fix" issues, but don't tell us what issues you think there are, nor how you think they should be fixed. I am very happy to hear suggestions to improve the game.
On a side note though, where did these even come from?
Quote:
new hokus-pokus, add some "black holes" , mega portals, quantum physics, interstellar time worps, tunnels betwean Earth 2 and Mars 3 ...
i am shure that spoiled brats like Malice who suggest this "Improoved Jump into more Chaos",
We're not even suggesting anything close to these things. We're simply breaking down 1 part of the game (relics) into basically, a puzzle. Instead of relics all of a sudden appearing, you find and make them. Nothing too crazy from that.
Anywho, BD is only as strong as those who play it. If you don't wish for it to die, then try to help it. That is why we are here in the first place. We're at least trying.
jjmewto wrote:
So once the alliance has enough fragments to make a relic how is deciced who gets the relic?
It is owned by the alliance, not an individual anymore. So the leader and possibly a 2nd in command will be able to move it. That's it.
