Command Centers Tweak

[Ferdoc]

Perhaps a better formula, this time linear. 10-(CC*0.25)= Kill Chance

Don't like this at all. The possibility of having a negative number, while unlikely, is present. What happens when it goes negative? The original presentation is better in my opinion. While the decrease is rather steep and at level 30 there is a very low chance (relative to the normal chance) of commander death; I prefer to see that kind of reduction rather than a flat rate.

So

on OP's version.

[Person012345]

Don't like this at all. The possibility of having a negative number, while unlikely, is present. What happens when it goes negative? The original presentation is better in my opinion.

Just on this, AE does not afraid logical contradictions. What happens when someone gets a >lvl100 commander?

Ribben's Guillotine. Just because an existing feature can do such a thing doesn't mean that new features should as well, if it's possible to avoid doing so.

I wasn't saying he was wrong, merely pointing out the fact that it might have the minutest chance to break the server is not on it's own a reason why the devs would want to keep it out - they have done so before, bargaining on the idea that no-one will get a >100 commander. If it is part of a seperate argument, all well and good, but the question "what happens when it goes negative" doesn't automatically mean anything, as the devs have already demonstrated that they are willing to put such things in the game.

[Ferdoc]

Perhaps a better formula, this time linear. 10-(CC*0.25)= Kill Chance

Don't like this at all. The possibility of having a negative number, while unlikely, is present. What happens when it goes negative? The original presentation is better in my opinion.

Just on this, AE does not afraid of logical contradictions. What happens when someone gets a >lvl100 commander?

Realistically speaking the level 100 commander can never happen without a MASSIVE change to AE's XP and/or commander setup. Command Centers have a significantly higher chance for someone to get to level 41. Seeing as that can be spead up by spending credits on tech, XP on commander and doing a basic time comparison for improving the base's con cap with improvements.

Is it likely? No. Would it take many many years? Yes. I'm just saying avoiding something like this would be preferable rather than exposing the game to such a situation.

[Cabbage]

Signed for me.

My JG is also my fortress and capital, my Logitics & Highest Level Construction COmmander is there.

They cost me a lot of Suicide XP, this would allow me to protect my Capital and the Commanders on it. (Or at least the one that is on it.)

[Bones09]

I'll sign this idea. I reserve XP in case I need to retrain a commander that is lost since most of the time the necessary XP gains to get a new lvl 15 prod commander are few and far between. Anything to help keep my commanders is good.

[Zoran]

I have no issue with the potential negative percentage; there does come a point when you have to realize what the point of having 41 CC's is; not only would that cripple base growth, but the cost would be immense. I say good luck to anyone that wants to put 41 on just one base; let alone all of them. I really do not think a negative ratio should be a worry at this time with the stated Graphs, I'm not sure I've seen a 30 CC base outside of the Dev server.

[Winchester]

Eboaticon Ironiship is up to 28-29; 30 is the soft cap, so that's the maximum we really need to worry about.

[Nagel]

I like this idea, and I prefer the linear option. As stated, 30 CCs is about the softcap. It has already been hit by Commander VoN on Alpha, and he may carry on grinding. But he only has 651 con, and 41 CCs is YEARS off.

[Sandcastle Smasher]

I'd agree to this if Base Pillages where far higher than they are now,
Only reason I hit bases is to have the chance of killing Commanders.

We don't need High players get mega CCs on all bases just because it lessons the chance of them losing commanders, so they can sit back and sim there huge fleets with there huge prod caps.

until Bases are more tempting to be hit.

If you want to waste 30 area, population and energy on all of your bases to keep a commander alive be my guest. Yet i doubt the scenario you mentioned would really happen as every player in the entire of ae could think of something better to do with that extra expansion room on a base.
Also i think the originally formula works better. Mainly because one of the ideas of this was to reduce the chance of commanders dying, especially for lower level players. The random number Ribb pulled up of 4% happens to coincide with

Code: Select all

15   4.63%

Which is what the noob guides recommend players to get. And for people talking about the soft cap, remember that by the time your cc's get to that level, if you are only building them higher to keep your commanders safe, it would probably be more cost effective to actually recruit new commanders with the credits rather than try to keep them safe with cc's.

[Winchester]

The reason I wanted 4% at the max isn't because I'm worried about everyone maxing out CCs to save commanders; it's because high CCs usually go with a high logistics commander, and the current formulas make it too unlikely that it will ever die if the base is hit.

[Callum]

Code: Select all

15   4.63%

Which is what the noob guides recommend players to get. And for people talking about the soft cap, remember that by the time your cc's get to that level, if you are only building them higher to keep your commanders safe, it would probably be more cost effective to actually recruit new commanders with the credits rather than try to keep them safe with cc's.

I've always seen 20 as the standard.

[Sandcastle Smasher]

Players who put 20+ cc's on every base are not exactly the same calibre of player that has to worry about losing their lvl 16 prod commanders on all bases or their lvl 19 log commander.
I doubt the higher up players will build huge amounts of cc's on their bases just to keep their commanders safe, as i said before it would be cheaper to just use the credits to train a commander, faster too.
The main benifit of this is to make it so lower level players who dont play with the same..... aggressiveness shall we say of the top players can get a chance to fight back by using high lvl tactical commanders, to help repel attackers from their bases.
This will keep them intrested in the game long enough for them to learn how to play properly and then not need to defend their bases in such a way.

Over all i cant really see anything that is going to break the balance of the game, just a little boost for an infuriating chance system (i have to say i have been a victim of having 4 bases hit and losing 3 of my high lvl prod commanders all in one day, its a *beep*, yet i wouldnt get my bases to high lvl cc's just because of it)

[VoN]

I will con

I like this idea, and I prefer the linear option. As stated, 30 CCs is about the softcap. It has already been hit by Commander VoN on Alpha, and he may carry on grinding. But he only has 651 con, and 41 CCs is YEARS off.

I will continue "grinding"

[Soundwave]

As a player who uses CCs all the time , i must say this will make CCs even more poverfull then they presently are. CCs are best defensive structure in game , and i defended all my bases many times with carefull planing , building and executing attacks on my occed bases with CCs , with excellent ratios and profit on them CCs are pro building for ro players who know where to build them and how to use them. In my guild i allways asking for ALL players to build minimum 10 of CCs , something ppl allways fail to build. With this said , im not sure do i like this idea. It will make more players build CCs , something , i would rather not see. I will not say what unknown bonuses CCs on bases have , but i must say NO on this , and its becouse of one selfish reason. I dont want CCs to become regular building on all bases. People who know how to play know how to use CC. Ppl who dont know how to play , dont know how to use CC. This is simple fact.

[Achilles]

Post by Naftal, I brought it here as it is interesting and isn't spam


Idea to make commanders die less often and people to use command centers more often:

When a commander would die, instead, if there are command centers at that base equal to the commander level that many levels of CC will be destroyed. This would mean that everytime a commander is saved by CC's you'd have to build them again.

This is the core of my idea. Here are some additional ideas:

- If protecting commanders isn't enough for players to build those CC's again and again then each level of command centers could give 1% bonus to that bases commander power. Note that the commander's power is increased by the percentage, not by percentage points. So level 10 commander with level 20 command centers would give 10% * 1,20 = 12% total bonus.

- I think the CC requirement for saving commanders is too low though, at least for >10lvl. The requirement could also be commander lvl + 5 (or other constant amount) or one cc for every level until 10 and 2 more for each level after that. Or something? Only amount equal to commander's level of cc's would be destroyed anyway.

- I'm not sure if destroying cc's or killing commanders should give xp or creds. If they would, it would be like playing lottery every time you're hitting someone. This could also encourage people to attack each other more even if there are lots of cc's.

- Since there would be a way to save your commander like this, the chance to kill commanders could be increased a little. Like to 15%?