Maelstrom wrote:
Considering our discussion on how to resolve the snowball problem (half of cash still goes to defender, or one of the other solutions), I would say we would want to change the cash flow somewhat. Each planet should have an even amount of cash, so smalls would provide 2, and mediums either 4 or 6 (maybe we should divide it into smalls, mediums, and larges for this result).
Sounds decent.
Maelstrom wrote:
To reduce the total cash flow because of this big increase, we can tone the capitol income down to 10 or something like that. As far as increasing the battle costs, I would say that would be a good idea, otherwise, with so many planets out there we can easily be overwhelmed with battles. Right now I have something like 12 clan war battles active, and thats way too many for me to get to every day.
In addition to Enforcer's comment...I point to my idea for becoming available for finishing a match.
Maelstrom wrote:
As far as the layout, I really like the star layout. The ring that was suggested is a good idea, but I don't see how its feasible with 5 active clans.
I pretty much gave up on the idea of a ring when I thought of the current layout idea (the double-map idea that I have a picture of at the top of the page). The point of the ring was to try to make it fair, which the double-map idea does a decent job of.
Maelstrom wrote:
Also with the two-map layout, how would we transfer resources between the two maps? Warp gates? Where would they be located? Perhaps in 3 of the systems directly adjacent to each homeworld we can have warp gates. That way, there is a possibility of taking someone else's warpgates, and attacking to the other map.
I figured just have it be just like it is now, with each clan just having a supply of money, and none of this "transferring between maps". Also, the idea I had was to have the warp gates replace where the capitals otherwise would be, and instead have the capital laying somewhere in limbo between the warp gates.