Adding more defense does limit WHO can hit them(bots). But it doesn't affect how many times they get hit.

The higher netted players just hit them more times. Same result- high DR.

and removing the military would take them out of range of the higher net players and change nothing other than the bots finish.....

what did you accomplish? no one had to work for bot land, and nub players can now grab them inefficiently pushing people deeper into landtrading.

Country A:
jets: 1 mil
turrets: 200k

Country B(bot):
turrets: 600k

Country C:
jets: 200k
turrets: 200k

True- Country C cannot hit country B, but Country A just hits country B more times. Resulting in same DR. It would be better for country B to save their $ on expenses than to buy more turrets.

What you get by beefing the turrets for country B is a larger gap between A & C.

quit explaining your points out. i get them, i just dissagree. you talking slow isnt going to change that. you accomplish nothing with a change that isnt needed. you in fact open up risk for the netters with suiciders, force larget countries to land trade, and encourage people to grab without taking advantage of optimal ghost acre returns.

ok

Holy crap discussion! :)

I want there to be a bigger gap between the top players. That's the whole goal imo of adding more land. Having land allows skilled players to grow. RIght now there's a logic and a reason to actually stunt growth and hide behind tags. Giving players incentive to grow more is not a bad thing. I want bots that grow and are harder to hit which gives an incentive for players to run bigger countries.

Mind you a basically untagged country shouldn't be able to break top 10 countries as easily as they can right now, but that's another issue for another day. A bigger top 10 starts to move the needle.

Actually let me put this way.

I want to see the bots used as a way for an alliance as a whole to grow large enough it can under the rules of the server to grab another alliance so we have less land:land 200% type agreements because the BEST players are able to actually out grow the good players. It makes the game more competitive and skilled and less of a spread sheet game. I think bots can help this and thus why I want there to be hard to hit bots and large net bots with hopefully more land.

It's not possible:

Basically the bots would have to make 1 1/2 turrets for every 1 jet a player makes.
Mostly everyone on ALLIANCE are jet heavy. Since the attacker gets 150% bonus for attacking, bots are not going to be able to defend against players attacking them. Until they can retal back, it makes no sense to have them buy more turrets. The viewpoint Mrford was making is that higher net players will want to have higher net bots to grab, and its his belief that can only be achieved by the bots buying more military. I disagree, in that the higher net players are mostly landtrading. Mostly the lower netting countries are hitting bots. Not a single player made top 30 by hitting only bots.

I'd love to see the bots hit back, even if they fail 1/2 the time. It creates some risk where there is little today. It also lowers their DR and makes them more accessible to more people more of the time.

Even more interesting logic would be to have bots ally with each other where one is a jetter and does the retals for the other. ;)

We could have a contest for code for the retal messages....

You $insult, I am gonna $threat until you $cfcondition. If you keep hitting me or $ally we will $nastyverb you until you $variantofbegmercy. Have a $adjective day!

Have a swirvey day!

I'd like to land trade with a bot for ghost acres. :)

lol that would be funny

we need pleasurebots

like this?

http://www.wowhead.com/npc=81758/pleasure-bot-8000

if bots played like that id play tyranny indy/farmer then just afk farm one bot the whole set that gives 20 acres a hit, so id get about 700 acres a day for no cost

its just as pointless as allx every day, self farming in ffa, and landtrading, either with other tags in tags or your own countries in ffa

also you dont gain 5k acres in 2 turns because you spend more turns rebuilding empty acres and csites

not sure what suicide has to do with the bots being in gdi

consider what would happen if there was 10x as many bots, maybe they wouldnt all be in 10dr, if that doesnt work then try 100x as many bots

and not all these bots have to explore max each day, some of them can stay small and play like bad players used to

we used to have bots that would sit on 2k land all set, bots can stockpile oil which cant be grabbed from them, and in the longterm bots can grab other bots, and retal, and suicide if they are farmed excessively

okay, so stocking, but also buying more def

Bots now...interesting.

+goestoresearch

Techers and indy's are larger in net. The game isn't all about the casher and farmer.

E: if bots played like that id play tyranny indy/farmer then just afk farm one bot the whole set that gives 20 acres a hit, so id get about 700 acres a day for no cost
A: 700 acres a day? That's about normal. What's 72turns a day * 10 acres per turn (explore) = ????

E: its just as pointless as allx every day, self farming in ffa, and landtrading, either with other tags in tags or your own countries in ffa
A: pointless, yes, but that doesn't stop ppl from doing it.

E: also you dont gain 5k acres in 2 turns because you spend more turns rebuilding empty acres and csites
A: you do gain 5k acres in 2 turns. but you're saying you spend more turns rebuilding empty acres and CS.

A: you mentioned more turns to rebuild- how do you figure?
A: 5k / 30 ( 20per atk + 10 ghost ) takes 166 turns for a Tyranny to gain 5k land. Then it takes turns to build on that land. How does that compare?

A: You also mentioned rebuild cost. - with the -1.3% building bonus each day, the cost of rebuilding can be drastrically reduced.
A: Still,.. saving 164 turns > costs of rebuilding.

E: Enshula
A: Celphi Reply

@hoop:

The point I'm making is this:

Can a player (of equal playing strength) all explore, beat a player who grabs land? No.
So the BOTs will always be inferior., at least until they are able to LG.

To multiply this effect., players on ALLIANCE rely on their clan protection, which enables them to carry mostly jets and not turrets. This makes it nearly impossible for any BOT to defend against players, for the simple fact that attacking gives 150% bonus. This means the BOTs will undoubtly be in perma DR. If you check eestats every set,. almost all the BOTs stay at 8+ DR. The only reason why those #s have been decreasing lately is because LandTrading has proved to be far superior.

My suggestion is, since the bots will be placed in DR regardless, why not have them carry 0 defense? They're going to have a maxed out DR regardless, so why have them carry the extra expenses? Have them use DR to their advantage!

As I've said in a previous thread:
By buffing their defense, all what will happen is a larger gap between higher end players vs lower end players.

Country A:
Jets: 900k
Turrets: 200k

Country B (bot):
Turrets: 600k

Country C:
Jets: 300k
Turrets: 300k

If you beef up the BOTs defense that will only create a larger gap between A & C. Countries in group A will always suceed, because ALLIANCE allows you to carry 90/10. Jets/Turrets.

The players in group C will then NOT be able to attack the BOTs because the BOTs defense would be too high.

You might reason that group B's DR would be lower because Group C cannot hit them, but all that happens is Group A just hits the BOTs MORE. Same DR result. To me, it would seem better, at least until the BOTs can retal back, to have them carry 0 defense and for them to spend $ in tech upgrades. Tech bots would be the obvious exception.

This is way too much reading. Just have the boughts run all jetter too and randomly hit countries ;).

10 10762 11979
10 13076 14537

its only 10 acres a turn at up to 14.5k acres if rep

the correct way to think about land gain is averaged land gain, just using explore to explain why traders dont grab at 5k/2 turns because its simpler, otherwise they would grow 100k a day

if my bpt is 100 and i explore 10 acres a turn my actual land growth a turn isnt 10 its 9.0909, you have to do the same thing with other growth methods

growth vs cost is the relationship, its a tradeoff, your proposing making the cost effectively 0 because the bots get hit anyway

afk all explore shouldnt be able to beat grabbing, there were a number of sets with 10-20 countries oop untagged all getting farmed 15 times a day before bots got brought in, average land per hit was much smaller then than now

there is already heavy diminished losses on defensive losses when dr is high, what ends up happening is when the bots get farmed a lot they start losing no defence when they get grabbed so their defence per acre starts going up

your proposal of 0 d for bots means people could just run 0 o and 0 d if they really wanted to know they could 1 jet ss/ps, assuming the bots were in perma dr and wernt giving ghosts anyway, why create a new equally silly setup rather than simulating the old system

whats the point of playing a game where everyone hits everyone equally easily, its like the people who advocate topfeeding, which you can never have best country or else your the one getting topfed so by definition your playing to lose

instead everyone would be playing to be equal

landtradings already dumb enough with having to have people in other tags equal to you to trade with

theres plenty of things worth trying before having bots run 0 defence, having them spend more money on defence, run higher income strats, not explore max each day, join gdi, use defensive alliances, buy weapons tech

mrford is right and reading Cellphis posts in this thread makes me want to bang my head against the wall.

I actually want to see bots disappear and never be heard from again as I think this will deter more newer people to game than it will attract. If I were to stumble upon this game having never played it or any others like it before and seen any evidence of bots, I would leave without ever trying the game out. I dont come online to play against computers, I can do that offline.

But hey, IF bots actually do all what you hope, than hell yea I am all for bots being around. Mighty big if though that I doubt will happen.