Coverting
 

I'm not sure has this been suggested before, but would it be possible to change the ships sabotage covert op option to slowing ships building / roll it back few %'s. Same way as the research sabotage works.

Re: Coverting
 

It hasn't been suggested before. Or maybe it has, I forget.

This idea will overpower cov ops, so I'm going to say no to it.

Re: Coverting
 

Might be overpowering if abused, but sounds pretty cool.

The ship sabotage one is wank anyways ;/

Re: Coverting
 

Well, yes and no.

Building yourself out of trouble is a standard strategy of PA for a long time. However, with the new-ish production system meaning that you can have large numbers of ships in perpetual production, wouldnt the rise of a covert op to (potentially, depending on Security/Alertness levels after all) to disrupt this be a valid balancing force?

Re: Coverting
 

I was actually going to suggest this myself.

If people can have huge orders in production laying in waiting, it makes sense to be able to delay their completion. It doesn't 'overpower' covert ops because I mean really... how many covops players are there out there? Very few, and if an alliance is doing an attack on more than one planet, a covops player would only be able to stop the production of 1 planet, thereby negating the ability to do this accross the board.

It would also add an element of risk to keeping stuff hidden, which tbh is becoming extremely commonplace atm.

Re: Coverting
 

That's another good point that I didnt really touch upon. The potential targets for this special treatment is quite large at any given combat tick, whilst the potential covert oppers are relatively few with limited reload as well (eg, once every two ticks each covert opper would probably be able to do at most 4-5 planets a day).

Inded. And its not like they cant be stopped either with some "investment" in security - investment that might be worthwhile anyway to protect resource stockpiles, amps/jammers and/or factories. So, its not too powerful. If you dont want it to be, anyway. If you want to leave yourself wide open to covert ops (in order to gain the most from more resource mining, or whatever), then that's a strategic choice for your planet and thus you shouldnt be whinging.

Re: Coverting
 

Similarly, here were relatively few XP whores before it became known how effective the tactic was. You cannot use current numbers, and apply them to a completely new situation, pretending nothing has changed.

Re: Coverting
 

That's true. But your point doesnt address the fact that people can still have immunity from covert ops. And if that particular covert op is looking a bit too powerful, all that needs adjusting is the number of agents required (thus, higher failure rate//easier stoppage rate).

The thing about XP wh0ring is that you cannot prevent someone from launching on you when they're smaller than you. That is not the case wrt covert ops.

Re: Coverting
 

Fair point. However, most people dont have to deal with cov ops much these days. Few people regularly deal with repeated Havoc attempts, and the other covert operations are a nuisance at best.

Adding this particular op would increase the number of cov oppers significantly (or at least I'd expect it to), making knowledge about cov ops a necessity. Considering the relatively complex nature of the formulae involved, I don't think that's the way to go.

Besides, there's a limit to how many agents you can assign to a covert operation. As soon as you go over it you essentially make it impossible for a cov op to succeed at all, rendering it useless.

Re: Coverting
 

It would solve the production hiding stuff.. what I do frequently as it's only way to survive in spealised targetting.. Problem would be the additional accounts what people would make as it basicly gives early game a sure roids as bcalcs would be accurate instead of that random element of target doubling he's fleet in the early days.

Anyways cov op's is a annoyinance atm, not a player strategy unless you got multiple cov oppers killing someone's resource stockpiles etc.

Re: Coverting
 

i agree but maybe to prevent abuse there could be a restricted use on it, or it could cost a crap load of res

Re: Coverting
 

Prod hiding is not a problem.

Re: Coverting
 

Well, no it isnt. However, its one of the very few (only?) good strategies in this game with absolutely no counter. Which makes it unusual.

This kind of covert op (once done with balancing tweaks like the #agents needed) would be a counter to an extent.

?

Re: Coverting
 

The counter is pulling 1 sec before tick. The detection mechanism is sandmans or (to an extent) a news scan.

Re: Coverting
 

Hmm, i suppose that's true. Not quite sure about the sandmans thing (due to perpetual production ... is that still possible? I've not played the last round or two). But the (very) late recalling is a fair counter; at least for the second wave.

Whether its sufficient or not is another matter i suppose.

<3

Re: Coverting
 

Repeated value losses without a discernable cause (roid gain, roid loss) usually point to ticks during which an order was placed*. The amount of value lost can then be used to calculate the approximate tick the ships will come out (very approximate, population can potentially speed up an order by a factor 1.6), and the value boost they will give. If this fails to happen, you know you're looking at a prod hider.

Obviously, the method is not perfect. Smart prod hiders will order the ticks before they land, to make it seem like a crash. However, most don't.



* Technically, the tick after the tick the order was placed.

Re: Coverting
 

Yes, that's quite true - the absense of data that should be occuring would identify (at least the less-smart) prod hiders. That's a good point.

Still, what's your fundamental objection to a balanced (ie, tough) covert op to make prod-building more challenging? Given that alterations to security and so on can occur quite quickly (swapping population over for example), why not give players more choice and options? :)

Re: Coverting
 

I don't think I've got a really good argument against it, it just seems wrong, I dunno. :(

Re: Coverting
 

sounds good.

Re: Coverting
 

Hiding ships in productionis bad. It can ruin someone's round and there's not a good counter against it. It makes it harder to attack certain planets. And the universe is already too small. It should be fixed. You can keep ships in production indefinately. When that was possible by putting 0 ships on a production, that was considered a bug. I have no idea why it's not a problem if you can do the same by just regularly adding a few ships to the order.

Re: Coverting
 

Imagine you log in to find you have incoming, you build out of it. The correct amount of ships needed to cover yourself will appear at the tick the hostile lands. You go off to work safe in the knowledge your roids will be safe.

You arrive home to find that a cov opper prevented your production coming out on time. You've been shafted for 25% and theres nothing you could have done to avoid it.

I hate the fact you've even suggested a new cov op ability.

Re: Coverting
 

PAX is all about abusing the system to max benefit, everything is "working as intended" ..

Anyways you can pretty easily calc hidden prod's value worth by using out of game sites info's.. but without them.. heh, never land on top planets without takedown fleet.

Re: Coverting
 

if you leave yourself open to covert ops, you should be aware of the consequences associated with that. pretty sure it was suggested as a covert op due to the lack of any other mechanics in game atm. the only way to really delay a prod order right now is to havoc the target and you aren't even guaranteed to blow up a factory - let alone the 'correct' factory.

Re: Coverting
 

It is wank, but its quite handy to decide what is home at a planet, as it only blows up ships that are home.