Outpost overhead


#1

my story: i have had an era in which i had about 300 ops by the end, with most of my members having like 20 outposts each. a lot of people don’t deem it important to help the alliance with networking.

outposts are just too cheap and don’t change in cost the more you have. i feel this should be changed to make it so that at later points in the game it would be more expensive to put down outposts. this would force alliances to share duties amongst the players and make everyone participate in networking. it would also make players be more careful about where they put outposts, since they spend more resources on them.

this is a very controversial topic. RIP

  • yes, add overhead to outposts
  • no, keep outposts the way they are for the reason i post below

0 voters


#2

I think rather than making an overhead for outposts, you should encourage your team to place more. Berate people that don’t and praise people that do. Make goals and markers to get them going. That’s what most teams I’ve been in do and everyone gets at least a good 50 in :slight_smile:


#3

what about when you have a lot of conqures and then they all get deleted and you have all these ops to raze but are getting taxed to death on them in the meantime,maybe make it where the colonys that get deleted not get the overhead or something , but yea it would help on the placements of the ops if you had an overhead on them ppl would place them wisely if they cost more LOL(i would anyway)


#4

I agree with Carter, I think that it should be down to the team how they wanna distribute the duties and good leadership in a good team would guide the team to contribute to the network like everyone else.

It would just be an annoyance to individuals rather than a force, because if others don’t wanna contribute then they still don’t have to even if your “outpost overhead” is high, and if you can’t get your team to work together to contribute to the network then there is a problem with the team itself.

Another thing is what would happen to solo players? wouldn’t that just make it awful for them?

Say if the team is contributing equally to the network but a person is just super active and takes a lot of ops from others, why should his overhead increase for simply being active and taking other ops?


#5

or get a good leader who kicks the useless mems who dont conterbute


#6

yea but then you back to the solo ppl LOL since most ppl are rogue and dont listen to a good leader and think they can do better


#7

thats where the leaders come out if ur a solo mem who
1- doesnt listen to the leader
2- doesnt conterbute to the team as a whole
tbh i wouldnt want you with me since your probably not be that usefull in wars :joy:


#8

yes, because networking and outposts are not important in a war. and a big portion of those ops werent built by me. i took them. and i somehow managed to get most units killed, which means im not useful in wars, by your standards.

and honestly, the things i’ve heard about you and the times i’ve seen you on the battlefield, i wouldn’t want to be with you either. so, it’s not a loss that you think that way.


#9

first of all i am saying if u dont have ops and dont wnna cooprate with ur leader to make ops to help the teams network means u wont be that usefull in wars thanks for taking it as a personal attack on u somehow about u :joy:
2nd of all
glad u dont want to play with me feeling is mutual m8 :joy: right back at u heard same things about u :stuck_out_tongue:


#10

Actually, I think the idea has some merit to some degree. It would change up the way things are played out now and rely on the TEAM as a whole contributing. And that’s something I’m always in favor of. More teamwork

However, I will say, as of the way things are done now, it is actually better for a few to hold the majority of the OPs. The reasoning being that OPs give a LOT of maintenance costs. Why make everyone get hit by that when you can just have 1 of your heavy boosters who can upkeep their workers without relying on their farming structure.


#11

i agree with your point, and you’re right. i should have added onto that.

not just adding overhead. making starter outpost maintenance cheaper so smaller alliances could spread quicker while bigger alliances have to divide their work amongst their members more since it gets more expensive.


#12

but at the end of the aren’t ops something like an investment yeah u pay a lot for ops early but you gain from it through the era 15 workers isn’t cheap at early