Sorry about the delay in posting the survey results. A business collegue came in from USA over the weekend and I had to spent time with him, so have not been able to log in for about 36 hours. Annoying. Real life gets in the way of game time far too often.

Results will be posted now in separate posts within this topic over the next few minutes and next few posts.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

First question: Should ships be reassigned to planets. Most frequent answer was NO WAY!

However, only 48% of players gave this answer. Another 12% said probably not, as better options exist, for a total of 60% of players voting no. Since I was one of the NO WAY votes and since a lot of players feel strongly opposed to this outcome, this is the last time this question will be asked. The SL council and the major of players both agree with my view, that this is not the best direction for us to go with the game, and there MUST be better solutions to encourage players to build up planet defenses (I am neutral regarding whether a single strong HW is better than multiple planets with modest defenses, but either way, I think defending planets should be encouraged in various ways, and players should seek to defend planets due to incentives for doing so, rather than penalties for not doing so).

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

my solution to bring hw's back:
1) fix market
2) buildings
3) add some kind of defensive building which gives the planet more 20M defense(so that we reach 100M possible defense again.
4) Limit number of credits you can have (maybe 5k as limit) - to prevent players from trading the resources for credits.

Second question: Should we have turrets? 74% of players voting said yes.

Third question: What type of turrets?
Super Strong, Three Levels only 33%
Weak, but unlimited or 25 trained fighters worth of them 35% (19 and 16% respectively)
Weak, can be defeated by 10 trained fighters 32%

Interesting distribution. So, 67% of players prefer smaller turrets, but majority of those who like weaker turrets want the ability to have a whole lot of them. Turrets will be designed to be able to withstand about 15-25 trained fighters, since this is range of compromise on overall voting with unlimited or lots versus few weak turrets.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

What should attack and defense be:

Huge distribution, no consensus, no dominate preferences, except that votes tended to be pulled towards the two opposite extremes. There was almost complete tie between very strong and very weak as choices provided (this was the same for the larger turrets as well).

I plan to take the votes, and weight the responses and come up with some middle ground, which will not be the choice anyone voted for, but which will be an intermediate position of compromise between the extreme positions voted on by most players to reflect average views. But, I have not had time to do this yet.

Details on final turret decisions on implementation will be announced in a few days. The details will factor in survey results as well as consideration of costs to build and costs to defeat turrets. Goal will be to have relative consistency between cost to build and cost to destroy turrets at nominal resource production assumed costs.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

Interesting distribution. So, 67% of players prefer smaller turrets, but majority of those who like weaker turrets want the ability to have a whole lot of them. Turrets will be designed to be able to withstand about 15-25 trained fighters, since this is range of compromise on overall voting with unlimited or lots versus few weak turrets.



great, i like pretty much that decision, i choosed weak turrets, but i want lots of them!!

Tied vote on behavior of spies. About half of players want to have spies be able to report on turrets, and about half want spies to be unable to see turrets. However, all players want to have spies be invisible to turrets. So, turrets will only shoot at ships that attack the planet, which includes fighters and assault ships.

As for spies, I have decided to offer a new upgrade option, which will allow spies to detect turrets. If you do not have this upgrade, you will not be able to see turrets until they shoot at an attacking ship. For the first month, however, this upgrade will NOT be available. Spies will not be able to see turrets and turrets will not shoot at spies.

Why do it this way? During the first month, players will have time to build turrets and there are likely to be a relatively small number of turrets on planets. Also, many players do not want spies to be able to see turrets. Therefore, we will try it without spies being able to see them, and we will give the SL council a chance in December to tell me no, this proposed upgrade is not needed. I will plan to have it introduced unless there is a clear vote that the SL council feels strongly that not being able to see turrets with spies is a good feature to keep and not to mess up with an upgrade.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

Ship detections: NO WAY 55% of players. Strong enough to say no, but we might need to revisit this question again in the future. The issue is not closed forever YET, as 45% said yes.

Green planets and ships detected by nearby? 68% said NO WAY, leave NEARBY alone! This issue is now closed. Will not be raised again, unless requested by SL council for a vote. Enough players are voting strongly on this issue to make consensus of community clear.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

Production of planets: Majority of players voted for minimum payback on investment of 4 days of payback. Vote was strongly bias in this direction, with about 30% voting for 7 days payback and only a few players voting for 10 or 14 days production time to pay back investment.

So, four days it is. We can change this later, if it proves to be a problem, but for at least the month of December, payback will be four days for first level of iron mine construction. Payback for level three will be longer, as efficiency of output versus cost declines as levels increase.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."

okay, so now we have a line of action. this is what SL is to look like in the near future. no more complaints

__________________________
CiDG

Cost of other two buildings: Fusion Power and Shield Generator

Majority of players said either SAME or DON'T CARE. The rest split votes between higher cost and lower cost. Given distribution of votes, and relative balance between those wanting higher cost and those wanting lower costs, the cost of these buildings will be same as iron mines.

__________________________
"Of all the things I have lost, I miss my mind the most."