Every other server I'm 98% successful with my attacks, but in alliance I'm bouncing everything even when I'm overspending 5% now. I'm taking into account their allies DOUBLING their current defense each time, as well as any tech or government bonuses... It says in the notes that allies aid with up to 25% of their army but you can never double your current defense, so am I reading that wrong or does it mean each ally can double your defenses?

If you have a 1 million jet break it means you will need 2 million jets to break if they have strong allies. Try over sending by 10 percent. Most of these bots you should be able to break by NW matching. So 3m Jets for a 3 mil NW country. 3.333m just to be safe if you wish


Are you adding in their weapons tech?

Tanks are worth 2 turrets as well.

50 percent weapons tech with 1 million turrets would be 1.5 m turrets.

If they have strong allies it would double to 3 m turrets.

Wait sorry I see now you added tech. Got me man. I’m stumped

Example:
If they have 1m turrets, 500k tanks and 1m troops I'd send:

2.6 million JETS.

and it would not break, and in this particular case they were a republic AND I had one offensive ally. So I was like okay whatever, then sent 2.7 million and still didn't break lol

and when i look at the losses its like 3:1. Im losing like 300k vs them losing 50k turrets, 100k troops, etc.

"If they have 1m turrets, 500k tanks and 1m troops I'd send:

2.6 million JETS. "

Correct me if I am wrong but that break would be 2.5 million jets not including allies and tech and government?

It would be 2,750,000 jets for the full 10% pang bounce factor. 2.6 million is just short of that, increasing your chance to bounce randomly.

EDIT: I didn't read all of the posting here, but in case you do not know, you must send an additional 10% to ensure you prevent a random DH due to what we call Pang'd – in Earth: 2025, it was Mehul'd

Req is correct. You gotta oversend by 10% to be 100% successful in all servers.

Yes it's 10% and in all servers so you (Lawton) been lucky you're only bouncing in alliance 😀

This. The break is 5.4 mil not 2.5 not counting weapons tech

With 50 percent weapons tech that break would rise to 7.5 mil jet break

I come up with the same RAW break as Ruthie =) What you're describing sounds more like a readiness issue. Are you sending these 90%+ readiness? I rarely bounce and normally over send by 100-150k jets. Other possibility is you're just a Pang magnate =)

20 million jets will never fail.

Minimum break formula for an SS is Turrets + 2x Tanks + 0.5 x Troops, x weapons, plus ally bonus

So your example as posted, would be 1 Mil, + 1 mil (2 x 500k tanks) + 500k (05. x Troops) x weapons, then ally military after.

Yes Ruthie, 2.6m is what I'd send, that was to represent my oversend.

In alliance I calculate the defense the target has, multiply by 2, and then oversend by 50-100k and still fail. I'm hitting countries that typically dont have weapons tech or a government bonus. (fascist and republics)

2.6 is without doubling it for allies and counting weapons tech. You need to double that and send 5+ mil. That is why you failed your hit.

No just no...

Lawton needs to learn how to read.

Yes, 1m jets + 500k tanks + 1 million troops = 2.5 m break without allies or weapons tech.


If weapons tech is at 130 that would be 2.5m x 1.30= 3.25m and the you add allies potential doubling that so 3.25 x 2= 6.5 million jets total to break




If you have 130 weapons tech then you would send a planned strike (50 percent attack bonus) of 3.4m jets today be safe


3.4m Jets x 1.3 (weapons tech) x 1.5 (planned strike) = a 6 1/2 million jet break


This is why he’s failing based on what he says is he isn’t factoring in allies

And it is not each ally doubles your defense, it is both of your allies together can double your defense.


It takes 25 percent of your allies defense each.

So if they each have 1 million turrets for defense, they would send 250k each, so it would add 500,000 jets total defense to the break.



If they had 10 million turrets each then you would get 2.5 million turrets from each ally.


The maximum they can give you is doubling your strength though. So 10 million jets to break would be 20 million. This isn’t the case most of the time but a maximum scenario.

I know how to read dipfluff.

I was illustrating an example. I have been DOUBLING in alliance because they have allies, whereas I shouldn't have given an example of an express hit. My point is, I am doubling and overspending by 50k-100k and failing quite often.

My question was is the instructions on allies incorrect or not. Is it what it says, the total defense from allies can 2x their defense, or has it changed. Perhaps you should learn how to read instead of me having to sift through 20 posts of people trying to do fifth grade maf.

Your example of 1m turrets, 1m troops and 500k turrets, assuming no tech would take around 5.6m jets to break with allies doubling the break and a hair over 10% for pang bounce.

I think you said 2.6 and 2.7 didn’t break which is why people are confused. In your example the break isn’t doubled for allies.

Kinda surprised people do ops on bots still. If you bounce 100 hits in a set making educated guesses on breaks (I.e when 4m fails up break to 5m), you’re probably still more efficient than opping all your targets, carrying spies etc.

It’s not like the bots get mad if you bounce here and there. Send 1m until 1m doesn’t work and then send 2. It’s pretty simple.

Also, re: losses on bounces, the closer you are to breaking a target the higher losses the defended will take. You’re likely losing 3:1 because you only sent around half what you need to. It takes about 50 hits at 1/6 break (just above generals stopping attack) to cut a break in half. That’s equal to about 9 hits at just barely not breaking and about 11 hits breaking. Also, bots carry medical tech which lowers their losses. Hope this helps!

Also, I’ll throw a hard take in. Now that there is 10,000 bots it’s sorta unnecessary for them to ally. Essentially the only benefits are inflating the military market which is actually bad imo, and allowing netters to unnaturally inflate their finishes if they send alliance requests quickly enough to have free tech leaches all set.

It’s extremely niche, unnecessary and supports only those who are in the know and push the right buttons fast enough. In other words, I think it’s terrible for generating newcomers who wanna compete with old heads. Case and point, this post.

I know that’s an unpopular opinion but it’s also a correct one for creating parity, and I understand this is a game where people figure fluff out out and keep it secret. This particular secret tho, directly benefits older players and directly hurts newer ones. I think it’s easily a terrible thing.

have you tried not sucking?

the game is like 25 years old, at this point find something you are better at

I can see why this game is dead.

It's been dead since high speed internet appeared.

Lawton, using your own example, you said:
Example:
If they have 1m turrets, 500k tanks and 1m troops I'd send:

2.6 million JETS.


so, in your own example, you are sending just enough to break the target without allies, or any tech consideratiions.
for the numbers in your hypothetical, you would need to send 5.4 million, assuming a doubling of the targets defence, because your 2.6 million jets is literally only breaking their RAW, not factoring in any tech or allies.

That's because, and I am going to break it down for you again:
when you SS or PS someone, ALL of their military counts. not just turrets.
So, you're sending 2.6 million jets against 1 million turrets, 500k tanks (which accounts for another million turrets equivalent) and 1 million troops (another 500k turrets equivalent). So they have 2.5 million units of military, to stop your 2.6 million units, BEFORE any tech, and any allies.
That's why you're failing.

best quote ever. Maybe. lolololololololololololololololololololololol. kek

Ah Lawton is gone apparently.

I guess he got deleted in express (Something I didn't even know about) and he told me to fluff off.
Now he can enjoy a ban because I wasn't the problem, but now there is a problem.

No need to waste your times with 5th grade mafs anymore or helping him out. lol

I'm not playing the game anymore but I am going to stick around to wait for this dumb moderator to admit their mistake.

Are you 12 or something close to that?