All Activity

Welcome!

A population category in cities as in Stellaris that gives buffs to army and population related statistics? such as skyscrapers buildings to increase population or military expos which decrease army recruitment costs? Eg. Ships 30 -> 27 (With 3 expos)

Much needed change. Don't care. I like the first 3 treaties, but I don't see the sense in the fourth one. non-chaining is more so a clause rather than part of the treaty itself just like intelligence clause. We have the alliance trade market for nations who want to trade with nations in their alliance. Agree with this. I think this is potentially a good idea but that will depends on the percentage of revenue, if it's daily weekly etc, and if we're talking resource revenue, cash revenue, or both.

Sounds like to me that Alex needs a some interns :serious:. But jokes aside, there are many people who play this game while also good coding. I think adding one or two more developers (who are paid in credits) that show they are capable of programming in PHP or just in general, while also being vouched by either the design team or the community itself should help speed things along. Now while I understand that can be risky since you are trust strangers to the codebase of the game, it seems to me like that there isn't enough manpower to code in any worthwhile updates to the game. I think a good start would be people in the API team who have contributed towards the API codebase in the past and working down from there.

Generals - Glad this is happening, it'll be a major update to the war mechanics. I don't know if I like everything about generals, but it's something different and new and that's good. Tariffs - Same thing. Colors - New players get booted because the colors are worth money when they right people are on them, but it's a "rich get richer" kind of set up. May you could look at having the colors giving benefits. Small population boost, reduced disease, boost stadium commerce, reduce food consumption, etc. tiny things that are relatively the same power. Separately, you could give the current income boost to alliances (as opposed to nations) based on the percentage of their members that are on the color. This way, the boost is more about alliance unity than kicking off new players and random people on the color don't punish alliance members. Achievements - I'm a big supporter of having achievements for large milestones on units destroyed/lost. I think it encourages game activity and could be the big milestones that whales can work towards. 100m soldier kills could provide an extra project slot or something. Projects - I take the opposite view as @KeegozThe REALLY beneficial thing about projects is that they can add new mechanics to the game for very little work. Because of this, I think they could be a massive asset to game development. I think we should have double or triple the number of projects available. This would force nations to choose between a vast array of benefits for their nation because they are slot limited. We could split project slots and provide a different number of war or economic project slots. Large achievement milestone could unlock additional slots. We could also have upgradable projects that operate as resource/cash sinks. This allows the war meta to change by providing a way to increase military power in a way other than just buying another city and reduce the impact of tiering on the meta. Project ideas - Econ - 1.) upgrades to specific improvements this could be like 10 project options- EX: Bauxite mining technology - increase bauxite per mine, Supermarket superstores - increase supermarket commerce 2.) Resilient economics - lower population has less of an effect on commerce 3.) Modernized NPP - each NPP covers an additional 250 infra/ Clean coal - coal plants- double infra - mega turbines - covers more infra 4.) Skyscrapers - more population for the same amount of infra Military - 1.) Surface to Air missiles - boost casualties to airstrikes by 1% per level (max 3 for all level-type projects) 2.) Stealth fighters - nullify SAMs by 1% per level 3.) Advanced radar - nulllify stealth fighters by 1% per level (requires SAMs) 4.) anti-tank mines - boost casualties to tanks on ground attacks by 1% per level 5.) Mine-Resistant Armor Protection - nullify ATMs by 1% per level 6.) Armor piercing mines - nullify MRAPs by 1% per level (requires ATMs) 7.) Advanced aircraft Aerodynamics - increase dogfight casualties inflicted by 1% per level 8.) Advanced flare technology - decrease casualties received by 1% per level 9.) Airforce/Army/Special forces/expanded ports Academy - allows another hanger/factory/barracks/drydocks to be built in each city 10.) lightweight tanks - reduce gas consumption on tanks 11.) Sharpshooter training - reduce muni consumption on soldiers There's so much potential in the project space to create more specialized nations and make nations an alliances choose how best to optimize their growth/military ability with limited slots that make it so they can't have everything. You could also make the military projects exclusive to each other. If you start developing Air Tech, you can't develop Tank tech and vice versa. If there's enough support for implementing this route of development, I'd be willing to help the design team ensure that the military projects add balanced benefits.

Keegoz has been lead for too long without anything to show for it. Off with his head!

Id assume its to show a difference between training alliances etc and offshore

Aye the big reminder here is that UP/AUP were partially designed to consume significant food to reduce the glut sitting in storage. We would need to sort out another way for food to be consumed.

Right now the game culture treats extensions and offshores as the same concept. Could you clarify the use case on these two different treaties? I am thinking “extension” can probably cover both situations?

I've been asking for distinct tax rates for different resources for like 8 years at this point.

All of them are good except proposal 2 we must make sure those cursed beings called roleplayers do not spread

Add global daily objectives which come in multiple difficulties which can give varying rewards. It gives a better focus then just completing the objectives and leaving them to rot.

I disagree with all of these projects

I like all of these. A thought on the bulletin changes: perhaps each month's top bulletin could be featured as a free Ad in-game?

Suggestion: move the data dumps to happen a bit after update instead of 5mins before update.

I think it's just spitballing. Let's save tearing them apart for when they propose something more concrete

I agree with all of these proposals.

Man what a lot of positive progress over the past year, It’s always nice to see what’s being worked on and released soon. If a road map with hard fixed dates with content releases doesn’t get more people donating and becoming super contributors I don’t know what will. Great job! I’m looking forward to next year already 🙂

So we’d be turning the game into a pyramid scheme?

is extension adding time to a current treaty or a new treaty? also im glad to see my suggestion for adding a marker on trades posted by your alliance members is going to happen

Could have a copy to clipboard button to click Add extension/offshore scores to main AA and give main AA limited management over those Alliances ingame.

Proposed Minor Changes & QoL Update Please give feedback to the following proposals: Proposal 1: Changing the word ‘Join’ to ‘Apply’ when attempting to click the ‘join’ button on the alliance. Reason for change: Reduces any confusion for new members. Proposal 2: World News & RP Expansion Add dislike button Add view counter Add sort by views dropdown Add go to page input by paginator Reduce overall size of comments on bulletins Fix archived 404 error (when you have >1 page of archived bulletins) Tags: Add tag field to bulletin create Add filter by tag to search OR: Add bulletin categories Reason for changes: 40-100 est active bulletin users Engaging for new players Growing usage Used by a number of communities Proposal 3: New treaty types: Extension Offshore MDAP (Mutual Defense & Aggression Pact) MnDoAP / MnDP (Mutual non-chaining Defense pact) Reason for addition: More accurate treaty types and easier to understand for newer players. Proposal 4: Highlight alliance members when trading on the market. Reason for addition: Easier to trade with friendly nations from a glance. Proposal 5: Export build button automatically copies city build into your clipboard OR remove the need to copy + paste builds. Reason for change: It’s annoying and even more so for mobile users. Proposal 6: Referral bonus change. After x amount of time, you will begin to receive a small % of the revenue of the nation that referred you. Reason for change: Current bonus isn’t worthwhile and doesn’t encourage older players to invest in newer ones.

Can I have a bit of what you or the team were smoking when you came up with this?

Military generals has always sounded interesting, though making it something that isn't just a CN rehash of the generals mechanic would be the challenge. Baseball is basically just a bit of chrome for the game at this point. I'm not sure what you could do there that would be a) interesting, b) not just a money grab ripe for people to try to automate so they can grab even more money. Perhaps have tournaments where the reward is a achievement of some sort? Tempting to say "why don't you just create a financial incentive to up the number of nations on a color?" but then knowing players, suddenly everyone would be on the same color and abandoned the rest. I mean, there are solid reasons for wanting to have a color with few, high end nations on it. So the challenge is to encourage people to spread out a bit, without creating "gated communities". For the love of God, no more buffs to reward/encourage raiding. We have enough. What I *could* see is an achievement for fighting in 'X' number of Attrition and Ordinary wars that would result in something like a free Military Academy project that would help you create better/more military generals (and presumably military admirals).

Thanks, I deleted the inactive multi.