Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/01/20 in all areas

  1. If Alex was going to be so blunt to say he will ignore experienced player’s quality suggestions about reworking beige, the least he could have done was come out and say it himself, what a joke honestly.
    19 points
  2. As opposed to when we discuss and make productive posts and then features roll out which don't include our input? Alex is going to do whatever he likes regardless of whatever input anyone gives on anything, as proven by literally the entire history of the game. Frankly my only question at this point is why. For someone who hates moderating the game and doesn't like public outcry and pressure, he seems hellbent on consistently implementing the most poorly constructed and disliked proposals by the vast majority of the active player base and alliance leadership in the most rushed and destructive way possible.
    13 points
  3. All political squabbles, rivalries and blue balls are henceforth to be settled by... CHESS DUELS That's right, you heard me people! *throws gauntlet at Keegoz* ROOK TO G8, YOUR MOVE SIR On topic: This is a formality thread and we all know you're gonna do whatever you want, so lets pretend I've thrown some angreh input here and you can go ahead and keep pretending anything the playerbase says is being taken into consideration. I doubt you're gonna see the community want to be your guinea pig, though.
    10 points
  4. Definition of Swamp 4. A bunch of incompetent bloated micro tax farms + Ampersand
    10 points
  5. Alex can grow a spine and come propose these himself, instead of cowering behind you.
    9 points
  6. Seem to be changing the game faster than fixing the latest couple of patches. The way this game is being updated is a mess. I however reckon Alex ignores all of us thinking we just don't want change, when in reality we just don't want change because it is rolled out so poorly. Pushing updates without really looking at the consequences. Doing full-blown changes when minimal tweaks over time were needed. Removing key things from the game with barely a plan to replace it. Now as players we're basically just hearing that we need to test it in the actual game? God help you if you're on the losing end of the next war because pretty sure NPO would be having a wet dream rn. Even winning might be extremely costly so for most it's going to make sense to just not be the guinea pig next war. Wouldn't even blame the game to straight up not fight for the rest of the year as a refusal to test this stuff.
    9 points
  7. Pff. Nice. So rather than actually look at ANYTHING we've offered, Alex just goes straight to Pre for an executive decision without discussion, testing, or for that matter even the slightest consideration. Frick you.
    8 points
  8. So to follow up with the previous war killing changes, you're going to introduce a change that puts aggressors at an overwhelming disadvantage. This change creates an environment where no one is ever going to want to pull the trigger. The past changes were massive blows to any incentive to go to war, this change, this is the final nail in the coffin. As mentioned above, when the NAP approaches an end, everyone's just going to decom and build their units into reserve, no ones going to blitz someone if their opponents units aren't killable, and surely aren't going to declare on them and be a sitting duck until their opponent comes active and whips out their reserve. Like I'm getting to the point where I'm actually suspecting the goal of all these changes are to kill the war system, there's no way that you and Alex can get together and come up with not one, but two, but three, but four, but five straight awful ideas. Maybe we need to get the games biggest pixel-hugger off the case.
    7 points
  9. Definition of Swamp 1 : a wetland often partially or intermittently covered with water especially : one dominated by woody vegetation 2 : a tract of swamp 3 : a difficult or troublesome situation or subject. Best avoided when travelling alone or when ghosting; that way lurk monsters. I acknowledge I should’ve read the signs to ‘Get Outta My Swamp’ and will stay clear in the future.
    6 points
  10. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=197219 Some of this stuff is on the fence, where others such as the Rayshard Brooks and BLM ones, are obviously over.
    6 points
  11. You are literally making shit up because if you caused a billion+ worth of damage to us, we would have demanded a billion worth of reps. Seeing as you could barely afford the 400 million and needed Wei to pay a portion of it, we would have simply ground you and your AA to dust. You are a joke and a sad joke at that. But hey, keep going. I'm sure your AA is really happy to watch you try and save face after you had to give away all their money.
    5 points
  12. Once a unit has been in reserve status for 10 days it is moved to active duty automatically. This means a blitz won't do shit. For example, let's assume there are two alliances, Alliance B and Alliance A. Alliance A blitzes Alliance B, who we will say are running max planes. Alliance B can just decom any units they have (or even suicide them in), and start building into reserves, which cannot be touched by anything besides spies, and at extremely low casualties. Wars last at most for a period of 5 days, over these 5 days Alliance B can literally max out their military and keep it in reserve, because they're only moved into active duty in 10 days, the length of 2 wars. Let's assume alliance A somehow ludicrously manages to 'win' the spy war from the initial contact and can even start spying Alliance B's military. Alliance B still has 10 days over which to rebuild their military, and come back out unscathed except for some infra damage. Even any superiority gained is worthless because they can simply wait for the wars to expire, and then attack. Effectiveness of the blitz? Zero. Hotel? Trivago.
    5 points
  13. Let's hope this is a line in the sand and the issues are no more. Because next time I wont let you out of this and no one will save you.
    5 points
  14. I'm not sure what is worst. That beige was just removed or that Sheepy is such a lazy administrator that he can't even take the heat for his decision himself and just goes through Pre who - to my knowledge - is in no official capacity within this game even though Sheepy obviously likes his input while ignoring everyone else. @Alex Do your shit yourself. Stop going through Pre for game changes. Like seriously wtf. That's so sad.
    4 points
  15. Tbh, adjusting it for naval is warranted, as atm there's no incentive to use ships to remove ships due to their pathetic killing power, alongside them guzzling through gas/muns and losing you ships in the process (it's true that air results you in losing air, but at good enough odds you also kill more/similar amounts of planes while killing ships, and planes are cheaper to boot alongside doing a better job at killing said ships).
    4 points
  16. So what, after being a coward and completely silent while making Wei negotiate on your behalf, now you're going to make up random numbers so that you can make bankrupting your alliance look like a W for yourself?
    4 points
  17. How dare you? I have offered constructive feedback for years. Which you constantly show complete ignorance of. Thus, you are telling us in no uncertain terms that you are entirely lying, and we have every right to complain when features roll out without our input... since our input isn't even noticed. There has been NO discussion as to these updates, to the point that you straight up announced the spy change as a done deal in its very introduction. Nobody was consulted on or had opportunity to discuss the removal of beige, and all the suggestions about fixing it weren't looked at either before it was simply flatly done. You want to know something funny? The reserve system actually existed at one point. During the last war, in fact. TGH discovered that there was indeed a way to "reserve" purchases of military and deploy them all at once. We immediately reported it as the bullshit game-breaking exploit that it was, and it was patched. Now we're at the point where it's just going to be implemented as a feature?? Hol up how're you moving your rook in move 1 >_> But seriously, even I'm 100% behind a protest NAP to prevent ''"testing'"' of the changes.
    3 points
  18. The chest thumping in this thread is hilarious. I love it when people call other's 'children.' It's so....simple. EDIT: It's so childish!
    3 points
  19. With the current score system, this change is not viable at all. With the previous system, yes, it might have been viable due to the heavy downdeclares But with downdecalres dead, there is no way you can get this system to work
    3 points
  20. No no no. Look, it's a replacement for a tiny part of what we need. The military rebuild is honestly a very small part of what beige was needed for: cycling already mitigated that much. No, what we'd still be missing is the opportunity to escape blockade. Even though a defender could be blockaded forever already, it was overwhelmingly difficult and with some pressure and smart play one could usually squeak out a turn of freedom for resupply or evacuation. Now, it's trivial to permablockade, and 'reserve' military in no way helps with that (on account of all opponents trivially being in range with max military at all times).
    3 points
  21. Sheepy being bad at game design, along with Prefontaine's horrible suggestions and Sheepy deciding to ignore everyone other than him makes me really angry, and I just can't deal with this game anymore. I'll be active just in CotL discord. Other games are far more fun than this, and I thankfully have friends I would rather spend time with than be annoyed over this forum. I meant to put this in Farewells and Goodbyes.
    2 points
  22. @Alex Offending nation: Darby (https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=208002) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luftwaffe It's specifically nazi, not World War I German forces. I'm just surprised his navy wasn't called kriegsmarine. Also, Sheepy, please for the love of the human subconscious, add a damn filter so we don't have to manually report these for you to manually deal with. Thanks.
    2 points
  23. Oh, he's using the community alright. Albeit just the unpaid labor and a middleman to take the heat for him. Understatement of the month. I mean; as was said above, it's getting implemented regardless. The reason being that Alex has an explicit, vested interest in *not* having a beige-like mechanic (because he cbf to properly moderate or hire someone to do it for him), so he's going to pick the more flawed, untested alternative to it simply due to that. And yes, it's unsurprising that people likewise cbf to provide more feedback when the heaps of pre-existing ones were rejected out of hand (due to the aforementioned interest, among over things). Especially in the manner in which it happened.
    2 points
  24. The latter, for the simple reason that he's also getting paid whilst behaving in this manner.
    2 points
  25. We would have loved to leave your Gov alone. Except that your Second In Command is a clown who got caught trying to be a shit raider. And we can't help that some of your other Gov members reached out to Swamp to find the truth as to why wars where occuring, and they agreed Shadow and TCM in the wrong. We didn't come looking for this conflict. Your genius 2IC did that for you, and we finished it.
    2 points
  26. Wait... your even admitting that this is a sloppy attempt at a change.
    2 points
  27. Hello, I don't have a clever replacement for beige, I'll leave that for people who do. There are a number of good suggestions on the forum. As has been repeatedly pointed out, by...I think yeah, everybody more or less...getting rid of beige completely is silly. What's even more silly is getting rid of it without a replacement. If I need to buy a new computer, and it's going to take 2 weeks for it to arrive, I don't decide to bin my old one. Because then I'd have no computer for two weeks. I can't work with no computer for 2 weeks, I'd lose money; I don't want to be poor. A suitable replacement for beige needs to be found. While we don't have a suitable replacement, beige as is is somewhat better to nothing at all. Right now permarolling is made nice and easy, and Roq and Leo are probably sad they missed it. Let's bring it back until something is worked out that actually fixes the issues that people have been raising for years.
    2 points
  28. If you caused Swamp a billion in damages so quickly and so easily, what's stopping you from giving them a few more bil damage? Why did you run to your protector so quickly? Who are you trying to save face for?
    2 points
  29. 2 points
  30. This would be a valid concern if the new meta for everyone with an IQ greater than a desert salamander wasnt to max everything but ships, and really, probably even ships too, once a war is expected. Yeah good luck just GCing me with 50% of your tanks useless in a meta where the score range means you aren't gonna be anywhere near big enough for that to not matter. Man good luck breaking that AS too when the GCs start yeeting your planes you know. Given that everyone with an IQ greater than aforementioned desert salamander knows this, being able to come out with anything but max military will be a general waste of your time. You won't be in range of anyone smaller, the same people, at the same size, with the same max military. And if ya got decked hard enough to be zeroed before, there's a good chance your alliance is losing because it's actually not very easy to do that anymore. Which means, you're probably just gonna get priority #1 kneecapping list, rather than "ooohhh throw them in here and tip this battle", because if you've actually used the mechanics, it takes units almost as long as Queen bloody Elizabeth to die, which means your disadvantage stays a disadvantage, even if you get a lucky RNG roll. Honestly, Alex doesn't seem to pay attention to this forum, but I'm not that mad. Because frankly, not enough of the suggestions ever made in it have ever heard of "The Big Picture" before and focus on random irrelevant details in very specific situations. Ironically, the same thing Alex does to constantly make bad decisions. Stop suggesting bad decisions.
    2 points
  31. As the golden sun slips past it’s watery veil, the clouded sky burns bright with fire. As the red hues streak across the sky as red velvet the darkness consumes it. Swallowing the world into darkness. As I stand on the bow of my ship the only light visible to me is the glow of the lanterns. The sky seems to envelop the world in a vast void. No stars to guide me, no winds to pull me. I am myself alone on this ship waiting until morn’ to carry out my adventures. But until then I am calm, I am quiet, I am at peace under these.... Article One: Darkness Covers All Black Skies does not favor anyone on the open sea. Both pirates and merchants slip past each other under the cover of darkness. Ships are free to relax, take a breath and enjoy the sea for how peaceful it can be. Black Skies is open to all play styles. Raiding, Banking, Flipping or RP players are all welcome to relax under the onyx sky. Article Two: Guidance Through The Waters Black Skies are hard to navigate. Your charts with locations and sightings have no meanings anymore. You are left to wander adrift and must learn new skills to safely navigate the darkness. Black Skies is willing and ready to teach players about other alliances and help them find which is the best choice for them. Should morning find them they’ll have the knowledge and power to seek out for that alliance. Article Three: It’s Dangerous to Travel Alone Black Skies are treacherous. You can get stranded on shoals, lose your ships to rocks, smash into debris or even worse lose yourself over the side by a swinging jib. As such you should always bring a sailing buddy lest you find yourself stranded and alone. Black Skies is open to listen to all forms of treaties with other alliances. It is the intention and goal of Black Skies to help wayward sailors find home again. Should members find Black Skies as their home we are willing and able to not only propel our friends to new heights but to protect them as well. ...I wait for hours, days, maybe weeks even. These Black Skies do not lift. It's a blanketed mass stretching out for miles. Am I lost? Have I found the Locker? Am I doomed to an eternity? Nay, says I, as I reach for the helm. If a man has no course and every course at once, how can a man be lost under these… these Black Skies. Signed - Guilo, Commander of the Fleet Join our discord here: https://discord.gg/rcqGP3N We're open to all treaties and offers.
    1 point
  32. You shouldn't be able to rebuild your entire military in reserve and then activate them all immediately - that's completely unfair to those winning the wars. Let's say you have a city 15 nation being held down and zeroed by three city 12 nations. All he needs to do is get his military maxed in reserve, come out at once (with 12 MAPs mind you) and can wreck the other side, get out of blockades, etc. Basically, any time anyone has a city advantage on somebody else, they can wait to have the military advantage through this mechanism and then come out of reserve and win battles. So if you're going to this reserve mechanic, there has to be some decent limits on how you activate them, otherwise, it's a really poor mechanic that basically removes the ability to do updeclares effectively. In real wars, if an opponent's military is wiped, you wouldn't see them fully replaced via some warehouse. If I have GC/AS/Blockade, basically occupy that nation, how can they immediately dwarf my military at the snap of a finger and turn it around on me?
    1 point
  33. 1) I really don't like the way the new system could nerf blitzes. If both sides are building up their units in reserve, whoever strikes first will probably be at a disadvantage. And if one side is building up first and the other side is waiting a couple of days, they can strike while their units are still in reserve after their opponents are knocked out. The incentive to strike first right now is really significant for the politics of the game. It leads to more wars compared to say CN, where there were (when I used to play) a lot more false starts when it came to potential wars. There's a big political cost to being the "aggressor" that the first strike advantage is a good balance for. I'm not sure how to fix it, just stating that this is a major issue that needs to be thought through thoroughly and addressed. 2) I'm honestly disappointed in the way proposed changes to beige to fix it were brushed aside and feel discouraged about putting any effort into offering meaningful proposals. That's not a hit at you Pre, you've done a lot of work and I appreciate you trying to salvage the situation here. 3) Regarding tanks: I would rather reduce the max tank amounts by 50-75%. I like the fact that there is a very cheap unit (soldiers) coupled with a very expensive unit (tanks). It makes ground fighting more dynamic. The problem is maxed tanks are about double the power of maxed soldiers, so you really have little choice to use them in most circumstances and be competitive. Tanks as an expensive supplement to soldiers is better than soldiers as a cheap supplement to tanks. 4) Not enough improvements are destroyed during war for improvements being lost to have a major impact. At least in the upper tiers. Maybe that could be addressed, and also add to the value of blitzes and help rebalance the air/ground balance, by allowing planes to target improvements.
    1 point
  34. I think spies should be about to steal money From another nation
    1 point
  35. With Beige gone, it is possible to permanently hold down a nation forever in blockades without them having the resources to fight back (it was still possible before too just not -as- easy). This new spy attack is to slip blockades and supply a blockaded nation. What it does: A nation can send spies into another nation which is blockaded and supply up to $25,000,000 and up to 10,000 total of resources (ex: 5,000 gas and 5,000 ammo) to a nation. The difficulty of this mission is determined by the number of nations blockading the target nation. Each nation blockading adds a 15% chance of getting caught, to a maximum of 55%. So one nation blockading gives you 85% odds of success, 2 gives a 70% chance of success, 3 gives a 55% of success, and anything above 3 gives you a 45% of success as you reach the cap. If your spy "attack" is caught, you have a chance of being discovered. Your spies have a chance of being killed. Your resources get split among the nations blockading your target nation. The numbers are very much open to discussion. Should the amount of money/resources be based on the number of cities the target nation has? Should anyone be able to send this "attack" to anyone? No score range needed. Should the chance of getting caught be done differently, or have different odds? Other input?
    1 point
  36. So with the knee jerk removal of beige, there is no longer any way to rebuild your military because you can be perma blockaded. If you do not create ALL the resources for keeping a military (muns, gas, steel, alum) [which is a literal impossibility due to the continent system] the first striker will typically win unless the defender is SUPREMELY more coordinated. How do you think anyone can 'rebuild' and fight a war if they cannot receive resources from the alliance bank, Trade system, or produce them? I agree with most here, You should have had an alternative ready to go before you rolled out an update that has the ability to FORCE PEOPLE TO QUIT THE GAME until your next update to the system (which could be anywhere from today to never). I believe most players will admit that if you were blockaded for months straight, with no reprieve, no bank, no money, no trading, no changing improvements (because now you have more improvements than available to your cities cause infra loss) There isn't even a point to logging in to play the game, it'd be time to move on to a new game. The system may not have been working as you initially intended, but that doesn't mean it needs removal without replacement. A simple games rule change would have literally solved this issue (which you did) that you claim is "abused". Another major thing i noted is one thing you said in your piece: "Furthermore, for far too long the "beige" mechanic has left perverse incentives in war, such as not wanting to complete a war"... The removal of beige literally enables what you, personally, complained about people abusing Alex. Edit: added a reference that producing all resources is impossible if blockaded due to continent system
    1 point
  37. The issue here is not forcing a term is not a critical feature of the game. Any war that will be fought will take advantage of beige removal. Ignoring the logistical challenge of saying, "Okay troops, after you defeat an enemy in war, start a 5 day timer and let's not hit them in that period", it's just not practical if you want to actually win the war. Frankly, I'd be really disheartened if I were on the shit end of a dogpile, but bet your ass I'd sit on people if I had the upper hand, not because I'm evil but because the incentives give me literally no other choice. That added with the ongoing debate over what constitutes a victory could lead to really long, ugly wars. As for just waiting for Alex to fix it, we might as well sign an extension to the NAP and that seems even worse an option.
    1 point
  38. I''ll be honest, I was not fond of the initial pledge, and am not fond of new pledges. While it's true that the community should be self-regulating, admin should not be relying on it to correct fundamental flaws in the game mechanics. If there's one thing we've learned, its that when people want to keep you at war, they'll find a way and a reason or justification to keep up a pretense of it not being a perma-roll. To that end, such pledges tend to be hollow. .. i'd rather we focus on calling for sheepy to correct this.
    1 point
  39. I try to give Alex the benefit of the doubt as much as possible. Being a game admin is hard, people love to complain, and there almost always is a lot of knee-jerk opposition to change even when the changes are good. That being said, I share your frustration about beige just being removed without warning when there have been tons of suggestions over the years about how to fix it that don't seem to have been seriously considered.
    1 point
  40. That's still 50 to 8. "popular" To reply to the OP somewhat, however... I am insulted and offended. I personally have suggested half a dozen alternatives, and there's dozens more yet suggested both in this thread and in that subforum you've linked. You've now made it abundantly clear that you have never read that subforum and have no intention to do so. More than anything else, that sentence alone was made with such crass laziness and bad faith that I now simply refuse to even try to help. If you don't want suggestions, then fine: you'll get none from me.
    1 point
  41. Alex... did you grow up in flint michigan? I can only imagine you thought this was a good idea if you got childhood lead poisoning.
    1 point
  42. On the basis that the precedent no longer applies, I consider this matter closed.
    1 point
  43. Alex, the fact that the "main difference here" is to do with being allied to the target, when there is no (to my knowledge) rule about only attacking targets that you are not allied to, makes that a completely irrelevant point. What If i told you that Agon were allied to THL? Agon would of course deny it, but you have no way of knowing because paperless treaties are commonplace in PnW so it is impossible for you to know whether or not two nations or alliances are allied unless you make it a requirement to lodge all paperless treaties with you. All we are asking for is a consistent enforcement of the rules. Either this is war slot filling, or as a minimum one, if not both, of the nations in the precedent, were not war slot filling. You cannot have one rule for your mates (and their friends), and another rule for the rest.
    1 point
  44. Rant: The early game meta of raiding inactive nations is kind of boring fixed the title for u rawr
    1 point
  45. I don't see any problem here, usage of credits, including selling them on the market is limited to 10 Credits per month. The prices of credits is also increasing because a lot of people are buying them to redeem Credit Items (i.e 5k resources or 15M money)
    1 point
  46. They bullied me out of Camelot now I am a KT boy again. Edit: also why the hell are you at 1.5k infra with 3 oil power XD @Epi @Alphalion git gud at IA noobs
    1 point
  47. So friendly that they tried perma warring the opposing coalition last war. Join Camelot!
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.