Leaderboard

I'm in favour of nerfing all loser weapons too (secret treaties, treaty chains and dogpiles).

Haiyo everybody, I am Korutsu, or Koru if you prefer. Anywho hhehe, I shouldnt be writing this at such a time... its 2am I jus ate mai meds q.q but enough rambling but they be not working. I am fluffy? and cyoote? and defo not smort- Also nou horny I will bonk that all. ahm... what else dew I write >.<. I like sheep. alot. and hmmm. Why am I in P&W? No idea, its too toxic for the like of me, in most places I presume. ;-; I hear alot of scary folktales of the toxic wastelands outside of the choco castle. QwQ. Oh yea I am trans-female --3-- or well maybe I guess. anyways. amh... I hope nou one will attack me for that. >.> Still nou horny, I'm practically asexual. mmm also I work as gov in CC, I got FA and IA within a week of joining? hehehhehe. I dew werk hard for CC, I dew more for cc than I dew for mai irl homework. uwu . tbh I am nao thinking I'm sharing too much personal info, then again idc what are you going to dew about it? >.> You all keep a safe distance from me unless I concent, 1) COVID 2) uh, Ill shoot you if I hab to. Even so I expect you to be a nicu person ^-^, I hab already made menny (pun intended) good and long term frendoes in P&W. So thanks so far to: Menhera (for everything), Klad (for alot and sharing in his Britishness), Bradley(for taking care of me), Squeegee(a good shoulder and a nice person), Luna (for being a genius russian emo), Wingawoo (for being adorable), Aiya (for being lots of fun), Havgle (for the drama kek), Haris, Clown, Yui, Tarroc (for being a nicu father), Bird (a fellow swamp german), Burger, Florida, Not laws, Anun Tiedra, Verin (even if you are a tad vulgar) and Xaria (we may be enemies now, but I will not forget the service you did for me at the beginning.) And everybody else in CC I love you all ^-^ *hugs them all* *quickly fact checks old intros* *suppresses any more wholesome content in fear of abuse* Anyways, if you want wholesome cuddles and convos and someone to potentially vent to, then you are in the right place. Heheheh, tho mhm, I will add you to my advanced blacklist if you try anything against me or my friends. I've been writing this for the past hour. q.q not sure tew what else write to ill jus post ig~

Isn’t this only going to be ever used in a situation where one side is already overwhelmingly winning? I can’t see this every being used outside a scenario where one side is already being dogpiled. You will never aim to kill Improvs otherwise. On top of that reducing Gas and Muni use for the already winning side to kill improvements? Seems like a mechanic that will only serve to make losers in wars suffer more, rather than a war mechanic that can aid in winning a even/close war if used correctly. Why not just have bombardments have some sort of interaction with other troops, this has been suggested before but the reason why ships don’t matter is simply because they literally don’t do anything to Ground or Air. Meanwhile planes interact with all types of troops, ground interacts with other ground and air. Ships only really do anything to other ships. I suggest having ships be able to bombard ground troops, I’m not suggesting Planes since I believe that it would be too much of a nerf to planes since they’ve already been hit pretty hard previously (decreasing total plane amount, then massive dmg cuts). plus adding a check for ground seems fine with them being pretty strong. Also @Lord Tyrion Missiles and Nukes aren’t over powered at all in actual war. If it’s an actual even or close fight, you should be losing your infra. The only reason why it “feels op” is because there has been nothing but dogpile wars this last year, where nukes and missiles shine. And in those situations nukes and missiles did not win anyone a war or get them ahead, it merely made it so people wouldn’t get unscathed because they chose to outnumber someone. Which is perfectly fine.

The following is a combination of old updates that were never put in, changes based on feedback/suggestions. Please feel free to provide feedback and suggestions to alternative options. Try to limit additional content beyond the scope of what is in this thread. Thank you. Trading Treasures Treasures can be directly traded between players. Treasures cannot be traded while either nation has an active offensive or defensive war. A nation with a treasure already in it cannot trade for another treasure. City/Project Timers New City timers are not effected by projects. New Protects have their own timer of 10 days (120 turns) City timer resets are reduced by 1 credit to 3 credits. Project timer resets cost 1 credit. New Projects Research and Development Center Effect: This project provides two project slots (net: one additional project slot) Cost Cash: $50,000,000 Food: 100,000 Aluminum: 5,000 Logistics Center Effect: Opens an additional trade route for Commodities Cost Cash: $5,000,000 Food: 25,000 Uranium: 5,000 Aluminum: 5,000 World Trade Organization Effect: Opens an additional trade route for Commodities Requirements: International Trade Center, Logistics Center, Space Program Cost Cash: $20,000,000 Food: 250,000 Uranium: 15,000 Aluminum: 10,000 Gasoline: 10,000 Spies Casualties Spy vs Spy casualties are reduced by 33% for the defender on a successful op, and attacker for a failed op. Missiles Spy attacks against missiles have a 25% chance to destroy an additional missile. Soldiers 5% increase is casualties from soldiers fighting soldiers. 33% reduction in tanks killed by soldiers. Soldier only attacks/defends kill too many tanks. Tanks Tanks ability to kill planes after gaining ground superiority reduced by 33% 15% increase in casualties to soldiers by tanks 10% increase in casualties to tanks by tanks With soldiers killing less tanks Planes 25% increase in tanks killed by bombing runs. 10% increase in planes killed by dogfights Ships 10% increase in ships killed by ships. New Attack Type: Bombardment When a nation is blockaded naval units can bombard a city instead of performing a naval battle. This attack destroys 33% less infrastructure This attack destroys 2 non-power plant, non-military improvements in that city. If there are only power plant and military improvements, this attack kills no improvements. This attack costs 50% less gas to perform. This attack costs 50% more munitions to perform If a bombardment attack happens while the defending nation has defending ships, the casualties caused by those defending ships is increased 25%. Example: If you attack with 200 ships and they have 50 ships defending and those 50 ships were going to kill 20 attacking ships, in a bombardment attack they instead would kill 25 ships. You must use at least 75% of your max navy when performing this attack max navy is determined by the number ships you could have if all of your cities had max dry docks, not how many dry docks you current have If you have 20 or less improvements in a city this attack will only kill 1 improvement. If you have 5 cities or less, this attack only kills 1 improvement. Nukes Nukes can now kill 4 improvements per nuclear missile. 2 of these improvements are "general" improvements and have a chance to be any improvement. 2 of these improvements are any non-power plant, non-military improvement. In the event there are no available targets, it bumps up the target list. Effectively if someone only has power plants and military structures, the nuke will destroy 4 of any improvement. Missiles Missiles can now kill 2 improvements per missile. Missile Launch Pad allows a nation to build 2 missiles per day. Iron Dome Reduces the amount of improvements killed from a missile by 1. In addition to normal effeccts Chance of blocking a missile reduced from 50% to 30%. Vital Defense System Chance to block a nuclear missile increased from 20% to 25% Reduces the amount of improvements killed from a nuke by 1. The improvement category this blocks from is the non-power plant, non-military category. Quality of Life Alliances can only have 1 treaty between them. Alliances have the ability to create up to 8 alliance positions, 5 more than the default 3. All alliance roles will come with a check list for which powers those positions have. Bank Access Changing Roles Ability to see spy counts Ability to see daily reset timers (time zones) Editing Tax Brackets Accept new members View member caches Alliance Trades offers also show in the global trades. These trades will show in a different color Expand leaderboards Increase the leaderboards from top 10 to top 100. Alternatively, include all nations in the leaderboards (suggested filters, upon talking more with Roberts: active, non-VM players, perhaps also with a filter to exclude the brand new nations that only logged in once/haven't built up anything). Allow for a search by discord handle Send an automated email to players with nations emerging from vacation mode after an extended period of time. Allow for an option to hide trades of embargoed nations/alliances from the market.

Somebody call an ambulance a pirate just killed a midget.

Meh. It's a dirt cheap project, and unless if you literally just got it or it's always failed you since acquiring it, it's more than likely to have paid back and then some. Also, one of the proposed changes is for missiles to destroy 2 imps and for ID to halve that, so there's that. RNG (which is ultimately what 'surprise' is) is a fairly lazy method to add a variable, and such variable is more often than not just frustrating. It's also hardly a 'surprise' when every other shot is statistically set to not land.

Something I just thought of, because it happened to me: We should also disallow treasures from spawning on nations currently at war. I still contend we remove timers all-together on projects. Very cool, Kanye. Casualties very cool, I personally enjoyed the 50% reduction myself. Missiles: Why? This seems like an odd/random choice given missiles are already fairly niche and have to contend with Iron Domes. Remove the bolded pieces or you're going to create imbalance. Soldiers already die too quickly and are meant to be a cheap unit to throw at your enemy when you have nothing else left OR meant to supplement your tanks. Having them turn into canon fodder is a pointless nerf. I'd suggest a 10% and 10% on both of these, respectively. 25% is a huge buff vs. tanks and we should see how the tank v. plane nerf plays out before we slash other things. Anecdotally, I think we should try 15% buff in ship v. ship. Ships are painfully bad at killing other boats, to me. But I'd be happy with 10. I disapprove strongly of bombardment as a concept. As stated on discord I think adding improvement-killers in the current war system is a recipe for a bad player experience and a bad meta. This strongly rewards people who have already won the conventional war and strongly incentivizes sitting on people for extended periods of time while you obliterate their economy/war improvements. I don't think any war system should ever take away a player's ability to act, which is what improvement-killing does. Improvements are frankly too important to die any faster and I personally think we should make them impervious. Again, I don't think either of these should kill more improvements. I would love to see the ability to build more than one nuke a day as well. Pls nerf the Iron Dome. It's so silly having a 50/50 shot when you're spending 8 MAP's. Why not match the VDS 25% block rate? Otherwise cool changes. re: leaderboards - please just do the whole game so everyone can see where they stand. I made a whole public thread on this with unanimous support and people already clarified they would rather see the entire game rankings rather than a simple extended version. A top 10 excludes all those outside of it and most people don't care. A top 100 accomplishes the same thing but with 90 extra people.

@PrefontaineI like most of the thread. But i am confused on this one. Is the bombardment only for the nation who has been blocked by the attacker, Or is it that the attacker can initiate bombardment after he naval blocks another nation? It would be lovely to see the latter in effect as people would actually have to think strategically if to blockade someone or no. But the second option (where the blockadier can bombard the blockaded ones) is overkill for the people/alliances (usually small/micros) if they get into a war and get their improvements destroyed in an all out war. Of course some people will say that he is a pirate so he fears his improvements get rekt up etc etc. But if you think about it logically, it will hurt the emerging player base, most of whom rely on raiding for their initial growth. And also the alliances who are new and dont have enough money to support the infra and improvements together.

I personally feel that the reduction in credit prices to get new projects will help whales more than new nations. I'm going to be neutral on this and see what the others have to say about it. If I'm not wrong, a 60v60 without buffs takes out 18 spies at most. This nerf means we lose only 12 spies in a 60v60. On the other hand, firstly what do you mean by Failed OP. Is it when you fail to kill spies and are caught? Kill spies and are caught? Fail to kill spies and are not caught? Secondly, atm, you lose 9ish spies on a failed op when detected at most. The nerf means we lose 6 spies now. I'm only against the second part of this change over here. Defending against spy attacks is way more difficult when in a blitz. So keep the causalities for failed attacking ops as is. The Missiles thing tho. I've seen a few people pitch out that ID needs to reduce missile damage to 50% rather than block out the missile all together. If you are game for that, I'm game for this. For the longest time, soldiers had been the weakest units in-game. However with the causality updates, that was overturned, making soldiers an extremely good defensive measure. They were nerfed once when tank costs got reduced to half(reducing their damage to half as well) and now we are reducing that by another 33%? This will only ever help the bigger, wealthier side of the game like all the other war-mechanics updates that have been made since NPOLT. Such changes help "Dumb, Herd" play and heavily nerf the "Intelligent, Innovative" play, a feature that has been steadily moving away from the game. Other than this, I'd like to propose something for the "Flying Tanks Update". Let us not fix the % of planes killed to be exactly 40% or 50% or 30%. How about having them as a ratio? 1c v 1c example: With the static 40% planes killed figure, a GA will always wipe out 6 planes per hit. However if we add in a factor of 40% times (Current Planes/Max Planes), this figure will keep decreasing after the first hits. In fact, imo, this should be done to all units so that you lose units proportionally to your army at that moment. Yes, this is a much needed fix to the planes. Thank you. I have massive problems with the Bombardment Option. The guaranteed ability to kill improvements is a big downside to smaller groups in a war. You can basically wipe out their improvements while sitting on them, forcing them to keep rebuying infra to be able to fight back, something they are already unable to do. You are also making this extremely cost-effective way for the aggressors who can kill improvements for pennies. This sounds like the "Flying Planes Update" but on every drug known to mankind. Something you yourself will make "patches" to once you see it in action. I already told you about the ID thing earlier in this huge assessment. Please re-read that. Thank you. As for the VDS, I have a suggestion. Even if the VDS blocks out the nuke, allow for the nation to experience "nuclear fallout". I'll explain it here. Since we assume the nuke is blocked mid-air, all the radiation and such should still affect pollution levels. This can be realized by polluting the city as if an actual nuke were to fall on the city. Other than this, I'd once again like to pitch out that we need to balance out the score system more and if possible, before the next global(in around 2 months). Plus, all these things MUST BE TESTED on the TEST SERVER. PLEASE DO NOT PUSH THEM LIVE WITHOUT TESTING FIRST.

I'm personally always wishy-washy on NAPs. I hate long ones, but shorter ones (3mos or less) are fine imo. I'd be hypocritical though considering I pretty much heavily emphasized for a long one after that stupidity with NPO and Friends. The only real reason why I did so was to allow players and alliances to readjust to things and figure out what they wanted to do moving on. Plus there was just way too much damage done in all areas of the game. And as a side note, there were some actual game changes coming up that I was hoping would improve the game once the NAP ended.

Not only is it redundant as reaching a peace agreement necessitates the ending and desire to cease hostilities, but it's so tedious to artificially restrict yourselves to not going to war when we clearly see multiple people will violate or circumvent those terms anyway. Not to even mention the number of people in my DM's asking Arrgh to do your dirty work because "the NAP doesn't let us hit them for another two months." If you must sign a NAP then do so on an individual basis, but stop acting like it's the new norm for ending wars.

that moment when the guy named toxicpepper is one of the least toxic people on this forum

What would this change mean for Space Program? 3 missiles or 4?

And don't forget, Machiavelli might be famous for the Prince, but The Prince was just one of many books he wrote about government and it's forms and how each form should be run and operated for best results. It's telling that he suggested the monarchy to dispatch well aimed and timed cruelty to maintain order, I think. Telling especially when you actually research the guy and his work and realize that in his opinion, Republics were the best, no contest, and that he wrote things like The Prince under duress.

Bombardment will make dogpiles even more one-sided

Heeey, I've seen your name somewhere before! Hehehe

>However, military alliances cannot make sub-alliances or declare offensive wars. :wutusaybish:

NO COMMODITIES! ALL CN MECHANICS NEED TO DIE WITH CN!

NOKIA GO AWAY GO AWAY SHOO SHOO

Petition to get nokia banned from the forums

I'm fully in favour of reducing RNG wherever possible.

Congrats on your NAP! And Good luck to your new alliance. Just a tip - The forums might be a bit harsh sometimes so don’t let it get to you.

I disagree. Imposing NAPs breeds animosity towards the people that impose them. Can't have good wars without animosity 😏🤏

The truth of the matter is that there are more and less effective political philosophies. Not more fun or more interesting, but merely more effective in accumulating and maintaining power. Often, and is this case, the more boring and more calcified, the more effective. Simply accumulating more people than everyone else has been a winning strategy forever, and if those people are unambitious, them being chained together into an immobile blob doesn't even bother them. This isn't even fun for those controlling the gigantic blob however, as the fruits of victory are as ashes in your mouth. The same unambitious blob that allows you to sit atop your golden throne also are those who prefer maintaining the status quo and aren't interested in embarking on things that might be fun. At the core of power, is an immense brain drain, as the bored and ambitious split away to do something for once. On the other side of the equation people with extremely risky, bold and ambitious alliance projects inevitably succeed in eventually toppling any hegemony, no matter how enormous, as hegemonies rot from the inside out. The problem is once toppled, these alliances either have to entirely reinvent themselves or die from the disease that brought them low. Learning no lessons, those who had toppled them from their golden thrones often will immediately jettison those too ambitious to be their vassal meat shields and will accumulate the same sort of hangers-on that the previous hegemony had, and the cycle repeats itself.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately, there is no real incentive for war in this game at this point. All of our reasons for war have been OOC based. I believe this stems from all major alliances adopting the same policies(no raiding top 50, switching to color, maintaining peace, etc) There are no mechanics for the game to successfully bring out war by itself. To negative those who would come into this thread and say “to keep your enemies from growing to fast, to stop a whale-tier alliance like Grumpy from dominating a tier” when have we, as players, consistently and fundamental used that without ulterior motives being at play? All in all, the game needs more features that would force or give reasons for alliances to go to war. Something needs a buff, or resources need a cap or to expire over time through degradation or something, to make alliances feel urged to do things. what were other’s thoughts on this matter?

A few people have been asking about our war with Pantheon so I thought it would be best to give you all a update here. Pantheon was approached a few days back about peace and they declined to take part in talks. Given the situation, we intend to call this war a victory and move on. We will not declare any new wars in this conflict and will treat new declarations from Pantheon as raids. We wish Pantheon the best moving forward. Proof of Victory: Special shoutout to Inst for making this possible

"A devastated world. A barren post war landscape. Two parties head for the same well, and spot each other at the same time. Each tentatively restrains themselves, hoping in agony that this will not end in bloodshed like the last encounter. Trigger discipline is exercised with wavering commitment, as the first party dares to speak, through their locutor, "I am Agathor. I seek only peace and brotherhood." Surprised the second party approaches, cautious that this may be a trap, the second stranger chooses to extend a hand in friendship anyway, realizing that the bloodshed cannot continue indefinitely. As he reaches towards this daring stranger, he replies, "Welcome, brother." From that first moment, a new chain was forged. One that shows the world how trust can be achieved between two strangers seeking the same goal. The two strangers cooperated and shared in the glory of their achievement. It was at that moment the world knew a light had been turned on, and the sunny shores of peace now appeared on the horizon. The Core of the Treaty - The Dominion and Human Over Alliances swear on pain of death to not hit each other with their own hands by signing Non-Aggression Pact. Under Treaty stipulations The Dominion and Human Over both agree to non-interferance in each others current wars (if any), and for three months will promote peaceful relations and trade despite Buck's single-minded determination to punish those who woke him from his slumber.

To be honest, I would significantly increase the bonuses. If the goal is to disrupt the meta and really add flavour via specialisation, then the bonuses have to be worthwhile instead of just just a couple % here and there. The bonuses have to really encourage a nation making the decision to specialise in a particular build so we can get rid of this approach to just whale it and buy everything and add some variety to the meta. 1 or 2% bonuses aren't really going to encourage much changes to the meta when the daily login bonus on its own exceeds most of the % benefits after all.

Take a refund then. It's like what... 6m? For blocking 50% missiles? Yea, no 😛

After reading this I think I need to take my own meds. Nevertheless, nice to meet you!

Alex already made some tweaks to the default settings that will no doubt be useful when searching for targets. These are additional settings/changes that will further increase the functionality of that feature, and significantly improve target finding in war. This is pretty straightforward. Officer+ can designate alliances as enemies and remove them from the list. This list of enemies is only visible on the control panel unlike the list of allies, which is public. The main purpose of this is for a new default setting on the "Find Nations in War Range" page, which by default will only display enemy nations (unless there are none.) An addition to this would be in-game raid rules. This would work the same way, with a panel allowing alliances to set raid rules by rank and/or protector rank and if the nation is applicant or member. By default, nations who don't meet those requirements won't show up on the Find Nations in War Range page, although this can be changed in settings. When declaring, there will also be a banner stating that you are attacking a nation outside your alliance raid rules. The enemy list trumps raid rules. tl;dr QoL changes to make life a little easier for new player raiding and wartime attacks.

Still don't see the point of commodities, just seems like CN-lite. But most of the other things are nice.

People who are bombarding are very well capable of fielding such, because if you're spending MAP's bombarding you've already got it in the bag. Meaning, the ships aren't actually at risk of being sunk. I don't see a problem with it not being perfectly round, since it could just be rounded up or down. Much the same way how PB works (you aren't recruiting 1.1 ships, for example). It'd also be going off the value of 15 ships rather than 3 drydocks. You'd be surprised at the value of having to reslot the improvements time and again (me knowing that because they make for good nuke cash in a pinch). And the response also doesn't address the loss of output in cases where you need to refit cities to something 800 infra spec or something of sorts. Which definitely ought to be factored in when balancing this since it's a long term productivity loss being incurred. Missiles don't cost as much, but they also can be ID blocked, kill less imps given the same MAP's, can be spied to be removed, etc. It's nonetheless a massive increase w.r.t. imp killing compared to the previous value; especially at higher infra values.

micro moment

It certainly should, if it is to go through. And yes, it should be pinned to city count rather than navy possessed or drydocks possessed at hand because otherwise it'd be easily gamed.

No one will ever forget this monumental day!

Yes... YES. YES!

Pantheon probably should've been destroyed but it should've happened as a result of the community failing to fight for it's existence through competent membership and administration. This seems like an artificial death and I think that cringe.

I dont Agree with just having no NAPs ever, but NO NAP SHOULD EVER BE LONGER THAN THE ACTUAL WAR. or even longer than a month regardless. i feel like having the Long NAPs means that when they end everyone is looking to handle all the issues they wouldve had small scale wars over during the NAP and just bloodthirsty regardless trying to find their "valid CB", which leads to these massive coalition wars, and very little happening in between unless you're a pirate or a micro. whereas if you would have just had like a 14 day NAP for this war, war would likely have not broken out at the end of that, atleast not between the whole coalitions and that new wars would come naturally when an actual issue occurs.

I mean, everyone signed a MDoAP against Quack that one time, so why not just do that again?

Okay how about PIATs instead?

My name is Horsecock, and I approve this message.

Declaring a public war then immediately offering peace isn't how to get raiders off your doorstep btw

For reals though what are these trash cb arguments. Kt is responsible for this abomination That is all the reason needed to roll them needed.

It's a replica of a CyberNations system that doesn't work great there and seems rather useless here.

PnW Players, I don't talk on the forums much anymore, and as of late I've been trying to cut back on my discord chatting too, however I decided to make this forum post to call attention to something that has affected me and the people around me. A little over a week ago on August 27th, Hurricane Laura made landfall as a Category 4 Hurricane on the Southwest Louisiana coast. At first the storm was forecasted to only be around Category 2 strength, however the storm ended up being worse than just about any other storm to ever hit Louisiana, and as of the time of writing this, there are still over 250,000 people in Southwest Louisiana without Electricity and a good chunk of those don't have running water either. In the worst hit areas surrounding Lake Charles, Louisiana, many people lost everything, I know many friends who live in the area that lost their entire house and have no place to go, some are even staying in tents in the places where their houses used to be. Recovery efforts are underway, however local officials have said that people in the Lake Charles area could be without power and water for weeks. I got power back this past Wednesday, fortunately for me, the area where I live was spared the worst of it, however we are still a ways away from any sort of "normal". I personally am in a good position, my house came out fine from the storm, and my family also managed to make it out. However, this past week, the more I watched the news, the more I realized that our plight had almost been lost in the void. After the first couple of days or so, people just stopped talking about us. Things are not okay here, and they won't be okay here for awhile, and I wanted to raise awareness of that. I specifically wanted to ask those of you that can, to please donate to the recovery efforts in place. Below is a link to donate to the Red Cross, they personally helped me quite a bit through the week where I didn't have power, providing warm meals among many other things to people who needed it and I've heard that they're doing great things over in the Lake Charles area. To be clear, I'm not asking for any money myself, I don't need it, but I want to see those who were affected severely receive the care that they need. I've been frustrated these past few days because it feels as though my little corner of the world has been forgotten in our time of most need. I also felt the desire to help those in need, however didn't quite know what to do about it and I hope that by making this post that I can help make somewhat of a difference, I feel that even just making others aware of what is going on here is a step in the right direction. Thanks for at least reading this message, and once again, I urge you to donate money if you are financially secure enough to make such a donation. https://www.redcross.org/donate/donation.html/

Evidence?

Collapse in the Mines 2 Electric Boogaloo