Leaderboard

First things first! The two major updates are being worked on by the coding staff, first are Beige changes and a general war overhaul most of which is outlined in that thread. There are some changes back from 2021 threads that are being included in this as well now that the improvement destruction system has been changed to accommodate for the changes to missiles/nukes and the VDS/Dome tweaks from 2021 which can be found about 2/3rds down in the OP of that thread. After that moves to testing, Perks will be next on the agenda for a major new content addition. The target for perks to be released is Spring of 2023. Once Perks are complete work on the next section of new content will begin with commodities. Note, the numbers in there aren't what will be in the final product, it's more about the concept. In between these we plan on continuing to make adjustments on existing content and smaller, less code intensive changes and additions while continuing to work on QoL changes. Now, lets get to the changes.: Reminder that this is the public feedback phase of content. Just because it's listed below doesn't mean it's definitely coming out as listed. Nations Leaving Vacation Mode will be automatically given a 12 turn (1 day) beige timer. This will allow for nations returning to not have the be around around at the exact turn their timer ends. Allows them to join an alliance and such should they need to as well. Spy Counts and Spy Odds will no longer be hidden or ambiguous. Players, through bots and API data have been able to calculate spy odds and counts with the current system. To allow all players, even those without bots, to play on an even field and reduce the API request and data scraping, this information will now be provided. Spy counts will be visible to all players. When performing a spy attack, odds will be shown rounded to the nearest percent. When a nation completes a bounty objective against another nation, but is blockaded, that player will still gain the bounty. The bounty will be in be deposited into the nation once that nation no longer has any active wars. This is to allow players to still earn bounties while blockaded, but prevents a nation from being able to exploit the bounty system to aid a blockaded nation still at war. Changes to Urban Planning and Advanced Urban Planning: These projects will have two different payment options. The first is the already existing one and the second option is outlined below with a focus on raw resources instead of food. Thus, if there is a spike in food prices the alternative option may be cheaper. If raw prices spike, the food option may be cheaper. This way players can balance cost options and more diversely spread out varied resource demands. Urban Planning Second Payment Option Coal 20,000 Oil: 20,000 Iron: 20,000 Bauxite: 20,000 Lead: 20,000 Advanced Urban Planning Second Payment Option Aluminum: 40,000 Uranium: 20,000 Coal: 30,000 Oil: 30,000 Iron: 30,000 Bauxite: 30,000 Lead: 30,000 Ammo: 40,000 Alternative Payment Option Removed. Changes to Pirate Economy Project: Pirate Economy now provides a 5% bonus to loot from ground attacks. New Project: Advanced Pirate Economy Requirements: Nation has won or lost 100 combined wars. Requirements: Nation has Pirate Economy Cost: $50,000,000 Aluminum: 20,000 Ammo: 40,000 Gas: 20,000 Effect: Nation has an additional offensive war slot. Nation gains 5% more loot from ground attacks. Nation gains 1.1x modifier to their loot (edit from feedback) from defeating a nation and the defeated nations alliance bank. New Project: Bureau of Domestic Affairs Requirements: Requires Government Support Agency Cost: $20,000,000 Food: 100,000 Aluminum: 10,000 Gas: 10,000 Steel: 10,000 Oil: 10,000 Coal: 10,000 Iron: 10,000 Effect: Timer for changing Domestic Policy reduced to 1 turn. Change to Resource Production Center. Renamed -> Activity Center Effect: Daily Log In Bonus increased by $500,000. If there is any daily log in streak above 1, Daily Log In Bonus increased by $1,000,000. This amount is separate from any other modifiers. Still has a City Cap of 15, and will turn off above 15 cities.

Hi The young nation of Tviconia has recently joined Orbis, and I have just entered training at the great alliance of Carthago. I really look forward to this! Best wishes from Olaf Haroldson President of Tviconia

It is optional for them to be considered a mini sphere or not. It is also mandatory for you to stfu.

...

How about you be a man and stand by what you say? Also:

Also, keep buying spies. @Codename V 👍

No one deserves this

You can simply make cities cost money and raws. Probably the easiest change to execute (coding-wise), doesn’t unnecessarily complicate the game and doesn’t really favor a tier over the other. If it doesn’t work, easy enough to revert too.

TKR- Better Known as The Knights Radiant This alliance, absolutely sucks donkey balls in every shape imaginable 1. Their king is a cardinals fan, no more detail is needed. Any team in the horrible city of St Louis (even if they have Pujols) is not a team you should root for. 2. Their foreign affairs leader is a Hoosier, named “BigMorf” of all things. One the Hoosiers suck, even their star quarterback left them and practically revitalized their year, and for basketball look at the current #1 ranked team to know everything you need. Dumb name as well 3. They are getting absolutely shat on (deservedly btw), they have lost almost 300k alliance score. TKR hasn't been so pathetically weak since May 2020, two and a half years ago. 4. Their Alliance concept sucks: I get Brandon Sanderson is cool and all other people it just looks like TKR = upright shiny cocky knights 5. "I have seen the end, and have heard it named. The Night of Sorrows, The True Desolation. The Everstorm." Well you didn’t stop it at all, see #3 6. Their 2nd in command, IDK anything about him his nation just radiates dweeb energy. 7. They just Suck, I mean really just suck 8. I have 218 won wars, and probably a majority of them are against TKR or TKR affiliates and allies, imagine losing to me of all people lmao. I mean right now I'm fighting and winning against 5 of them lmao. 9. Like 20 government members, way too many. How all these people decided to become gov members of such crap is beside me. 10. Orange is a bad color, especially that shade on the PNW site it just looks ugly like ew. 11. Actually their current color on PNW should be Beige as 63% of their members are on Beige right now, the rest on Vacation or AFK Grey Trade Bloc 12. Too many Alliances rely on TKR for Protection and Treaties, like they can't even protect themselves 13. Made that stupid pact with Rose just to backstab them after getting nuked a ton, then their bloc disintegrated on them cause how stupid it was. 14. Rose sucks also btw 15. Petition to Rename TKR as The Ketchup Resistance Do not Join TKR

How dare you insult my sekrit ally TKR like this. I may agree with points 1 and 2. You may even catch me agreeing with 3, 4, 5, and 6. Don't tell anyone else, but points 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 are true too. Ultimately, points 12, 13, 14, and 15 state a valid point. But frankly, the audacity to post such a thing, I will remember this as a perma-CB

Sir, this is a Wendy's.

Sorry TKR, may as well disband after this. You all had a good run.

How young are you before people insult you for such a bad post?

Can't forget their crimes in which they place Pineapple, a fruit meant for fruit salad, on Pizza , an Italian bread dish meant for cheese and meat.

Who is this noob lol? But yeah i agree on point 1 and 2. Both of them should be couped. One is a piegon fan and other is a power ranger. But seems like TKR must have given you a hard time that you are crying so much. Not even a child cries like that 🤣

Spend 60k steel, aluminum and gasoline and $500m to make all of your future cities cost 10% more permanently in the future. Can buy as many times as you like, but can't delete it. Main benefit is clout, all your cities you buy after having one of these get a fancy badge to certify you as being rich as balls. Multiple projects equal multiple badges. Combine with a feature that lets you reply to forum posts with an automatically generated comment that compares how many city badges you have vs that user. Will equalise economics in upper tiers and bring fairness to PnW politics at long last. Inshallah.

The current dark theme logo looks low-quality and it takes literally just a few clicks on GIMP to create a better dark theme logo from the normal one Attached is what I made in like 5-10 minutes + how it looks with colored background for both v1 and v2

Including mil improvements? So they couldn't rebuy? I feel like this would be an interesting separate weapon. Little infra damage but disables improvements. EMP.

So, I think it makes sense for nuclear capable nations wanting to improve nukes, but when you're the one getting nuked constantly, as I used to be a few weeks ago, I think that nukes are already so damaging to smaller nations and those without a large stockpile of money and resources that increasing the damage they can inflict would make nuclear capable nations overpowered against those who are not.

Hopefully a simple ask. Can we start to capture missiles and nukes blocked on our nation page stats? The section on the image to show Launched (Blocked): 73 (32) Eaten (Blocked): 49 (23) Both for nukes and missiles.

It was a placeholder, and then I don't use the dark theme so I forgot about it lol

Trade confirmation Trade confirmation doesn't really help, because it is identical and appears for every trade, so after a while you just automatically accept Only have the trade confirmation when you post for the wrong price (and it's not a private trade) (e.g. selling for less than a current buy offer) Have it the prompt really obvious e.g. Red alert style, "You are posting a trade for less than you can sell on the market. Consider adjusting your price above $XXX or accepting an existing offer <link to trade page>" -> button "Post offer anyway" Allow creating trades via the alliance bank instead of using your nation Alliance bank -> bank trading is already a thing. It's inconvenient to find buyers/sellers for large amounts because there is no centralized market. No one wants to put many billions of resources on a single nation, because it limits who can trade and it's riskier, especially leading up to a war Current trades e.g. food, have a cap of 1m or something (which doesn't need to be there) Change the buy/sell offers per resource restrictions Restrict it so that you cannot place offers (in a resource) more than the amount of resources you have If a seller/buyer no longer has the required funds to back a trade, remove it from the trade page (it's annoying to accept a trade offer only to get an error) Remove the arbitrary 3 trade limit (denison says it would be abused still, so keep the 3 trade per resource limit) Trade notifications When you get a notification for a pending trade, include a link to accept/reject it. (suggested by Vanek) Merge functionality of the buy/sell page into the create offer page e.g. When you go to buy, enter an amount you want to buy, and the ppu you are willing to pay. If there are buy offers available, accept those for the lowest price. Otherwise it creates an offer (or does both) By default, show a table of the top price of each resource on the create offer page Add a dropdown to show the price history Price history graph Dont use a stacked line chart. It's terrible. Basically unreadable without hovering over each price point and reading the prices. At which point you may as well have a table, since that'd be easier to read. Maybe separate it into three line graphs (non stacked): Manu prices. Raw prices (not food), Food.

Proposed changes: Gather intel op does not consume an offensive spy slot. Gathered intel is automatically shared with the alliance. Alliance intel can be shared with other alliances depending on the treaty. When viewing a nation for which your alliance has intel, show the extra information along with a timestamp for when it was last gathered. When attempting to perform a spy op on a nation, display success percent based on spy counts from the last gather intel op. These changes will help put other alliances on the same playing field as those who have created their own intelligence sharing platform. It will also get rid of the issue of slamming the server to calculate spy estimates. The number of spies a nation has is supposed to be a secret anyway, right? So why do we even show "Greater than 50%" or "Less than 50%" odds at all right now? Basing odds on the last gathered intel makes far more sense and would also make the Gather Intel op more useful.

I'd like to start out with a disclaimer before I get jumped on (rightfully so, since this is only a rough idea) and clarify that I thought my idea itself is good, however I am asking for community help in the case the community finds this interesting enough. So to start, as the topic title suggests the idea here is to add "Alliance military." What do I mean by this exactly? Well it's actually quite simple. For every city a nation owns that nation can have up to 15000 soldiers, 1250 tanks, 75 planes and 15 ships. It would work largely the same. So for example TKR has (currently as of writing) 3851 cities total. So 57,765,000 would be the maximum amount of reserve they could hold in soldiers. Now here's where things get tricky because I thought of multiple ways this could obviously create problems, some of you are probably thinking "okay but if an alliance has such resources sitting in reserve they can just continually send out 'reserves' to keep their troop counts maxed" Your right to think that, which is also why I thought of the next step. Limitations on either how many times per day an alliance can send out their reserve forces and/or limiting how many times per day/week an individual nation may receive these reinforcements. So this is where I need your help, what would be the best way to achieve this in order for this to become a good idea? Do we add a bit of everything limiting an individual nation to say receiving these reserve troops to once every 5 days? Would that be too long? Should we also limit how many times an alliance can send out reserves to their member nations -10 per day as an example, or perhaps a % depending on how many nations are in said alliance or maybe a percentage of the total reserve forces on hand for an alliance? Next I'd like to just toss a small cherry on top of this suggestion. Similarly to aiding nations with resources in wartime if an alliances nation is blockaded and needs reserve forces you cannot send it to your member nation if they are blockaded which I thought would be a cool little addition that would add immense value to ships that simply weren't there before. In conclusion the idea I'm presenting is meant to help add a new breath of fresh air to the depth and intensity of a global war, give a new direction to alliance banks that at the moment only exist to give out city/project grants and 'save' up war chests and in rare cases help certain spheres from not getting caught completely with their pants down or rather giving them a fighting chance in what would be a day 1 lost war. Everything written above should be considered subject to change to fit in better with the communities feelings on if the subject matter in this topic can be of a benefit towards the entire game community or this is just another idiotic idea doomed to be tossed aside a few hours after I post this. Let the dunking commence. Thank you to the people that take the time to read this. I will edit this post with community suggestions if for some odd reason this comes off as appealing to you all. I hope it does, despite my terrible ability to communicate my thoughts and ideas. P.S just small small QoL clarifications - lets say an alliance has maxed out their reserve forces, if for some reason that alliance disbands without selling off the forces it will automatically sell off all military at the same return of an individual nation selling off military and be dispensed evenly to every member of the alliance, this does not include applicants. Also if you lose members from your alliance at max reserves you don't lose those forces but you cannot buy more until you've fallen under your new maximum. For example if TKR had full reserve and lost 20-30 cities, they would keep the forces those cities provided but could not buy more until they dropped under their new maximum.

If reserve units are cheap, it becomes a requirement for every alliance to have a max stockpile and there isnt a trade-off. If its expensive, each alliance will have to weigh the costs versus benefits of maintaining an expensive reserve army. Not having units will increase profits but will put you in a vulnerable situation if you get leaked. Being able to send reserve units to only nations in beige would better address the goal of making globals more dynamic, while not hurting Pirates.

The nation in question can only receive the number of troops according to their improvements. So if they're running 0/2/5/0 the amount of soldiers an alliance can send will still be 0 until that nation switch's their build. Also as I mentioned if you blockade said nation they cannot receive any reinforcements & furthermore as I mentioned I was thinking there should be a 5 day cooldown for individual nations after being sent reinforcements.

Ships are considered a defensive unit in this game. The only reasons you would use them is to either get a blockade (the main reason), or hit cities with massive infra (which is pushing it). If nations are using max ships on a nation with little to no infra, then that nation is gonna cause more damage to themselves then they would to the opponent because of the cost of resources to initiate the attack being more than the damage dealt. And after looking at your nation. I would recommend not running 2k infra per city while only having 6 cities. That isn't something you should consider till at least city 15 imo. Anyways, like others have said, ships need to be buffed or have a new mechanic introduced to them.

Ships need significant buffs, not nerfs.

Add the ability for the alliance to see what their members are voting for (if at all) in regards to the colour trade bloc if Enable Alliance Information Access is enabled.

Add tax records as an API endpoint with mostly the same parameters as the V2 Bank records API endpoint

Hol up folks, the only reason this would work is if beige remains as is. Shortening or removing it would defeat the purpose entirely, and is a terrible idea in its own right.

I think something on the lines of 2x losses is just fine. Maybe throw in less beige time, etc. You also can only surrender at less than 50 resistance maybe as way to prevent abuse from people insta surrendering.

How to tell me you have around 10 cities without actually telling me you have around 10 cities.

I'm happy this was posted on April fools lmao

I'd prefer to see a city cost increase for low tier, and a large discount exclusively for city 40+, that way the peasants can know their place

This trend will actually continue endlessly because as the top players get towards all being c40, then this suggestion will be brought again. The solution should be to create another end game form of progression rather than just building more cities. it’s perfectly fine for city growth to stagnant in the c30-40 range. Otherwise, in a year or two, we will all be c40-50 and asking for another city discount because our only form of progression is bigger city number and the cost becomes unviable to purchase without more discounts. Are we eventually just going to have cities be 50% off or more above x city level from all the stacking discounts? At that point just make cities above x city cheaper than they are now and spend time making projects which actually add some content. Also I please don’t base the decision off the poll as it is trivial for this suggestion, is the goal to make the game more balanced or see what the people want? You could make a poll asking if every player wants a free city and the majority will vote yes. tldr: City discounts are a bandaid on a bleeding wound that is, we have no other end game progression besides bigger city number.

While I agree with you that the main reason you should be buy cities is for military power, you also have to consider the stagnation of growth around the city 30 area. And why you don't see that many players move past city 30.

Given the progression of the game towards more and more players being C20-25+ and that the Top 100 nations by city count are all at least C36, it's only logical (in my opinion) that another tiering be offered. As for when it should be offered, C21 would be most logical to keep the trend (5 cities between each), but I wouldn't complain if it were at C25.

That's because you shouldn't be buying cities for the cash, you should be buying them for the military might. The extra cash is just a bonus.

It's already hard enough for the 'losing' side of a war to bounce back. Wars seem to be won before they begin, and punishing the losing side for being in that position. The design philosophy being applied here is backwards. The ideal situation would be to develop the mechanics so that it's possible for the losing side to develop a strategy to fight back effectively and make a comeback somehow. I'm not sure how you would do that, but that's what players try to do now when they nuke and missile their enemies alongside attacking with soldiers and few ships- and it can be fairly effective. Don't make it harder for the losing side. Make it so that the losing side can fight better despite losing the upper hand (if they are capable of doing so through good planning, skill, and tactics).

Haven't read this in its entirety to be able to address all points but I've said it before and I'd like to reiterate: forcing people to stay on beige is a terrible idea. Why force them to stay in beige if they don't want to and discourage them from warring and participating in the game?? They should be able to leave whenever they want.

@hidude45454 Join dev-team pls. @Justinian the Great You have to burn this concept of trapping people on beige. Your solution must work for any imaginable scenario that a loser can be in. Sometimes the two sides in wars are fairly even, other times one side is outnumbered 10:1 by the other and rebuilding military isn't even an option on the table. When it isn't an option people will need to fire missiles/nukes and do raiding type stuff with soldiers only; you cant make this impossible by trapping people on beige for a week, especially not with all this punitive stuff I see in @Lord Tyrions post, "where the nation can't do ANYTHING" while trapped on beige. rofl

Not sure what happens more, nerfing raiding or flaming in suggestion threads.

can i just remind you guys that raiding has been killed enough already.

Right now the dev team are a small group of individuals who discuss, and sometimes pitch, new game suggestions to streamline the development process. So currently it is me, Adrienne from TKR, Lucians and Vexz from Rose, DrRush from Guardian, Prefontaine, and Alex. I have spent quite some time and effort trying to recruit more people from different spheres to get a variety of opinions, but with limited success. If you or someone you know would like to join the dev team, it's not like we're a cloistered lot. DM me or one of us and ask. Frankly posts like this are why the development process has ground to an almost-halt. The admin and the coders don't want to deal with people like you. PnW is a free-to-play game with a lack of documentation on a lot of its mechanics. I checked the wiki pages for formulas before I post and I've been in and out of plenty of top alliances but I don't have every single number memorized. This game isn't my life, but I'm here spitballing trying to improve it. It's part of why this is an open discussion, to catch errors and get feedback. Instead you use it as a platform to act like an ass. Why don't you take a step back and stop responding with aggression to a discussion post about Pnw game mechanics?

Does the dev team play the same game we do?

This is indeed an issue, but it's not that widely abused because it is pretty quickly reported. At the end of the day, it will never be the deciding factor of a war if Arrgh beiges a few people. Meh, you're merely changing the meta here slightly. Rebuilding infra + mil already exists in the current meta if you need to whilst losing. The more likely outcome is what normally happens which is to nuke/missile. Normally people are struggling for targets if they're winning, I very much doubt people will care if they're out of the war. It won't have the impact you're looking for.

I have a solution, don't touch how the current beige system works and rather bring back the old war mechanics....also gib 50 score per city instead of 100