Leaderboard

Hey everyone, the June 2023 Update is now officially deployed! Below I’ve listed the various changes completed. The key differences from the original post is that the beige and partial superiorities changes are not being implemented and an army value modifier has been added. July 2023 Update The July 2023 Update should be announced and deployed in the next short while, along with a rough roadmap of content through to the end of this year! Changes The entirety of the war components for the game have been rewritten from the ground up, that’s both the backend and frontend. Given the nature of these updates, there will most certainly be issues in its implementation, and the goal of the tournament is primarily to test these changes and catch any issues before they become apparent during a live server global war. Spy counts and exact spy odds have been made public. Nation score from cities has been returned to 100 score per city instead of 75 score. An army modifier is being implemented to take the calculated army value (for calculating attack success, not casualties) and raise it to the power of 3/4. I.e. If I have an army value of 1000, my army value is now 1000^(3/4) = 177, and my opponent’s army value goes from 800 to 150. For casualties, the kills for each unit will be calculated using the formula (the army values here are pre-adjustment to the power of 3/4) ((att army value + def army value) / (att army value ^ (3/4) + def army value ^ (3/4))) * (side army value ^ (3/4)). For example, to calculate attacker kills the side army value would be the attacker’s army value before being adjusted to the power of 3/4. This formula has the effect that it reduces attacker losses and increases defender losses when a smaller military is attacking a larger, and increases attacker losses while reducing defender losses when a larger military is attacking a smaller. Spy attacks against missiles now have a 25% chance to destroy an additional missile. Nukes now kill four improvements per attack. 2 of these improvements can be any improvement. 2 of these improvements are any non-power plant, non-military improvement. In the effect 2 such improvements are not available, the remaining improvement destructions can target any improvement. Missiles can now kill two improvements per missile. Missile Launch Pad allows a nation to build two missiles per day. Iron Dome reduces the number of improvements destroyed by a missile by 1. The chance that Iron Dome blocks a missile is reduced from 50% to 30%. Vital Defense System reduces the number of non-power plant, non-military improvements destroyed by a nuke by 1. The chance that Vital Defense System blocks a nuke is increased from 20% to 25%. Military Salvage now uses steel/aluminum used by both sides when calculating the amount of resources to add. Treasures can only be lost through defensive wars. National Projects Added Bureau of Domestic Affairs: $20,000,000, 100,000 Food, 10,000 Aluminum, 10,000 Gasoline, 10,000 Steel, 10,000 Oil, 10,000 Coal, 10,000 Iron. Requires Government Support Agency. Reduces the timer for changing Domestic Policies to 1 turn. Added Advanced Pirate Economy: $50,000,000, 20,000 Aluminum, 40,000 Munitions, 20,000 Gasoline Requires Pirate Economy and that the nation has won or lost 100 combined wars. Adds an additional offensive war slot, 5% more loot from ground attacks, and a 1.1x modifier to loot from defeating a nation and the defeated nation’s alliance bank. Pirate Economy now provides a 5% bonus to loot from ground attacks. Added Surveillance Network: $300,000,000, 20,000 Aluminum, 20,000 Steel, 10,000 Uranium Requires Intelligence Agency and Advanced Urban Planning. Spy attacks against your nation are 10% less likely to succeed and the attacker is 10% more likely to be identified. Added Mars Landing: $200,000,000, 20,000 Oil, 20,000 Aluminum, 20,000 Munitions, 20,000 Steel, 20,000 Gasoline, 20,000 Uranium Requires Space Program and Moon Landing. Similar to Moon Landing, provides a unique achievement to the first player to build it as well as one to every other player who builds it. All players who complete it will be tracked on a leaderboard like the Moon Landing project. Nations will also gain a daily boost to their approval rating. Economic Changes These economic changes are going live with the posting of this announcement. Nuclear plant upkeep is doubled, going from 1.2 to 2.4 uranium per day. Food consumption per city is changed to (((base_population)^2) / 125_000_000) + (((base_population) * (city_age_modifier) - base_population) / 850) Miscellaneous The game will now notify you when your verification is about to run out. The new player revenue bonus is extended to 100% at C1 then decreasing by 5% through to C20. Login bonus changes: These changes are amalgamated from the approved changes here https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/33757-game-development-discussion-second-new-player-thread/ as well as the more recent ideas here [https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/35717-log-in-bonus-increases/.](https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/35717-proposed-log-in-bonus-increases/) Login bonus daily increase changed to $500,000. Login bonus maximum amount increased to $2,000,000. When you miss a day, you go down two steps not down to zero. New players earn 2x the max login bonus (no chance from existing functionality), making their maximum bonus $4,000,000 with a $1,000,000 daily increase. Nations leaving Vacation Mode will automatically be given 1 day (12 turns) of beige. Players will be sent an email to verify their IP address when logging in from a new IP. Completing a bounty while blockaded will place the money into an escrow account that will be emptied onto your nation once you are no longer blockaded. When a nation deletes with active defensive wars, 50% of its resources will be split between the attackers. A new withdrawal confirmation modal to protect against mistaken transfers. A new alliance disband button to allow easier alliance disbandment (this has a number of checks to prevent against erroneous or mistaken use). Add a editor parameter to the nation and alliance edit pages to allow disabling the WYSIWYG editor for custom HTML descriptions (&editor=raw in the URL) API Changes These changes will be likely be deployed after the test server tournament, however they may be launched earlier. Further updates will be provided in the Politics and Development server (https://discord.gg/Rrq56nMYSK). API v1/v2 are being deprecated. They will have a six month deprecation period then after that they may be deleted or have their functionality reduced at our discretion. I strongly recommend upgrading your code to use API v3 moving forwards. The send-message endpoint is an exception to this deprecation and will continue to function indefinitely. Massive shoutout to Putmir for this, API v3 now has mutations for accepting personal trades and managing alliance positions. Also, tax bracket and treaty mutations were released a while ago although never announced very well. Again massive shoutout to Putmir, the game now has functionality to facilitate the creation of scoped API keys (i.e. API keys that only have access to specific pieces of information). These scoped keys will not work for API v1 or v2 but will allow users to protect themselves and limit what actions and information developers are able to work with when creating bots or scripts. All existing API keys will have all scopes and new nations will no longer be created with an API key. Massive shoutout to Mateus for this, API subscriptions now support backtracking, meaning if you lose connection, once you reconnect your channel will receive events back to the last 10 minutes. To manually trigger this process, the client may make a GET request to /subscriptions/v1/rollback endpoint with two URL parameters being the timestamp (in milliseconds and up to 10 minutes before the present time) to roll back to and the channel to roll back. Events will then be sent back to that time. The API will also be getting a number of new fields to correspond to the war changes and new projects. And again to Putmir, anew query roughly equivalent to the tradeprice query from API v1. Conclusion Thank you guys so much for your patience, have a wonderful day and enjoy the update!

I've been exercising my right to plunder farmers and they have called in their slaves to counter me. However, I've been sitting at $5.3m for days despite my opponents making immense triumph after immense triumph in ground attacks that plunder over $1m each. It could very well be that they are getting money out of nothing, and I myself am not losing money.

Can't reply to stuff on the forums.

I would love to see that if you change your gov settings to get the 5% discount to buying projects, it should not lower the cost of the moon and mars projects. Actually now that i think about it, it should charge you 5% more. If you are stupid enough to waste all those resources and a project slot on something that does nothing, you deserve the maximum punishment to your warchest for it. That is all. -SRD

I manually update them all, meant to do it last night but didn't have a chance.

Lol @Thalmor, well done

sadly, there were still active conflicts going on. the warmongers at game admin only gave us those thirty minutes of true peace 😔

SRD's hot takes If any of you have been allied to him, you'll get used to it. We try to keep him in the Grumpy old folks home but it looks like he got out, our apologies

You can still missile and nuke, if you save up your MAPs and buy it at the right time. (I would also argue other points to counter this mindset, but I'm sticking to the topic here) Here's another example. I could literally declare war on... say... @Don Juan. He's a big boy in the game. Sitting at 51 cities, 2850 Infra per. To my 31 cities, 2500 Infra per. And he has a military. He can't declare on me though. He's too big. If I declare on him, he can wipe out my spies, wipe out my military, and even beige me. He cannot stop me from nuking him twice, at the very least. If he doesn't pay attention to his own MAPs to beige me quickly, I could probably squeeze in another nuke or missile. That's easy statpadding damage right there. He can't spy away nukes, he can't loot away all my resources to prevent buying nukes, and the daily bonus will ensure that I have enough cash accumulated to buy nukes (Or resources). Sure, he can accumulate enough resources to build his cities back, but he cannot stop me from nuke turreting him over... and over... and over. I don't have to watch my MAPs. I'm guaranteed at least 2 nukes on him as long as I check in once a day for 2 days of war. Let's expand on this idea and how ridiculous it can be. Any war, the alliance can easily go guerilla warfare with this idea. We seen it happen with the conflict KT was in recently, when they ate something like 300+ nukes. There's nothing they could do about that. It can't be stopped. There's no counter to it. Any alliance can do this if they have the basic communication skills to tell their members "Hey, just nuke them since we lost the conventional war." And now it's 4 Improvements gone per nuke. Let's add in the beige change too while we're at it. Beige doesn't tick down till all defensive wars are ended? So I can declare war on a player who has invested a lot of time and effort into building up his nation, being a "whale" in the game, and just target him out. I would get countered, but... that doesn't stop me. If they happen to beige me? That's fine, that's more time to accumulate daily bonuses and resources to declare again with. If they don't beige me? That's more nukes. Is that really fair for the defender? They have to watch their MAPs and time it right to beige me quickly, but I don't have to watch mine. Yet your argument is that it's not fair for me to have to watch mine (As the nuker) otherwise it'll just get spied quickly as soon as I buy it? That's the risk. That's the counter to it. You can't buff something without adjusting preexisting things to balance it out effectively. Nukes and Missiles definitely need a buff, but all the past year changes need to be looked at it too. Daily Bonus, Cash Loot limit, MAP usage, Resource Cost adjustments, etc.

Well, you are correct that it is all context dependent. But you're playing an online game an if you're expressing hateful ideologies towards others, then yeah that's generally going to be against the rules. There's no reason for it here - you don't have to see or know about what anyone else is like IRL anyway, it's a nation simulation game.

Here is the rule: https://politicsandwar.com/rules/ I would say that your post qualifies at a minimum of "showing a dislike of homosexual people" which is not allowed.

I didn't issue the warning, and the warning should have had more specific detail. However, I believe that your bulletin could have and probably did make some LGTBQ+ players (IRL) uncomfortable, and there's really no reason that you needed to write that. It was more of a personal opinion than nation roleplay. This is an online game where you don't have to see or know what anyone's real-life is like, and so your bulletin which was potentially harmful and had no real relation to the game was taken down.

1. Lack of economic incentives: One of the main criticisms of communism is the absence of individual economic incentives. In a communist system, the means of production are owned and controlled by the state, and wealth is supposed to be distributed equally among all members of society. However, this can lead to a lack of motivation and productivity, as individuals may not have the same drive to work hard or innovate without the promise of personal gain. 2. Centralized planning and inefficiency: Communist economies are typically characterized by centralized planning, where the government determines production targets, resource allocation, and distribution of goods and services. This top-down approach can result in inefficiencies, as the government may struggle to accurately assess consumer demand or allocate resources effectively. This can lead to shortages, surpluses, and a lack of choice for consumers. 3. Suppression of individual freedoms: Critics argue that communism often suppresses individual freedoms, such as freedom of speech, assembly, and expression. The state's control over media, censorship, and restrictions on political dissent can limit personal liberties and stifle creativity and innovation. This lack of freedom can lead to a lack of diversity of thought and hinder societal progress. 4. Lack of market mechanisms: In a communist system, the market forces of supply and demand do not play a significant role in resource allocation and pricing. This can result in a disconnect between consumer preferences and production decisions, leading to a mismatch between what people want and what is actually produced. Without market mechanisms, it can be challenging to efficiently allocate resources and adapt to changing conditions. 5. Potential for corruption and abuse of power: Critics argue that the concentration of power in a communist system can lead to corruption and abuse. When the state controls all aspects of the economy and society, there is a risk that those in power may exploit their positions for personal gain, leading to inequality and a lack of social justice.

One of my major complaints about the Test server is that the testing phase, i.e, the initial tournament phase has everyone set equal. In the real game, everyone is not equal. People have different city counts, military, etc. In the test tourney, everyone starts at 10c or so. The test hence cannot in essence capture what a real war would be like. I think it would be better to transfer over nations from main to test server so things like updeclares, downdeclares, etc can be tested better. Ofc I am not saying all people get moved over. To be moved over, you need to sync your current real server nation to the test one. Could be done using ingame messages. This will create imbalances which will help to mimick real server better.

TLDR; The beige cap will make beige cycling worse than before. It needs to be removed entirely to ensure a defensive coalition rebuild isn’t compromised. I don’t see beige cycling going away. I just see it looking different. Beige cycling will still be achieved by the tactic of racing beige for one half of the alliance and sitting on the other half until expiry to create the military rebuild offset and maintain the advantage. If the defender declares wars and they lose the first round, they probably can’t win their offensive wars. This means their offensive wars can sit on them until expiry while their beige clock ticks down and compromise their rebuild. This encourages downdecs for the defending alliance to minimize the danger of being sat on. To avoid this, defenders might be better off not declaring any wars at all. That way they can try to ensure a full rebuild. But without counters, the race beige vs expiry offset will still cause a compromised rebuild. Option 1- They declare offensives but lose the military battle. The 5 day cap means an offensive war can sit on them for 3-5 days after all defensives expire and their offensives beige them a turn before expiry for a minimal “rebuild penalty” of 5 turns. option 2- They declare no wars but lose the military battle. Imagine the alliance has four people. Two defenders will get beiged in two days and start to rebuild. They’ll come out in 5 days or sooner with near max mil at 7.5 days into the war. The other two defenders will get beiged the turn before expiry, starting their rebuild and finishing 10 days into the war, when the first wave are already half way through their second round. in either scenario the whole alliance will never get fully rebuilt at the same time which is the effect of our current beige cycling. To make matters worse, the inability to farm and stack beige makes it functionally impossible to get the whole alliance rebuilt at the same time. The new meta makes it impossible to beige cycle a single player, but it’s definitely still possible to beige cycle an alliance and effectively only fight half of them at max mil at a time. At least in the current meta, if everybody declares wars to farm beige, some can get 6 days, others get 9 days, and others get 12 days for example. they can find a 5 day overlap to get rebuilt together and break beige together. They also have the element of surprise. under the new meta, breaking beige to surprise your opponent will be all but gone. that’s how I see the new meta of large scale wars looking, and it could be potentially worse than what we have right now. potential fixes? 1.) A project for greater daily rebuy could help. Just plugging this again. 2.) The beige cap is the fundamental problem here. the simple fix is to remove the beige cap and allow beige to stack. Offensive wars are only 6 turns of beige anyway. 3 defensives give 90 turns of beige. Then it doesn’t matter if the defensives try to offset the war endings. Either way the defender gets a full rebuild that will coincide with alliance members that were also blitzed. It also allows alliances to break beige at a turn if their choice and keep an element of surprise. 3.) beige countdown doesn’t begin until the nation completes all wars. But with the 5 day beige cap, alliances will still coordinate when wars complete in order to create the offset. And it’s simple. The offensive wars beige first, then the defensive wars beige in unison. I don’t know if this will fix the problem. But since the losing alliance can choose when they declare their offensives they can try to minimize the offset by declaring offensives right on the end of the second day of war before the beige window opens. But that just opens them up to being sat on by their offensive ear. 4.) nerf the resistance damage of every attack. That way it’s impossible to finish wars in two days and each war completes closer to five days, This just makes an offset smaller and more difficult to achieve, but the wars will be such a slog and impact income for raiders.

I need 5 days beige to recover from reading this start to finish.

So I just got a bulletin taken down for homophobia and transphobia, but as always, there was no explanation behind why. The bulletin I wrote was called “My views on LGBTQ ideology.” In that bulletin, I did not demonstrate any kind of hate or prejudice, but rather expressed my opinion as a conservative Christian. However, you moderators found this intolerable and decided to take it down and give my moderation points. I am requesting an explanation as to the rationale behind this decision.

I bet you rarely hear anything about the test server on this forum,but this is important enough to be in a forum post. So it is in the test server a new bloc has been founded by three alliances, 196 Stewie Avenue, Cosmos, and EEEE. This bloc has been named The Stewie Mafia Bloc by the leader, Toto of Toto II, which is me. If you want to apply to the bloc with your test server alliance go to this link https://discord.gg/A6bkt2x7a9 and then create a ticket in the #apply-your-alliance-to-the-stewie-mafia channel and somebody will be with you and then you will have to sign mdp or mdoap treaties with the members of the bloc.

hmmm i dont think so

seeing this from a Marxist perspective, why do we focus on unequal pay between the workers when (in the USA at least) the top 1% holds nearly as much as the bottom 90%?