Jump to content

Alex

Administrators
  • Posts

    12883
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    211

Everything posted by Alex

  1. For a much faster response time, in-game reports do get checked daily, while I'm the only one that really checks things here and I've just been super busy lately.
  2. Ignore these folks. It looks like you used the Google Play Store, which is a legitimate way to purchase Credits, and they do cost more on there than via PayPal in the web version of the game because of the associated much higher fees Google charges. I am going to send you an in-game message, but this is a semi-frequent issue (not sure what causes it to only sometimes happen) and we can manually issue your Credit. In the future, for a faster response, please open a ticket in Discord via the #support channel
  3. Basically, the title. Double the cost (money and resources) for missiles and nukes, as well as require at least 1,000 infrastructure in your whole nation to build any new ones. This is a nerf to the nuke/missile turret (or griefing) strategy, while still making it possible (just more expensive - you have to buy at least 1K infra and spend more per missile/nuke) and would have minimal to no impact on regular players.
  4. A warning was issued and the war ended.
  5. In offensive attacks? Can you show a screenshot? Otherwise, as Jesus Prime said, if you don't have gas/munitions to operate your units they won't be used.
  6. I don't think we'd be able to do separate profiles for forum roleplaying only, but we can definitely add in additional subforums. Could you write up a general outline of what should (and shouldn't) be included in each subforum? Then I will make them, you can post them, and we'll pin them for everyone to see, so it doesn't get (as) bombarded with junk. Thank you for your thoughtfulness of this though, I would love to foster more forum based roleplay!
  7. In real life, warfare is changing quickly with the implementation of cheap drones that can be remotely operated and cause damage. Military units haven't really changed in a long, long time. So I am proposing Drones as a new military unit. Like all military units, I think they should have a specialized purpose that is different than every other military unit. If they do the same thing as aircraft, for example, then that's not a meaningful addition to the game. My thought process is that Drones should be cheap (like IRL), do pretty minimal damage, and be able to target military units and infrastructure. In a lot of ways, they would be similar to aircraft, but I think we could specialize them a bit more. Here are the key points to my idea: Drones would require a new National Project to be able to build. The new national project would be relatively cheap and affordable for, say, a C10 nation. Drones would be able to target Soldiers, Tanks, Aircraft, Ships, and Infrastructure The damage that Drones do would be pretty minimal. Maybe 75% of the equivalent for an Aircraft strike Drones would be cheap to build, say 1 Aluminum + $1,000 Drone Strikes would use 1 or 2 MAPs (everything will need to be balanced/finalized, but the purpose being they can be done quickly and repetitively) Successful Drone Strikes would reduce minimal resistance (3?) We could add a defensive project, like a Laser Defense System that has the ability to shoot down anywhere from 25%-100% of the drones There would be no other defense against drone attacks (like Missiles + Nukes), e.g. your drones do not "defend" against attacking drones The intention is not to completely overhaul warfare or drastically change the meta, but just to introduce something new and fun with a niche usage. Obviously the specifics are open to suggestion, but this would be my vision for a new unit that would make the game more fun and interesting.
  8. I think it's a good idea - it nerfs nuke turreting (which is annoying to the other side) and also creates a larger resource sink, which is good for the game. And it's simple. I like simple changes.
  9. I made a related suggestion here:
  10. The context for this suggestion is covered well in: Basically, the goal being to make solo (or small group) play more viable. Obviously, alliances are at the core of gameplay, and the goal here is not to stop that. But, the thinking goes, that making solo (or small group) play more viable will make the game more fun for more people, encourage greater fragmentation of alliances, improve player retention, and overall make the game more fun. So, my proposal here is dynamic war slots based on how many offensive wars that you declare. My proposed formula for the number of defensive war slots available for any given nation is: Defensive War Slots = max(Offensive War Slots Used - 2, 0) + 2 What this means is that, at a minimum, you would always have 2 war slots available. This means any two nations could still attack you at any time, which is a decrease from the current 3. This would make immediate dog-piling / winning the blitz less viable, while still making it advantageous for attackers to strike first and gain a war slot advantage. This also means that by declaring only one or two wars, you are not making yourself more vulnerable than before. If you declare 1 or 2 wars, you still only have 2 defensive war slots open yourself. As you declare additional wars, the number of defensive war slots that open up for you increases. If you have 3 offensive wars ongoing, you would have 3 defensive war slots open, making you more vulnerable to counters, and so on. Here's a table of how it would work: I know this wouldn't be the biggest change in the world, but it would reduce the number of new players, unaligned nations, and nations in micro-alliances that get raided to death and give them more of a chance to fight back. It would also obviously impact alliance war dynamics, but I am sure everyone could adjust the new meta (even if you don't really want to )
  11. Alex

    Possible Multi

    Banned for multis, thanks!
  12. I'm not having any issues, but I did just try purging the Cloudflare cache. Let me know if you notice an improvement.
  13. It was a Google thing that should be resolved. Are you still having any issues?
  14. Alex

    LARGE MULTI

    They have been banned; thank you!
  15. I deleted all of them, thank you! In the future, you can report them in-game for a faster response. There's a button at the bottom of the nation page:
  16. I've escalated this to a Discord support ticket #7522 so that it doesn't get missed. Thanks!
  17. I've created a Discord #support ticket for this so we should get it resolved soon, thanks!
  18. Alex

    Multis

    https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=610006 is the only one that ever validated their email, probably they could not receive the emails or had another error with the other 2 accounts so I will just remove those
  19. I don't see conclusive enough evidence, but that's not to say that we won't catch them for multis in the future.
  20. Alex

    Multis

    It's possible, but there's not enough evidence at this time.
  21. No, I'm not sure that there is a limit
  22. Two were abandoned/inactive so I just removed them
  23. Presumably this has already been fixed; for any future API issues I'd recommend this Discord server: https://discord.gg/AVnXwZU87U
  24. IMO it's working exactly as intended. It was designed to give people something to fight over, and people do. Sure, it's not very fun to be on the losing side, but that's true of any mechanic that creates conflict. Or just conflict in general.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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