Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About ENKI

  • Rank
    New Member

Profile Information

  • Leader Name
    President Enki
  • Nation Name
  • Nation ID

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name
    ENKI #5895

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you all for your inputs and much appreciated. It seems the majority of the comments are in favor of current rules and S.O.P. so point taken. I guess my 35 plus years of gaming has mounted up to NOTHING in the views of the many so i will leave it like that. Politics rule over War and i guess the few hundred that play this game know more then the thousands that play popular War games, slash Politics. Namely Grepolis and Game of thrones, to name a couple. I would make a final comment and then leave this alone for good. If the creator wants to make money with a fast pace, Politic / War game, they need to make changes as they see fit. If they are happy with the few that enjoy the game - As Is, then do nothing and continue with what your doing. I was only here to make suggestions and to get the game moving a bit faster and exciting but as the many that have spoken, "that is not the direction of this game" so i will submit to popular demand. Enjoy your game play ladies and gentlemen. -Enki OUT....
  2. First of all, thank you Griefer for your comments. As i like to do with most of them, i will reply. okay, your Defensive slot example is flawed by you havent given the human factor. Your thinking of the Tech factor. 10 vs 1 nation. UNFAIR. hahahaha... really Griefer. I been playing games for over 35 years. i know what is fair and unfair. You failed to realize that if a nation of 40 cities, first would be in an alliance, secondly they would have massive defense units. If smaller nations would attack a large nation like that then of course that nation would request assistance from his allies and alliance. Thats a natural response to an overwhelming force coming at you. You must factor everything in when dealing with alliances and allies etc. War is not about the players that are the initial attackers or defenders. When i was playing grepolis, there is no limit to how many attackers come at you. 1 or 500... Its up to the defender to find a way to reinforce your units, city, base whatever in anyway you can. And on top of all that UNFAIRNESS, the higher, more powerful defender would have the advantage do to the amount of defense units he or she had in the first place. There would be no land or air supremacy or blockade going on etc. from the attackers. The attackers would get no bonuses. Extra resources - Im guessing your talking about the Gold, Silver and Copper? I just didnt assign thema purpose,doesnt mean they dont get one. There are too many ways i can factor them in. Example: 1 million gold mined = 1 credit. 10 million silver mined = 1 credit, 50 million copper mined = 1 credit. or having a particular amount of either of these resources would increase your buying power in building your cities, (lower the cost per purchase etc) or market discounts etc. many things can be done with that. Nuclear Disarmament - applies to Non- alliance wars. Just nations to nations. City cost is killing me. hahahaha... your thinking of the old structure way of buying or creating cities. You can have it a flat rate to build a city at 10 million, less the first city you own. The builds in the cities could be higher cost factor as well. This will slow down city building and as i mentioned for the extra comment about city building you can limit them per day of how many you can build. Stock Market - I cant comment on the Stock Market, as im not familiar what is in place right now.
  3. I wanted to add something on (2) major concerns above: City growth The use of Nuclear weapons. Cities - For those that are afraid of upper ranked players creating massive about of cities with their large amount of cash and resources, I would simply say that there could be a limit per day of how many cities you could build. Just like in all your other creations of; military units, structures etc. Why not cities too? Nukes- Nuclear weapon deterrence's can be a major factor in controlling the use of nuclear weapons. At the moment, I dont think there are any other then; radiation factors and other nations having them. Nuke use could have a negative impact in other ways. For example: Any nation using nukes, the markets and all trading could be closed for them for 10-20-30 days. This is do to the adverse effects on other nations and alliance not agreeing with the use of nuclear weapons. There could be world nuclear disarmament accords put in place, which prohibits nations to use nuclear weapons or face serious sanctions. Example: No trading of any kind for 60-180 days. Negative attack and defense points during wars. Etc. Any nation using nukes would after launching their nuke, wait (6) MAP turns. The impact (damage) would not take place until the (12) MAP turn. This allows the defender to build up on their defenses etc. Only countries with the proper projects and nations that have; (20-30 )cities would be only be able to build them. This would limit how many countries that could have nukes. Projects that provide a warning system against nuclear attacks. This gives the defender enhanced MAP starting off in the war. There are already spies that can sabotage nuclear missiles, or there should be. Give the defender enhance defense bonuses do to an increase in morale. Nuclear Disarmament Accords could be formed if lets say the top (10) alliances agree to it, or the majority of the top (10) alliances agree to this.
  4. Thank you all for leaving messages, even though many are not agreeing with my assessment of what I feel could make the game more exciting to play. I would like to address most if not all the comments. Many are valid, some are not. Unlimited MAP guarantees victory. Perhaps but then again, if your offline for many hours with out protection. Missile defense systems etc. How is that any different then real life Missile attacks. And you have to wait for at least 6 hours, under my suggestions before just 1 nuke to be launched. Then another 12 hours do to the (1) hour MAP increase etc. I see over reacting to this suggestion. If you want to keep your nation safe, BE ONLINE and play the game. SIM players like to log in for 30 min-1 hour at at time and then leave and do other games or other things. Thus the lack of activity in this game. I see many players playing other games while playing this game because this game is about maintenance with 10% action in wars. I understand WAR is NOT everything but its fun in a GAME. Thus GOT, Game of Thrones, Grepolis etc. They have thousands of players online at one time. Here, your getting around 120-200 players at a time. Why? You can only attack with in a certain range. \You can NOT attack everyone. The range is based on your power points. Stock market and Leagues are nice if done right. Will have an impact on the game for sure but I think a positive one. Regarding City growth. This is one of the biggest misconceptions I have heard yet. That if you have too many cities, is bad. Not so. The game of Grepolis, players have up to 100-200 cities by the end of the server game before a new server starts. Older, longer players of the game should be more powerful, thus the dedication of the game. Gives new players a strive to get more cities too. There can be a curtail of the cost of each city. I mean, its too cheap to have cities and grow. I been playing for less then 2 weeks and I have made over 50-75 million dollars and I could have had 10-15 cities if I wanted to. If you want to keep the cities to a low number or lower, then just make them more expensive on various growths and cost to build. But not on the initial builds as in the cost increases the more cities you build. Theres nothing wrong with having a vast amount of cities. Just structure it in a way to be more realistic for the players. Longer playing players should have an advantage in the game. Loyalty counts. Tactical satellites? What could they provide – Various things comes into mine. They could contain a missile system (less MAP to launch missiles), increase in damage for attacker or less damage to the defender if the system is active for the defender. Etc. The game pace is in my opinion only, too slow for and exciting game play each day. Its a growth and chat community game style with a little combat mixed in. Thats fine if the creator Alex wants this exact game style. Im just sharing my opinion my friends. My friends that are so “On Edge” regarding WARS, attacker advantages etc. Anytime you put something in place, it should be of equal value for offense as in defense. You worry about if a player is offline that player could be devastated when he or she returns to their nation. NOT SO. Why do I say this or how? Simple. The turn base is still slow, (1) MAP per hour and your still limited to what you can use do to the MAP restrictions. If a player chooses to not be online for 12-24 hours, then thats their fault, especially during an alliance war. Everyday play maybe it would be okay. Maybe. I been playing online games for over 25 years and I see what works and does not work. Offensive players will still have time limits to what they can do with what weapons they have. \Not to go crazy that in 1 turn or first strike, the nation is devastated. Cant happen. As I said before, Defenses can be made to slow the attacker or attackers down, beyond the MAP set up. Regarding defense slots to be 6-10, depending on the size of the nation. I believe someone said that is crazy or very unfair to the defender. NOT SO. Example: if I have 40 cities, with the defense of thousands of units, then why not have up to 10 attackers attack that player, lower level players etc. This game is on a percentage -25% to +75% target range of the nations point system. Thats good. I would just have it -25% to +100% attack range in points. Give the little guys the ability to team up and attack a larger opponent. Why not? I also said 6-10, meaning, that if your a lower pointed nation then of course your not going to have (10) defense slots open, maybe only (6) etc. The range depends on the power of the nation. I didnt mention this before but I think limiting nations to (5) wars is low but I didnt mention it before but it should be raised. Biological weapons, thank you for finding it an interesting concept. Again regarding nations with too many cities,untouchable. NOT SO. I have already mentioned to increase the defense slots and expand the nations that could attack such a nation and there are other nations that will be large as well. Thus in real life – USA, RUSSIA, CHINA are these nations untouchable? Think on that when thinking of untouchable nations. Remember, the attacker and defenders still has a limit do to the MAP system and multiple attackers can take down a large nation. Missiles got launched at once (all at once im guessing this person is suggesting) would be terrifying, and would put the defender into the stone age. I think I covered this already. MAP system would stop that on a active nation. In a nutshell, a nation could have 1 nuke every 12 hours, 2 nukes a day, 10 nukes in one war. Thats the max. less the initial (6) MAP's starting in the war. Using Nukes in a game is very destructive and I would think that the larger alliances would have a world order of the use of Nuclear weapons etc. Nuclear deterrence's etc. To counter some of the Blitz type thinking, you could start your MAP's at Zero or (3) etc to slow a blitz type attack that many players are afraid of. My last comment on the above comments guys is there can be order in the game, there can be balance in the game (if done right) but you must admit that the game needs to pick up to increase activity among the players. The game does not have to be all about war but does have to get players engaged in the game more so then what is present now. These few tweaks can do that. Implement some or all would make the game more exciting and more fun to play. I enjoy the game as it is but it would be better with the suggestions I have provided, given the right set up and count checks etc. Thanks again for your comments guys.
  5. Ive just read the some of the replies earlier. i will address them shortly. All good stuff but a few rebuttals are in order my friends.
  6. Thanks Epi for your response. I understand this is a long term game but there are balances in online game, some SIM some COMBAT. At the moment, the game is set for more SIM then more COMBAT. Combat activities are set to be super slow and mundane. My suggested changes speed up the game and make the game more active and interactive. You mention progress in the game. What exactly do you mean with that statement? Remember, this game is a growth, combat, and real time interaction game. Its up to the players whether they will make this game all combat, all sim, all interaction or a combination of each. Im only adding excitement to the game and making it faster during action events. Thanks again Epi for your comments.
  7. Thanks for the comments Changeup. I respect your opinions that you have given. Of course we dont agree on some of the suggestions as anticipated but they are just suggestions to be discussed. I, myself have been gaming for over 35 years, over 25 years online gaming and i believe i have a feel for these types of gaming. Yes, some of these suggestions will create wars and increase fighting but in the real world this can happen as well. Its the Alliances that keep things in check. Not one particular nation. Also, i feel many of these suggestions will speed up the game and make the game more fun to play. More activity etc. Thanks again for your opinions. Thanks NIBIRU, my Anunnaki brother. Many of the new projects or abilities can poses various types of benefits. That one you listed could be one and there are others that could apply as well. Less loss of stealth planes vs. your opponents planes. increase in attack value if you use stealth planes. Increase in damage done to inf or other units etc. Many different things brother.
  8. Game rules upgrade suggestions. Seems the WAR aspect of the game is very slow and suggest that being a SIM player is fitting for the game. Currently you have to wait (2) hours per (1) turn of MAP - I would suggest that the Turn base be (1) hour per Turn, not (2) hours. Spying is very limited and limits the use of spies in general. I would say we should be able to use spies as many times per day as you like but only up to (3) times per nation being spied upon per day. Spies should also be able to stay in an opponents city, increasing intel or sabotage as instructed until recalled. Expose factor to be checked daily. MAP is limited to a max of (12). I would suggest that there is NO limit to the amount of MAP you can store before using, provided you use them with in the WAR time line. Currently there are limited amount of TYPE attacks you can do: Land, Air, Sea, Missiles. I would suggest that we be able to do combinations; Land-Sea, Land-Air, Sea-Air, and the massive Land-Sea-Air. Each providing benefits and levels of MAP cost per TYPE of attacks. Currently there are only (3) slots for Defense per Nation. I would suggest we increase this to 6-10 depending on the Nation size that is being attacked. Nations should be able to be re-enforced by other nations, enhancing their defense capabilities/score etc. Not to be used for extra power attacks. Nations should be able to attack other nations anywhere in the world, provided they complete a particular project that gives them world mobilization ability. Perhaps a Turn base amount could be applied for travel time of the military assets. Submarines are not include in the game, i think they should be. Mining GOLD, SILVER, COPPER should be a resource for trading value on the world markets. Possible STOCK MARKET could be created. Giving players more things to do then a baseball team. If sports are going to be introduced to the game then various sports should be presented. Alliance leagues and world leagues could be created. Bringing up interest in doing sports events. Bio-Weapons could be created. A thought. City cost seems to go up the larger you get. Why? (other then limiting the amount of cities one can possess). I think cities should cost the same, from the first city to the last. Growth of the city should cost more as you increase the size of the city. Thats understandable. Special military assets should be in the game, provided you complete particular projects etc. (example: Stealth bombers/fighters, Special weapons for troops, or special munitions that do more damage). Projects: Spy satellites, Tactical satellites could be produced. Military assets: Troops, Tanks, Planes, Ships could be power/defense enhanced through training projects and experience on the battlefield etc. These are just a few things on the table i think would improve the game Tremendously. Games should be medium to fast pace and keep the players active throughout the game. The game is more into in city building and chatting among players. Feedback on my suggestions are appreciated.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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