Jump to content

Deborah Kobayashi

Members
  • Posts

    115
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Deborah Kobayashi

  1. Im not sure if this should be a separate suggestion altogether, but I will post it here as it is connected to roles & perms. Heir Position ability to coup should be editable, where you can choose whether they can coup at will, coup after all leaders are over X days inactive, or where coups can only occur if the leader is deleted (or put into the Deletion VM)
  2. If Intel report operations were split from your other spy operations limit, then I think it would be ok to remove the >50 <50 thing and end the ability to calculate it, but as it stands now I think removing it is a bad Idea. though at the same time, if intel reports had no limit at all, we could just spam 1 spy intel gathering missions until we get it.
  3. This isnt how the bots track it, and we all used to do it manually back in 2018. All you do is go to an espionage attack page, change the op, the number of spies, and the operation, compare it against the spy calculator built in the game, and judge their spy count based on where the >50% changes to <50%, doing this manually you can get a spy count with a 1 or 2 spy margin of error. the bots just streamline this calculation. the only way to stop this from being figured out would be to remove the >50% <50% thing, which would be worse at least imo than people being able to figure it out, manually or with bots. (if you might recall, it used to say like 75-99% instead, when they changed this it really just made the margin of error like 1 or 2more at certain spy counts, but it is why they changed it I believe)
  4. This is what you deserve for defending and hoarding inactive applicants in the first place.
  5. same, as a raider I don't care if banks can be moved constantly, I think its just all part of the game, and alliances that offshore are the equivalent of those in the real world with better banking networks and offshore wealth. some alliances are just easier to loot than others, and it should remain that way, people with bad banking practices shouldn't be protected at the expense of those with good banking practices. now maybe I could be talked into believing that if an alliance is deleted and a new on remade, the new one should be looted instead of the dead bank. this would force them to move the money around their beiges, which while still allowing them to protect it from a solo raider, would make it harder to hide from a well coordinated raid campaign, unless they have a highly decentralized (in terms of multiple alliances) and coordinated bank network.
  6. I'd like to see the ban and invite functions separated from the kick and accept functions. ~ Ban Members (separated from kick) ~ Invite/Uninvite (separated from accept) ~Sign Treaty ~Propose Treaty (Could be Tied to Signing instead of its own) ~Cancel Signed Treaty ~ Cancel Unsigned Treaties (could be tied to sign or cancel, instead of its own permission) ~ Sign/Cancel Market Sharing It would also be nice to have a separate extended audit log in the Control Panel, that works similar to the "alliance Activity" but cant have things hidden by someone spamming things that appear there, as it should show at least the last few days of activity even if the log is full on the main activity panel. I add this to this list instead of making a topic as a separate suggestion mainly as id like to see ~ View Alliance Activity ~ View Extended Audit Log I really like this idea especially the titles, as I could title members by their Gang, Military Squad or Military Rank, without having to give them any perms.
  7. it sounds good at first, but I feel like in a year after this would be implemented you'd see massive changes in the meta, with raws no longer being the main source of passive revenue for newer players, as the Whale Power Houses with the most land would produce so much raws it would likely cause the prices to drop back to levels were commerce is king, even for low infra raiders. low raw prices also effect MFG prices, weakening their producers economically as well, so in reality would end up being a nerf to raw & mfg production for new players. this really just puts the other raws in the same situation that food is in, without the nuclear winters causing stable fluctuations in the market, & a massive overrepresentation of whales dominating the market even more than they already do now.
  8. I really like this idea, though I'd prefer the points to be more category based, with all military buildings being the same improvement point cost, but MFG, Raws, & Civils different from each other. though I guess individual differences in the categories could offer a path for wind power to have more feasibility, by taking up less slot points per improvement.
  9. while this seems like a good idea, all I see coming of this is they will now buy more land than they need before someone explains why this is bad, using money they could have invested into projects and more cities. whereas the prompt would (hopefully) make atleast some of those look into it a bit more. though one major issue with the prompt is, a farm economy requires 20 farms per city to get the max production bonus, will it prompt them every time they buy a farm, even if they choose to ignore it for whatever reason, or just the first in each city? P.S.: There Definitely needs to be an explanation on the production bonus, which isn't really explained well in the tutorial at all. The biggest issues I run into when guiding new players are: Farms without land & project, Uranium Mines without the project, Raw Resource improvements (as well as MFGs) being haphazardly spread around their cities instead of centralizing and/or maxing one type per city. like if you have 2 cities that have 5iron and 5coal in both, they produce less than 1 city with 10 iron and 1 city with 10 coal, despite having the same total amount of each improvement. this completely flies over the heads of many I try to explain it to. There also doesn't seem to be much explanation on Crime & Disease in the tutorial either, which can be pretty important for newer cities when it comes to military population at low infra.
  10. I don't think its the case that it can only happen at 12MAPs I've had this glitch happen when I had only 3 MAPs & 9 MAPs, especially during the Halloween War. I almost never allow MAPs to go beyond 12 without reason, but have had this glitch occur on my attacks multiple times.
  11. I mean... any micro that raids enough doesn't need treaties, its hard to get rolled for being a micro if your always slotted for being a pirate.
  12. Oasis is just Swamp's long term plan to ditch Farkistan
  13. Similar to my suggestion a few years ago, Army value should change according to whether or not don't equip soldiers with munitions is checked, when the amount of units is reduced, and when tanks are weakened from ground control. I'd also like the max planes Killable by tanks with ground control to be shown as well and the army value from population that you experience in ground attacks to be shown in ground attacks (the reason you still have casualties when the enemy has no ground army, and why they are higher when a city has higher population from infra or age.)
  14. yeah you can change daychange/troop reset, just remember if you ever choose to do so not only do you skip a your next reset after setting, But changing after the free reset cost 1 credit, so make sure you are counting theright timezone since the math seems backwards to some people in haste, as - negative utc timezones midnight is further away, so adds hours to default reset instead of subtracting, and positive UTC time zones subtract turns from reset. anyone trying to change to a reset time that takes place before noon UTC should wait for default reset then switch before their new reset time, it will skip it but wont add another day without a reset like if you did before. and since it cost credits, daychange settings should probably be discussed with alliance military leadership to make sure if you do really need a different reset time because default is just never available for you, that maybe your still coordinated in a reset time with other members on at similar times, instead of everyone having mixed match timezones, which can make double buy coordinating confusing.
  15. I usually just go by what ever city count grump's lowest member is + 2250 avg. infra minimum to call someone a whale. back in the beginning of Knightfall most people I remember considered the cutoff 23 or 25, nowadays id say its at least somewhere like 28 to 34 to be a true whale, maybe a few less cities with higher infra to be called a beluga or mini-whale. i use the term whaler/whale-hunter interchangeably to describe both nations that hunt whale tier (most common use) or anyone that habitually hunts people 8+ cities than them regardless of city count. orca i use for militaristic smaller whales and mini whales and even the high end of upper tier if they fight whale tier and then Albino Whales are c40+
  16. Long Live the OBSIDIAN ORDER This post is redeemable for one war or raid campaign against the Next Alliance to "Mess With BK"
  17. That's the Global part of the war, all spheres hit each other because they blame the others for losing stats and filling slots or beiging people one side didn't want beiged.
  18. Next global will just be KT in the middle of the battlefield vs all spheres.
  19. •Cost 12 MAPS •Requirements opponent must be inactive for over 5 days. (Open to more requirements) Abandons The War. No loot no beige. Reasons this is needed: A raider declares on an inactive, the alliance counters, they agree to peace out on the inactive but the countering alliance doesn't want to accept peace right away, so they can attack if he goes back on the agreement, creating a valid reason for what can end up being in essence slotfilling if the raider has other wars or is a target for any other reason. The raider is also technically slot filling in this scenario, preventing other raids or a blitz from touching that nation Other reasons why & scenarios where this is beneficial: The countering alliance can move on faster, and not have to worry -You accidently declare an incorrect war type -You declare on the wrong enemy -Your alliance orders you to peace with an inactive because of raid policy or because a priority target is in your range
  20. My Suggestions for this 1. Bounties blockades do not stop bounty collection, or at least add an escrow account for collected bounties until blockade is lifted 2. Treasures Rework Increase the number of treasures and have more variety in their bonus (including having some higher then the highest now) Make Treasure Tiers: c15 & Below c10 to c20 c15 & Above 3 different ways i see to do this, easy mode: Treasures only spawn in tiers hardcore: treasures can only exist in tier (do not receive in war and cant trade out of tier) Middle Road: Treasures Spawn only in tier and can be sold only in tier but can always be taken through war (my Preference) Tiers listed are just suggestions, open to change the tiers, but they must have some overlap Treasure Tiers make it so that alliances can't just horde them in their strongest tier, if an alliance attempted to horde many treasures in different tiers, the potential of them being taken through war increases if that alliance doesn't have strong coverage in that range 3. Territories like Treasures but provide bonus for resource production, Each Territory only adds a bonus to 1 type of resource. Linked to Continents, Must be on its continent to take it when winning a war. must have a diminishing bonus when holding more than one territory of the same resource type Changing continents forces respawn Open to making tiers for this as well, but not my current vision for it 4. Rebuild Cost Change Infra cost less to rebuild than to initially build.
  21. This is one of the reasons I always force people trying to DM me about this game to take it to an Embassy or Inquiry Ticket.
  22. the second poll should be redone if the first poll is what they are going with, everyone should agree on the change amount
  23. same i would vote no change and think 30 is to low, 33 would be an understandable number, but very low and id prefer 40% or 45%
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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