Vice
-
Posts
137 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Vice
-
-
7 minutes ago, Liberty said:
Yes I don't want dogpilers to be given even more incentive to dogpile because they know their infra is safe. As Isjaki said somewhere stats don't mean anything wars are fought for different reasons with different goals in mind rather than stats.
That is a valid point but it seems like a reactive change rather than being proactive about tackling that problem with an end game in mind (to how wars play out). I was just bringing what i said up because there have been recent posts claiming there is no "reason to go to war in orbis" as there really isnt a huge reason to end one either if both sides can just grind themselves down to nothing. What percentage to stop a missile would be fair if they were to keep the core mechanics the same? 20% like VDS?
-
2
-
-
RNG is not inherently a bad thing.... Finding the balance of it can be. I think small incremental changes are the best way to work towards a happy medium. I would prefer to have ID stay at a % chance to land and increasing the amount of missiles one can make each day or reducing ID from 50% to 40% and then evaluate it from there.
Also, for those of you in approval of the major change, this would prevent the quicker wars which some of you have asked for. When the losers run out of options, resolution is reached much quicker. I get you want losing side to be engaged but sitting back giving no incentive of resolution because you can just missile the winning side doesnt seem like an expedient means to an end. Please think about how you want the core game to work and feel rather how ID works by itself. Isolated the ID may seem dumb but how it affects the way wars play out is a bigger role. Do you want every war to destroy infra on both sides making who wins almost irrelevant? If so make the change.-
3
-
5
-
-
11 minutes ago, BigMorf said:
As the Secret Quack Leader i couldn’t possibly comment
If you did it's worth my two hours drive to pay you a visit...
-
On 2/12/2021 at 5:51 AM, Mars said:
christmas came late this year, all the 'please raid me' alliances in one place and theyre actually putting up a fight
thank you noob bloc this is amazing and way better than being afk waiting for that god awful nap to end
just please, for the love of god, whatever you do, dont go afk 3 days in, it really takes away from the whole experience
Can we go public with our relationship yet?
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, Wingawoo said:
Secret HM leader, Secret Oasis leader, What next Secret Quack Leader?
Hey Krampus... could just be a rumour but I heard.... something something 30m something
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, Alexandra B said:
The NAPs are inherently fine, imho. However, no punishment for breaking the NAP is just appeasement, plain and simple. If we were in a world where treaties meant anything, there'd be more than just Oasis fighting KT for violating it.
Just like with the American impeachments, it just proves that the NAPs are meaningless if there's no effective punishment. Why sign them if there won't be any enforcement?
It's easier for people to beat their chests in front of one another on the forums than to tell their soldiers to pony up for war for something that isn't "their problem." Im sure anyone who wants to walk the walk & would like to help slap up KT for violating the NAP, then cruise on down to the battlefield in the desert. I dont want to speak on behalf of KT, but I dont think they would mind one bit.
-
While what you speak of was before my time, owning up to mistakes is the greatest step towards improvement. Regardless of the capacity or scale. While your mistakes may have created ripples throughout Orbis, it has defined the game to what it is today. May we close that chapter, learn from it, and proceed forward.
It is never good news to have a loved one fall ill and I wish you best of luck. We look forward to your return!
-
Congrats!
-
3 minutes ago, Aqua-Corpsman said:
Or maybe, just maybe, maybe it's maybe possible that maybe this information maybe
Doesn't
Even
EXIST!You remind me of a cadet that went through basic with me. Frickin hated that kid. I hate you for making me think of him.
Ugh, and his smug little underbite. He just loved making everything miserable. "Petty Officer, this recruit saw [me] steal bread from the mess hall" "Petty Officer, this recruit saw [me] talk in formation" *steps on back of boot while marching* *steps on polished front of boot while in barracks* *refuses to help* *acts like a 4 year old*
If I have any PTSD it's cuz of that !@#$.Hence why i said I wasnt saying there was any truth to it. I was more focusing on the fact that even if there was validity to his posts, there are more things at play than "its been a month, lets reveal everything now." Also that PTSD gets the best of us sometimes. This thread is going to make me need a therapy dog.
-
1
-
-
It's quite comical how the social norms and intricacies of diplomacy elude you even after all this time. Not saying there is any truth to a hedge leaker, but if there are multitude of reasons why someone wouldnt reveal a source. Its as if you think time is the only variable as to why information isnt made publicly available.
-
2
-
-
Cheers to all involved. Also, I think someone from UPN put mead in my goblet.
-
4
-
-
Alliance of the Year: Rose
Most Powerful Alliance: T$
Most Improved Alliance: TFP
Best Alliance for New Players: TI/The Mortals
Most Honorable Alliance: TFP
Most Controversial Alliance: TKR
Biggest Warmongers: Black Skies
Best Alliance Growth: TFP
Biggest Alliance Decline: Schrute Farms
Most Likely to Succeed in 2021: T$/TKR
Most Likely to be Rolled in 2021: Swamp
Best Economics Department: Grumpy
Best Foreign Affairs Move: New Oasis Bloc Formation (TFP leaving swamp)
Best Flag (peacetime/standard flags only please): Aurora
Best Holiday Flag: TI-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Hime-sama said:
munity on its official jurisdictions, not even unofficial alliance servers, news servers, etc.
The game, Discord, and forums all share rules on hate speech, OOC harassment, etc. In my post I tried to make it explicitly clear that it should not apply to all bans, instead only to bans for the more egregious actions, which are mutually enforced between all platforms. This is different than someone being banned from the game for having multis and then being barred from the Discord and OWF, which is not what I am advocating.
The thing is though, they dont all share the same rules. While both platforms may not accept hate speech, what defines it for each channel is different as is the punishments. As much as I would like there to be, there isnt a universal rule for hate speech because it cant be measured and there also isnt a universal punishment. I want everyone to feel welcome in all places but sometimes thats not how the world works and clicking the mute or leave server button is the best option.
-
9 minutes ago, Hime-sama said:
There should be a crossover between the game, the official Discord, and the official forum in some capacity. If someone is banned from any platform for OOC, hate speech, basically any extreme violation of that sort, so should they be banned from the other platforms to root it from the game as much as reasonably possible, since moderating other unofficial servers is too delicate. The punishments for these violations, would also need to be revisited, because a 1/9 warn on the forums for hate speech is frankly not enough.
Why. I am against Hate Speech as much as the next person but you can't blanket ban people for stuff because each form of communication has its own ToS and rules. If a kid gets suspended from school for fighting, he shouldnt also be suspended from his private tutor his parents pay for.
-
1
-
-
Thats gonna be a no from me dawg. I get slapped with a point here for pointing out someones logic in relevance to their opinion on the uses of modern medicine meanwhile there are multiple threads spewing way more toxicity that go hundreds of comments with no closing of the thread. Discord is discord, pnmw forum is the forum. While I understand moderation being stronger on those who are dog piling a certain individual who IMO reaps what they sow, it should be individual discord server moderators to do their job. If a server isnt run right that isnt Alex's fault. There is an in game communication system if you dont like discord.
-
1
-
-
Most likely to start the next major conflict/war
Followed by most likely to speed up its resolution/bring about diplomatic peace lol
-
1 hour ago, Zephyr said:
I only raid unaligned inactive nations and pre-war was getting regular targets to fill my slots, so I'm not sure this is really an issue. It might be that people aren't looking well enough or don't have access to the tools to find them. It's only a few days post-war, maybe I am yet to discover this issue myself.
I don't actually know how the game currently handles inactives, maybe @Alex could outline exactly the process inactive nations go through before being deleted. If they are being placed into vacation mode, maybe this approach could be revised as long as it's not touching any nation placed into vacation mode by the player themselves.
I don't understand why access to vacation mode should be limited based on city count given that the purpose of vacation mode has nothing to do with this variable.
It was mostly that a C3 coming back from extended stay has a less daunting task of getting back to pre VM status than a C19.
-
9 hours ago, Zephyr said:
I imagine allowing players to take a break and resume later is great for player retention, instead of forcing them to entirely restart which would be uninspiring.
I think right now raiding of inactive unaligned nations is best in the 1 through 3 city range roughly, with possibly options still up to about 5 cities (it's been a while since I chose to look and settle myself at 3 cities). You have 10 cities and are member to TFP, so it makes sense you will likely have few or even no raid options in your range.
I don't think the game should focus on raiding, it's simply a consequence of being inadequately defended.
You should also note that the reason there are so many more easy raid options in the micro and low tiers is because there are many players that try the game for a few days or even only a single hour before abandoning it. Naturally these nations don't progress very far, so they're small, and many don't even get to the stage of joining an alliance, or they fail to complete alliance application processes, or are kicked for inactivity. That is, many players determine that the game doesn't interest them fairly early on.
Next we should note that the game does not actually prohibit you from raiding nations in your range, so your argument is really that you feel the game environment should produce easy raid targets for you (otherwise you would go where the action is and have sat at fewer cities raiding micro tier, or joined Arrgh and raided the way they do). You want raid options to come to you because you feel entitled to the benefits of raiding without the effort.
Well now I'm confused, you understand why raiding exists but yet you still maintain your entitlement? And you propose it be at the cost of players who have prioritised focusing on their personal life over the game? Why exactly do they deserve this punishment just for your convenience of easy raid targets? Do you honestly think this is a fair way to treat other players?
Vacation mode may arguably be 'abused' during wartime, but I still think it's more valuable to have and enable players to take a break and prioritise on their personal lives than to remove or limit it and unnecessarily force players to choose between the two. Players shouldn't feel trapped in constant engagement under threat of losing the nation they spent so long developing if they dare take time out for themselves, even if it is for a year.
Its not an entitlement thing. The creator of the game said he wants better player retention. Having more targets for people who are in lower levels will keep them invested in the game and less likely to quit. Thats why I dont care that much about raiding at my level personally. I am not asking to DELETE VM which seems to be a confusion. I dont see the harm in shortening VM for lower tier cities. I think Deborah makes a good point that most of the cities that are in VM mode are lower levels that were auto VM'd and likely dont have infra or money after their inactivity queue. This was just a chance to open up discussion about keeping a backlog of things for newer players to do while they get settled. Raiding is a way to make it feel like you are being productive because the game can quickly get to a point where you are waiting without a lot to do before you next major war, project, city, etc. Sorry if i didnt elaborate enough on the original post that it was an angle to increase participation and retain players by taking a look at VM mode.
-
23 minutes ago, Who Me said:
Quite frankly, unless you are a reroll at 28 days old you really have no idea about anything of how the games works. Perhaps you should learn more about how things work in the game before you voice rather silly ideas like this.
Ok. Many players come and go and part of retaining newer players is keeping them both active and engaged. Raiding is a huge part of the game especially for c10 and below. The intent on limiting VM is to increase raiding for lower tier cities. Idk why people are salty over a suggestion. Also the game is not THAT complex. I understand the core mechanics.
could even enable length of VM allowed relative to city score. It doesn’t need to be completely removed.
-
4 hours ago, Zephyr said:
What exactly is your issue with people using vacation mode for extended periods?
I've used vacation mode numerous times because I don't want to be concerned about a game when I'm holidaying, and some people even holiday for several months abroad. Others are in the military and hit vacation mode when they're deployed or going through training, and some even hit vacation mode just to focus more on their studies. According to you these people may be mentally deranged. I think you're being absurd.
You make valid points. Its a pretty small percentage of players that would actually need vacation mode for such an extended period of time. People are complaining about lack of nations to raid and I think VM is a part of that issue. any nation under 2000NS with any sort of infra gets triple slotted for inactive raiding immediately. If the game wants to focus more on raiding then revamp of the VM would probably be a breath of fresh air. If they dont want raiding to be a core mechanic and to prioritize internal income production, then VM is fine as is.
-
8 hours ago, Who Me said:
So if people have something going on IRL they should just delete instead of going into VM?
Vacation mode for a week or two is understandable. Vacation mode for months and months is insane.
-
Well that is actually super helpful as I have totally missed that function. It will definitely help! Thank you
EDIT: Vacation mode is still stupid.
-
9 hours ago, Phoenyx said:
I joined this game, as I have joined other war games in the past, not for the wars per se, but for the community and the politics that such wars create.
Yet you manage to turn the entire community against you because you can't seem to let things go or acknowledge differences of opinion? I have been lurking here for not long but you seem legit unable to pick up on social cues. It seems you want to be the "go to source" for information and use that to elevate your status within the community. I'd recommend a different approach. You could use this time to spotlight other communities you think are great, find MVP's of the past war and elevate their status, write your own predictions on the future landscape of the community, wars, and economics. You say you love the community but you seem more infatuated with the cogs of knowledge within the game and not being one of them than you are giving back to the community you so "love."
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Prefonteen said:
As a lead negotiator on my side, I can with certainty say that you in no way sped up my decision making process. At best, you caused me to consider refusing peace out of spite.
Please don't punish the large majority on both sides. I feel like i ate a few missiles towards end of the war here because you all know he once walked these halls...
-
2
-
Iron Dome Rework
in Game Discussion
Posted · Edited by Vice
I agree. I also agree wtih Dryad. I dont think ID will change "dog piling" but my concern is more for the players who may quit because of a long drawn out war or feeling of losing such a great investment on either side but particularly the losing. I dont have the numbers but I would love to know if and how many players quit during GW16 because they were constantly zero'd out. People get pissed because they have a restart a level that took them 30 minutes of time in console games, let alone losing days/weeks/months worth of play time here.
Personally, someone can come zero me and ill still find a way to have fun but not everyone is like me. I would love for there to be an incentive to make people build military no matter what round of the war they are in. For example, I recently had a war with someone in KT that came out of beige R2 with a full army and it was awesome. Constant infra from missiles is just "meh" from both sides. They do it because its the only option rather than what could be a fun alternative should it ever be thought of.
edited for sp and formatting