ataraxis

Considering how nobody wants to beige the other in a war (something that probably should be fixed, since that makes wars way too inconvenient), I don't really forsee this making wars much more damaging.

We are available as sub-subcontractors

You guys also declared war on us?? But hey we're cool with it. Let it be known that the alliance you guys fled to (NRA) isn't exactly much of an improvement.

And at the same time probably make less money since you probably won't get double or quadruple the amount of name changes. (Besides, it's probably not good for the game if everyone was changing their names willy-nilly.)

I need my slots, and nuclear is overkill.

No, I'm pretty sure it's 1 extra MAP in each war you are in (i.e. you start up with 7, no matter if you have 1 war or 6 wars) It's not mind-blowing (in fact you can't really use this to maximum efficiency unless you're willing to adopt a very weird 22-hour sleep schedule) but it can help in say repairing missing turns. Alternatively, it allows you to combo airstrike/ground attack or naval/ground attack on your first turn, which could be quite strong. We'll see. Raider build would probably just be to take all the military and war perks (the only other useful ones could be the 1% pop, or the deep development tree perks)

Huh, I wonder why.

Last time I checked, we were at good relations with Arrgh.

Likely war would just last longer in order for people to feel that they have done "meaningful" damage.

Minor aesthetic quibble: when the minutes timer is less than 10 (e.g. 1 hour and 9 minutes remaining) I'd rather see 1:09 rather than 1:9. Also I'm not sure if this is easily implementable or not, but you could make the client timer a javascript clock so that it automatically updates real-time

Or just guess, you often don't need a precise number

I've got nothing against you guys, just thought it was amusing to point out the pretty hilariously low bonus as a result of there being about 7 brown nations.

Make tanks stronger then?

Why not beige?

Soldiers killed! (I think this is the first time this has happened in P&W Stable; correct me if I'm wrong) EDIT: yea there should be a soldier killed leaderboard

Maybe this can be tied in with my suggestion.

Yeah, probably. However it is a way to increase your ground strength to city ratio which is entirely fixed otherwise. Being slightly less cost-efficient than regular soldiers is fine, although a cost reduction wouldn't hurt.

Join for 0.7% color bonus!

Yeah, for the record, we didn't accept him.

Of course this suggestion isn't a final product. I believe that the general concept however is useful in making the game more dynamic. 1) Beiging opponents is only bad because it limits the amount of damage that the opponent receives as a result of not being able to redeclare on them later. This mechanic expressly changes that (in the event of an formally declared alliance war), by making it so that nations that are beiged during such wars are instead instantly turned into gray, so that they can immediately be redeclared (by different people). 2) First off, the beige designation for alliances only applies for alliance wars - in other words, you can still attack them individually. They as an alliance cannot be declared upon. Their members can be declared upon. They as an alliance cannot declare alliance wars. Their members can declare wars. 3) I intended this to be a mechanism for neutrals to not need to fuss with greater potential damages. It makes the color bonus more restrictive, which is apparently a stated goal in various other suggestions. Furthermore, as a beige alliance, you cannot acquire treasures through war, which here would be reworked into an alliance-wide asset.

On insta-gray: Well I noticed in previous wars, the strategy of "intentionally not beiging people" to do increased damage felt a bit off-putting, as well as the fact that nukes are entirely counterproductive in this regard. This fixes that, making people actually want to win wars instead of just trying to dance around the limits. On treasures: I think many of us agree that the individual treasure thing won't promote wars at all. Furthermore I feel that even if alliance bonuses are tacked onto the treasures, it becomes more of a "precision strike" venture (if anything happens at all). This encourages full-on alliance warfare which is likely the intended effect treasures should have had. On neutrals: Neutrals can opt out of this feature entirely. Or they can continue to maintain huge militaries that they are doing right now and keep their color bonus. This doesn't change anything in that regard. On raiding: Low-tier raiding would take a very long time to win such alliance wars if the opposing alliance is reasonably big. This is similar to the alliance bank raid mechanic: the smaller the nation proportional to the alliance, the smaller the proportion of bank raided. Furthermore, if the point of raiding is to gain money, increased infrastructure damage does not affect that amount (arguably it makes raiding less sustainable). This relation is also symmetric - you are also susceptible to increased damage and expanded war range (which is probably the biggest "safety net" that low-tier raiders have). I'm certainly open to moderating the suggestion (e.g. only a subset of the featured perks listed above), but currently I'm just throwing out as many related possibilities.

Just a random idea that could create more tensions and excitement. Alliances can now declare war on each other, which facilitates the following: - War range is expanded (maybe to +100%/-33%) - Increased infrastructure damage - Automatic alliance vs alliance embargo. - Defeated nations are not beiged and go straight to gray - Possibly a shorter war cooldown than 7 days? War score is a feature of these alliance wars and is a single number that begins at 0. Every time you win a war against an opposing nation, you gain war score proportional to their size relative to their alliance, creating a sort of tug-of-war battle (if the war score is favored in their side, you can bring it closer to your side). When the war score reaches some threshold, the war ends, and the losing alliance gets beiged, which affects color bonuses. (You can also end a war by a mutual agreement similar to trucing.) Beige is a color that alliances can choose to be in. Beige alliances do not get a color bonus but cannot be warred upon or declare war. There is no timer until you get kicked out of beige, so this could be a potential sanctuary mechanic for neutrals. (You can still individually declare war but you can't get the bonuses and such) Other potential explorations: 1) Perhaps changing treasures to becoming a strictly alliance-owned thing may be a good idea. By coupling these ideas together, neutrals can effectively opt out from "treasure wars" and hope for a spawn. 2) Maybe increased military production while at war?

Yes, otherwise you should get more score per infra with higher infra levels. Linear is fine.

Not if you have population limits and such.

You could first look into revamping nation bonuses, but I think Sheepy said that he's not going to change that.