- Popular Post
Zoot
-
Posts
356 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Zoot
-
-
1 hour ago, Prefontaine said:
Due to community feedback regarding the removal of beige, that was walked by over a week ago.
That doesn't address my question at all.
-
In Alex's message about removing beige he said "Furthermore, for far too long the "beige" mechanic has left perverse incentives in war, such as not wanting to complete a war or intentionally defeating allies to help them. As such, I have removed "beige" time given from losing wars" could you please explain how this is not going back to that, just with a different goal post for what losing a war is?
-
2
-
-
Alright, so while I agree with Alex's reasons for these changes, i am afraid that they will end up having the opposite outcome.
First let us take the city score change increase. This change is likely to force alliances to tier their nations even heavier than is already the case since it will make it harder to support people if you do not have the same or almost the same number of cities. This will cause certain alliances or groups of alliances to end up largely in control of certain tiers when it comes to war, similar to what we have seen in previous wars, but to an even larger degree. The issue with this is that, unlike in previous wars, the increased score from cities, makes it harder to hit outside your tier, meaning the side in a war that controls the upper tier will have a harder time downdeclaring and the side that holds the lower tier will have a harder time updeclaring. This will cause the stalemate effect we have seen in previous wars to become even worse as neither side will have the ability to get a decisive advantage over the other.
Secondly, let us look at the plane rebuy time (because honestly none of the rest matters at all). Planes are already over powered and making them quicker to buy will do nothing to help that situation. But let us look at the specific reason many are citing, the ability to "make a comeback". In theory that is all fine and good, but in reality what this basically does is make it impossible to hold down large nations, thus giving an advantage to nations with higher city counts. It is already made harder by the city score change since it means you'll have less people able to help hold down large nations and added to that the large nations ability to instantly buy to 2/3 max planes makes it nearly impossible. It means that in order to hold down a large nation you will need nations with similar city counts in order to do it and if you don't have those you are simply out of luck. It will make it near impossible to decisively beat alliances with a higher tiering than your own.
So my opinion is that while I totally agree with the intentions of these proposed changes, I don't think they will have the desired outcome, but rather an outcome that is detrimental to the game.
-
5
-
-
18 minutes ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:
With just a little organization, GPWC could decide the results of every reward if we don’t do the delegate thing. So wouldn’t surprise me if everyone loses motivation to do them if their ideas to give more alliances a chance fail.
That wouldn't be different than how it has always been. Whichever group can muster the most people to vote controls the result.
-
3
-
-
Zoot approves. Good people all around.
-
Perhaps rather than a hard cap a soft cap could be used. Basically if an alliance exceeds its cap the amount above the cap decays. Would allow people to exceed the cap if they wanted to, but not without it costing them.
Also while I agree the solution you proposed in the op needs tweeking, I must say I am glad that you are taking this issue seriously and is looking into how to fix it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Micchan said:
When BK will reach positive net damage after attacking enough innocent alliances /irony
It isn't irony if it is true
-
5 minutes ago, Buorhann said:
Personally I find it strange how many of these micros and minor alliances are throwing themselves for folks who planned a war against the two smaller spheres in the game.
Its almost like there’s a serious lacking of critical thinking going on.
What is critical thinking? Is it like when you repeat whatever god-emperor Roq says?
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Memph said:
@ZootI've found that sometimes with people who struggle to understand seemingly simple concepts like @Arathorn, using analogies can be helpful.
Basically, this is like if you hire a hitman to kill someone, and then when the hitman declines and word reaches the target, you're shocked that the target decides they want to have you dead.
True, but that only applies to people who genuinely don't understand, not people who are being intentionally dense in order troll which I truly hope is the case. I simply refuse to believe that anyone is as dense as Arathorn is pretending to be. That would just be too sad.
4 minutes ago, Arathorn said:Alright, let me try one last time to put this in very simple terms, which will hopefully make it easier to understand.
Consider the following situation:
You say that you are going to gather a coalition to attack alliance A. Who is the threat to alliance A? You.Now let us expand that to the following:
You say that you are going to gather a coalition to attack alliance A. As part of that plan, you say you're in talks with alliance C to attack alliance B to keep them from being a threat to you. You don't have any confirmation on whether alliance C is on board or not. Who is the threat to alliance A in this scenario? Still you. Who is the threat to alliance B in this scenario? Not you, but alliance C possibly if the plan is true and if alliance C is on board.
Now let us transfer it to the current situation:
We say, in the leaks, that we were going to attack Chaos. As part of that coalition/plan, we are in talks with NPO to hit KETOG to keep them from being a threat to us. We didn't have any confirmation on whether NPO was on board or not, but the log claims we had already talked with them or were in talks with them - beyond the planning to ask them. Who is the threat to Chaos in this scenario? US. Who is the threat to KETOG in this scenario? NOT US. POSSIBLY NPO IF THEY ARE/WERE ON BOARD.You can keep trying to twist it any way you want, the facts remain EMC always remained even under the disguise of a mini-sphere smokescreen.
No, in your scenario you are still plotting to have KETOG attacked and are thus a threat to them. Whether NPO would possibly also be a threat is irrelevant to whether you were a threat or not. You were plotting to have someone attacked, thus you were a threat to them.
-
6 minutes ago, Arathorn said:
You are not making any sense. You saying that KETOG going to war on a leaked log that identified KETOG as a target for tS/NPO, not BK. KETOG hit BK instead of the ones who posed an actual direct legitimate threat to KETOG in accordance with the log you use as justification for the war. The fact that TCW/BK were the ones planning to have them hit doesn't make TCW/BK more of a threat than the sphere TCW/BK employed to hit them. KETOG ignored the direct threat and hit the planners instead. When NPO joined in, there was massive crying. If you believed the log, there should have been zero surprise of NPO's entrance, and thus KETOG would have been more wise to go after tS/NPO instead of BK. However, you keep claiming you took NPO's word for it as the reason for not doing so, when that same NPO's word was non-existent until AFTER they joined and received the massive crying.
Alright, let me try one last time to put this in very simple terms, which will hopefully make it easier to understand.
Consider the following situation:
I say that I am going to gather a coalition to attack alliance A. Who is the threat to alliance A? Me.
Now let us expand that to the following:
I say that I am going to gather a coalition to attack alliance A and B. As part of that coalition I would like to have alliance C join. I don't have any confirmation on whether alliance C is on board or not, but I am planning on asking them. Who is the threat to alliance A and B in this scenario? Still me.
Now let us transfer it to the current situation:
You say, in the leaks, that you were going to gather a coalition to attack KETOG and CHAOS. As part of that coalition you would have liked to have NPO join. You didn't have any confirmation on whether NPO was on board or not, but you were planning on asking them. Who is the threat to KETOG and Chaos in this scenario? YOU.
You can keep trying to twist it any way you want, the facts remain.
QuoteYou saying "We are going to believe and use this leaked log to justify uniting Chaos, KETOG, and Rose, negating our own mini-sphere agenda, and attack BK/TCW despite believing NPO's future word that they have no involvement" is and always will be you breaking your own mini-sphere smoke screen and still believing and assuming IQ remains a thing, when in fact EMC continues to remain a thing.
As for Rose's involvement, I have nothing to add to the comment already made there either.
That is just nonsense. If you are going to try and argue at least do it in a coherent way that makes at least some sense.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, Arathorn said:
No, because while the leak mentioned trying to ask tS/NPO to hit KETOG, it was only ever mentioned that TCW/BK was going to hit Chaos bloc, planning to have tS/NPO hit KETOG to prevent them from being a threat to us. The threat was not from BK/TCW as the log clearly shows we TCW/BK had no plan in hitting KETOG, the threat was tS/NPO hitting KETOG.
Attacking NPO because the log had tS/NPO assigned to hitting KETOG (not BK/TCW) makes sense. The planning, the plotting, the threat, was Chaos bloc not KETOG bloc.Also, how does Rose get into this? There is absolutely no threat to Rose in any of it?
You are not making any sense. You saying you are going to have someone else do your dirty work by hitting KETOG does not change the fact that you were the ones planing to have them hit.
You saying "We are going to get a coalition together and have KETOG and Chaos attacked", is and always will be you planing a war, you presenting a thread. Doesn't matter who you say you are going to invite to be part of your coalition, it is still you making a coalition.
As for Rose's involvement, I have nothing to add to the comment already made here:
-
1 hour ago, Sisyphus said:
ThE sYnDicAtE aNd iTs AfFiLiaTeS hAvE nO inTeNt To ExPaNd ThEir WaR oN tHe CoALitiOn CuRrEnTLy FigHtiNg ThE bLAcK kNigHtS aNd ThEir ALLieS bEyOnD gUaRdiAn AnD gRuMpY oLD bAsTaRdS.
HEY! You're not supposed to be doing that!
-
20 minutes ago, Tiberius said:
Had KETOG remained out, they'd have shown the community that they weren't connected with Chaos and Friends.
Instead they opted to show that they are indeed still tied up with Chaos and Friends and the whole minispheres idea was an illusion to allow them to reassert their Hegemony.
Am I doing it right?
No, you are not. KETOG and Chaos are connected by the fact that the leak showed TCW and co planing a war against both of them. They are temporarily united by a clear, immediate common threat
9 minutes ago, Arathorn said:You are misunderstanding what my initial argument was. BK was of zero threat to KETOG, as clearly shown in that log you're all going by. It clearly shows planning to hit Chaos bloc. However, that log shows it was a possibility that tS/NPO would be a threat to KETOG. KETOG should have either 1) stayed fighting Chaos, 2) declared on NPO, or 3) backed out completely. But KETOG joined in and declared on BK on day 1 to a sphere that wasn't even a threat to them, thus proving the claims about your whole mini sphere being fake were correct. KETOG was not even aware of NPO's response that they heard nothing about this until after all was said and done, so KETOG's only valid CB there was NPO from the beginning, not BK. The fact is, KETOG DID hit BK first. So YOU and YOU alone broke your own mini sphere agenda first.
Also this
No, because while the leak mentioned trying to ask t$/NPO to hit KETOG, it was still TCW and by extension you guys, planing to have both KETOG and Chaos attacked. The threat was not in how you intended to split the targets in your planned attack, the threat was in that you planned to have them attacked in the first place.
Attacking NPO because you planned to have KETOG attacked makes no sense. The planning, the plotting, the threat, was yours and thus you were attacked.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said:
Hard to play to a gallery that wouldn’t believe otherwise and receiving logs from Chaos gov that there were discussions on rolling N$O. Moreover, also specific inputs regarding rolling NPO to trusted friends of ours.
Given the new information, sitting out and waiting our turn doesn’t seem to be worth it, might as well hit while we can ?♀️
People refusing to believe something doesn't keep you from proving them wrong.
Also if you had anything even remotely like the evidence you are suggesting then you should have presented it in the OP. Claiming evidence without providing it just makes you look bad.
-
4
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
9 minutes ago, Frawley said:Have you read the forums, or discord lately, we have been trolled since the war started lol.
You have played these games long enough to know not to pay too much attention to what people say on the forums.
Also much of the flack you have been receiving has been based on people assuming you would pull a move like this. Had you just not done that it would made fools of many of your detractors and helped convince many others that you had changed. Instead you did this...
-
1
-
7
-
- Popular Post
4 minutes ago, MonkeyDLegend said:You are free to belive whatever you want to.
I know. I am not in NPO ?
-
19
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
22 minutes ago, Frawley said:Secondly, as I further explained, clearly the game has it in for us anyway, so we might as well bite the bullet since you clearly want us out of P&W.
Mate, if you guys had just kept your noses clear of this entire war no one would have had any more of an issue with you than people always have with spheres that aren't their own.
Any animosity you are facing is of your own making due to your, frankly, appalling handling of this entire thing. You have, basically, done everything to ensure that people would be the most upset with you.
Had you stayed out, most people would have been chill.
Had you kept to the limited engagement, most people would have been mildly annoyed, but at least you would have kept your word and not fully entered.
Had you entered completely straight away people would have been pissed about it, true, but at least you would have made the move honestly.
Instead you chose this weird ass way of going about things that, as I said, I don't think could make you look worse, even if you tried...
-
1
-
16
-
So, what? We are supposed to believe that you had no idea that NPO was going to hit TKR and that you had nothing to do with it? I am sorry, but it is going to take a lot more than pulling out of a war, in which you were getting your asses handed to you, to convince me to trust you again.
I guess we will see what the next few days bring, but for now, fool me once...
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Schirminator said:
Question: Do you think for yourself or does NPO do all the thinking for you? I await NPO's response.
What gives you the impression that it is thinking? ?
-
1 minute ago, Tiberius said:
Imagine being KETOG and Chaos trying to paint the picture that you want minispheres and then join both spheres together again to hit NPO. Integrity does not exist on your side. I guess this is your confirmation that you would prefer the status quo and that your actions previously were bullshit.
...did you miss the part where this is you attacking TKR on behalf of your overlords in BK?
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Ok, so I am totally willing to take you guys at your word that you are only doing this to damage the whales, until such time as you expand your war effords, but there is one thing that bothers me and that is the strategy behind the hit.
If your goal was to bring the whales a bit down, then why hit now? Wouldn't it have damaged them much more to let BK and co do as much damage as possible with their nuke turrets this war, wait till the war ended, give the whales a week or so to rebuild and then hit them? That way you could damage the premium infra twice...
-
8
-
1 hour ago, Tiberius said:
I have 0 issue with using bots for everything else because there's nothing in the game rules forbidding them. Technically it would be within the rules to have bots carry out attacks for you, declare wars etc my point is the only type of bot that is illegal in the rules is automated trade bots.
So Alex, can you define and re-wire the part of the rule regards automated trade bots so that we are clear on the amount of automation that would be illegal.
I think it's clear enough as it is. What TKR's bot does is not automation and thus perfectly legal.
-
1
-
4
-
-
This half assed late topic is the best you can do? Really?
*shame* * shame* *shame*
-
1
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
6 minutes ago, Fezza said:We all know Helios.
No we don't.
Also, why so Sirius?
-
1
-
11
Game Development - October
in Game Discussion
Posted
Ah, time for the monthly rebalancing of the war system.