Azaghul

I don't know a lot about the coding but it doesn't seem to me that adding up totals would be too much of a strain. You're right it's not that hard to keep records, but it can be kind of tedious. Having the game do some of it for you would make things easier.

So right now you can see the tax records for every nation in your alliance per turn. This can be very useful, but often only if you put all the numbers into a separate spreadsheet. Allowing you to see aggregate numbers would make it easier to make use of. I propose the following options (as in, you can switch them on and off.) 1) Instead of viewing records just for a turn, give an option to view by day. Maybe even be week/month as well. 2) Allow someone to search tax records by nation, so you just see the record for one nation. 3) Allow someone to see the total tax income for the entire alliance. By turn, day, etc.

Alliances would have people put what alliance they are in in the description title, it wouldn't change anything except making raiding marginally easier in some cases. But alliance's would still get up in arms over anyone raiding their members, and there's not much you could do to change that.

If Iron Domes become ubiquitous the best way to make them worthwhile again would be to reduce the action points needed to fire them, or raise how many you can buy a day. No need for fancy mechanics regarding firing 2 at a time.

Right now if you write a title that is more than 50 characters, you get an error message when you hit send. It'd be easier and less annoying if in the field where you write a title, it wouldn't allow you to write more 50 characters. Rather than having to deal with error messages, backtracking, counting your characters, etc.

It's been fun.

Maybe experiment with sending a smaller number of planes to get better infra destroyed vs. gas/munitions used ratio. Missiles/nukes should be the most efficient way to destroy infra action points wise, otherwise there's not that much reason to build missiles and nukes.

Fair point, but just make sure people are aware of it.

The problem is people are looking at two different things: how much gas/munitions they take, and how many action points they take. And the two things are not in line. I think the solution here is to cap how much infra each airstrike can do, to make it line with the action points, but make sure parents are aware of this so that they don't spend excess gas/munitions on planes. Say a limit of 200 planes to calculate infra damage, and put that as a notice when sending airstrikes so people know not to send more if they don't need more to overcome their opponents defense.

I like the idea of being able to change when your "update" is for buying military and anything else based on days rather than turns (off the top of my head only military.) A simple restriction to prevent abuse would be to make it so you can only push an update forward, not back. So whenever you change it the period between updates has to be more than 12 turns / 24 hours.

I was talking about Syrup's lack of resources.

Given your current individual predicament caused by your own failure to prepare properly you probably shouldn't be throwing any stones. Just saying...

The 1 missile per day thing already limits how much an outnumbered nation can do.

It's time for war boys.

Do the national projects that increase the efficiency of a manufacturing improvement (arms stockpile, bauxite works, Emergency Gasoline Reserve, Ironworks) increase the amount of resources used (for example the amount of oil used by each oil refinery per day ) in addition to the amount of resources each improvement generates, or do they JUST increase the amount of resources each improvement generates?

Either allow people to sort by open/closed offers, or have separate pages under "my trade agreements" for open and closed offers. Right now it can be annoying/tedious to try to find what offers you currently have open because you have to look through all the closed transactions to find them.

I'm not opposed to this idea but given alliance's ability to focus the bank's funds on smaller or bigger nations, I'm not sure this is necessary.

I feel dumber for having read this thread.

Nation Name: Middle Earth Nation Link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=11529

In this case, I think (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) DOES do something right, in that the aid caps to a large degree help create "tiers" of nations where winning in one tier helps in other tiers, but doesn't guarantee victory. You can win in the top tier, and that allows you to send out more aid than if you don't, but aid is limited so that it isn't overwhelming. With unlimited aid, a small nation can declare (or be declared on) by a big nation, and immediately build up to be a mid sized nation. Of course (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) does it wrong in some cases as well, in that aid caps are relatively static, so that aid between large nations isn't feasible. Of course the context of this game is also different in just its age. The "big nations" today will be relatively small in comparison to what nations will be in another year or in several year, assuming the game is still around and with similar mechanics. I definitely think some type of aid cap would be nice. The problem would be trying to prevent using trades to get around it.

Yup and there are no slot limitations. And trades could easily be used to bypass slot limitations. There'd be almost no economic cost to take reparations. Other than that it also depends on political will and economics. Nations are small enough here that reps could make a big difference in growth, and nations don't take that long to build to a "relevant" size. That makes reps more viable. But political will also matters, and not loosing the PR battle. The attitudes taken from other worlds affects the political game a lot.

Politically like other games of this style this is a sandbox game so there's no real way for the game design to incentive war in the political sense except indirectly through economic means. Something like this. Maybe have the bonus be split up into multiple categories to "earn" it? For example. Max bonus is 50% tax rate, which decreases over time. Each component of that 50% decreases on its own over time, perhaps in 4 categories? - Wars declared: 30% of bonus (15% of income.) - Damage done in wars: 20% of bonus, (10% of income.) - Wars declared on you: 15% of bonus (7.5% of income.) - Damage done to you in wars: 35% of bonus (17.5% of income.)

I really like this idea. It would help discourage the type of stat hugging seen in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). The one thing I'd say is that it should be structured to benefit fighting an *actual* war more than just raiding.