rapmanej
-
Posts
172 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by rapmanej
-
-
12 minutes ago, Mohammad.badawy4 said:
I like this idea, maybe extened to overall beige, u take X% of the revnue of Y% of citites, for Z turns. Would also stop beige-bait.
Yeah, I could work with that. Sort of a Mongol-type tribute system. Of course, players could zero out reduce their revenue to lower the amount to the other player, but all they would be doing is harming their own growth.
It would give alliances a choice, yes, beige does give the enemy time to re-mil, but would the stolen revenue be worth it?
-
I don't want to completely crap on this idea. Maybe if a city is below a certain infra level (500?), a ground attack has maybe a 10% chance of stealing all revenue the city produces for x turns?
Maybe occupation over conquer.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
The newly released infra purchase tool is apparently only available for VIP subscribers.
@AlexPlease, rethink this. Walling off game-related features is not a good start.
-
1
-
22
-
3
-
nvm, wrong place.
-
2
-
-
On second thought, no.
-
7
-
3
-
1
-
6
-
-
2 hours ago, Alex said:
Dogfights don't append any extra information to the report message, if that's what you mean. The other attack types do (and X tanks/ships/soldiers/etc.) but the attack message already reports the number of aircraft you destroy regardless of attack type so there's not a need for extra messaging.
As far as I know, it's all working properly.
I do think you should change this to either A) move the message to the end to follow the convention of the other attacks, or B) Post the number of aircraft destroyed in both in the middle and at the end. (i.e.) 100 aircraft destroyed due to the attack, and 150 destroyed due to targeting aircraft.)
Option B would at least show people how much extra aircraft they are destroying if they select dogfight.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, pooball said:
People still don't get it. Not once has NR bank had 206 billion in cash/rss. I've not once said the people didn't cheat. What I'm saying is we didn't know where it was all coming from and so reported it myself. Clearly its wrong and I'm waiting for Alex to reply so I ca. Give more details.
????????????????????
-
2
-
-
-
7 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:
The official TFP theme song.
-
1
-
-
46 minutes ago, Angel Lara said:
What it says on the title. The surrendered nation would give away loot and lose infrastructure as usual. The winning nation would have no choice but to accept the surrender. The surrendered nation should probably be sent away to the beige bloc.
As it is right now, not only you have to give away loot and lose infrastructure in the end; you also have to watch the enemy plundering small amounts of money and destroying your infrastructure for the lulz.
Not sure we share the same definition of surrender. Usually the losing party is in no position to dictate terms.
It's also mechanically unclear how you would "force" the nation to accept the surrender.
-
1 hour ago, rollo said:
is there a pool being run for when the heavy donating nations start whining to Admin about changing the dynamics of VM?
Are you new here? Complaining about VM (Peace Mode) is a well-respected PW pastime.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, kosmokenny said:
And I have responded more than 5 times that I don't give a shit, a significant portion was taken away long after it was paid for.
You'll forgive us for thinking otherwise, mainly due to the overwhelming amount of whining you've been doing on the forums lately.
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, Lemac said:
I am well aware it can`t be changed; I was aware of that rule.
However, you quoted
it sort of does not mention you cannot defend either, giving the attacker a free pass (in other words, it is a bit vague)
unable to fight existing wars is not vague at all.
Shouldn't have deserted your alliance in their time of need.
-
1 hour ago, Prozenz said:
You detonated a nuclear weapon upon the nation of Thisland led by Atom. The attack destroyed 2,070.00 infrastructure in the city of Atomopolis, and killed approximately 206,731 people, you monster! You also destroyed a nuclear power plant and a nuclear power plant.
Nukes win the war.
That depends on your definition of "winning"
-
5
-
-
7 minutes ago, Placentica said:
The people in my alliance/myself lost the political pre-battle, obviously. This topic is about in-war game mechanics.
You ignore every single post I've made on the issue of nuclear warfare. Go read them if before replying. Then see the history of our first war and Silent.
The people in my alliance's first defensive strategy is always conventional until that isn't viable due to overwhelming forces against us. For that we have insurance and that insurance grows as we see threats we can't beat because we don't have the membership size or all kinds of bots/scripts that do our trading/recruiting like what some people in TKR use.
When you have 3 defensive wars that are all with people that have way more cities and max military, the only in-war game mechanic for fighting back is nukes. I'd like to see nukes removed so that we don't have all the !@#$ing about why this is so unfair. And might as well increase the downdeclare range so that for people like you, who don't seem to get it, can understand the war system isn't about proficiency, it's filling slots which are arranged before a war starts. Politics and war. I would prefer that this is made abundantly clear, would make the game experience much more pleasant for everyone I think.
Maybe you should go suggest a game mechanic that would give a losing nation more options to combing back if it's so important to you. I won't support that, but you should go suggest something and if the community likes it, maybe Alex will implement it.
No.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, Placentica said:
I'm not joking. I'm 100% serious. Obviously, refunding the nukes and NFP is part of this.
-
7
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
Joke suggestion is joke suggestion.
Might I add to remove the ability for the defender to attack back at all. I think that would be a fair compromise.
-
14
-
3 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:
Not bad!
The Sweeeeetest Sweeeeet Ronny D of Jewidia ordered a naval attack upon the nation of Resistance and eliminated 14 Resistance. The attack was an immense triumph. The Sweeeeetest Sweeeeet Ronny D's forces lost 0 ships, while King Apeman's defenders lost 0 ships. The attack destroyed 1,405.27 infrastructure in the city of ESA Pride.
That's my best so far.
Oh that stings! 39 mil in one strike...
-
Hoof of Oppression OldYak of Yakgolia attempted to detonate a nuclear weapon upon your nation of trolly. The attack was thwarted by your Vital Defense System National Project.
A well invested VDS.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
14 minutes ago, kosmokenny said:I thought it was pretty constructive. And still, stupid !@#$ like Arkiri Arch are too busy being racist !@#$ to figure out that nobody has control over what wars go in their defensive slots. Nexa gets it though.
srsly.
PW logic folks, if you like the war changes, then you are racist against nuke bloc.
-
11
-
9 minutes ago, durmij said:
Fair enough, although do we have an exact date for when Alex made it public that this was going to the system going forward? And it still boggles my mind that a design flaw like the attacker determining how much damage the defender can dish out even got to the coding phase, let alone actually going live.
Yeah, about 3-4 weeks ago.
From the Changelog
02/27/2018 - Incoming War Changes
Hello everyone,As most of you know, I've been testing some changes to the war system on the Test Server for some time now. I am relatively confident we've worked the bugs out, and I'm ready to deploy the changes to the live server. Due to the nature of the changes, we're going to have an extended rollout process, wherein I will (temporarily) declare world peace.
How this will work is that in the next few days, no earlier than March 1 (server time) and no later than March 5 (server time) I will freeze new war declarations and all espionage operations. After that has happened, I will wait until all active wars have ended, and shortly after I will push the war system changes live. Once they are rolled out and any deployment issues worked out, I will issue all nations 24 turns on Beige (or an extension for nations already on Beige.) Then I will enable new war declarations and espionage operations. This is to give you time to prepare and to know when you will be vulnerable to new war declarations again.
Now if you haven't been participating in the Test Server or following development, you may not be sure what all of the coming changes are. A thorough description of the changes is available on the Forums:
https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/22501-2262018-war-changes-coming-soon/
Posted by Alex 02/27/2018 02:30 am
03/05/2018 - New War Changes Live
The previously announced new war changes are live. New war declarations & espionage operations are now enabled again. Everyone has been issued 2 days on Beige to adjust before they're vulnerable to new war declarations.Please read the full set of changes on the forums:
https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/22555-352018-new-war-changes-implemented/
Posted by Alex 03/05/2018 11:46 pm
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
3 minutes ago, kosmokenny said:whine whine whine
Git Gud M8.
-
7
-
22 minutes ago, kosmokenny said:
Im not sure you understand how to get your head out of a paper bag
That's pretty rich considering your recent posting history can accurately be descried as "whine whine whine"
-
3
-
-
You ordered a naval attack upon the nation of Words that start with C led by Class Act Campaign. The attack was an immense triumph. Your forces lost 0 ships, while Class Act Campaign's defenders lost 0 ships. You used 975 tons of munitions and 650 tons of gasoline executing the attack. The attack destroyed 1,014.92 infrastructure in the city of Cobain and destroyed 0 improvements.
Simple typo in nuke message.
in Tech Support
Posted
"Spiritual leader Billy of Minoatia detonated a nuclear weapon upon your nation of trolly. The attack destroyed 1,895.00 infrastructure in the city of City31 as well as two a banks."
No need for the a before banks if both targets were banks.