Shakyr
-
Posts
483 -
Joined
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Shakyr
-
-
Short and simple. Can we both remove the ability to unleash espionage attacks against beige nations and also in turn remove it for beige nations.
It's meant to be a safe zone to recover from wars and warlike activity, but currently it is not.
-
6
-
-
If we're following that logic, I should also take your money and your women during wars.
Well I already take your money, so I guess we should start taking the women too?
-
11 hours ago, Majima Goro said:
How does radiation affect coal blocks or any inorganic things for the matter? I think what you really mean is radiation should affect global disease rates as well, something I would very much like to see.
Radiation affects the workers, which decreases the production rate. Sure it doesn't affect the resource directly, but there is no resource that will collect itself (unless Sheepy wants to give us an AI project).
11 hours ago, Majima Goro said:Imagine global nuclear winter and everyday it goes on, say 10% of your then population dies off. Moreover, building efficiency should depend on your population, each improvement needing a minimum number of people to work, below which, production is scaled down proportionally. It would make global conflicts actually have a global effect, hurting everyone instead of just the people involved. It would pave the way for smaller and shorter conflicts because a big one would be devastating for both sides. Not only this, such a change would make nukes very much more powerful than they are currently, leading to treaties to limit nuclear weapon usage and such.
Sure, having global radiation affect the disease rate is another way to go about it. You'd have to be very careful with deciding your minimum number of people to work though. Too few and you may as well not bother. Too many and you screw over low infrastructure builds.
7 hours ago, Jacob Knox said:How to Plummet Raw RSS Value: A 2 (3?) Step Guide
Can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. Most changes will screw with resource prices (UP/AUP was great for Food prices), to one degree or another. It's not a reason to outright reject sensible solutions, though.
Most of the resource production improvements would be softcapped by pollution (as anyone who's tried to build everything has found out), but you could leave in a hard cap of x (where x is a nice point above the softcap) if only so people don't break the game.
Could even be a good chance to reintroduce the Approval Rating (useless stat). Too many improvements taking up land, your people get unhappy and bad things happen.
-
12 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:
Remember food is the only resource that scales based on land, where the other resources have a hard limit. So nuclear fallout is a good balance mechanism for it.
Link land to improvements instead of Infrastructure and then allow uncapped resource improvements, providing you have the Land available (though you'll be soft-capped by pollution).
In the short term, scale other raw resources to land. Maybe manufacturing can scale to commerce rate. I'm quite alright with other resources getting a buff, if it means that food is no longer discriminated against.
Not to mention that nuclear fallout is one of the most underutilized mechanics in this game. It needs something to make people actually fear a nuclear winter.
-
On 5/16/2022 at 12:36 AM, Majima Goro said:
The ones who'll buy it are whales. I thought we are trying to make nerf whales, not make them profit significantly during globals. They make a lot already.
Plus, in a few years, nuclear winter would be gone since more or less everyone would have 30 cities due to Metro Project and making food.
Global nuclear winter could be a big thing and we just throwing a good mechanic under the bus cuz newbies can't produce food?Personally, as a whale who pretty much exclusively produces food, I have no issues with losing production due to nuclear wars.
What I have an issue with is the fact that only food is discriminated against. I'd much rather radiation was applied fairly across the board, for all resource production.
On a side note Prefontaine, you missed the chance for a nice little easter egg: "Soldiers in nuked cities are less likely to die and kill more enemies, due to wearing power armor to negate radiation."
-
Personally, projects are a poor man's tech tree. I would much prefer a decent tech tree, so we could have more variety in nation builds.
I'd make sure of two things though:
First, add things like City Count, Infra Count, Land Count to the prereqs (along with any previous nodes). Maybe even stuff like "must own x improvements" or "x soldiers", etc.
Two, have opposing branches in some cases. If you unlock x, researching y will negate x (and you'll lose it and anything unlocked after x). Also the further you go down the path of x, the more expensive y becomes.
This stops nations (like myself) from simply buying out the whole tech tree. Which is currently what I've done with the projects (hello 23/30 project slots). It also makes people think about what they're choosing.
-
3
-
-
On 4/1/2022 at 11:12 PM, Mystic Piano said:
So, the cost of cities, keeps increasing exponentially, but our revenue per city doesn't.
Just buying cities won't increase your revenue by much. You need to also buy infra, as that provides a much larger increase.
Unfortunately too many alliances like sitting around 2k to 2.5k infra, which cripples their income, unless they can raid other nations.
-
14 hours ago, Majima Goro said:
We should implement NFTs into the game as well!
Please keep trash talk out of the suggestions forum
-
2
-
-
Linking in this suggestion, from my post history.
-
RE: Trades
- Increased trading limit to 10M. The current cap of 1M is way too low, give it a year (or less) and I'll be sitting on 100M+ Food, without the ability to easily post it on the market.
- Can "Date Accepted" be added to the Sorting Filters (separate from Date Offered). Also set it to the default for "My Offers" (with any unaccepted offers sorted by Date Offered, at the top). It's a pain to have your latest accepted trades in "My Offers" be halfway down the results.
- Can the "Current Top Offers" on the "Create Offer" screen be moved to left of the form, Sell Offers top, Buy Offers below (dropped below for a mobile) and by default it be displayed. The way it is currently, it can be easily missed.
-
1
-
1 hour ago, Jacob Knox said:
The only thing about opening it up for non-whales to get easier would be moderately encouraging new players to get farms, and as someone who has seen all too many new players with awful builds and farms—and having been one for some time at the beginning of my time playing here—I don't necessarily want that haha.
I've been running Farms for years, outside of a few times in the year when I've been forced to change by wars. Stockpiling and selling off Food, got me through to C40, almost entirely self-funded.
So long as you prioritize your Civil/Commerce improvements, so you're running minimal Disease/Crime and maximum Commerce, the rest of your improvements don't matter.
1 hour ago, Jacob Knox said:Hm... I hadn't thought about that. I, personally, used only roughly 5K food per day at max military. But I am also half your size haha. I suppose it can be all to easy in this game to go "whales bad, why help whales?" But sometimes we have to consider things from different perspectives, and I like to think that I at least try to do that.
Overall, I wouldn't mind seeing this get more attention and having more people discuss the pros and cons of it as we are. And some suggestions for the game, regardless of what they are, is always better than having no suggestions at all.
Too many are shot down by people who just want to maintain the status quo. I don't think the suggestion forum gets enough traffic either.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:
That's no fun, drop the nukes, kill the farms.
War is PAIN!!!
I can always post my suggestion for radiation to affect the production of all Raw Resources (can't produce stuff if your workers are dying). Not a topic for discussion here though.
10 hours ago, Jacob Knox said:This is certainly an interesting suggestion, but I wonder how it will benefit anyone besides whales who produce food. The only affect on the greater game, that I could see, would be reducing or limiting food inflation during war time. However, that has never been too severe—at least, that I have seen in my time here. For example, since November 28th the lowest average ppu was 115 and the highest was 148 (according to in-game average chart), even during two global wars where the radiation caused 100% reduction in food production. Of course, correct me if I am wrong here and feel free to provide counter examples lol.
It'll benefit any nation who produces Food, but restricted to only a small subset of your farms, it's not going to seriously impact a larger nation's deficit. I mean my nation in particular, I'd only have 1800 (3 Farms/City) to 3000 (5 Farms/City) Food per day, protected. I have a deficit of 20k (not even running full military).
My aim was to provide the general player base with the ability to offset their loses due to two or more unrelated alliances deciding to go to war. The addition of losing the Summer/Winter variations on those farms was added because it made logical sense.
The current situation only benefits the whales who produce Food, as they're the main ones with massive stockpiles that can be sold off. I'm actually shooting myself in the foot somewhat, by posting this.
I'm happy to drop the requirements to one degree or another, open it up to players more easily. The lowest I'd go would be Mass Irrigation and 2-3x the cost. I also don't know whether 3-5 Farms is too few or not.
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Quite simple, allows up to x Farms (I reckon 3-5) per city to be protected from the elements. They always produce Food at a constant rate, regardless of the season or the radiation levels.
Requires: Arable Land Agency, Green Technologies, Mass Irrigation
Cost: Same resources, but about 10x to 15x what is required for Mass Irrigation
-
7
-
Pretty sure my calculations are correct.
You can be targeted by 3 Espionage Operations in a day and the maximum potential damage for Tanks/Aircraft/Ships are 37% of your Daily Rebuy.
Also on top of that, Sheepy has already nerfed Espionage Operations so you can't destroy nukes that were built that day, yet nothing was changed for other military units.
This means that you can literally keep someone at or near zero military, by simply spamming them with Espionage Operations each day.
Just going by the maths, that is f*cked.
-
So as things currently stand, espionage is screwed up, like majorly.
- If you have 10 spies and the other person has 60 spies, that espionage operation should have a very high chance of failure, regardless of what you're trying to do.
- % based damage costs for military units is just plain broken, especially when stacked with Spy Satellite. Spies should not be able to take out 4k tanks or 48k soldiers (using one of the larger nations I know).
My suggestions:
-
Each spy you own, gives a small improvement to your defense against espionage and increases the chance of attacking spies being killed. Longer term, allow the player to configure how many spies are operating defensively (for a larger improvement per those spies), at the cost of having a lower chance with attacks.
- This seems logical, considering they're otherwise sitting around your nation doing nothing.
-
Spy Satellite gives a bonus to defense and reduce the attack bonus. Longer term, allow the user to configure the split between attack and defense (with a cooldown of x days).
- Spent enough to buy my eyes in the sky, it damn well better be useful.
- Safety Level should lower damages, the higher it is. But it should (if it doesn't already), lower the chances of spies being killed.
-
Attacks against military should target one improvement per x spies and if it succeeds, wipe out up to 100% of supported units.
- Less spies you have, less damage you can do. Simple as that.
-
3
-
2
-
5 hours ago, Alex said:
Presumably they could Missile/Nuke you, so let's wait and see what happens.
Oh they did nuke me, so I guess I'll withdraw the report.
Nukes are about as annoying as a fly hovering around a buffalo though, a far cry from their real life equivalent. So he's still filling a defensive war slot for me, at minimal cost (happy to have 3-5 cities nuked at the cost of a defensive war slot being filled for a few days).
-
Nation Link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=583
Ruler Name: Placentica
Nature of Violation: War Slot Filling
https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=1159437
They have declared war, for no other reason than to cry about a war that happened in the past, without the capability to actually wage a war.
While they may not have the intention to do so, it has lessened the number of defensive war slots I have available, at no cost to me.
-
2
-
4
-
-
Alex should change a lot of things. Approval Rating is not one of those things, unless it is to make it actually relevant to the game.
-
1
-
-
Food itself is should be a game on it's own. I mean who doesn't love trying to cook a turkey, without setting the kitchen on fire.
As such, I think we should expand the game to include the following. Note: All times are Game Time, not Real Time.
Raw Resource Improvements:
-
Grain Farm (replaces existing Farm)
- Produces Grain, 20% more in Summer, 20% less in Winter
- Same Costs as existing Farm
-
Livestock Farm
- Produces Raw Meat, 20% more in Spring, 20% less in Winter
- Pollution +5
- Operating Cost $500/day
Manufacturing Improvements:
-
Bakery
- Consumes Grain to Produce Bread.
-
Camp Kitchen
- Consumes Raw Meat to Produce Steak.
-
Canning Factory
- Consumes Meat and Aluminum to produce Canned Food.
New Resources:
-
Grain/Raw Meat
- Cannot be used to support a Population
- Grain will expire after 3 months
- Raw Meat will expire after half a month
-
Bread
- Can be used to support Population
- Provides no Bonus
- Will expire after 3 months
-
Canned Food
- Can be used to support a Population
- -2% Gross Revenue
- -10% Soldier Effectiveness
- Will expire after a year
-
Steak
- Can be used to support a Population
- +2% Gross Revenue
- +10% Solider Effectiveness
- Will expire after a month
New Project
-
Frozen Storage (I suck at Names)
- Bread, Raw Meat and Steak can be kept for up to a year
- Steak has half the normal Bonus.
New Gameplay Mechanic
-
Food Expiry
- Any Food created will expire
- Expired Food is removed every turn
- If you run out of Food due to it all Expiring, all cities gain +5% Disease
-
4
-
Grain Farm (replaces existing Farm)
-
In all seriousness, wtf?! You want to introduce a resource Project to help newer players, but then twist your brain cells in a knot trying to kneecap it so that older players get minimal benefits? I'm not sure how you decided that this was a good idea.
New players already get free money from the tutorials and I'm pretty sure they don't have City timers any more for the first few cities, how much more do you want to give them handouts?
If you're dead set on giving them more money, just outright give new nations a "Budding Nation Grant" on their Revenue page, of $x per turn, expires in x days.
At least that way you're not kneecapping new players, who should be buying a Center for Civil Engineering instead.
13 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:I could be out of the loop here, since i haven't dealt with little nations in a few years in this game, but at 3 cities, are you really in a position to actually have a project slot open? you would need 1667 infra per city to hit 5k infra.
Each nation gets a freebie Project slot, I assume they want new players to burn that up with this ... whatever it is.
9 hours ago, Zevari said:What if you made it so you can only purchase the project once, it last X amount of days before expiring and after that you lose access to it, this serves the purpose of actually helping the new players but also prevents alliances that intentionally stay small from farming it for essentially free money.
We can call it the "Self-Destructing Mining Labor Camp" and after it expires you get a "Mass Grave" Project, that gives you a bonus to your Soldier casualties.
-
Could we have these tools default to "Buy Only" and have a checkbox underneath saying "Also Sell Infra/Land if required"?
There are very few circumstances where you would ever want to sell infra/land. Yet there are plenty of times (especially in war) when you have mismatched infra and you want to bring all Cities that are under x, back up to x, but ignore those cities that are over x.
This would hopefully be a minor change and a quick win, that would make player's lives easier.
-
3
-
2
-
-
-
-
4
-
1
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:
I meant the system itself not the programing, which by the way your system would require adding completely new scripts and checks for a whole new deposit system, since your basically creating a second trading inventory for them, which is just as likely to have bugs.
Something like what you have proposed has been suggested and shot down by alex before.
Sure it would require new code, but the only ongoing scheduled script would be trade expiry, which is a fairly simple check. The other code for handling market transactions is simple and I could write it in my sleep.
If he's against it, nothing I can really do, but won't stop me from posting the odd suggestion like this, that can change the game for the better, in my opinion. As opposed to some of the changes that have been made. But that's a tangent from this topic.
2 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:Also why did you skip the more important issue of my post, that your tax hurts noone but traders, and serves no purpose at all. Actual traders have to change prices on their trades all the time, because markets aren't static. It doesn't discourage abuse, People using it as a deposit system take less penalty than getting looted, and have a protected trade account they dont have to worry about.
That's way more abusive than offshoring since Trading large quantities provides one of the few opportunities to blockade and loot those with secure banking networks, and this removes that opportunity.
so all you are really suggesting here is Protected trade inventories, a cash sink on trades, and discouraging healthy market competition since when someone undercuts you by 1, you cant change the price without taking a loss every time.
This is bad for global economics, war, raiding, and probably a dozen other reasons I don't have the foresight to see.
A race to the bottom is in no trader's best interests. The current market seems to mostly swing between everyone buying up the resource, then people notice the "price" has risen, so they start dumping resources and undercutting each other.
Not only that, it's very easy for "Joe" to undercut by a large amount and post a few mill of a resource that he does not have. No one will necessarily call his bluff and try to accept the offer (which would be cancelled if it couldn't be filled), so people will just blindly undercut him and the price drops even lower.
I'd say the current system hurts traders a lot more than anything I've suggested.
Sure the tax is less than a penalty of getting looted, but there is already offshoring procedures in place for quite a few alliances, which costs the nation nothing. Here they would lose money/resources every time they cancelled the trade, then put up another trade with the remainder that they do not need.
Trades are public knowledge. This means that during a war, your opponents will be able to see any trade movements you make and if you are blockaded, no access to the market.
I also did not say that other measures could not be put in place, for example:
- Cap the price, so that it can't be more than x% higher than the average, which stops people putting stuff up for $1 mill ppu.
- Put a restriction on the number of Trade Offers that can be made.
- Make Personal Trade Offers expire within 24 hours.
-
12 hours ago, Deborah Kobayashi said:
I think the issue can be solved by instead having the system calculate the total of all of your current sell offers (or buy offers when making a buy trade, but not cross calculating them), and if the new offer when making a new trade would put you below 0 of the rss (or cash for buy offers), then you cant make it.
and to cover errors from depositing into the bank or being looted, maybe run a check on turn changes, as long as that wouldn't add a noticeable amount to turn change scripts, and any excess in the offer either be removed, or the entire offer cancelled altogether.
the system you are proposing is overly complicated, and making a fee when people may have to remove their offer and repost when people are undercutting only hurts traders not people that would be abusing it to hide funds, since 1% would be less than the 14% of a looting by a raid war in pirate policy, anyone not in a blockade on the final turn before beige could just drop everything in the market and pull it out for a 1% feeYou say my system is overly complicated, yet you propose something that is even more complicated? Having the system adjust everything "magically" for you in the background might sound nice, but it would be a complete pain to program (I do it for a living). It would also probably introduce way more bugs, especially adding on that "turn change" script. I can just imagine it accidentally wiping out all the resources on the market and the game having to be restored from a backup
1 hour ago, KiWilliam said:Could the solution to fix possible abuse not just be if you lose a war all your currently standing trade offers are cancelled. Resources & funds are recalled as loot is divided up.
You could then have the mechanic where a person hides money for example using the market, but then can't use it during the fight. If the person is not blockaded they have this advantage, but once they're blockaded they're cut off from those funds/resources tied up in the market, and then can only access them if the blockade is broken, or if they lose the war and then they are automatically recalled to be divided up as loot to the winner.
So you can risk trying to stop your money being stolen in each individual ground attack, but you tie up your funds you may need to fight, and then if you lose anyway, you're not ahead of your opponent, and if you keep out of being blockaded, and then also don't lose the war, I would just consider that the superior force using its ability to protect some part of the nations coffers. Risk-reward. Any exploits there that I'm not envisioning?
Yes they can drop money on the market, but is that no different to dropping it in the alliance bank and then it getting almost instantly shifted offshore? I remember the last global war that I participated in, nations in general were pretty quick about doing that.
So in this case, why bother complaining that people will abuse a new system, when they already have a way to abuse the system?
Personally, if you don't blockade the nation and they move resources out, that's your own fault. There's no reason to twist ourselves into a pretzel, trying to think of ways to give them free loot.
Take land when raiding
in Game Suggestions
Posted
I actually want to change that, but I doubt it would happen.
Population should be a combination of both. If you buy more land, you should gain x pop, as there is more room for housing. If you buy more infra, you should gain y pop, based on your current land, as you're building bigger houses on the same amount of land.