Jump to content

Nintendo

Members
  • Posts

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Nintendo

  1. Overall, I really like the announced changes. It's great to see effort being put into the game from the dev team. 

    I'm really not sure what to make of the 2 tiered IT change, but part of that is because I don't really understand how it works from this post. It's not really clearly explained.

    Love the changes to beige. I've always hated the concept of beige cycling and the fact the game made that so ease to do. This is probably my favorite change. I really like this part too, which is ease to miss in the massive post: Beige accruals do not begin reducing down until all defensive wars end.

    I still think part of the war system still needs to be changed, but sounds like future updates will be more frequent, so I'll hope changes down the line. For me two things need to change with the system:

    • I think IT are way to easy to get, while successful victories are to hard to achieve once you've been IT'd. My reason is that ITs offer a what I think are overpowered bonuses to who holds IT...it should be easier to break ITs, which would allow the "losing" nation to fit back a bit better...if they are putting in effort to replenish their military units.
    • As stated above, I think IT effects should be nerfed slightly...but perhaps this 2 tiered IT system sort of does that naturally.
    • Mega down-declares aren't fixed here. I think a down-declare should be capped at a 10 city difference. But the changes to missiles/nukes might help fight these off a bit more since it makes it easier to knock out more improvements.

    I'm happy to see the announced changes though. Will be interesting to see how they pan out!

  2. I was thinking of something similar. My suggestion would be the following:

    - Keep the score range as the default war range method
    - Down declares are capped at a 10 city difference limit

    So basically, the current score range system applies....but if your target nation has over 10 less cities than you, you're considered out of range. The fix still allows for players to do some serious down declaring...but removes the extreme side of down declaring that nations can do.

    • Upvote 2
  3. I recently purchased a new Project. When I clicked the button to approve the purchase, the game loaded the Projects screen again, showing I still only had 13/14 projects built and a message stating I can't purchase a project for 10 turns. Basically, the "National Projects Slots:" portion at the top doesn't update after you purchase a project. If you refresh the page again, it will update.

    image.thumb.jpeg.3ae55d1426e620a05ca7b940f87cb7e9.jpeg

     

    Basically, very minor. But did cause me a few seconds of confusion. I imagine this is something that easy to duplicate. It's been so long since I purchased a project, I don't recall if I used to get a "Successfully Purchased" message in the past or not, but I feel that's what should display after the purchase.

    • Thanks 1
  4. This probably explains the matter along with what was said above:

    Logs.jpg

     

    It does bring about another question though, is this an unintentional exploit of how AA Bank funds can be managed? To me, they are taking advantage of a loophole, where they can stash a lot of money in an AA bank, then quickly start up a new AA and transfer the bank over to that new AA before getting beiged. The only way to really prevent that would probably be to implement some sort of AA age criteria before transferring large amounts of money/resources into that AA. Maybe make the AA have to be 10 days old before other AAs can send in money. I don't know. This is a topic for another thread.

    I definitely don't fault someone for using how the system works to their advantage. I'll tip my cap to Veins and Dryad for being able to execute that gameplan as well as they do.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
  5. 4 minutes ago, Dryad said:

    Vein withdrew from his alliance to the nation and then back into the bank. You can see the amount withdrawn and then deposited is the same in both the case of 10b and 15b so there is no 25b being generated as that money comes from the alliance and goes back into it.

    The money went from the bank to Veins first. Then back to the bank. So, where did that come from?

    I guess we are only talking about $15 Billion, not $25B, math is hard sometimes haha

  6. 20 hours ago, MIB.HG said:

    fun-facts-submitted-by-pbnjaemitumblr-mo

    Wow....It dawned on me that we probably hadn't bumped this thread in over a year...so I come over here all excited to revive this thread from the deepest depths of the Orbis recruitment page....only to find MIBHG beat me to it by 20 hours! 

    • Upvote 1
  7. I'm trying to move one of our applicants to member status within our alliance. When I attempted to change their alliance roll, I get the following error: That leader does not exist in your alliance.

    Our AA page is here: https://politicsandwar.com/alliance/id=1210

    The applicant in question is here: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=165041

    I'm putting "Donald J Trump" into that field, so I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. My first thought was some sort of PnW bug, but I see no others reporting this issue. I've had other members of my alliance try to move him over and they get the same error. Seems to be something specific to that nation.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.