Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Wayne

  1. Yes really, take Sheepys numbers as proof. Out of 35000 nations, only 4500 are still currently 'active' (which I assume means they have not been deleted from the database yet). 1962 nations have logged in at least once in the last week, I'll assume the new nations are included in the 'logged in at least once in a week' category. Which means from an 'active' player count of 4500 only 1485 returned to the game in a week. Out of 1485 only 550 bothered to log in today. I wouldn't call that a thriving game. I would call it a game with serious retention issues. And of course the 'Yes' vote is larger, the changes only truly effect a small portion of the active, forum dwelling, player base.
  2. We dominate because we are allowed to dominate. How many do I think it would take? Honestly, MENSAHQ. They have the builds and the coordiantion. We are not super nations. Look at the top 10, people with scores of 4000+, they are the super nations, the real untouchables. We are just nations in the thicl end of the action, that are focused on war and fighting. If you wish to mix it up with fighters then you need to build like a fighter, it's pretty simple. You can't have 1000+ more infra, with the improvement slots and the cash generated, as well as a strong city to military ratio, something has to balance out. Having anything above 1300 infra is not a fighters build. Simply claiming untruths as the truth is not the way to go. The Arrgh 'super nations' as you put it, do not prey on the new. Ask DEIC... I'm not and never have argued for keeping improvement slots (I nerfed my cities down to 1000 infra upon joining Arrgh, I didn't keep any extra slots), I would rather see them tied to infra more closely and once 50 infra is gone, an improvement randomly gets destroyed (with the exception of power plants). I'd also rather see military count as a percentage of total populaton instead of tied to improvements (cities), with each unit costing a certain amount of manpower (troops = 1 citizen, tanks = crew of 4, planes = etc etc). Something along these lines would actually give real worth to infra. Instead we get an ill thought out change to pander to the hurt feelings and bruised egos of the high infra brigade.
  3. Mensa was one of the most spied up Alliances in the game when Sheepy nerfed Spies. Pretty sure Mensa alone had 10 guys with 150. I was one of them. We can be challenged within the current mechanics, either through teamwork and coordination with 1500 city builds (as shown by maths and is the current Mensa build) or by going to the extreme method that Pre (on his own) showed. Yes, my build is a powerful build for my score range, this is due to the fact I keep my infra low. For the benefits of being strong and having an extra 3-4 improvement slots over what my infra can support, I take a massive hit in the daily cost of running this build. To your ninja'd post: This guy is the lowest range guy I can hit, https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=4002600 days! Not a great example, he's been inactive for a while and no doubt raided down the ranges. So I checked the bottom 10, this guy was the youngest at 143 days: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=27009Thats nearly 5 months playing time. I do not class that as a new player. I then decided to check the ages of the 'victims' of the linked players you provided. Dan77: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=21262241 days, not a baby Me: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=3051980 days, a baby but boosted a great deal by his alliance it would seem Ryu: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=21262241 days, same as Dan Jacob: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=16301a whooping 351 days, almost a year old! Karrajor, (this guy is a real raiding pest it would seem, his one battle consists of) https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=6944a MASSIVE 552 days old. The notion that we are killing the game by making it harder for new players is a myth. We would rather rich, high infra, no army, old targets, that is where you make your bread and butter!
  4. The target of these proposed changes are aimed at maybe 5-10 players. All of which could be countered with a bit of teamwork, dedication and coordination. This 'Arrgh tactic' is not as widespread as the infra-lovers would have you believe.
  5. How many players are running that kind of build? 4-5 at most... I assume.
  6. A thousand or so? You are overestimating the size and interest in this game!
  7. You could only really 'open a can of whoop ass' on a 1750 if he had a shitty high infra build.
  8. I kept a full military when I was in Mensa. I was making 1.4 million a day with 1500 infra. I was able to grow ok and hold a decent war chest. The odd raid here and there on inactives was a welcome addition to the kitty. It's not massive amounts of cash, but there are other ways to top up your income. War was probably my most profitable time! I agree with you on the number tweaking though. I think that would have been a better starting point then nerfing infra score.
  9. Can't be that against it, seeing as he encourages people to have 0 armies.
  10. Fully built, the majority of Mensa could declare on me.
  11. We can already fight people that have equal or higher numbers then us. So that arguement is null and void. Give it six months and we'll be discussing changing the mechanics again.
  12. 90% in my range (pretty much the same range as Dan) would be easy targets. Not because I have more cities, but simply because they are unarmed. They are unarmed becsuae they want to maximise their profits. That is their choice. Plenty in my range that can field an equal and larger army then me. Just as plenty that I am larger then. Does Sheepy envision a game full of high infra and no armies? Because that is what he is encouraging.
  13. Whn I was in Mensa, I kept a full military at all times. I was still able to make a tidy profit each day. You chat shit, so much shit.
  14. Arrgh can offer you protection.
  15. Plenty is being done to put a stop to us, it's just not in the way that we would have hoped... Politics and Baw indeed.
  16. I am pretty battered atm, I can hit someone at 1000 score, 9 cities at the Mensa approved 1500 infra in each city. I can be hit by someone at around 1800 score, who would be able to field more troops then me, more tanks then me and more planes then me and be able to bring 2 mates of equal size along with him.. It's not like we are invincible, !@#$ sake one guy tied up Arrgh's top teir on his !@#$ing own... Arrgh have explained over and over again, we've even gave you the numbers and the tactics needed, you all had a first class lesson in a way to deal with us, yet no one wants to do anything about it other then cry that its unfair.
  17. These are the two players at the very limits of my range. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=16787https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=9882 A nice broad range of players with a variety of infra and cities. Many without armies... Again, I ask just how many low infra/high city accounts do we have in PnW?
  18. Could have done it based on city count, seeing as that is the controling factor on military strength...
  19. Just how many of these low infra/high city accounts do you think there is? At a rough guess...
  20. You didn't fo far enough, that is why you continue to have the problem of the hordes of low infra/high city raiders running amok and ruining your game. I'm pretty battered atm, with most cities around 800. I'm still a force to be reckoned with in my score range. So try fiddling with the numbers more...
  21. You vaule infra highly it seems, judging by your comments and attempts to protect it. Yet you made infra something that is not overly needed. Instead of tying military to improvements, you could have tied it to population, which in turn is tied to infra. Suddenly making infra highly sought after. Tying them to improvements was bad design. One nuclear power plant, and 5 barracks, Airforce bases and factories are all the improvement slots a real man needs.
  22. Infra is a small part of the game. As we have shown, a part you can mostly live without. So you failed massively in your design...
  23. Seeing as you won't answer my question on IRC, I'll try here. As the creator of the game, how did you intend the game to be played?
  • Create New...

Important Information

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