Jump to content

Alarik

Members
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Leader Name
    Alarik Isarnhelm
  • Nation Name
    Aldemark
  • Nation ID
    13927
  • Alliance Name
    The Fighting Pacifists

Alarik's Achievements

New Member

New Member (1/8)

1

Reputation

  1. Nation name: Aldemark Nation link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=13927
  2. I love the idea of an automatically calculated GDP and GDP per capita. It adds a bit of depth and realism in the game, as well as a way to benchmark your country against real-world examples. It just seems a bit odd to me how low these numbers actually end up being. The country currently at the top of the leaderboard has a per capita GDP equal to that of Djibouti, and most of us are even worse than that. I don't believe there's anyone out there who has a per capita GDP higher than $4,000 (Zambia-level). This is somewhat depressing. Our GDPs (and, god help us, our average yearly income) shows that every country on Orbis is in extreme poverty. I don't expect us all to be wealthy superpowers, but no one wants to be the DRC, and at this current moment, all of us are. ------------------ No offense is intended to the above-mentioned countries. I only mean to say that it should be easier to advance economically, as our current world leaders have countries well below the poverty line.
  3. The ads are irritating at best, downright offensive at worst, and are largely pointless and hard on the eyes -- forgive me for saying. They serve almost no function, and do not add to the game in any significant way. I can see how it might be looked on as a way to unify the forums and the game. But most players who don't frequent the forums do so because they don't want to. Many of the players are not interested in the interplay between alliances they are not a part of. And, while we're at it, it seems a bit unfair to force players to pay a monthly fee in order to return to the style that got them hooked on the game, and to which they had grown accustomed. I understand the need for revenue, but isn't there some less irksome way of getting it?
  4. Ah, noted. Thank you for the correction. Still, I think this would be a good idea.
  5. The current war mechanics only allow you to target the capitol city city with the most infrastructure. While the current system is by no means unworkable, I do think there is some possible room for improvement. Might I humbly suggest allowing players to attack an opponent's secondary cities? There are a few ways that this might improve gameplay: It would add a new level of strategy (e.g. attacking the city with the drydock to prevent ships from being used, and stratagems of this nature) It would save players from the tedious task of rebuilding the same city after every war. Variety is the spice of life... It adds a certain amount of realism to the game; very few wars in the real world were fought only in one city. It makes city planning more meaningful, and facilitates critical and tactical thinking in this area. There's nothing wrong with having the capitol city most developed city as a default target, but I think it would be a worthy use of time to program in this option.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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