Mohammad
-
Posts
192 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Mohammad
-
-
Change Blitzkrieg. Honestly rn it is probably the worst war policy you can be at. After 24 hours of switching its all loss 0 gain. Here is my proposal:
QuoteBlitzkrieg
Do X% more damage in the first 24 hours of any war, con: attackers start with 7 MAP
OR
QuoteBlitzkrieg (Anti-Fortress)
Start with 7 MAP when declaring war, con: opponents also start with 7 MAp
Reduce Defensive war slots to only 2. In globals rn, all that matters is that you are 3 v 1, even if you loose at the start you have 3x the rebuilding capabilities, so by day 3 you have already turned the tide of the war irreversibly. This is even worse when you have an advantage over an enemy nation, and then his aa hits you with 3 other enemies, and ur going 4 v 1. Reducing the slots to 2 makes it a far more even playing field, so wars are less of 3 v 1 dogpiles, and closer to 2 v 2 multi-war engagements. Would make war based on your skill, and not how effective your aa discord counter bot is.
Let Airstrikes hit Resources. irl hitting enemy fuel tanks/storage units can be decisive in war. Feel free to add ideas, but maybe Target Enemy Fuel (Gasoline Stockpiles) and Target Enemy Ammunition Depots (Munition Stockpiles) should be new options.
Make Naval Battles more like Airstrikes. As a lot of people already commented, naval is kinda useless rn, unless your enemy has low muni/gas stockpiles. My idea is that Naval Battles work just like Airstrikes, you can target enemy Ships, Units (except Planes), Infa, Money or Resources (see above). Just like Airstrikes, all NB go through enemy ships.
-
2
-
-
-
Time to kill this RNG goddess, and trap her in depths of Tartarus.
#FixPlaneRNG
#KillRNGod
-
Lets make it happen
-
War Length should be based on the objective of the agressing parties. Here is my template:
Raid: You just want some of that booty, in and out. 3 days
Ordinary: U dont know what ur doing with life. 4 days
Attrition: You wanna stay the whole time. 5 days
-
3
-
-
The ultimate goal of any war is a swift and decisive victory over your opponent. In real life no one send their nation to fight multiple oversee forever wars just for the shits and giggles (
unless ur last name is Bush).The goal of Wars should be to beidge the enemy target ASAP, inflicting as much damage as possible during that time period. however, the way the game mechanics are playing out, beidging is now a unfavourable outcome of war, and you now are being ordered to let the war expire so your allies can cycle the enemy and not let them rebuild. This has arguably ruined the entire war mechanic. Here is my humble proposal:
Goal of War: Win a swift and decisive victory over enemy. Inability to achieve victory in a timely manner is a defeat.
- If war "expires" (aka no one gets to 0 resistance) then the defender wins the war, and the aggressor nation is beidged
- increase the penalties of bedige (loss more infa, more loot)
-
1
-
4
-
-
16 hours ago, Prefontaine said:
I like the idea. Putting it through to the dev team. Problem would be hitting someone with this in mass. Right before update hit them 3 times over a couple hours keeping them at 10 MAPs, then continue to do so for 6 hours after update. Kinda rough there.
Perhaps something that limits further the frequency a nation can be hit with this in a given period?
Yeah, def thier should be some sort of limits.
-
best global since it took 6 ground to win the war.
-
13 minutes ago, BelgiumFury said:
As you would expect it would make land a lot stronger, and everyone would have a lot more land 😛
Which would beinterestingg since Landoes nott affect score does it? It would mean you could have economic powerhouses, making millions worth of resources in very low tiers.Theoreticallyy at least.
-
2 minutes ago, BelgiumFury said:
this seems so useless it is not even funny.
If you only have 1 turn until day change, and you want to prevent an enemy attack, or at least delay it, this could be an option.
-
3 minutes ago, BelgiumFury said:
This would not solve inflation.
I dont think that would be the goal. The goal is to just make Land something more relevant, other than for the Whales feeding us, and getting 2k land to reduce ur disease.
But then again, thier are some hardcore PnW Economists here so what do they have to say?
-
Def should be a game mechanic. All it is is a less hassle trade system, but it is instant. Only thing is make it also blockaded by Naval Supremecy to avoid it being used as route to bypass.
Great idea.
-
I like the idea, since we changed Ground.
-
Right now land only reduces pop density (aka disease) and increases food production. but in reality, if you have 5,000 square miles of land, you should be making more raw material than a guy with 2,000.
My idea is to base raw material production on land. I don't know what would be fair numbers, but take this as a sorry ass example:
Oil Wells: Land/1000 of Oil per turn
Idea is that now Land can be directly related to increased production capacity, not just for food. Also, would be a safe place to invest your money, since you cant loose land.
Feedback?
-
4
-
-
As title says, a simple idea to just have a new espionage operation that will target a single enemy MAP.
Possibile Variables:
-Only requirement would be that you have to be at war with thar nation, so they have 1 less MAP against you
OR
-the MAP is lost from a random war (or one from each war, although that would be OP in my opinion)
-there could be a limit, for example, target must have 10+ MAP, war must be 24 turns old, ect.....
Would allow espionage to be a more useful tool for directly aiding in war effort.
Feedback?
-
2
-
-
I like the idea of doubling planes, since it would make it harder for a 20c whale wiht max planes and no mil to declare war an a 10c and wipe out thier units.
-
Wars should be on an alince vs allince level:
ie- i BK wants to hit TKR, then BK declares war on TKR as an allince. Nations are then randomly matched to opponents to fight (wihtout having a 20c whale hiting a f--- 10c)
-
3
-
-
Or just delete it
Only point was for it to increase resistance, which meant no one could win wars, which is the meta rn
-
Lets take this down to the level of the average joe:
Make wars based on city count, dont know the numbers, but thats what @Alex is for
-
I think you need to fix war mechanics first, and then worry about beidge........
right now a 30 city whale can demolish a 15 city guy, all thanks to the broken score system. A 30 city whale has DOUBLE the military capacity as a 15 nation.
2 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said:Here’s another solution that’ll solve the issue: ALL wars result in beige. Higher resistance at the end wins. If both sides same resistance, both lose resources/infra without gaining any resources but both are beiged anyway and both nations increment their lost wars stat.
BEST IDEA EVER......
This would end the cycling of nations at 6 resistance, and would in effect make wars usefull.
-
1
-
-
When you win a war you also take a percentage fo the defeated enemies units: tanks, planes, ships, missiles, nukes. SOldiers and spies cant be looted. Percentage should be meger, say 1%. Howver, you cant launch the msssile or nuke unless you get the project.
-
1
-
-
^ see above
Basically, allow planes to bomb nukes and missiles. Ofc, thier should eb a limit, say max 2 missiles or 1 nuke.
-
1
-
2
-
-
yes.......
but not this
-
1
-
-
its a prank right?
Sphere Wars mechanics discussion
in Game Discussion
Posted
What about other 3 proposals? Ideas? Feedback?