Jump to content

Khorne

Members
  • Posts

    197
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Khorne

  1. Wow what a heavily biased piece of opinion we have here.

    I thought you quit the game? If you have enough time to write 3000 word essays online about p&w FA stuff, you could`ve just kept on playing lol

     

    Looks like someone didn't read the first few lines of the post...

     

    (Psst! I'd like you to actually counter my arguments rather than just stating that they're biased.)

    • Upvote 1
  2. You are sorely mistaken if you think this means you're getting out of that 2000 word essay you owe me.

     

    I will hunt you down, I Will find you, and I will give you quill and parchment to get you started.

     

    I dun owe you nuffin!

     

    (pls have mercy)

  3. Yo Filip, friendly advice; please shut it when you're in the position to recognize your mistakes and rectify them (I say this with hesitance due to your piss-poor conduct), and not continue having ad hominem plastered upon your posts.

  4. Completely agree. Honestly hope this is sarcasm.

     

    While it is reasonable to see all big cities look the same - New York, London, Tokyo - with 4 banks, 3 shopping malls, 2 stadium, max number supermarkets all maxed out, whereas for the rest almost everybody is playing the template, boring, unrealistic optimal model of 3 banks 3 malls 2 stadium 1 subway?? No one has any supermarkets at all??? Wow -_- Maybe, just maybe because the PPS they offer is lower than other commerce improvements, and that their true potential is only uncovered after, you know, you buy a 45m+ project?

     

    10 resistance for fortify at the present moment is perfect. At least it protects newbies from spawned multis or other nuisance players. 

     

    I have a brilliant suggestion too. Every of your city which does not have a supermarket means your soldiers are not getting fruits and groceries, and their effectiveness down by 90% during battle. Very good suggestion. So good, in-fact, that it doesn't belong here.

  5. So what you're saying is that unless you dedicate all of your time specifically to tracking statistics for the however-many alliances, your playing the game wrong? Lol what? I've literally done this for you, go ahead and search Militarization Tracker in the search bar, created a sheet for you that you just need to click. Have that sheet open and you'll get mil statistics for the first 35 alliances, updated every minute, Yeah, sure, that makes sense. Yeah, it does. And don't even start about the 'political landscape' when we're in a situation where people start global nuclear wars because they got a bit bored. M8o, you aren't understanding my point. The point is, although there's a lot of uncertainty in situations, if you feel as if there's trouble, you need to arm up yourself. That, in and of itself, is judging what the 'political landscape' looks like. No, I'm not telling you that it's beautiful, just stating how things are. There's very little politics in Politics and War.

     

    And yeah, sure, if your Military is outnumber 1.5 to 1, you should have problems. But when the other guy has literally thousands of tanks and you've only ever fielded a few hundred at a time, and he wipes out the vast majority of your standing force in the initial attacks, there's a problem. That isn't a fortify problem at all, and it's more than expected for that to happen. That's a war range problem, and a downdeclare strategy, which you can still counter by submarining. You shouldn't have to devote the majority of your economy to the military // Mate, the fact is, if you don't have the military to protect your economy, your economy sucks. The best Econ is not one that doesn't have any military, rather, it's one that can protect all those money-yielding slots/infrastructure. Oh and, the entire point of using mil trackers is to build yourself and your alliance mates up, and increase activity, so as to mitigate the damage dealt by a blitz [...]and play goddamn perfectly according to a specific city setup, to at least be rolled over slightly less. 

     

    And yeah, with only having two options, get set back an extreme amount, or get set back an extreme amount and inconvenience the guy who caused the problem, guess which one people are going to want? The problem isn't Fortify, it's War Range. You should not be able to down-declare like you can right now, the people on the defending side have basically no other recourse but to fortify until the end of days. Make a separate thread for it, derailing this one won't be advantageous.

     

     

     

  6. Look we're just an alliance Thalmor, looking for peace and now war.

     

    Sure we've made slip-ups but hey we're all human right? We all always make mistakes.

     

    The fact that you're defending them and not protecting us is confusing and unfair.

     

    Throwing shade, shittalking protectors, trying to poach members, generally annoying everyone and anyone including your protectors... yee boi, ya dun goofed

    • Upvote 4
  7. Na I U pantheon doods

    Yarr all awesome m8ty arrgh!

     

    Arrgh!

     

    (Yee you bois @ Pantheon are da real MVP better than some would wish to think. Keep up the good work. And loot; keep your warchests fat, and military low)

  8. Indra give me some credit pls: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/17728-assemble-a-fighting-squad/ :v

     

    You've made a fatal mistake. Anyone who chooses me is basically begging for that Hidude luck to hit them too

    (For those of you who don't know, I was known among TEst for having the worst luck during wars)

     

    New modified list - I'll go with a Ryleh approach and pick from different alliances:

    1. seabasstion

    2. Bet

    3. Ripper

    4. Memph

    5. Koso

     

     

    Hehe

     

    Hidude gets all the credit. <3

    • Upvote 1
  9. The current individual War API lacks in certain information that I personally feel as if would make parsing war stats easier by a wide margin. It would also reduce the amount of scraping (pls sheepy don't do dis to me) I have to do for unit damage dealt/taken, and extra things such as gasoline/munitions/steel/aluminum used. If you can add that too, I and a whole load of other programmers that use the war API would be grateful.

     

    Taking the example of the current individual war API (/api/war/<warid>) with the - as of the time of posting this - newest war:

     

     

     

    {
    ["war_ended":false,
    "date":"2017-04-24T14:38:57+00:00",
    "aggressor_id":"56540",
    "defender_id":"51045",
    "aggressor_alliance_name":"Lordaeron",
    "aggressor_is_applicant":false,
    "defender_alliance_name":"The Fighting Pacifists",
    "defender_is_applicant":false,
    "aggressor_offering_peace":false,
    "war_reason":"All your base are belong to us",
    "ground_control":"0",
    "air_superiority":"56540",
    "blockade":"0",
    "aggressor_military_action_points":"2",
    "defender_military_action_points":"6",
    "aggressor_resistance":"100",
    "defender_resistance":"88",
    "aggressor_is_fortified":false,
    "defender_is_fortified":false,
    "turns_left":60}]
    }
    

     

     

     

    ... vs. the one I wish to propose:

     

     

     

    {
    ["war_ended":false,
    "date":"2017-04-24T14:38:57+00:00",
    "aggressor_id":"56540",
    "defender_id":"51045",
    "aggressor_alliance_name":"Lordaeron",
    "aggressor_is_applicant":false,
    "defender_alliance_name":"The Fighting Pacifists",
    "defender_is_applicant":false,
    "aggressor_offering_peace":false,
    "war_reason":"All your base are belong to us",
    "ground_control":"0",
    "air_superiority":"56540",
    "blockade":"0",
    "aggressor_military_action_points":"2",
    "defender_military_action_points":"6",
    "aggressor_resistance":"100",
    "defender_resistance":"88",
    "aggressor_is_fortified":false,
    "defender_is_fortified":false,
    "turns_left":60,
    
    // Now start the Unit/Infra losses for the Defender
    
    "defenderSoldierLost":<insert soldiers lost>,
    "defenderTankLost":<insert tanks lost>,
    "defenderAircraftLost":<insert aircraft lost>,
    "defenderShipLost":<insert ships lost>,
    "defenderInfraLost":<insert infra lost>,
    
    // Now for the attacker
    
    "attackerSoldierLost":<insert soldiers lost>,
    "attackerTankLost":<insert tanks lost>,
    "attackerAircraftLost":<insert aircraft lost>,
    "attackerShipLost":<insert ships lost>,
    "attackerInfraLost":<insert infra lost>,
    
    // And if this is possible, resources used:
    
    "defenderGas":<insert gasoline used>,
    "defenderMuni":<insert munitions used>,
    "defenderSteel":<insert Steel used>,
    "defenderAlu":<insert aluminum used>,
    
    //For the Attacker:
    
    "attackerGas":<insert gasoline used>,
    "attackerMuni":<insert munitions used>,
    "attackerSteel":<insert Steel used>,
    "attackerAlu":<insert aluminum used>,}]
    }

     

     

     

    Would such an addition to the current API be feasible, or am I completely out of my mind? 

     

    Some Benefits:

     

    Fact is, for stats gathering at the end of a war, for IA purposes to gather total losses of nations when an alliance leaves a war, and a few other miscellaneous purposes, this API upgrade would mean a lot. It would mean that the player doesn't have to scrape through several war-declaration pages, and overall mean that the API's both more comprehensive and detailed, and actually includes some, in my opinion, very relevant information in relation to the "/api/war/<warid>" API, which I feel as if is lacking at the moment.

    • Upvote 6
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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