Jump to content

Shiho Nishizumi

Members
  • Posts

    838
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Shiho Nishizumi last won the day on July 11 2023

Shiho Nishizumi had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Leader Name
    Shiho Nishizumi
  • Nation Name
    Kuromorimine
  • Nation ID
    47112
  • Alliance Name
    Requiem

Recent Profile Visitors

9050 profile views

Shiho Nishizumi's Achievements

Veteran Member

Veteran Member (6/8)

2.6k

Reputation

  1. Enclave's called. They want their POTUS back.
  2. Although it's true that smaller nations get affected more on relative terms due to city count, that's not the logic by which nukes are used. The logic for their usage is maximum damage inflicted, and larger nations tend to make for better targets due to taller infra. Nobody's going to nuke a 2250 infra C23 nations when (and if) they can nuke a C45 nation with 2800 infra. Disproportionate impact on smaller city count nations is also a thing with all attack types. A ground attack launched on a C20 affects 5% of his cities. A ground attack launched on a C40 affects 2.5% of his cities. I'm not entirely sure why would nukes be singled out, their peculiarity of just deleting a city down to sub-1000 infra put aside.
  3. Perhaps I phrased it poorly, but yes. For people who actually tried to nuke them (by building up), it's been made easier. For those who didn't, it was made possible. I have to question the point of the change, if nuking them doesn't have that much of an effect on them anyways (a premise I disagree with).
  4. It was proposed and pushed explicitly to make turreting easier, if I recall Keegoz correctly.
  5. Further buffing nukes and missiles seems unnecessary (even if by means of fairly pricey projects). Missiles in particular have already gotten several buffs over the years, and both benefitted greatly from the updeclare range increase. Nukes and missiles have always destroyed a fixed amount of infrastructure in contrast to conventional militaries' always scaling infra destroyed (which I presume is what they're being contrasted to). I don't see the particular relevance of this given that they don't compete with each other in this regard; you use missiles and nukes exclusively when you're losing, while tanks/planes/ships either get used when you're winning (nukes/missiles wouldn't even be considered), or as suicide when you're losing (they'd either be followed up with nukes and missiles, or you would use the ones you recently built on the wars which you can't touch conventionally), or alternatively, flashing (you usually have a separate target for nukes/missiles, both due to how flashing works, and because MAP's would get tight if your flash target was also your nuke/missile target). Fixed amount of infra destroyed doesn't mean fixed damage either. It depends on how tall your target's infra is. It was already the case that larger nations would have better targets than smaller nations by virtue of who they could reach (simply put, it scaled to some extent), but the updeclare range increase made it possible to hit targets with even taller infra which were otherwise inaccessible. In other words, that formula change already addressed any potential scaling off, by virtue of letting you hit targets which were previously unreachable, with these not being people that you would be hitting with a conventional military anyways. With that said, the other suggested changes do seem interesting; changing how color blocs work would probably be the easiest one to code with a more immediate impact on things, although nation/alliance decisions could be a neat little addition to change things a bit. On perks: Would it be you either pick military or econ perks, or would it be a matter of mutually exclusive picks within those separate branches (as an example, Integrated vs Dispersed Fire Support, and Concentrated vs Dispersed industry in HoI4).
  6. I mean, there was more chatter in that brief convo than there was in the embassy for the entirety of the past year. While embassy chatter is hardly the defining aspect of a relationship, it does serve to show, alongside everything else, how glacial the relationship's been. But yeah, a brief one-time exchange on the public channel in t$' main discord (the FA one is a separate one, for the record) doesn't amount to much. These sorts of things are a fairly constant undertaking, especially if the starting point is a strained relationship rather than a neutral one.
  7. In most cases, it's either the group doing the rolling or being rolled discussing those. Rarely, if ever, was it the case that there's a fully milled third party that one knows isn't on good terms with you. Couple that with them already having an idea of what to do next (sign Singu) and apparently not getting along too well with Eclipse (cue Pascal's comment), and my wonder is why didn't they wait until peace to 72 (or otherwise notify).
  8. I'd agree with your viewpoint if an alliance was deemed as being neutral or friendly. TFP was neither, and that's the point. There was nothing in that relationship suggesting that they would have acted as a restraining factor. What did exist indicated the opposite. As for the last bit; I'll hazard a guess and say that most third parties are just baffled about TFP telling WEL that it wanted to go its own separate way in the middle of a war.
  9. Player of the Year:- Most Influential Player:- Most Likely to Succeed in 2024:- Best Alliance Leader:- Worst Alliance Leader:- Best In-Character Poster:- Best Villain:- Nicest Player:- Most Controversial Player:- Most Missed Player: Partisan Best Nation Page:- Best Fighter:- Best High Government Member:- Most Online/Likely to respond in 1 minute:- Best War Criminal:-
  10. I appreciate your clarification, Rush.
  11. I'm aware that it was supposed to be done by Village, but was held up. As for the latter bit, and because it's better to clarify it right away; the thought isn't that Keegoz single handedly came up with the score change. He obviously didn't. The thought's that he pressed for it to be implemented sooner post-announcement because there was already a realization within Singularity that the next war was going to be a losing one. There was no advantage to be taken of because Singularity was already expecting a rolling by that point, making any infra retaining concerns moot. The change was implemented on December 14th, two weeks after the order went out. It's your right to think that. It's not within your purview to say what t$ is utilizing, or not, as a CB. Those were listed out at the beginning of the post, item per item. "Singularity made it clear it wanted to roll us, made moves towards it, and we reacted accordingly" doesn't need any bolstering. Noted. My personal thought about the change itself is that I understood where it came from, and that increasing it slightly wouldn't have been a bad thing necessarily. Of course, it wasn't increased slightly because it was straight up doubled, but that's a separate matter altogether. Improving the game is something that's easy to find support for. How to improve it, not so much. I think that this is reflected on the receptiveness of Quality of Life changes versus mechanical ones; the former tend to be met with widespread support while the latter are divisive. Part of that divisiveness has to do with the background people come from, which colors their perspective. That's simple human nature, and it'd be foolish of me to pretend that it isn't a thing. Concerns about conflicts of interests and potential self-serving behavior is an old one. So much so that, for example, Prefontaine was sitting in his own one-man alliance when he was doing design team stuff. Does everyone act in a self-serving manner or otherwise overreaches with the power/influence that they wield? No, and I'd be willfully lying if I made such claim. Conversely, does everyone act in selfless manner, or at the least remove themselves from their IC context when weighing in? No, and I'd likewise be willfully lying if I were to claim that. And with all due respect Sketchy, I never had much to do with Keegoz on a personal level. And I don't mean it in a scathing way; the closest I've had to do with him was during the TGH days while we were allied to KT, and even then we didn't talk much to each other because of our respective fields (if I recall correctly, Keegoz was FA and then Grand Master, while I was always Milcom high govt throughout). The main KT people who I spoke to then were Theo, Vince (the person who invited me to this game in the first place), Vlad and some others. Outside of that, the second closest was when I was in Rose for the period of time Singularity still had an MDP with it, and then I had zero contact with him. I don't understand your angle here. And ultimately, I don't believe that it's going to impact anything game development related, as it doesn't impede said work. I'd likewise expect him to have gone into dev team stuff knowing full well that these sorts of concerns would've been aired sooner or later (if they haven't been voiced already by now), and it would surprise me if it was the case that such wasn't factored in prior to agreeing to it.
  12. ...the reason it hadn't been pushed through wasn't "it just wasn't lol", it was "We're waiting for wars to wrap up". And wars were still ongoing when it got implemented. So yeah. Attempts at lecturing while obfuscating the actual reason given for non-implementation doesn't work. Neither does pretending that the rest of the DoW text, which explains why t$ is involved in this war (this 'manufactured grievance' not being one of those reasons), doesn't exist.
  13. To me, Singularity is first and foremost a GFL event, and it's been abbreviated Singu for years now. So yeah, force of habit. I did acknowledge that it came after a pitch to the sphere as a whole had been made. While I can't comment much on the specific substance of whatever talks took place, I don't think that they can be described as attempts at diplomacy. Reaching out at the 11th hour seeking for NAP extensions with little to none prior preparation is just a hail mary.
  14. I mean, the record's there for posteriority. Whether it's relevant or not, that's another matter. Given that it's an over year old act by a former FA head which Cataclysm and Paradise acted upon for the Fortune war (which, fair enough), I don't think that it is. I should note that Singularity tried to get a NAP with t$, and only t$, after their attempt to have the sphere-wide one extended fell flat. Obviously, given the context, agreeing to it with any serious intent of honoring it would've meant reneging on the M levels, which I guess would've been approved of this time around by the Cata-Para people that make up Singu.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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