Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

27 Excellent

1 Follower

About KingGhost

  • Rank
    New Member

Profile Information

  • Leader Name
  • Nation Name
  • Nation ID
  • Alliance Name
    Knights Templar

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name

Recent Profile Visitors

35 profile views
  1. KingGhost

    Embark on the Next Crusade!

    Can confirm this alliance is autismo
  2. KingGhost

    Ayy there

    Welcome to the game! I hope you enjoy it. if you have questions you can ask on the PnW Discord lots of people will help or you can message me and i'll try to answer your questions
  3. KingGhost

    Dear Diomedes

    Did you just DoW a 3 nation alliance Go ragnorok I guess woo 👌
  4. KingGhost

    Koth/Capture Points/Territory

    Do you think a idea like this would even be good? After reviewing it i can see why this mode might be way to early for this game as it would require a lot of tuning with the points system. Do you think maybe if you scrap all the points and just make it so an alliance can claim a Capture territory and the transfers of territories would just be a condition in peace terms that Alliance A Has to give Alliance B? I feel like alliances don't have a lot of incentive to war besides grudges, role play, and just to have fun.
  5. KingGhost

    Koth/Capture Points/Territory

    I agree I messed up with the tiers. ive also buffed % of commerce, Raws and manu production, it might need more tuneing. also I saw in war stats that it seems infra lost is the most costly so I put in the 75% Reduced infra lost for the defender on a slot and 25% for the attacker. perhaps that needs to be upped to 80%/50%?
  6. KingGhost

    Alliance "Categories"

    This sounds like a good idea it might need to be worked on but i think the idea is viable and it would make sense towards the game A game called politics and war yet the government system doesn't do anything? Kinda weird I'd suggest there needing to be something like 10 days for the government type to change To prevent alliances from choosing the economy one and then the moment they get into war "Well we are a dictatorship now!" Also the coup thing imo is kinda unnecessary. A lot of people wouldn't hold the alliance hostage and you could always just create another alliance and have everyone move there.
  7. Basic Info So I'm bringing this idea from another game. Basically I'll call them territories in the thread but it can be any of the preferred names either in the title or whatever you like. Ill call them territories for consistency sake Basically You would have certain places on the map where you can capture to make them your territory. This would be very few as in maybe 3? Not sure put down what you think would be an appropriate number of Territories to have. You could choose to begin capturing one of the territories and there would be like a certain number of available slots Such as this very crude but i think it gets the point across excel graph Basically each second you're on the wall it would "tick" a point. You would need an xxx amount of points to capture the territory which could be whatever is deemed balanced. I used 100,000 just as an example Now one big thing that could deter pixel huggers and nations with common sense alike is the cost vs gain Basically infra lost. I'm proposing Infrastructure lost is reduced by 75% While on the slots Infrastructure lost is reduced by 25% in wars VS Nations on the slots Improvement lost is reduced by 25% For both sides if at least on side is on the capture Loot taken is reduced by 50% for both sides if at least on side is on the capture Alliance banks looting is 0% As in you cannot get anything from alliance banks if at least one side is on the wall (IF YOU ARE FOUND USING THIS TO PREVENT AN ALLIANCE BANK FROM BEING RAIDED, Meaning you joined the wall after being declared on to take advantage, similar to VMING a bank. there would be punishment) % Are subject to change based on if its balanced Monopolies One of the concerns might be. "Well the top alliances will just hog all the territories" Well theres an easy solution. Each alliance may only have 1 territory. this bonus is given to only them and no one else (Like procterates mdps etc) Another concern would be "Well won't they just sit on their one territory and farm it???" Solutions Make it so territories are automatically "Neutralized" Every ??? days/months. I'm thinking towards 4 months an alliance has had it Or Make it so territory bonuses are changed every ??? days/months to encourage them to move to a bonus they want more of Or Make it so after ??? Days/months They have a combat disadvantage to encourage them to "Throw away" the territory as in there would be an option to abandon Also a rule must be in place. Alliances can not intentionally give up a territory to another alliance to prevent trying to create a monopoly of territories. they must have a valid reason to abandon (Which could be bonus change) If they have given that as their reason they are not to attack the alliance trying to capture to help their allied alliances as they have already declared disinterest Attack Ranges Now you might be thinking Wouldn't this mean Alliances could just hire very low score nations to abuse the -25%/+75% Attacking range? Well there would be some solutions to that 1. Would be tiers to prevent low/high score campers Tier 1 - Top 25 Nation OR Consists of 8000+ score Tier 2 - From The 26th nation to 5000 score OR Consists of 5000-8000 score Tier 3 - Consists of 3500-5000 Score nations Tier 4 - Consists of 3500-2000 Nations Tier 5 - Consists of 2000-1000 Nations Tier 6 - Consists of Everything below 1000 NOTE: Your recruitment of all military besides spies, missiles , and nukes are reduced by 50% while on a capture slot (To prevent people from Decom sitting on the wall and waiting lower tiers to declare then buying) PROS Would make it so nations of all score can play their part and contribute Solves the cant hit nations cause of score problem 100% Still makes it so nations way above can't abuse the weak Decoming then double buying isn't worth it Nations are encouraged to be at max military when they join the capture Nations are disadvantaged due to the 50% Recruitment rate which prevents a powerhouse from camping CONS Would make it so nations at lets say 2000 could hit 1000 score nations IF The 1000 score nation goes on the Slot If your blitzed by 3 Max nations and you aren't near the top score range in your tier it can be very detrimental ETC I don't know more please put them down in posts and i'll add in any pros/cons You would also always be able to declare on nations 1 tier higher than you. Now keep in mind this does not mean that the alliances fighting for the territory would be applied these tiers. ONLY The nations on the wall would have these tiers applied to counter having Either super large nations not being able to be touched or super low nations not being able to be touched 2. Another Solution would be to INCREASE The Attacking Range From 25/75 To 75%/100% if your declaring on a nation on the wall. I think this solution is very flawed and bad but perhaps there might actually be a way to make this work. I don't know how but i might as well put this out. PROS Prevents low/high score camps to a point. Increases ranges so all nations can participate CONS Would allow high score nations to declare on very small nations Not guaranteed to prevent low score campers Nation bullying from high scores IF you have anything to add to no.2 just pm or post Now one confusing part. The point system The basis of territory wars is basically you gain points until you get the required amount to capture, however how will that work with multiple alliances? Make it so all point gain is permanent meaning the points you gain are put into the total and cannot be removed Make it so if your on the wall your points accumulated is worth 100%. However once you get knocked off 50% will go into total (Which means if your on the capture to the end your 100% efficient!) Make it so all points gained are permanent but getting knocked off will deduct points from your total SUCH AS Tier 1 - Loses 5000 pts when beiged Tier 2- Loses 3000 pts when beiged Tier 3 - Loses 2000 pts when beiged Tier 4 - loses 1000 Pts when beiged Tier 5 - Loses 500 pts when beiged Tier 6 Loses 300 Pts when beiged If you have anymore post! thank you for @Akuryo for pointing out the tier problem, for some reason I remembered the top nation being 5k when it was actually 10k score Changelog -Added more tiers. The sweet sweet rewards! Now with all this effort you might be thinking what would be the rewards?? I'll list out some bonuses for factions which i think would be Balanced yet enticing enough for alliances to go for. 15% Bonus to commerce Generation 15% Bonus to RAW Generation 15% Bonus to MANU Generation — Changed Generation 5>15% More worth? Perk : Combat Training 10% Ground COMBAT Strength 10% Airforce COMBAT Strength 10% Naval COMBAT Strength ^^^ NOTE: The combat strength will have to be tuned to a point where its not broken. I'm using 10% On each as a starting point. —- Perhaps make it so you would get a flat 10% boost to all combat instead of indivdual? 5% Recruitment Rate (Like a PB) — Seems fine, up to debate? 5 Extra spies. — Starting with 5 extra spies. Underpowered or Op? Recruit 1 Extra spy per day Op? It’s like an IA without the increased spy capacity, however it might make it worthwhile 30% Population Bonus (Technically it would affect both millitary recruitment and commerce so perhaps?) — Set POP % to 30% Perk: Rapid expansion - Cities are 10% Cheaper -Infra cost is 15% Cheaper - Land cost is 20% Cheaper (2nd “Bundle” Type perk. I would appreciate if experienced players could tell me if this is underwhelming or OP) ETC IF you have more suggestions for rewards post Changes to rewards — Deleted 5% Defensive combat bonus (Reason being Combat strength in my mind is working like defensive combat bonus but on offensive also. Sorry if that wasn’t clear) - Deleted Increased power Gen - Changed 10% Combat perks to all be in one Perk - Added Perk: Rapid Expansion Keep in mind all these % aren't set in stone. they are just numbers i thought MIGHT be balanced enough yet good enough to war over Also obviously but i feel like i have to say it. You would only get 1 of these buffs from the territory. Also all territories would get a randomized buff every xxx amount of days to make it so you cant just sit and farm. But wait! What if another alliance just declares right after i capture it?!?!? There would be a grace period of i'm thinking 1-3 months where that territory cannot be captured to give time for all alliances to rebuild and enjoy their respective reward! NOTE: THIS IS ONLY A ROUGH OUTLINE THAT I HAVE SPENT TO MUCH TIME ON Its only an idea. if the community doesn't like it. so be it, scrapped. however i think this would be a very good addition to the game albeit needs a lot of work
  8. KingGhost


    So basically i was thinking about the idea of having a networth count when trying to figure out how much i financially have grown Basically networth would be Units Cities Infra (Worth) Land (worth) Projects Improvements RSS On hand Money on hand Credits on hand Baseball CURRENT Value ( So basically if your stadiums maxed it would always stay at that. but for players it only counts what is currently upgraded and not already retired players) I think it would be a nice way to see how much you've grown in networth or have lost. Maybe you could even have a graph. Of course theres the question of if it should be public or if it shouldn't be public. I'm leaning towards public view since espionage are already a thing but theoretically you could calculate their RSS and Money on hand through net worth but theres a lot of things you can't see as whether if the networth is from baseball/credits so i think it would be fine

Important Information

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