Majima Goro

Score changes should be made. That's one of the biggest problem with war system atm. Other than that, air superiority halving tanks is definitely a big problem, given how ground control is pretty much useless without tanks. Maybe make air superiority base on the number of planes the opponent has?

Aight cool I'll make em myself.

No, I think the anger is because due to some sort of rounding up in the background, even 3 times as much force isn't enough to get IT at times. A fix to it can be to multiply the initial value of units by 100. I'll show how this can work Example 1: Opponent = 1 ship Me = 2.6 ship Current Roll System: Opponent = Round(1 * 1) = 1 Me = Round(2.6 * 0.4) = Round(1.04) = 1 Proposed Roll System: Opponent = Round (1*1*100) = 100 Me = Round(2.6*0.4*100) = 104 Example 2: Opponent = 1 ship Me = 2.5 ship Current Roll System: Opponent = Round(1 * 1) = 1 Me = Round(2.5 * 0.4) = 1 Proposed Roll System: Opponent = Round (1*1*100) = 100 Me = Round(2.5*0.4*100) = 100 The multiplication by 100 should in theory take care of most stray decimals for values just over 2.5, maintaining the mechanics that 2.5 times can result in a draw roll while making anything above 2.5 times result in a win. In fact, a higher power of 10 like 1000, 10000, etc can get even better results to minimize such grievances.

@wintercrest is it possible to divide the graphs further based on city counts? Ideally, it should be C1-10, c10-c15, c15-c22, c23-c28, c28-c35, c35+

It is implied actually Lets say you have x ships and I have y ships Since a roll has a minimum value of 0.4, the least possible value of my ships can be 0.4y Since a roll has a maximum value of 1, the least possible value of your ships is x The minimum value needed to win a roll for me is if 0.4y>x => y > x/0.4 => y >2.5x Or in other words, if y is 2.5 times larger than x, it is a win for me in the roll and subsequently all other rolls.

There are three rolls If all 3 are in your favour, it is an IT 2 is MS and 1 is PV 0 is a failure When a large army attacks a smaller one, usually more than 0 rolls are in their favour meaning you get atleast a PV However, when a smaller hits a larger, usually less than 3 rolls are in your favour meaning you dont usually get a IT. You can get a MS or PV or a failure more likely. However saying this never happens is BS since it has happened a lot to me, so much so, I've even got ITs with 2/3rd their armies. Plus defenders also get the advantage that if the roll values are equal, defender takes a victory.

This statement is half-true half-false. Since the servers cannot use decimals(0.1, 0.5, etc), the numbers are bumped to their nearest integer. If I'm not wrong, the multiplication of the 0.x factor happens on the raw number of ships you use. Based on it, a 1 ship can have a max values of 1 ships(rounded to 1). You'd need atleast 4 ships to secure a IT(3×0.4=1.2, rounds to 1, giving opponent the victory in offensive wars you declare). Basically, you need to figure out what numbers you need to get to minimum value to get guaranteed IT.

Game is designed to buy buildings one-by-one Thus no matter whether you click a lot of time or one time, it will only show you that you bought 1 for the price of that 1 unit only. Quiet possibly you got charged 3000 but just didn't notice possibly.

Currently, someone getting air superiority over their opponent reduces the strength value of tanks to half of what they should be. This means 1000 tanks would be worth 500 tanks. While this reduction does nothing to the number of planes a tank can kill, i.e, 1 tank still kills the 0.005 tanks or something of that value, it does straight out reduce combat value to half. Personally, I think the value should be somewhere b/w 1/3th(33.34%) to 1/4th(25%) reduction in strength, given how the current meta is max army. I am curious to know what the rest of the people think of this - would people want the value to stay same, go down or go up? There is a poll either up or down this post. Vote on it and let us know your views on this.

OK Btw did anyone realise that OK looks like a stick man but sideways?

https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=949156 This just happened again Did 6 Ground Attacks I had wasted a lot of MAPs waiting for DC to buy units.

I am to assume you wasted MAPs as in had 12 and still didn't do attacks for some turns?

Gather around my friends and plus ones…. First our children grew up and hell has frozen over. Now something truly no one expected. It is by command of the joint alliances of the The Immortals, Camelot, Aurora, The Fighting Pacifists, Rose, and friends; that I present to you the Neo-Inquisition! We, the neo-Inquisition, come together in full manifestation of our friendship and solidarity. Committing ourselves to these accords in agreement with full promise of mutual prosperity and strength; with a greater understanding to be shared between us. I Mutual Defense A direct attack on one signatory is considered an attack on all signatories. II Optional Aggression All member alliances shall reserve the right to support each other in every dogpile. III Support We stand together in the shared security be any means. Information, aid, and diplomatic resources are all encouraged of each of member alliances. Our support for each other shall not be limited to a list. Yet we agree this agreement shall take precedence over all others. IV Sovereignty While unified, we remain sovereign. V Admission A prospective alliance may petition any signatory for membership. If sponsored, admittance will be a unanimous decision of the conclave. VI Withdrawal NO! BAD! BAD! (Request to all involved alliances to put their signatures at the bottom)

There have been multiple reports of people doing more than the number of battles their wars would allow. When first discovered, it was caused by each battle happening at a fixed time interval after you pressed the Battle button. This allowed you to use multiple devices or tabs to spam the Battle button to send multiple simultaneous requests, allowing you to do multiple hits for same amount of MAPs. This Glitch was fixed however by introducing a random delay between when you actually press the button and when the request reaches the servers. However, there have still been reports recently about multiple battles occurring despite the above glitch being fixed. I've tested to see if that glitch still can occur and I can confirm that isn't the case. However, this does happen in wars regardless. Timeline: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=256054 As you can see in this timeline, I was able to do 5 ground attacks one after another. This is usually impossible to do since at most you can have 12 MAPs which allow you to do 4 ground attacks at most. However, it is quiet clear from both the timeline and the resistance loss(58 resistance lost) that this did occur. While I cannot say for certain whether the resources looted in the hits actually were looted or not or whether units were lost on either side or not, I can confirm that the opponent did lose 50 resistance. Now on to the circumstances of why I think the glitch occurs. @Dryad theorized that the glitch only occurs when you have 12 MAPs and don't do any attacks still, ie, you save MAPs past 12. While ingame, it doesn't look like you have 12 MAPs, it is possibly still being stacked past 12. This theory has ground since in most cases the glitch is reported, people are trying to do attacks with 12 MAPs back-to-back, possibly having wasted a few turns with 12 MAPs on them. For this war as well, I waited for 12 MAPs and wasted a few turns to build military before the hit. This somehow gave me extra MAPs to do more than 4 ground battles. While Alex claims that no units or money is lost in these scenarios, it still costs resistance, which leads to unfair battle advantages, leading to possibly a different winner in some scenarios.

RoH, RoH, RoH your shipsGently down the streamMerrily merrily, merrily, merrilySekret treaties is my wet dream

I 100% support whatever he is saying.

Guys um we need a new hegemony.

You need to have coal or oil in your nation to power your cities. This means if you have 0 oil you wont be powered, even if you are making more oil than you are using, since the oil that is needed to power the city is needed now but the oil you are making will be produced next turn. Hopefully this makes sense.

I had used 3 ships vs 1 ship So this comes out to 3*0.4=1.2 vs 1*1=1 in the worst case scenario for me Result was still a moderate success.

Interesting idea there. But with a fixed cap on military and your opponent having a maxed 5553 build, it still would mean min-maxing wont work the way you intend it to. Plus, this has an obvious downside in the way you can go 18/0/0/0 to max out soldiers in first buy, then go 5/0/0/13 to get a lot of ships in the second buy, essentially letting you buy a lot of military, much like a double buy

War Battle Link: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=933193 War Attack ID: 10610698 Attack Type: Naval Success Type: Moderate Success According to the war mechanics, any attack done by a force 2.5 times larger than a defending force will ALWAYS result in an Immense Triumph(IT). However, recently, possibly after the new mechanics got pushed live, this hasn't been the case, with armies 2.5 times larger getting Moderate Success(MS) or Pyrrhic Victory(PV) at times. For the given war linked above, I used 5 ships to hit the person with 2 ship(2.5x army value vs opponent)(Victory type=IT), followed by two naval hits with 3 ships on 1(3x army value vs opponent). The first of the 3 ship hit resulted in Victory type=IT while the second one resulted in a moderate success. I had enough munitions and gas to run the 3 ships(look below for the API data for that war-attack). Hence, I should have gotten an Immense Triumph. But that was not the case. And this isn't a one-time thing as well. I've seen this happen multiple times with people trying to use the minimum troops or just above minimum troops required to get ITs against opponents. And this isn't only for ships. This has happened for ground units as well. I'd like @Alex to look into this and if it isn't a mechanics issue, tell us if the numbers to get a guaranteed IT has been twerked around. JSON from the war-attacks api for the above attack: { "war_attack_id":"10610698", "date":"2021-05-16 06:02:18", "war_id":"933193", "attacker_nation_id":"262298", "defender_nation_id":"270929", "attack_type":"naval", "victor":"262298", "success":"2", "attcas1":"0", "attcas2":"0", "defcas1":"0", "defcas2":"0", "city_id":"540187", "infra_destroyed":"0.93", "improvements_destroyed":"0", "money_looted":"0.00", "note":"11", "city_infra_before":"1185.00", "infra_destroyed_value":"7701.52", "att_gas_used":"6.00", "att_mun_used":"9.00", "def_gas_used":"1.80", "def_mun_used":"2.70", "aircraft_killed_by_tanks":0 } PS: How do I show things as spoilers

Johnathon can invade my space anytime 😏

Hey when this GW ends, can we have a post saying "Its all Ogre now" for peace thing.

Please tell me WHO!