Jump to content

TRM

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    417

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Posts posted by TRM

    Active and Reserve military [Beige Mechanic replacement]

    in Game Suggestions

    Posted

    34 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

    The best solution I've come up with regarding this is:

    • Units can only be kept on reserve status for a period of time, 10 days or 14 days, sort of thing. That way going into a war you'll likely already have military in active status because you want defenses during peace time to prevent raids. This also makes having your war plans leaked a more dangerous thing, because alliances can order militaries to be built into reserve and wait. Then the other alliance can delay to them to pop to active -- etc.. it adds another dynamic.

    The reason I'm not the biggest fan of your solution is that a big part of coming out and fighting fresh is having that days rebuys available to you. 

    Problem with this is the fact that in 90% of wars, the defenders know that they are being targeted. This will be especially true with the fact that ground is now stronger, and alliances will probably be milling up b4 the blitz now more than ever, giving a heads up to their target that "Hey, we are coming".

    Active and Reserve military [Beige Mechanic replacement]

    in Game Suggestions

    Posted

    14 hours ago, Azaghul said:

    I'd limit reserve military to 50% of the max capacity, which would allow you to build up to 50% and then get to 90-100% of units with a double buy.

    Allowing people to have 100% of their military in reserve would be too big of a nerf to blitzes.  

    I totally agree with this part. Having IT on someone is not a good enough trade off. You blitz someone on day one, they come back around on day two at full military strength, remove all those ITs you got by attacking them in the first place, and just plainly destroy you. This would completely discourage aggressive action by alliances. 

    Instead, just as Azaghul said, limit the number of units that can be in reserve. Be it 50 to 80% of your total capacity. 

    • Upvote 1

    Warslot filling discussion

    in Orbis Central

    Posted · Edited by Mr. Goober
    Fek, someone posted this while I was typing, lmao

    I think that it is important to first off define what slot filling is. In my opinion, it is to attack a nation with the main intent of preventing it from being attacked and therefore harmed by others. 

    • Upvote 1

    War Slot Filling

    in Game Reports

    Posted

    7 minutes ago, Borg said:

    I guess, but... https://politicsandwar.com/city/improvements/bulk-import/ is easy enough.

    Again, it is still easier to switch that one barrack, and not to mention costs less. 

     

    9 minutes ago, Borg said:

    A single day's rebuy is enough to justify the barracks. 10 ground attacks lasts 2 days (and thus two rebuys), so therefore it should always be worth it. 

    As a raider, I max soldiers and don't skimp on my barracks. Can't say that I've done much max tank no soldier raiding. Or no tank, 1 barracks raiding. 

    Sure, a few ground attacks probably get you enough to recoup ur losses on switching the barracks. But then come in the economic factors. 

    Regardless, this is hardly a moot point. Alex just needs to remove those strikes. 

    • Upvote 6
    • Popular Post
    • Popular Post

    War Slot Filling

    in Game Reports

    Posted

    33 minutes ago, Borg said:

    It was like 1 barracks (with a double rebuy). Who raids at c25 with only 1 barracks???. You make loot from ground attacks, using soldiers, more so than you would having those slots being used for e.g. farms. So someone with the goal of maximizing profit would have maxed barracks instead of the bare minimum for an immense triumph. 

    Well, who would do that u say? Me, for example. I have 2k infra, and 8k tanks as an mmr. All I ever do need is 50 soldiers and a few thousand tanks for an IT every time. Plus, it is a lot easier to switch one mine to a barrack, than do that to all of em, and wait 3 days to max soldiers to get max profit. 

    That's besides the economic factor as well. 

    As a raider, I'd expect you to know this, Borg. 

    39 minutes ago, Borg said:

    because if the goal is to keep the money in the alliance, letting pirates raid Florence is the opposite of that??

    What I said was in reference to slot filling. Slotting ur own member for loot is not against the rules, as the reason you are targeting the member is to loot him, not to prevent others from attacking him, which is what the basis of slot filling is, to prevent others from attacking the nation in question. 

    • Upvote 9
    • Downvote 1
    • Popular Post
    • Popular Post

    War Slot Filling

    in Game Reports

    Posted

    I cbf to read the rest of the thread, nor do I have the time for it right now. But I would like to address some of this. 

    4 hours ago, Alex said:

    In this context, these nations are probable allies, and these wars fall under what I would consider "sending attacks with minimal units to appear to be fighting a war."

    These 2 nations did not send minimal units to fight a war. No, instead, they sent minimal units to beige a target, as would anyone who gave the post a few more seconds of their time. Understand, these nations aren't fighting a war; thry are raiding. Why go mill up to 5/5/5/3 and waste tens of millions on milling up, when you can just attack with a few thousand soldiers? This is more cost efficient, and allows your other improvements to make u money whilst u are raiding the target. 

    4 hours ago, Alex said:

    These were both Raid wars, so if the attackers' true intent was to steal as much loot as possible, they wouldn't have sent such minimal units. Just because they fought the wars to completion does not mean that it can't be war slot filling - it seems clear that the intent was to fill the slots to protect the nation from being attacked, and then give them beige time to continue to be invulnerable to new declarations.

    Again, what I said earlier. It is more cost efficient to go with the least troops possible to beige the target, rather than mil up, and lose millions of steel for tanks, and much more for daily income. 

    As for beiging to protect, how does that make sense? If they wanted to protect the nation via beige, why not allow other pirates to beige said target? Would that not get the same result, with less effort? 

    As I stated earlier, I didn't really read what Sphinx posted, but your ruling, and the logic behind it does not make any sense. 

    • Upvote 18
    • Downvote 1

    Let's Play!: Scam or No Scam?

    in Game Discussion

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Firwof Kromwell said:

    Why would one spend double what it is bargained for when they can use that for other things so they dont waste there time.  

    I don't know. You tell me. Why would anyone buy credits if they are so poor ingame?

     

    5 hours ago, Nadya Iwakura said:

    I dislike credits with pay-to-win uses and $40/month subscriptions as a player, it feels exploitative to people who are addicted/competitive towards the game in my opinion, like microtransactions in mobile games/gacha, and also means free players don't have the same reserves that those who spend money have. But sadly it seems to be the standard for free-to-play browser games and apps in the current games industry.

    This game is not P2W. If it was, there would be no cap on credits used per month. 

    Y'all need to stop complaining and just play the game. 

    • Upvote 2
    • Downvote 2

    Let's Play!: Scam or No Scam?

    in Game Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Mr. Goober

    55 minutes ago, Firwof Kromwell said:

    I was more aiming at the fact Alex is advertising to buy credits & since people are greedy, prices are double & more what they are worth to cash em in for.  That more or less forces people to pay actual money since they are being ripped off.  Thus causing a MTX problem through the ads.(Like the one I stated in that video I made).

    People aren't forced to spend actual money to buy creds.  They can just buy em off the market. And if they don't like the prices, well, sucks to suck. 

    You are merely trying to find a problem where there isn't one.

    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1

    What happened to NPO

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    11 minutes ago, CaptainPronin said:

    Absolutely lovely how hostile this community is to new players. I am about to be banned now I am sure. Nice playing with you all I guess.

    Maybe stop posting racist shit on ur nation, and you won't get the strike. 

    As they say, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. 

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
    • Downvote 1

    Bank in VM

    in Game Reports

    Posted

    3 hours ago, AntMan said:

     

    Money Food Coal Oil Uranium Lead Iron Bauxite Gasoline Munitions Steel Aluminum  
    -$228,619,276.47 -23,618.30 -1,917.04 -2,518.42 -935.93 -779.84 -2,160.74 -3,206.74 -1,468.74 -3,489.11 -5,297.94 -2,348.39  

     


    I have calculated that it indeed isnt a his safekeep
    The "-" sign signifies he has received more from the bank than he has put into it(taxes not included)

    Hm. Just looks awfully small to be a bank, lol. 

    Increase Spy Training Limit

    in Game Suggestions

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Menace said:

    Can you explain why it would make spies useless? I can see how it would make it more difficult organizing to hold an opponents spies down, rather than wiping out spies at the start of a conflict and then not worrying about it for a while. However, a day to wipe out spies and 6 days to rebuild with the associated projects is not unreasonable. This is a slower rebuild time than every unit in the game, giving multiple days to spy military while an opponent rebuilds spies.

    Let's be fair. It takes more money to jill spies, than the spies are worth, or at least that was the case last global. I may be out of touch atm. 

    Either way, if you spend most of ur time spying spies, there will be very little respite from that to spy units, and that's to add on to the fight that using spies as a team is already hard enough. Why make it harder? 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept