jack3top Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 Humans need food and water to survive. This game is trying to simulate real world, right? If this is right, we got food but no water. Water is found naturally all around the world, however not all the water found is consumable. Water needs to undergo treatment in order to be consumed. Hence I propose a new improvement called "water treatment plant" and a new resource called "treated water". If someone does not have treated water, his nation population will survive however, disease rate +5%. Whats your thoughts?Any questions? Quote discussion before violence What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 I suggest you go back to playing Fallout and never post a suggestion again. But hey, I'm just in the Christmas spirit. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rameses Posted December 26, 2015 Share Posted December 26, 2015 I've moved this to the Suggestions subforum, it's more appropriate here. Also, I suggest you go back to playing Fallout and never post a suggestion again. But hey, I'm just in the Christmas spirit. No reason to be abusive towards somebody because you don't like their suggestions mate. He was trying to offer some ideas about the game, and regardless of whether it's feasible we don't want to discourage people from trying to contribute. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack3top Posted December 27, 2015 Author Share Posted December 27, 2015 I suggest you go back to playing Fallout and never post a suggestion again. But hey, I'm just in the Christmas spirit. At least, tell me why its not feasible. Quote discussion before violence What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooves Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 1: We already have enough improvements slots for now 2: For people's general war/economy needs, this is a huge waste of effort 3: This is why we have food that can also be dubbed "general needs" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 At least, tell me why its not feasible. I am unable to do so in a manner that would not result in another warn. Ho ho ho! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace and War Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 Water actually is big business in real life. Look at California for example. Water deals are a big deal. This idea would fit well if an environment was ever added to the game. When droughts impact your nation. 1 Quote "Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilal the Great Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 (edited) At this level it would be too game changing. If this was suggested back in alpha/beta it would work better. Edited December 27, 2015 by Bilal the Great 1 Quote King Bilal the Great Mediocre The Average monarch of Billonesia Wikia page (if you're into roleplay things). We Tvtropes now. (down the rabbit hole!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack3top Posted December 27, 2015 Author Share Posted December 27, 2015 1: We already have enough improvements slots for now 2: For people's general war/economy needs, this is a huge waste of effort 3: This is why we have food that can also be dubbed "general needs" It be a fun challenge to see how people include it in the current order of improvements. Why is it a huge waste of effort? well, we need food and water to survive, should be same here too in my opinion Quote discussion before violence What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack3top Posted December 27, 2015 Author Share Posted December 27, 2015 (edited) At this level it would be too game changing. If this was suggested back in alpha/beta it would work better. Too game changing?so you mean there should not be any big game changes since it is in stable mode? Edited December 27, 2015 by jack3top Quote discussion before violence What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack3top Posted December 27, 2015 Author Share Posted December 27, 2015 I am unable to do so in a manner that would not result in another warn. Ho ho ho! Leave out the vulgar, just say the facts, this way, you not get warned and I can try to understand why you are so mad. Quote discussion before violence What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pax Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 Too game changing?so you mean there should not be any big game changes since it is in stable mode? Typically speaking, there are only a few reasons things are implemented post beta: * To fill a gap in content where the game is boring or uneventful * To fix a big problem or imbalance in the game * To promote certain actions that are considered worthwhile (for example, treasures were implemented because Sheepy wanted more war. It wasn't effective, but that was the reasoning) Adding complexity for the sake of complexity doesn't really improve the game - realism isn't the end goal, otherwise nukes would be crazy OP and everyone would pile into a few select alliances. It doesn't provide any real benefit to anyone, only a detriment to people who don't follow it - so nobody's going to be too keen on such a change. 2 Quote <+JohnHarms> We need more feminists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted December 27, 2015 Share Posted December 27, 2015 (edited) To lazy to search properly, these are the only two I bothered to find https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6938-new-resource/ http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2986-new-resource-idea/ Edited December 27, 2015 by Metro Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack3top Posted December 28, 2015 Author Share Posted December 28, 2015 (edited) To lazy to search properly, these are the only two I bothered to find https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/6938-new-resource/ http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2986-new-resource-idea/ suggestions by me on this(maybe next time someone can fine it and it be accepted) : a)water(existing) b)increase nuke damage to affect 5% of af,army and navy c) nuke enrichment facilities d) granary e) submarines f) nuke misfire Since its been suggested before but denied, I cant say much just that long-term this game will become another game which gets dull and boring like you know *to those who criticize me including one asking me to go back to fallout 4(I dont play fallout 4, and seems like post has been edited), or that I should feel ashamed, I feel sad that new ideas cant be accepted and worked on together, instead someone must produce out everything, no discussion and then thats how people decide whether to reject or approve the idea. Going to answer a few basic questions that I think should be answered/brief write-up on my thoughts on why I suggested these stuff, if anyone can do better and make p&w community accept it, it be great. ============================================================ Why water?water is the elixir of life Suggest?water refinery to refine water that is commonly found but undrinkable Ideas: when there is summer, less water maybe even might have drought and then all food production decreases (output from farms) How did I arrive at this idea in the first place?well, I was thinking about nuke damage and uses of nuke in P&w then I came across on how you can use nuclear technology to detect sources of water. Then I saw, P&w has no water as a resource, maybe water refinery to process water, and reservoirs to store the water. (on a side note, it be great if we have granary to store food, this way somebody cannot stockpile large amount of resources and there is a cap) My idea if this water suggestion was accepted was to suggest that we should have nuclear enrichment centres to enrich the nuclear fuel. Currently, you just buy uranium, and if you got the project,cash and resources you just build the nuke, too easy. I was thinking, how to make it a bit harder and time consuming to get nukes, because when the game develops further, next time hundreds of nations will be having nukes, how to make people think twice before acquiring nukes, currently only the person who the nuke hits get damaged. So, I was thinking if we had nuclear enrichment facilities to enrich the uranium like in RL, time to get the nuke increases, one new market for enriched uranium to be sold. For the nuke back-fire part, mistakes do happen it is possible that technicians made a mistake and the nuke lands in your own country, this will make people think twice before firing nukes. Now we come to the morale part, if your country is in war, your country gets nuked, it is either your people are resolved to fight or just surrender. Same context as if you carry out a air raid and succeed, your compatriots will also be affected that you did a successful job and morale goes up, while if you fail, everyone gets affected after a few times. For submarines, thought it be a wonderful addition to the game, imagine a new naval unit that can break blockades I will not post any new suggestions in future. No point annoying others anyway, I guess I am not clear in all my suggestions thats why everyones so mad, ending with this "Be open to new suggestions and always question old assumptions", I rest my case. Edited December 28, 2015 by jack3top Quote discussion before violence What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saeton Posted December 28, 2015 Share Posted December 28, 2015 Currently, you just buy uranium, and if you got the project,cash and resources you just build the nuke, too easy. I was thinking, how to make it a bit harder and time consuming to get nukes, because when the game develops further, next time hundreds of nations will be having nukes, how to make people think twice before acquiring nukes, currently only the person who the nuke hits get damaged. Not always. Some players have done lengthy analyses and have discovered that nukes don't always do the most damage. If you're strategic enough, you can definitely do way more damage than a nuke. Quote (TEst lives on but I'm in BK stronk now and too lazy to change the image) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.