Jump to content

2/22/2016 - Military Caps & Donation Changes


Alex
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes, my numbers were off, I have no idea why I thought you could get $40m for 10 credits. In any case, you suggested in your previous post that players getting 20m/40m/60m per month was ridiculous, and I don't know where you came up with the latter two numbers.

 

Also, expect as soon as March 1st hit, everyone will be buying and then selling credits on the market, prices will drop to around $2,000,000 I'd wager.

 

Your numbers are still off. Ok let me do the math for you. Right here:

2mil per credit * 10 credits = 20mil (Current Rate)

3mil per credit * 10 credits = 30mil (Through Trade)

4mil per credit * 10 credits = 40mil (Through Trade)

 

If you think, that people will drop the prices of credits, to where they no longer make a profit, than either you dont understand economics, you're naive or you're just not thinking clearly.

 

If I bought 10 credits and I wanted to make a profit, I would go to the market and sell them for more than what they are worth. Currently they are worth 2million. But I want to make a profit, so I'm going to sell them for... lets say 3 million. Why, why, why would I ever drop the prices sheepy? March 1st or not, I'm going to keep selling them AT LEAST 1 million higher. 

 

Some players will sell them for 4 million, because they can. And so they will make 40million per month. 

 

I don't know if you've been really stressed out, but you're just not thinking through this.

22:26 +Kadin: too far man

22:26 +Kadin: too far

22:26 Lordofpuns[boC]: that's the point of incest Kadin

22:26 Lordofpuns[boC]: to go farther

22:27 Bet: or father

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Your numbers are still off. Ok let me do the math for you. Right here:

2mil per credit * 10 credits = 20mil (Current Rate)

3mil per credit * 10 credits = 30mil (Through Trade)

4mil per credit * 10 credits = 40mil (Through Trade)

 

If you think, that people will drop the prices of credits, to where they no longer make a profit, than either you dont understand economics, you're naive or you're just not thinking clearly.

 

If I bought 10 credits and I wanted to make a profit, I would go to the market and sell them for more than what they are worth. Currently they are worth 2million. But I want to make a profit, so I'm going to sell them for... lets say 3 million. Why, why, why would I ever drop the prices sheepy? March 1st or not, I'm going to keep selling them AT LEAST 1 million higher. 

 

Some players will sell them for 4 million, because they can. And so they will make 40million per month. 

 

I don't know if you've been really stressed out, but you're just not thinking through this.

 

Who is going to buy them at $4,000,000 or $3,000,000? Come March 1st, there's going to be something like 200+ Credits for sale - You post yours for $3,000,000. The next guy comes and posts his for $2,900,000. And so on. If there's enough supply the price will trend toward what they're worth - $2,000,000 - because the people who are selling them are happy to get anything more than the plain 'ol $2,000,000.

 

Seriously, I've seen people comment about how they buy credits when they're really cheap at the beginning of the month, and then sell them later when they're worth more, but I have serious doubts that they'll ever be worth $4,000,000 a piece. At that price, people just won't buy them, or they'll donate and get their own credits.

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Im not sure how much 5k max of a single resource is going to change to a nation at war, considering i like spent 15k of gas and ammo in just the first round in the previous one. Looks to me that this its going to be used by new players to catch up instead.

 

And even if someone rebuys said resources, and they are losing, well, means more for me to loot :v.

 

I didn't see anything pay to win in this update really, buying resources sounds the same as buying cash to me, if that wasn't P2W, why is this?

 

That's my thoughts as well. What it will is keep resource prices (namely Steel) from going too astronomically high, which means it's easier for nations to prep for war, and we'll have shorter war/peace cycles.

  • Upvote 1

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

 

 

 

 

So at the end, it does not matter whether the strategy is beatable or not by team-work, what matters is military incompetent people getting frustrated and quitting the game because their alliance couldn't protect them. I wonder what will happen the day an alliance gains enough members to dominate all score ranges with sheer numbers. That's bound to frustrate people. Could always pull out the war mechanics then!! :P

 

I raided probably the most in the past few weeks using this strategy, there was never a time when I did not have full offensive slots. Do you know when was the last time someone I hit quit? Back in the tS-Mensa vs UPN war when I was around 1600 score. The guy raged when his infra was blown and quit. After that, not a single person I raided quit, primarily because I hit inactives, sending peace after every attack and only actives in case of ending up in war with the alliance. Your whole base of people getting frustrated and quitting the game is strange since no one in PP encountered such behavior. Maybe from Arrgh but a lot of raiding there was from the people with 4-6 cities. They've a very lethal low range. What I do know is, just because of this change, 2 people with 13 cities did quit however with maybe more including maybe me following. That's all the truth I know. 

 

In my opinion, it is useless talking about this now since you want this change for some reason or pressure, and it will happen no matter what anyone says about it now. You started with math numbers and ended up with because the strategy was hard to counter which frustrated people. Nothing left to discuss now. Have a good day. 

 

 

I mean, I think you understand it, yes. The reason for this change is to improve player retention by re-balancing the game so that smaller/newer players aren't so vulnerable. The numbers illustrated how this change was relatively small, and that nations in your position would still have the advantage, just less of one.

 

It should be obvious that my primary concern is the growth of the community and increasing players/retention, not how much fun you have raiding smaller vulnerable nations.

  • Upvote 1

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is going to buy them at $4,000,000 or $3,000,000? Come March 1st, there's going to be something like 200+ Credits for sale - You post yours for $3,000,000. The next guy comes and posts his for $2,900,000. And so on. If there's enough supply the price will trend toward what they're worth - $2,000,000 - because the people who are selling them are happy to get anything more than the plain 'ol $2,000,000.

 

Seriously, I've seen people comment about how they buy credits when they're really cheap at the beginning of the month, and then sell them later when they're worth more, but I have serious doubts that they'll ever be worth $4,000,000 a piece. At that price, people just won't buy them, or they'll donate and get their own credits.

 

No no sheepy, Markets work like this: I want to sell my credits. This guy is selling it for less than me. Good for him, he will get bought. But I on the other hand want to make money. I will not go lower than him down to 2million. Cuz I'm not stupid.

 

So I'm gonna post at 3million. The other guy will soon run out of credits. When that happens, I control the market. I sell them for as high as I !@#$in want. Which most likely will be 4 million. Literally go to the credits page. Look at the trends. Just watch them.

22:26 +Kadin: too far man

22:26 +Kadin: too far

22:26 Lordofpuns[boC]: that's the point of incest Kadin

22:26 Lordofpuns[boC]: to go farther

22:27 Bet: or father

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

No no sheepy, Markets work like this: I want to sell my credits. This guy is selling it for less than me. Good for him, he will get bought. But I on the other hand want to make money. I will not go lower than him down to 2million. Cuz I'm not stupid.

 

So I'm gonna post at 3million. The other guy will soon run out of credits. When that happens, I control the market. I sell them for as high as I !@#$in want. Which most likely will be 4 million. Literally go to the credits page. Look at the trends. Just watch them.

 

Why do you think demand for credits is that high? No one needs credits, if the prices go too high no one will want VIP etc, that badly. We will watch and see what happens, I don't think the prices will ever reach $4,000,000.

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think demand for credits is that high? No one needs credits, if the prices go too high no one will want VIP etc, that badly. We will watch and see what happens, I don't think the prices will ever reach $4,000,000.

unless some people decide to play the market to force the average credit cost to be higher.

Edited by Etgfrog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason for this change is to improve player retention by re-balancing the game so that smaller/newer players aren't so vulnerable.

You've made them more vulnerable though. It's not difficult maths. More tanks for the attacker and much more difficult to recover once you've been hit.

 

You're sticking with this regardless of the facts out of pure stubbornness. You even admitted your figures are wrong after I pointed it out but seem to just shrug your shoulders and pretend everything is as intended.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think demand for credits is that high? No one needs credits, if the prices go too high no one will want VIP etc, that badly. We will watch and see what happens, I don't think the prices will ever reach $4,000,000.

 

I sold a couple credits for 3 mil each pretty easily during the last world war.

 

Pretty sure someone bought the 6 mil credits that were on the market, too, because by the time I checked back, they were gone -- at that point in time, the credit market was completely devastated. Made me kind of wish I'd held out for more than 3 mil each. I'm sure at that point demand was so high I could've sold them for 4 mil each.

 

Average Price History doesn't really teach us anything about the current highest price things are going for on the market. Especially in war time, I'm constantly encountering higher prices than "Average Price" would have me believe.

 

All I'm saying is don't underestimate the market for something people will want without using real money to get it. Some of the older/bigger players on this game make 4 mil a day, they'd have no problems buying credits for 4 mil each if there was something specific they wanted.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sheepy did sell another metaverse to Grealind on a different planet one time. We all remember how well that turned out.

History does tend to repeat itself. And with that I end this. Let's see how long this will last until something else is changed because certain camps are angry they lost a few hundred infra.

  • Upvote 1

"In an honest service there is thin commons, low wages, and hard labor; in this, plenty and satiety, pleasure and ease, liberty and power; and who would not balance creditor on this side, when all the hazard that is run for it, at worst, is only a sour look or two at choking. No, a merry life and a short one, shall be my motto." - Bartholomew "Black Bart" Roberts


 


Green Enforcement Agency will rise again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I for one, 100% foresee credit prices to be upwards of 4 million. It'd take an idiot not to take advantage of the situation and sell for as high as possible while still low enough for players to buy.

 

Since the average player would simply want the credits, and not bother to form an economic union to boycott the purchasing of expensive Credits, well... here comes 4mil+ prices! :D

 

 

Psweet> pro-tip: don't listen to baronus if Prezyan disagrees with him

5:48 AM — +Eva-Beatrice sq**rts all over the walls

Eva-Beatrice> I'd let Sintiya conquer me anyday x)

10:56 PM — +Eva-Beatrice m*st*rb*tes in front of Prezyan

12:13 AM — +Eva-Beatrice has no one to !@#$ :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITT people don't understand supply and demand.

 

There is now more supply. Is there any more demand? Probably not.

 

I think increased demand is supposed to result from the new 500 material buying option and higher 10 credit per month spending limit.

 

Whether there's actual increased demand resulting from these factors or not remains to be seen. The real test will be the next global war. ...Although I suppose there's always increased demand then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ITT people don't understand supply and demand.

 

There is now more supply. Is there any more demand? Probably not.

 

But if you believe that credits are gonna sell for a little more than 2mil you're being very generous. Towards the end of the month they may when people get desperate to make a buck. But for the majority of the month expect them to stay around 3-4mil when they can sit on their asses and wait the market to play into there hands. 

22:26 +Kadin: too far man

22:26 +Kadin: too far

22:26 Lordofpuns[boC]: that's the point of incest Kadin

22:26 Lordofpuns[boC]: to go farther

22:27 Bet: or father

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once again I'll ask seeing as I was ignored.  Was this change to the war mechanics tested out on the test server?

 

I doubt it.  The maths wasn't even checked being as Sheepy got his tank caps wrong by 263%.  Just a small issue though, let's gloss over that and pretend it's all as intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something like this should have been tested on there first. In my opinion this make some alliances even more deadly, leading to yet again more boring wars. One mensa blitz and the fight is over... Don't do this to us Sheepy!

☾☆

Warrior of Dio

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Yes, it was tested on the test server, literally everything is tested on the test server. I can't even update the actual game without updating the test server first.

  • Upvote 2

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it was tested on the test server, literally everything is tested on the test server. I can't even update the actual game without updating the test server first.

 

To what length was it tested?  Something such as this needs extensive testing, so you understand how it will directly effect the game. From what I read, you wish to !@#$ over the defender (loser) for the rest of the war.  Seemingly to put a spot to high city count, low tier raiding... 

 

After 5 decent days of getting the shit kicked out of you, your war is over.  The next war will see countless rage threads about how shit this mechanic is.

  • Upvote 3

☾☆

Warrior of Dio

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To what length was it tested?  Something such as this needs extensive testing, so you understand how it will directly effect the game. From what I read, you wish to !@#$ over the defender (loser) for the rest of the war.  Seemingly to put a spot to high city count, low tier raiding... 

 

After 5 decent days of getting the shit kicked out of you, your war is over.  The next war will see countless rage threads about how shit this mechanic is.

 

By the same people who wanted it too. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your reply is you don't have to max military? Like seriously...? That works both ways you know. It's like you've forgotten other people who've to counter and declare wars. 

 

We arn't supposed to play the game, we're supposed to stack pixels. 

 

 

 

You don't have to have the max military built when you declare war, you know.

 

 

 

Sure you dont, only if you dont want to win. You're missing the fact that a lot of what you are trying to fix with these cap changes are not issues with the caps themselves. Its that the war system was heavily favored towards the aggressor. Successful tactical execution allowed for this to be used. 

 

Playing the game and monitoring it are two completely different things, from your standpoint this all makes sense. From ours it does not. 

 

The huge point gap created by these military caps will stop people from successfully being able to fight there opponents. Now if you add onto the fact that you are now recommending people declare without full military, wait 2-3 days then really fight is also silly. You have obviously ruined what was the best game mechanics in politics and war. A slight tweek to battle odds probably could have favored everyone better. 

 

None the less we are still dealing with the fact that nations with little to no military where being declared on, its not like we where fighting hyper well armed nations. Mensa nations still took 3 arrgh nations to take down, and most times it was still by a hair. They would have been the best example. Mind you our exact strategy was designed 100% around using up-declares to fight, which this hasnt solved. All your caps have done is make it so up declaring vs an armed nation is IMPOSSIBLE

 

 

To what length was it tested?  Something such as this needs extensive testing, so you understand how it will directly effect the game. From what I read, you wish to !@#$ over the defender (loser) for the rest of the war.  Seemingly to put a spot to high city count, low tier raiding... 

 

After 5 decent days of getting the shit kicked out of you, your war is over.  The next war will see countless rage threads about how shit this mechanic is.

 
I too have called this and I can personally promise arrgh will make those folks suffer terribly. Some of my closest friends have quit because of this update, and by god will I show everyone how stupid it really was.
Edited by Jacob Hanson
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even as a pixel-stacker, my goal is to get max military (or at least max Ground and Air forces)... playing a game where that's NOT the optimal military-building strategy -- either for the attacker or for the defender, but especially for the attacker -- doesn't make any sense.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even as a pixel-stacker, my goal is to get max military (or at least max Ground and Air forces)... playing a game where that's NOT the optimal military-building strategy -- either for the attacker or for the defender, but especially for the attacker -- doesn't make any sense.

 

Yep me too. As a filthy neutral such as myself I still have max military, besides boats.

  • Upvote 1

We have seized the means of production. Though union, and self-governance, we have organized between all peoples of the land.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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