Ogaden Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Lets see if people manage to beat us now that we literally have one arm tied behind our backs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fronin Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Hip hip hurray! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted February 23, 2016 Author Share Posted February 23, 2016 Hip hip hurray! Don't celebrate yet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorton Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 it was getting to hard to roll nations that has already been rolled. now it will be easier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 (edited) really? U still have a head to hammer, two legs to kick and a shoulders to bump.. ..Arrgh! Edited February 23, 2016 by Arthur James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayor Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin Lannister Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 Both arms tied you mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan77 Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 If it was such an unbeatable strategy that it needed changing so badly, surely everyone would have been doing it. This change just panders to pixel huggers with bad city builds. Also, this is more likely to reduce credit purchases (I refuse to call them donations) than increase them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woot Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 It would have been nice if people had at least tried to counter these builds within the framework of the game, before running to Sheepy to petition a massive nerf on it. It seems like it was absolutely out of the question that a normal player could do anything with any city except immediately dump 1500 or 2000 infra in it to maximize the yield of their pixel farm, and the game mechanics had to be reworked so that this could never have serious military consequences. I regret that I never got to go to war with you guys while low score tactics still worked, it would have been a blast. o7 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGqWnD-Q9MA 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spite Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 I have avoided posting much on this because as an involved party it's easy to look butthurt whatever side you take. My thoughts are that "submarining" or coming back from a war maintaining a low score and up-hitting is a very strong tactic and was very clever of Arrgh to do. It was particularly impressive they managed to maintain cohesion (well, the main group of heavy hitters anyway) despite being trampled. The problem is when peace is declared and the nations don't rebuild. Raiding is one thing, but staying low and picking off weak accounts permanently is a bit of a mean thing to do. It's not new either- the 99% guys used to do it and it was annoying as hell then. I'm all for pixel smashing, but not everyone can be a raider, and low accounts with high military need lots of farms just to maintain their armies. So it becomes a kind of parasitic relationship, and since the low score nations don't really have anything to lose, it's just not worth the effort for the big alliances to counter them. When a position is making the majority of players unhappy AND it's impossible (or extremely unprofitable) to counter, then there is a problem with the game. I'm not sure this solution is the one I would have picked, but it'll certainly nerf the tactic. 5 Quote ☾☆ Priest of Dio just because the Nazis did something doesn't mean it's automatically wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 I have avoided posting much on this because as an involved party it's easy to look butthurt whatever side you take. My thoughts are that "submarining" or coming back from a war maintaining a low score and up-hitting is a very strong tactic and was very clever of Arrgh to do. It was particularly impressive they managed to maintain cohesion (well, the main group of heavy hitters anyway) despite being trampled. The problem is when peace is declared and the nations don't rebuild. Raiding is one thing, but staying low and picking off weak accounts permanently is a bit of a mean thing to do. It's not new either- the 99% guys used to do it and it was annoying as hell then. I'm all for pixel smashing, but not everyone can be a raider, and low accounts with high military need lots of farms just to maintain their armies. So it becomes a kind of parasitic relationship, and since the low score nations don't really have anything to lose, it's just not worth the effort for the big alliances to counter them. When a position is making the majority of players unhappy AND it's impossible (or extremely unprofitable) to counter, then there is a problem with the game. I'm not sure this solution is the one I would have picked, but it'll certainly nerf the tactic. a month of war that they declared is not permanent and was atypical plenty of people are on the DNR list which is ridiculously cheap to get on at least nobody is pretending that it's about new nations anymore (hint: this game is very much designed to all but force newbies into alliances to begin with) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted February 23, 2016 Administrators Share Posted February 23, 2016 As mentioned previously, this isn't about you or your tactics, but about patching the loophole in the game that would allow a high military capacity nation to fight a low military capacity nation. And I didn't even remove that ability, just gave the lower military capacity nations a bit of an advantage. I also inadvertently increased the cap on taps tanks, so you can always just build even more tanks and steamroll people, which is probably ideal because that increases your loot. 1 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pfeiffer Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 If there's no penalty beyond negative income for people who stay below their improvement level, then this is a good change. I was all for a steadily increasing penalty per city below the improvement cap, which would ultimately make the nation unusable. Military caps going ever lower, and actually LOSING already purchased units was something I thought would work...but since that's not happening, the change is necessary. Quote ☾☆ Chairman Emeritus of Mensa HQ ☾☆ "It's not about the actual fish, themselves. Fish are not important in this context. It's about fish-ing, the act of fishing itself." -Jack O'Neill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valakias Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 If you are convinced that such changes were unneeded than you were either someone who didn't care or someone who made his living out of the current system. Guess who complained the most on this thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spooner Posted February 24, 2016 Share Posted February 24, 2016 If you are convinced that such changes were unneeded than you were either someone who didn't care or someone who made his living out of the current system. Guess who complained the most on this thread? I am neither of these. Quote ☾☆ High Priest of Dio 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.