12/16/2016 - Coming Winter Update

[Gnilraps]

I am chiming in with a response to Alex's announced decision to alter the rollout of his war updates. That thread got locked before I could speak my mind. Now I've even more reason to want to.

 

First of all, Alex's decision is a change to a change. This is dizzying. I think it is extremely good practice to do several of the things Alex did. He opened up a test server where all were free to experiment with the new system. What does this accomplish? Two things at least. First, he gets to tweak his changes before they go live. Second we get to learn how to make best strategic use of the upcoming changes. Win/win. Alex also announced in painful detail the how, why, and (intentionally ambiguous) when. We all knew the process he was taking, we all knew what would be possible before, during and after. We knew. No matter how you feel about the changes themselves, their rollout was being handled spectacularly transparently, even painfully so on several points. Anyway, what was good for us was good for him. At some point Alex felt confident enough to announce the rollout, he announced it, and alea iacta est. Or so we thought. Lo and behold, what was going to change has changed, but AFTER a group of players invested their assets into a strategic plan based on the test server and rollout announcement. Bad move, Alex.

 

Second of all, it is clear what has led to Alex's decision to change the rollout by delaying the spy ops portion of the update. That is, some players formed a strategic plan to take advantage of the announced update (which had been available for all to "test drive" on the test server - so definitely no surprises to anyone), and the group of players that were on the losing side of this strategic plan complained. In a game, players are expected to make strategic plans to take advantage of whatever is within the legal boundaries of the gaming environment. This is called gaming and when done well it leads to winning. Theoretically, this is a desired outcome in a game. And so my second point is that Alex's decision is antithetical to the gaming spirit. Sometimes arbitrary game changes happen which destroy a gained advantage, and these are understood as part of playing an evolving online game. But this was not an arbitrary decision, it was made specifically in reaction to a set of players and their dreaded "winning". This changed change is really no different in substance than the kid who quits as soon as he thinks he's going to lose. It's Lucy swooshing the football away from Charlie Brown's impending boot. In essence, Alex has moved a target that had squandered its chance to move itself. Admin has played its hand on one side, not the other.

 

The reason I am putting my thoughts out there for you all is this. I'm a gamer. This isn't the only game I play, but just as I try to make smart choices in the games I play, I also try to make smart choices about which games I play. As others have pointed out, this is not the first example of Admin abuse of power. What I am saying is that this latest unfortunate incident crystallizes for me that this game is on the top of my "to be replaced with a new game" list.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Gnilraps

[Alex]

I am chiming in with a response to Alex's announced decision to alter the rollout of his war updates. That thread got locked before I could speak my mind. Now I've even more reason to want to.

 

First of all, Alex's decision is a change to a change. This is dizzying. I think it is extremely good practice to do several of the things Alex did. He opened up a test server where all were free to experiment with the new system. What does this accomplish? Two things at least. First, he gets to tweak his changes before they go live. Second we get to learn how to make best strategic use of the upcoming changes. Win/win. Alex also announced in painful detail the how, why, and (intentionally ambiguous) when. We all knew the process he was taking, we all knew what would be possible before, during and after. We knew. No matter how you feel about the changes themselves, their rollout was being handled spectacularly transparently, even painfully so on several points. Anyway, what was good for us was good for him. At some point Alex felt confident enough to announce the rollout, he announced it, and alea iacta est. Or so we thought. Lo and behold, what was going to change has changed, but AFTER a group of players invested their assets into a strategic plan based on the test server and rollout announcement. Bad move, Alex.

 

Second of all, it is clear what has led to Alex's decision to change the rollout by delaying the spy ops portion of the update. That is, some players formed a strategic plan to take advantage of the announced update (which had been available for all to "test drive" on the test server - so definitely no surprises to anyone), and the group of players that were on the losing side of this strategic plan complained. In a game, players are expected to make strategic plans to take advantage of whatever is within the legal boundaries of the gaming environment. This is called gaming and when done well it leads to winning. Theoretically, this is a desired outcome in a game. And so my second point is that Alex's decision is antithetical to the gaming spirit. Sometimes arbitrary game changes happen which destroy a gained advantage, and these are understood as part of playing an evolving online game. But this was not an arbitrary decision, it was made specifically in reaction to a set of players and their dreaded "winning". This changed change is really no different in substance than the kid who quits as soon as he thinks he's going to lose. It's Lucy swooshing the football away from Charlie Brown's impending boot. In essence, Alex has moved a target that had squandered its chance to move itself. Admin has played its hand on one side, not the other.

 

The reason I am putting my thoughts out there for you all is this. I'm a gamer. This isn't the only game I play, but just as I try to make smart choices in the games I play, I also try to make smart choices about which games I play. As others have pointed out, this is not the first example of Admin abuse of power. What I am saying is that this latest unfortunate incident crystallizes for me that this game is on the top of my "to be replaced with a new game" list.

 

You are entirely incorrect in your analysis here.

 

The test server is where we test for bugs, yes. What happened in this situation was not a bug, and it was not something that could've been tested on the test server. The only reason I am taking any action in changing how the update is rolled out is because this is all caused by me in the first place - the fact that I disabled new war declarations had unintended consequences, and I am now trying to minimize the fallout from that.

[ComradeMilton]

I think it really just comes down to trusting if this change doesn't work he'll just do something else to try to fix it. He's not going to make the game shit and just leave it like that.

[Spooner]

Just to clarify -- in the patch going live soon, will spies do the damage announced with the patch, or will they continue to do !@#$-all to tanks/planes?

 

The wording on your post was a little confusing, some of our members are confused by what you meant.

[Phiney]

Alex is saying spys will maintain their current ability. Also, he is saying not disabling spies with the war system was a mistake, and using spies so aggressively so they could take advantage of the update spies are to going to receive is abuse of his mistake, which makes realising this pre to him disabling the war system and not informing him of it, a super shitty thing to do.

[Tywin Lannister]

While we're at it, from what I see, the potential issue was that if TEst was hit on spies like that, they would counter instantly and try to take out the opponent forces and gain air/ground controls before they completely lose their spies and lose up to 30% of their entire military type on an update spy attack. In this situation, TEst would only be able to attack after their spies were very well wiped out and they would lose up to 30% armies when declaring, hence going in on a major disadvantage caused by Alex. Like I said before though, kudos to TKR and all for exploiting his mistake, it was well thought out. 

 

The whole issue arose because Alex didn't think about this and made the mistake, which he accepts he did. This is more Alex fixing his own mistake if anything.  

[Thedark]

-snip- so they could take advantage of the update spies are to going to receive is abuse of his mistake, which makes realising this pre to him disabling the war system and not informing him of it, a super shitty thing to do.

 

For the the entirety of my time playing this game, in alliance warfare, countries would try to beat down the enemy military to zero and then damage infrastructure without performing 6 ground attacks that would beige them and not "winning" the war in-game. This, by virtue of the Alex attempting to change that now so you *must* beige, we can see this was an originally unintended consequence of a legal game mechanic, that you, I and every other competent player has exploited to it's fullest extent, There are many who as a result of this tactic lost thousands upon thousands more infrastructure than they would have, to the point that doing so is more effective than using a nuclear weapon. 

 

We all knew this, we know Alex didn't like it much, but everyone did it anyway because it was within game mechanics to do so. 

 

Playing legally within game mechanics is not a "super shitty thing to do", it's just smart. 

[Alex]

Playing legally within game mechanics is not a "super shitty thing to do", it's just smart. 

 

And so long as you're not doing anything against the rules (which no rules were broken here) I agree with you. Even though it was my mistake that allowed you to take advantage of this situation, I'm still letting you mostly keep that advantage, and certainly not rolling anything back or giving everyone full spies again like was suggested by some.

[Beatrix]

While we're at it, from what I see, the potential issue was that if TEst was hit on spies like that, they would counter instantly and try to take out the opponent forces and gain air/ground controls before they completely lose their spies and lose up to 30% of their entire military type on an update spy attack. In this situation, TEst would only be able to attack after their spies were very well wiped out and they would lose up to 30% armies when declaring, hence going in on a major disadvantage caused by Alex. Like I said before though, kudos to TKR and all for exploiting his mistake, it was well thought out. 

 

The whole issue arose because Alex didn't think about this and made the mistake, which he accepts he did. This is more Alex fixing his own mistake if anything.  

 

I liked Sheepys' post if only because he admitted it's his mistake. 

 

However, it's a pretty shame that you liked this comment.

 

 

the potential issue that TEst is facing is arguably better than being sneak attacked by many major alliances all at once. The element of surprise and a quick blitz is what wins you a war from the get-go. 

 

In the current situation, Alex is removing the advantage to those that used his faulty mechanics, while also taking away the disadvantage of being unprepared for war. This means that TEst & the rest of the club can get ready for war, organize themselves, make a war plan, distribute resources, gather allies, and so on.

 

If this update hadn't been rolled, then perhaps all of TEst members would have 0 slots and their millitary virtually destroyed in one success blitz. Mensa wanted to exchange the element of surprise to use the new mechanics, and instead isn't going to get to do either.

[Woot]

Alex, am I reading that last post in the other thread right? You completely and utterly !@#$ed us and gave us the worst outcome imaginable, an outcome worse than what anyone complaining in the thread was expecting. 

 

Put the new spy system in, and then give them all their spies back and don't refund us a cent. It would be ten times better than letting us keep a spy advantage and then making that spy advantage next to worthless.

 

All we can do with the current spy system is blow up one or two more nukes per nation than we could have if we didn't have a few days head start. Current spies do nothing in the coventional war. We would never have sacrificed the element of surprise for that in a million years.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Woot

[Alex]

I liked Sheepys' post if only because he admitted it's his mistake. 

 

However, it's a pretty shame that you liked this comment.

 

 

the potential issue that TEst is facing is arguably better than being sneak attacked by many major alliances all at once. The element of surprise and a quick blitz is what wins you a war from the get-go. 

 

In the current situation, Alex is removing the advantage to those that used his faulty mechanics, while also taking away the disadvantage of being unprepared for war. This means that TEst & the rest of the club can get ready for war, organize themselves, make a war plan, distribute resources, gather allies, and so on.

 

If this update hadn't been rolled, then perhaps all of TEst members would have 0 slots and their millitary virtually destroyed in one success blitz. Mensa wanted to exchange the element of surprise to use the new mechanics, and instead isn't going to get to do either.

 

I don't understand what delaying a small bit of the war update has to do with any of this? As I understand it, you spied them yesterday or even two days ago - they would've had that time to find allies or whatever regardless. This has nothing to do with delaying the spy updates.

[Gnilraps]

You are entirely incorrect in your analysis here.

 

The test server is where we test for bugs, yes. What happened in this situation was not a bug, and it was not something that could've been tested on the test server. The only reason I am taking any action in changing how the update is rolled out is because this is all caused by me in the first place - the fact that I disabled new war declarations had unintended consequences, and I am now trying to minimize the fallout from that.

 

I'm not going to get into an argument with you, it really does not appear that you are listening. But I'll respond.

 

You say I am entirely incorrect in my analysis, but the only point which you offer a different shade of meaning is to suggest that the specific thing you are changing about the change is something that could not have been tested because it relates to an error in your judgment. Of course I agree with you that the "rollout" procedure was not part of the test server. That was not at all what I was talking about anyway. What you were rolling out was tested. That's my point. And since what you were rolling out was testable and tested both by you and by us, and then the parameters of your rollout were set by you and understood by us (and even complained about)... you cast the die.

 

Then you uncast the die AFTER a segment of the gaming community had already made significant investment in time, resources, risk, and relationships. They made a gambit based on all of the details that were fully laid out on the table for everyone.

 

If you then made a mistake, we were all equally "victim" of it.

 

Your latest mistake, to change the details of your rollout, creates a class of victims. We are not ALL victim of this latest mistake, ONLY those who made their gambit based on the widely known details are the victim of your latest mistake.

 

I sincerely hope you log out and think about this long enough to grasp ahold of what I am saying. If you cannot, you ought not administrate a game.

[Beatrix]

I don't understand what delaying a small bit of the war update has to do with any of this? As I understand it, you spied them yesterday or even two days ago - they would've had that time to find allies or whatever regardless. This has nothing to do with delaying the spy updates.

 

(putting aside the fact I didn't spy out anyone)

Put yourself in the shoes of Mensa & Co for a moment(before your decision)

 

You can surprise attack, use all force, delete the millitary as fast as possible and start beiging/grinding down their infra. This also doesn't allow the defender to organize himself properly, distribute resources(mun, gas, etc), and rally up allies.

 

Instead, Mensa-sphere decided to give up this major advantage because they expected to get a different advantage in return - spy superiority in the new system. They decided to kill spies - which lead to them being caught, and they knew this will happen.

Mensa-sphere has decided that because TEst cannot declare war- it's a worthy exchange.

 

However, instead of exchanging the element of surprise for spying advantage - they lose the element of surprise, and they lose the spying advantage because you decide to roll it out later. Having more spies w/o the new system is really not much of an advantage.

 

 

 

In other words, this decision doesn't give Mensa-sphere any advantage - it gives them a disadvantage, a very serious one that might cost them the war. And it's all because they simply played with the game mechanics.

 

 

(tl;dr - Mensa/TKR-sphere could've waited without spying, then launch a massive attack the old fashioned way. Instead, they used the opportunity to play with the new mechanics, but because you're not going to implement the new mechanics, Mensa/TKR-sphere can't launch a massive attack and their spy efforts were wasted, leaving them in a crippling disadvantage)

Edited December 26, 2016 by Beatrix

[Insert Name Here]

(putting aside the fact I didn't spy out anyone)

Put yourself in the shoes of Mensa & Co for a moment(before your decision)

 

You can surprise attack, use all force, delete the millitary as fast as possible and start beiging/grinding down their infra. This also doesn't allow the defender to organize himself properly, distribute resources(mun, gas, etc), and rally up allies.

 

Instead, Mensa-sphere decided to give up this major advantage because they expected to get a different advantage in return - spy superiority in the new system. They decided to kill spies - which lead to them being caught, and they knew this will happen.

Mensa-sphere has decided that because TEst cannot declare war- it's a worthy exchange.

 

However, instead of exchanging the element of surprise for spying advantage - they lose the element of surprise, and they lose the spying advantage because you decide to roll it out later. Having more spies w/o the new system is really not much of an advantage.

 

 

 

In other words, this decision doesn't give Mensa-sphere any advantage - it gives them a disadvantage, a very serious one that might cost them the war. And it's all because they simply played with the game mechanics.

 

 

(tl;dr - Mensa/TKR-sphere could've waited without spying, then launch a massive attack the old fashioned way. Instead, they used the opportunity to play with the new mechanics, but because you're not going to implement the new mechanics, Mensa/TKR-sphere can't launch a massive attack and their spy efforts were wasted, leaving them in a crippling disadvantage)

 

 

Yup, I've just read the last post on that other thread which got locked. I'm not swimming in money, so I'd never have targeted enemy spies if I knew the spy buff wasn't coming into effect. So will I get my money back, Sheepy (not even counting the cash to replace dead spies, just the cost of the operations)?

 

Honestly, I don't wanna add to the drama and all, but this constant moving of the goalposts (we lost the element of surprise amongst other things) is an absolute joke. How do you intend on compensating our side? Coz we're being royally screwed through no fault of our own...

Edited December 26, 2016 by Insert Name Here

[Tywin Lannister]

(putting aside the fact I didn't spy out anyone)

Put yourself in the shoes of Mensa & Co for a moment(before your decision)

 

You can surprise attack, use all force, delete the millitary as fast as possible and start beiging/grinding down their infra. This also doesn't allow the defender to organize himself properly, distribute resources(mun, gas, etc), and rally up allies.

 

Instead, Mensa-sphere decided to give up this major advantage because they expected to get a different advantage in return - spy superiority in the new system. They decided to kill spies - which lead to them being caught, and they knew this will happen.

Mensa-sphere has decided that because TEst cannot declare war- it's a worthy exchange.

 

However, instead of exchanging the element of surprise for spying advantage - they lose the element of surprise, and they lose the spying advantage because you decide to roll it out later. Having more spies w/o the new system is really not much of an advantage.

 

 

 

In other words, this decision doesn't give Mensa-sphere any advantage - it gives them a disadvantage, a very serious one that might cost them the war. And it's all because they simply played with the game mechanics.

 

 

(tl;dr - Mensa/TKR-sphere could've waited without spying, then launch a massive attack the old fashioned way. Instead, they used the opportunity to play with the new mechanics, but because you're not going to implement the new mechanics, Mensa/TKR-sphere can't launch a massive attack and their spy efforts were wasted, leaving them in a crippling disadvantage)

 

I'm not really bothering getting into an argument with you because it has no use, but this one thing you keep on saying, distribute resources? What on earth is that? Who keeps their resources in the alliance bank and distributes it before war? What goes on over at tTO? 

Edited December 26, 2016 by Tywin Lannister

[LordRahl2]

Yup, I've just read the last post on that other thread which got locked. I'm not swimming in money, so I'd never have targeted enemy spies if I knew the spy buff wasn't coming into effect. So will I get my money back, Sheepy (not even counting the cash to replace dead spies, just the cost of the operations)?

 

Honestly, I don't wanna add to the drama and all, but this constant moving of the goalposts (we lost the element of surprise amongst other things) is an absolute joke. How do you intend on compensating our side? Coz we're being royally screwed through no fault of our own...

 

Its Okay.  Like Kemal said, moving the goal posts to increase the difficulty level is exactly what you should do when you have mastered a single player game.  Nobody should play CIV on 'warlord' or EU as France after they have figured out the game mechanics.

 

Its just that the other side(s) are not so brilliant so they need some game balancing.

[Beatrix]

I'm not really bothering getting into an argument with you because it has no use, but this one thing you keep on saying, distribute resources? What on earth is that? Who keeps their resources in the alliance bank and distributes it before war? What goes on over at tTO? 

 

Take for example members who don't have enough of a resource because they were recently involved in war(or whatever reason).

[Tywin Lannister]

Take for example members who don't have enough of a resource because they were recently involved in war(or whatever reason).

 

Nothing like that here. Every member is responsible for their own war chests. No spoon-feeding there. Our tax rates are 0 I believe. 

[Rozalia]

(putting aside the fact I didn't spy out anyone)

Put yourself in the shoes of Mensa & Co for a moment(before your decision)

 

You can surprise attack, use all force, delete the millitary as fast as possible and start beiging/grinding down their infra. This also doesn't allow the defender to organize himself properly, distribute resources(mun, gas, etc), and rally up allies.

 

Instead, Mensa-sphere decided to give up this major advantage because they expected to get a different advantage in return - spy superiority in the new system. They decided to kill spies - which lead to them being caught, and they knew this will happen.

Mensa-sphere has decided that because TEst cannot declare war- it's a worthy exchange.

 

However, instead of exchanging the element of surprise for spying advantage - they lose the element of surprise, and they lose the spying advantage because you decide to roll it out later. Having more spies w/o the new system is really not much of an advantage.

 

 

 

In other words, this decision doesn't give Mensa-sphere any advantage - it gives them a disadvantage, a very serious one that might cost them the war. And it's all because they simply played with the game mechanics.

 

 

(tl;dr - Mensa/TKR-sphere could've waited without spying, then launch a massive attack the old fashioned way. Instead, they used the opportunity to play with the new mechanics, but because you're not going to implement the new mechanics, Mensa/TKR-sphere can't launch a massive attack and their spy efforts were wasted, leaving them in a crippling disadvantage)

 

Nukes have already been lost due to either being destroyed or decomed. The targeted alliances were already pretty bulked up due to the Alpha/Fark/Polaris war. Also to say "could cost us the war" is to be dramatic, the overwhelming odds are in your favour whatever were to happen. I imagine you say it to help sell your post better but please don't, unneeded.

Edited December 26, 2016 by Rozalia

[Beatrix]

Nothing like that here. Every member is responsible for their own war chests. No spoon-feeding there. Our tax rates are 0 I believe. 

It's an example, really, but it can apply to everything from food to uranium or steel. 

[Beatrix]

Nukes have already been lost due to either being destroyed or decomed. The targeted alliances were already pretty bulked up due to the Alpha/Fark/Polaris war. Also to say "could cost us the war" is to be dramatic, the odds are in your favour whatever were to happen. I imagine you say it to help sell your post better but please don't, unneeded.

Odds are infact in the favor of TKR/Mensa-sphere. This doesn't mean that Sheepy didn't heavily distort them in your favor. (even if you're still the underdog)

 

I accept the nuke destroyed/decom argument, but sadly this isn't nearly as important as having a wide initial strike.

Edited December 26, 2016 by Beatrix

[Phiney]

You guys are vastly overestimated your opsec. It was known before you started spying. 'giving away this advantage' isn't a thing.

[Insert Name Here]

You guys are vastly overestimated your opsec. It was known before you started spying. 'giving away this advantage' isn't a thing.

 

 

Regardless, we wouldn't have risked being caught spying if there was no spy buff on the horizon, The reward wouldn't be worth the risk. This retroactive measure only punishes our side and saying otherwise would be insulting people's intelligence.

Edited December 26, 2016 by Insert Name Here

[Tywin Lannister]

Regardless, we wouldn't have risked being caught spying if there was no spy buff on the horizon, The reward wouldn't be worth the risk. This retroactive measure only punishes our side and saying otherwise would be insulting people's intelligence.

 

Wouldn't have mattered though. As Phiney mentioned, you over-estimate the Opsec and things get out. Everyone was just relaxed as Sheepy had talked about disabling the war system so people were relaxed due to that. Like I said, many weren't even around because of things being disabled. As much as I hate to repeat it, it is poor Alex's mistake here and that's about it. 

[Gnilraps]

Wouldn't have mattered though. As Phiney mentioned, you over-estimate the Opsec and things get out. Everyone was just relaxed as Sheepy had talked about disabling the war system so people were relaxed due to that. Like I said, many weren't even around because of things being disabled. As much as I hate to repeat it, it is poor Alex's mistake here and that's about it. 

 

You all keep getting this one point wrong.

 

There were TWO mistakes.

 

The FIRST mistake was to leave spy ops open. We were all equal victims of that mistake.

 

The SECOND mistake was to delay the spy ops portion of the rollout. ONLY those who took strategic advantage of the situation are victims of the second mistake.

 

The second mistake is FAR WORSE than the first.