Jump to content
Alex

PROJECT PROPOSAL - Insurgency Program

Recommended Posts

I'm looking to add a lot of new National Projects to the game to increase diversity, specialization, and dynamism in-game (while giving larger nations more to do and more options to pick from.) So expect a lot of posts like these. Initially I'd just like to get feedback on the ideas and proposals for number tweaks.

Name: Insurgency Program

Description: Enables your nation to be a better state-sponsor of terrorism. 

What it does: Buffs the "Terrorism" espionage action in-game, allowing you to destroy up to 100 infrastructure in one attack (from the current 35 max)

Proposed Cost: $20,000,000, 2,000 Munitions, 2,000 Gasoline

---

Now, please offer your thoughts. Numbers could be tweaked from amount of damage you can do, to the cost of the project.

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alex said:

What it does: Buffs the "Terrorism" espionage action in-game, allowing you to destroy up to 100 infrastructure in one attack (from the current 35 max)

1 hour ago, Paul Warburg said:

100 infra isnt enough for it to be used. Id think itd have to be atleast 500 for it to be feasible.

Why does it have to be a solid number instead of a percent? What if it was something like 5%? 50 for 1k infra, 100 for 2k infra, etc.

It even makes sense logically, Alex. If you want to attack a building, you'd have more targets which are larger in a larger city. 9/11 wasn't in Oklahoma City because OKC didn't have towers the size of the Twin Towers. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, WISD0MTREE said:

Why does it have to be a solid number instead of a percent? What if it was something like 5%? 50 for 1k infra, 100 for 2k infra, etc.

It even makes sense logically, Alex. If you want to attack a building, you'd have more targets which are larger in a larger city. 9/11 wasn't in Oklahoma City because OKC didn't have towers the size of the Twin Towers. 

This is a better idea than mine.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean it sounds good but realistically, given the existing or planned project choices, would people really choose this project? The only real use will come from people randomly spying on others with this terrorism to cause infra damage. During a war, this will probably not be used as much. It takes a precious project slot for most mid tier nations making it a bit of a fancy. At 20 million plus another 6-10m in resources it seems a little expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul Warburg said:

This project is focused towards whales I believe

The whole game is tbh

Alright for a more serious response. The problem is that this is a war project meant for people who do not fight in wars. You do not reach 23+ cities by consistently fighting. These people are risk averse, which is why they have high growth. While this project isn't to bad in itself, it just flat out wont be utilized as smaller nations have more important improvements to buy and whales never fight to begin with.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeotheGreat said:

The whole game is tbh

Alright for a more serious response. The problem is that this is a war project meant for people who do not fight in wars. You do not reach 23+ cities by consistently fighting. These people are risk averse, which is why they have high growth. While this project isn't to bad in itself, it just flat out wont be utilized as smaller nations have more important improvements to buy and whales never fight to begin with.

that is completely incorrect, I am pretty sure I have fought in every major war except for 1 and I have 29 cities.  What helps you grow is to not sit in some shitty ass alliance that charges you ridiculous amounts of taxes that don't let you grow.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To my knowledge, nobody uses spy ops to destroy infra, and this would only be useful against very large whales, at best. Also, given your penchant for wanting to stop inflammatory remarks/names/things (i.e. no Nazis, white supremacists, etc.), a project about state-sponsored terrorism may be a little...bad.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Numbers aside, I don't think this actually can be balanced. In order to be a useful addition an idea needs to add a meaningful aspect to the game, correct a balance issue, or address a basic quality of life concern. This doesn't really do any of those. This also has a fatal binary flaw. If the damage is sufficient to actually be useful, I feel it becomes broken as it becomes the new meta for dealing damage. Why spend 100s of millions or even billions on an actual war if I can use spies to do the same damage for 50 mil. If damage isn't high to be useful, its underpowered and therefore a waste of time.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Paul Warburg said:

100 infra isnt enough for it to be used. Id think itd have to be atleast 500 for it to be feasible.

100 Infra destroyed (every day) for a nation with 4K infra is $10m. For 3.5K infra, it's $7.5m. For 3K infra it's $5m.

500 would be an insane amount (of monetary damage) at high levels of infrastructure.

7 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

What would be the cost of the terrorism spy attack? would it be unchanged?

Under the current proposal, yes.

7 hours ago, WISD0MTREE said:

Why does it have to be a solid number instead of a percent? What if it was something like 5%? 50 for 1k infra, 100 for 2k infra, etc.

It even makes sense logically, Alex. If you want to attack a building, you'd have more targets which are larger in a larger city. 9/11 wasn't in Oklahoma City because OKC didn't have towers the size of the Twin Towers. 

A percent would mean a ton of damage for nations with large quantities of infrastructure, and extremely trivial amounts for small nations. 5% of 1K is 50, which costs $230K to replace. 5% of 3K infra is 150 infra, which is ~$8m worth of damage. For someone that could be used against you twice a day, every day, I don't think people are going to be okay with taking that much damage.

A flat number makes more sense, imo, because then it can be balanced for large infra nations, and there's not really a huge detrimental effect for small nations (who likely wouldn't be faced with nations that have the project, anyway.)

3 hours ago, Dr Rush said:

Numbers aside, I don't think this actually can be balanced. In order to be a useful addition an idea needs to add a meaningful aspect to the game, correct a balance issue, or address a basic quality of life concern. This doesn't really do any of those. This also has a fatal binary flaw. If the damage is sufficient to actually be useful, I feel it becomes broken as it becomes the new meta for dealing damage. Why spend 100s of millions or even billions on an actual war if I can use spies to do the same damage for 50 mil. If damage isn't high to be useful, its underpowered and therefore a waste of time.

I don't disagree, it obviously wouldn't be the most practical project. And the intent was not to make "Terrorism" a primary espionage operations for use in wartime. The idea is just that this project would be an investment in the ability to troll other nations; the "Terrorize Civilians" operation is cheap and has a high rate of success; this project just allows you to specialize in trolling people, essentially. Like all projects, you wouldn't have to get it if you didn't want it. However, I think having more options is always a good thing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong thread ignore:

Personally I'd prefer AA to be default on naval ships (like cities fight back against soldiers) and the project instead gives you a carrier per X ships - so once you've finished your city air slots you can get a few more planes than the opposition.

Edited by Flanderlion
Edit: Wrong thread, thanks Tank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Flanderlion said:

Personally I'd prefer AA to be default on naval ships (like cities fight back against soldiers) and the project instead gives you a carrier per X ships - so once you've finished your city air slots you can get a few more planes than the opposition.

i think you're in the wrong thread

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Paul Warburg said:

100 infra isnt enough for it to be used. Id think itd have to be atleast 500 for it to be feasible.

What are you talking about?  100 Infra hit on a 2000+ Infra city would make this Project so much more valuable with damage to cost ratio, and it'd be a way to get around the Resistance mechanic in a war.

I'd be ok with this.

Edited by Buorhann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LeotheGreat said:

You do not reach 23+ cities by consistently fighting. These people are risk averse, which is why they have high growth. 

Lolwut? 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LeotheGreat said:

The whole game is tbh

Alright for a more serious response. The problem is that this is a war project meant for people who do not fight in wars. You do not reach 23+ cities by consistently fighting. These people are risk averse, which is why they have high growth. While this project isn't to bad in itself, it just flat out wont be utilized as smaller nations have more important improvements to buy and whales never fight to begin with.

https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=15294

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see how this could be utilized by mid tier nations to annoy the hell outta people like me, and I like the idea of a new useful project to buy. Seems like a decent update

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LeotheGreat said:

You are the exception, not the rule.

Not true. I'm 300 days younger than you and already have 5 more cities than you have. I think you are the exception, not the other way around.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty good feedback so far, and general support. Anyone got any better project name ideas? I don't really know what you would call a project for state-sponsored terror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its called the CIA, atleast according to any movie with the CIA in it.

 

Side note, Connor your war numbers are terrible, you are actually proving his point.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Conner Temple said:

Not true. I'm 300 days younger than you and already have 5 more cities than you have. I think you are the exception, not the other way around.

You never did a real war, you are proving his point

I did more in this war with Arrgh than what you did in your nation history (and Arrgh players delete their units after the first strike :D)

Edited by Micchan
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

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