Administrators Popular Post Alex Posted March 8, 2018 Administrators Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 This proposal is pretty straightforward. It would serve two purposes: 1) Eliminates the "Double Buy" 2) Eliminates the need to do blitzes at the game's midnight. The game mechanics would no longer be reliant on that specific hour change. How it would work: I'm going to use Soldiers as an example. Every day, you can buy 1000 Soldiers per Barracks. Under this proposed change, you would instead be able to buy 83 (1000/12) Soldiers per Barracks per turn. This would stack up to 12 turns (1 day) for a total of 1000 Soldiers per day. So you would have some 'reserve' of units that could be recruited instantly, and each turn that would increase by 1/12 of the daily amount, capped at 12/12 of the daily amount. It would make sense to do a slight tweak to unit numbers to account for dividing by 12, I.E. Barracks allow you to recruit 1,200 instead of 1,000 soldiers per day, meaning +100 per turn instead of +83.3 per turn. This has been proposed, and I think was mostly well received. I want to bring it back up again for further consideration. 45 16 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...
Dio Brando Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 As a refresher, why was this put on the back-burner? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 It also eliminates any possibility for a large nation to even think about trying to hit back the plethora of smaller nations that can declare war on them, who they cannot touch. It would also probably make it more difficult to turn wars around, but we would have to test it out first. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micchan Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Not sure if I got it, example If I do a downdeclare before the update I can buy max units (let's say 120k soldiers) but after the update I can only add 10k soldiers? And to be able to buy the 120k soldiers of thay day I have to wait 12 turns? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 that would be correct, now technically your double buy has turned into a 13/12ths buy, if this is approved. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Theodosius Posted March 8, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 5 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said: that would be correct, now technically your double buy has turned into a 13/12ths buy, if this is approved. I'd put this proposal into the same column of the reversed war changes. It cuts down on tactics and strategy and oversimplifies the war system, turning it more casual. No. 15 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin076 Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 6 2 Quote Chief Financial Officer of The Syndicate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Spaceman Thrax Posted March 8, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 I love this idea in theory. If you think "allowing blitzes to be functional any time rather than just at update" makes things more casual I'd respectfully disagree. As things are, the ability to be on at update is a massive advantage to certain players based, basically, on their real life location and circumstances, which is beyond silly. (And this is speaking as someone who update is actually pretty convenient for, timing wise). The devil would be in the details though. Balance wise I'm not certain 12 ticks is the appropriate amount to be able to store, for example... no reason it couldn't be any other number. Try it on the test server, imo, and see how it plays. 9 1 Quote Slaughter the shits of the world. They poison the air you breathe. ~ William S. Burroughs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post rapmanej Posted March 8, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 11 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said: I love this idea in theory. If you think "allowing blitzes to be functional any time rather than just at update" makes things more casual I'd respectfully disagree. As things are, the ability to be on at update is a massive advantage to certain players based, basically, on their real life location and circumstances, which is beyond silly. (And this is speaking as someone who update is actually pretty convenient for, timing wise). The devil would be in the details though. Balance wise I'm not certain 12 ticks is the appropriate amount to be able to store, for example... no reason it couldn't be any other number. Try it on the test server, imo, and see how it plays. Emphasis mine. We already did a while back. (think last summer or sometime before that). It was a disaster, hence the reason the changes were first abandoned. It offers no hope to turn wars around, and was generally an unpleasant experience. Strategy wise, this was paired with removing caps for military improvements, and a further discussed idea of creating a market for military units. I could see trying that again with that last parameter, but I have extreme doubts. Unfortunately, without that change, (and coupled with fortify being nerfed out of existence) this just becomes a way for aggressors to win wars without having to plan a strategy. At least a well executed double buy gave nations a chance to claw their way back. 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Thrax Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, rapmanej said: Emphasis mine. We already did a while back. (think last summer or sometime before that). It was a disaster, hence the reason the changes were first abandoned. It offers no hope to turn wars around, and was generally an unpleasant experience. Strategy wise, this was paired with removing caps for military improvements, and a further discussed idea of creating a market for military units. I could see trying that again with that last parameter, but I have extreme doubts. Unfortunately, without that change, (and coupled with fortify being nerfed out of existence) this just becomes a way for aggressors to win wars without having to plan a strategy. At least a well executed double buy gave nations a chance to claw their way back. Gotcha. So screw it then, unless there's also accompanying changes that may get at the rest of that? I do still very much like the idea of eliminating that critical period for activity, if it can be teased out, somehow. Edit: Also, thanks for catching me up. I was wondering why the idea seemed so ill received by people haha. Edited March 8, 2018 by Spaceman Thrax Quote Slaughter the shits of the world. They poison the air you breathe. ~ William S. Burroughs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
丂ħ̧i̧₣ɫ̵γ͘ ̶™ Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Sure, make it so propaganda bureau gibs you 1 extra turn so, 14/12 at update. Also makes it so you have to top off military if you don't get 0'd out. More logins=more traffic. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micchan Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 What about 2 updates per day (only for military)? If before your max soldiers per day was 100k now could be 60k 00:00-12:00 and 60k 12:00-24:00, more units per day but not all at the same time reducing the power of the downdeclares and giving more ability to fight back if you were unable to be online at the update 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rapmanej Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 31 minutes ago, Spaceman Thrax said: Gotcha. So screw it then, unless there's also accompanying changes that may get at the rest of that? I do still very much like the idea of eliminating that critical period for activity, if it can be teased out, somehow. Edit: Also, thanks for catching me up. I was wondering why the idea seemed so ill received by people haha. Yeah, I wouldn't be so strongly against it if it wasn't already tested before and soundly rejected. That being said, I'd be willing to give it another shot with a more active Test participation, but I wouldn't hold my breath, and certainly not without accompanying changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bortwald Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 You can set up day change to change everyday, making the last turn of the day lasting 1 (or 3) hours. So days will be of 23 (or 25) hours and the day change line will move everyday! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codonian Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 I actually like this idea HOWEVER, it obviously needs to be tested in the appropriate server beforehand. No more trial changes or untested ones if possible. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roquentin Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Alex said: This proposal is pretty straightforward. It would serve two purposes: 1) Eliminates the "Double Buy" 2) Eliminates the need to do blitzes at the game's midnight. The game mechanics would no longer be reliant on that specific hour change. How it would work: I'm going to use Soldiers as an example. Every day, you can buy 1000 Soldiers per Barracks. Under this proposed change, you would instead be able to buy 83 (1000/12) Soldiers per Barracks per turn. This would stack up to 12 turns (1 day) for a total of 1000 Soldiers per day. So you would have some 'reserve' of units that could be recruited instantly, and each turn that would increase by 1/12 of the daily amount, capped at 12/12 of the daily amount. It would make sense to do a slight tweak to unit numbers to account for dividing by 12, I.E. Barracks allow you to recruit 1,200 instead of 1,000 soldiers per day, meaning +100 per turn instead of +83.3 per turn. This has been proposed, and I think was mostly well received. I want to bring it back up again for further consideration. This or something similar would be good as the game is too update-centric. For a lot of time zones as mentioned, it's very inconvenient. Even in the US, for a lot of people, it's still hours where they probably having something else going on. For instance, even with Daylight savings, it's 5 PM on the west coast. Is someone expected to always somehow be able to make room for it IRL? It's important to consider this with the buff to fortify's attacking casualties. This isn't exactly like the stacking system tested two summers ago since the stacking system was actually more favorable to waiting around and stacking if you got attacked and it was along with buffing infra as part of score. It doesn't need to be per turn necessarily but being able to buy the full amounts right before and after update disproportionately favors people who can be online at update and it's a flaw with the game many have mentioned before. Edited March 8, 2018 by Roquentin 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Curufinwe Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Just now, Codonian said: I actually like this idea HOWEVER, it obviously needs to be tested in the appropriate server beforehand. No more trial changes or untested ones if possible. That Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Clooney Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 Absolutely should be play tested if it hasn't been already. But as an idea that has a lot of positive potential, I endorse this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 I dont know how hard this would be to code in, but can you make it so that players can set their military reset time to a time of their choosing? So if game update is at 5am for someone, they can change the time that their military rebuy occurs to be say 5pm instead of 5am. and make it something that can be changed like your nation location or gov type. Then you can also charge credits if you want to change it again (it would have to be on a 12 turn delay as to not abuse it) This would actually add a new layer of strategy to war. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Buorhann Posted March 8, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 (edited) No thank you. Double Buys are already strenuous on resources and timing. Keep in mind that in order to Double Buy effectively, you're having to store up lots of Steel and Aluminum in order for it to be effective. For me, that's at least close to 3k Steel and 1k Aluminum (If I did my calcs right) per full rebuy (So 6k Steel, 2k Aluminum total - and with the current market...) . Plus the cash that goes along with it. Let alone those kind of rebuys also come with attacks right after (To hopefully restore control back in your favor) - so you're burning more Munitions and Fuel with the stored MAPs you have. This would also affect people who have 3 Defensive Slots filled up, at which they do not have a chance to come back (Even if you reduced it to 2 defensive slots, they'd have a hard time to come back). The problem with Double Buys are alliances not educating their members how to use it or know how to setup to defend against it, or they simply refuse to use their full military slots and just focus on Air. Edited March 8, 2018 by Buorhann 10 1 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Titan Posted March 8, 2018 Share Posted March 8, 2018 5 hours ago, Alex said: This proposal is pretty straightforward. It would serve two purposes: 1) Eliminates the "Double Buy" 2) Eliminates the need to do blitzes at the game's midnight. The game mechanics would no longer be reliant on that specific hour change. How it would work: I'm going to use Soldiers as an example. Every day, you can buy 1000 Soldiers per Barracks. Under this proposed change, you would instead be able to buy 83 (1000/12) Soldiers per Barracks per turn. This would stack up to 12 turns (1 day) for a total of 1000 Soldiers per day. So you would have some 'reserve' of units that could be recruited instantly, and each turn that would increase by 1/12 of the daily amount, capped at 12/12 of the daily amount. It would make sense to do a slight tweak to unit numbers to account for dividing by 12, I.E. Barracks allow you to recruit 1,200 instead of 1,000 soldiers per day, meaning +100 per turn instead of +83.3 per turn. This has been proposed, and I think was mostly well received. I want to bring it back up again for further consideration. This is actually a fantastic idea that increases the flexibility of some of the alliances with lots of players. It would need to be play tested, sure, but this in essence allows large alliances to decide when they go to war. We have people all over the world, and cant rely on people logging in at 1-6 am in the morning to declare on war. So this optimizes the process. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Dio Brando Posted March 8, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 Idk why I always reply to these topics at 5 AM in the morning but here I am. For those posting new suggestions, Sheepy will probably say, "Suggestions in different threads please." Back on topic: Let's first understand a bit about double-buys. For one, they are not merely a defensive tactic you employ when you have been jumped, they are also a method through which you gain military for offensive maneuvers, I think that's something important others miss out on. (a) In the current meta, alliances perform double-buys to both avoid getting in range of opponents without proper military (if you're semi competent you'd have standing military already), and also because they're simply more efficient (in 10 minutes or so you could get mostly war-ready if you had a day or so worth of military prior, compared to an enemy that doesn't. With the way space control (air superiority, ground control) works, this tactic of building up quickly before your enemy does would allow you to establish bonuses and deal penalties so you can perform say, another buy without getting your current military demolished. On one hand, this does allow defenders some leverage, in the context of there being no such 'sneaky' build up. (You would need to spread out your buy across 24 turns, each at the interval of the 12th turn; if the defender's military guy isn't retarded and tracks militarization increases, and their FA has sufficient contacts to know they're getting hit, they should have plenty time to militarize). On the other hand, this just prompts higher military builds all-around, which means that the issue would come full cycle back to defensive power being reduced. It only gives more power to the more prepared, not by increasing their damage, but by limiting the ability for the defender/less prepared to turn around the war. Alongside the nerf to Fortify, I don't think this would be a good addition. To summarize, double buys are an integral part of defending against a militarily superior opponent, or multiple opponents at or slightly below your level. This provides a good segue to my next point: (b) Down-declares use double-buys too. You drop down, usually hit as many targets as you can, and buy twice to make sure you stay on top of those enemies. In counter to this, submarine stats have already proven to be useful if applied appropriately and not idiotically; my personal view is that there needs to be a better way to transition between tiers. For one, it isn't entirely balanced for an alliance like, say, Grumpy to be incapable of truly countering the people that hit them, nor does it truly provide a way for the people who use a 2-day beige timer to get 3 days worth of military (barely enough to re-engage, but better than the alternative of being pinned down for the rest of the round) to appropriately build up their defenses. Similarly, they work for medium-range updeclares too. (c) This works somewhat against what I perceived as your goal: making wars shorter, and not longer. That is one of the reasons you nerfed fortify, no? This only makes it so that you can not deal the same damage within the same time period. Then, there is also the issue of fundamentally proven-to-be-good war tactics not being as effective. Coming to the point of effectiveness, there are some myths revolving around double-buys: For one, they are not all-enabling methods of making people git gud. If you're in a war with the opponent having, say, Air Superiority, your tank rebuy would generally be enough to get you an edge, and not a full-blown assured win. Secondly, the amount of cash and resources that nations in the middle tier (c17-c21, where most of the drop downs occur) use up via double-buys is ridiculous. A byproduct of this change would be not using resources up as quickly, and while that may sound like it's a good thing (reduces war costs) it really only is so because the time required for people to start with x military in this mech system, and in the next, is less. Expanding wars like these where tier segregation is so high you end up at a pseudo-stalemate is not fun for anyone. They really aren't. You'd end up in a scenario where lower tier nations can slowly work their way up, wear targets down, and the upper/mid tier can't legitimately counter by down-declaring. (If they do, and they can't double buy, they're going to be shat on hard). ----- With respect to update timings, I do think that allowing some leeway for players in TZs that make update time inconvenient (for example, it is 4:48 AM right now and update is in 12 minutes for me as I am writing this) is a good idea. However, if you are to implement such 'leeway' via this change, you definitely need to tweak your numbers so the act of double-buy isn't entirely killed. That just won't be bueno in several settings. ----- Having coincidentally glanced at the conversation above about test server/trialing there, while that is definitely what you should do, I'd like to note that you can not replicate or appropriately judge the meta of live in test, unless you port the same expectations/objectives/alliances there. Having said that, it is a suitable enough model for the playerbase to judge what the effects of x change would be, ceteris paribus. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Justin076 Posted March 8, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted March 8, 2018 This will not help people in different time zones. No matter what, alliances, if they are smart will launch a blitz at the same time and rely on their members to log in at that time. So even with this change, alliances will still set a specific time to blitz and as we all know, its going to be night and day in different parts of the world. With that, this update has no real benefits, only negatives, as stated the main one is the double buy. In a game where we have been trying to help people have better chances in the defensive position, getting rid of the only thing that really gives anyone a chance at coming back in a war is a terrible idea. 7 1 Quote Chief Financial Officer of The Syndicate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 Just because a group of alliances can't utilise the tactic to save their lives doesn't mean it should be changed. If an alliance cannot co-ordinate a blitz during update time and utilise the double-buy, that's because they lack communication/commitment with one-another. Every alliance, unless your some kind of supremacist(can't think of the word), has member nations from around the globe. It's a problem best left for alliances to deal with, not have another *fix* implemented. You've already removed fortify which will be detrimental to defenders when they get blitzed, so I don't see the need to change this when winning an offensive war is the easiest its ever been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted March 9, 2018 Share Posted March 9, 2018 To be fair, and argue on the other side, the Time Zone difference is an issue, but it will always be an issue. Remember when the server time changed at midnight EST? It was reduced to 7pm EST to cater to the more primetime American crowd. If anything, @Sweeeeet Ronny D's suggestion holds the most sense in this regard, but how would that not be exploited would be the next issue. We've been in this game long enough to see various alliances (Both small and large) utilize this at blitz, but not many utilize it throughout the war because of the stress it has on resources. Players would rather dump their resources instead of continuing the fight most of the time (There's also other stuff related to this, such as alliances hoarding resources or players not utilizing their full military slots - like Navy - to prevent blockades which could send much needed resource aid to help them back up). 2 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg 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.