Jump to content

Remove war


Emperor Jonas
 Share

Recommended Posts

ohno.png?width=300&height=300

  • Upvote 2
By the Grace of God, the King of the Swedes, the Goths/Geats and the Wends, Grand Prince of Finland, Duke of Scania, Estonia, Livonia, Karelia, Bremen, Verden, Stettin, Pomerania, Kashubia and Wendia, Prince of Rügen, Lord of Ingria and Wismar, Count Palatine of the Rhine, Duke of Bavaria, Jülich, and Cleves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just so y'all can have a good laugh at an old meme that is used way too often

 

ohno.png?width=300&height=300

  • Upvote 4
By the Grace of God, the King of the Swedes, the Goths/Geats and the Wends, Grand Prince of Finland, Duke of Scania, Estonia, Livonia, Karelia, Bremen, Verden, Stettin, Pomerania, Kashubia and Wendia, Prince of Rügen, Lord of Ingria and Wismar, Count Palatine of the Rhine, Duke of Bavaria, Jülich, and Cleves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprising Fund

The Surprising fund is a small-profit charity organization, once we reach our benchmark of 110mil. We will proceed to Surprise people. :rolleyes: People that may be creating lots of threads.

Tl;dr message me In-game / Via Discord to confirm your donation. Then we begin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Emperor Jonas said:

Hello all. I've been playing for quite a while now, and have been in two alliances, Arrgh and TFP. While I was in arrgh,  i raided. A lot. And while I got a little bit of cash, I lost a lot of soldiers and infrastructure. As well as gas, munitions, steel, and aluminum. It was so expensive and tedious that I left and joined a more peaceful alliance, Fighting Pacifists. Since I joined TFP,  I have not raided once and have built up lots of infra. I've been chatting with my gov and thinking: Why do we need war? Don't you win the game by building up infra, cities, and projects? Sure, having a military (but not using it) helps a little, but ultimately I think war is overused and bad for this game. I'll explain why.

1. Roleplay 
If you are the leader of a real-life nation, you wouldn't be in non-stop wars with 5 people. You would be sittingback and building, as you should be in this game. Warring decreases your approval, something extremely crucial to how happy your simulated citizens are. This is a nation-sim, roleplay is important-and realistically, constant war isn't a part of real nation-running. 

2. Winning The Game 

You win the game with the most score. Constantly losing it in war just decreases your score and makes you less powerful. I think if someone is truly the best, it is one with stacks of land and infra that doesn't war and racks up score. Not many people do this. I have 2K infra in each of my 7 cities and I'm very high score for my size because of it.

3. Getting rich

War uses tons of money and resources. If you really want to be rich (you should, way better than war) , the best way is for you to just have tons of infra and commerce while producing resources and selling them for more cash. War uses valuable resources and makes you lose valuable infrastructure, which has to be paid for. Once it's over, even if you win, you realize how much you have lost.

So, because of the reasons above, I send a message to all leaders: NO MORE WAR! Make the game something good with building up infra, land, resources, and cash. Have lots of treaties for defense if someone really is foolish enough to fight and waste time and money! Do more roleplay! Ultimately, war is pointless and not worth it. Would you rather constantly be destroyed and miserable, or rich and strong.

Also, support my good ideas by upvoting. Thx

Stop downvoting me. Let's face it: War is useless, and my alliance agrees. Most of the game agrees.

  •  

I will bite and respond to your post in a constructive and meaningful manner other than downvoting you.

Firstly, in your introduction, you mention that you lost more in Arrgh then what you gained in loot.  If this is the truth, you did not raid correctly.  As a former member of Arrgh myself, I can say that raiding is a very profitable practice if done correctly, which it seems that you did not do.  Now moving on to your points:

1. Role-play may be the objective of some, however many find enrichment from the war system.  There are many other games and forums which allow you better opportunities to RP as a proper nation (NationStates comes to mind).  If you find that this game does not suit your purposes, why not try one of the others?  You say that most of the game agrees, however if they did, the war mechanic would have been removed in the beta phase of this game.  Furthermore, these downvotes that you keep complaining about is further proof that the game does not agree with you.

2. There is no defined "win-condition" of this game.  While someone like you can say that your "win-condition" is to build as much score as possible, this may not be true for others.  Others for example, may find that they define "win" as having military superiority over other groups (as politics seem to work in this game).

3. Mass accumulation of resources increases inflation of the number these resources, causing your "valuable" resources to become worthless.  A true winning war may cost resources sure, however you will gain a resource advantage over your opponents by dealing more damage to them then they deal to you.  If winning to you means to become the richest, having this advantage over the enemy will help with that objective.

I believe that you should take the time to listen to "most of the game" and realize that your ideas are not agreed upon by most of the game.

Thank you for your time,

The Honourable Last Hope Lunaris

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, don't remember how forum acc making works if you need verification to link your nation or whatever but this guy created his forums 2 hours ago and the owner of the PnW nation linked hasnt even logged on for 10 hours.

This could be a troll trying to screw the nation over maybe he has a grudge or something keep that in mind

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way." - Cormac McCarthy 

  • Like 1

 Registered slot thief

Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Is double posting about the same thing a valid CB? 

Yes

44 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Is double posting about the same thing a valid CB? 

Yes

Edit: thoroughly disappointed that it joined the two posts together

Edited by Schirminator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emperor Jonas said:

You disgust me.

Mate, this is just a game, and these people we're killing aren't real in any way. Stop getting so worked up over it. War is literally the name of the game. No one here would seriously propose killing people in real life for fun (probably not at least).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the self-proclaimed official representative of the entire Game Suggestions subforum, with the rights bestowed within me, I hearby declare this post DENIED and not allowed entry into Arstotska Politics and War.

inb4 new spy operation “Plane Hijack”

This is the 21000th post in this subform and I'm fine with it.

TRI-poloski.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emperor Jonas said:

Hello all. I've been playing for quite a while now, and have been in two alliances, Arrgh and TFP. While I was in arrgh,  i raided. A lot. And while I got a little bit of cash, I lost a lot of soldiers and infrastructure. As well as gas, munitions, steel, and aluminum. It was so expensive and tedious that I left and joined a more peaceful alliance, Fighting Pacifists. Since I joined TFP,  I have not raided once and have built up lots of infra. I've been chatting with my gov and thinking: Why do we need war? Don't you win the game by building up infra, cities, and projects? Sure, having a military (but not using it) helps a little, but ultimately I think war is overused and bad for this game. I'll explain why.

1. Roleplay 
If you are the leader of a real-life nation, you wouldn't be in non-stop wars with 5 people. You would be sittingback and building, as you should be in this game. Warring decreases your approval, something extremely crucial to how happy your simulated citizens are. This is a nation-sim, roleplay is important-and realistically, constant war isn't a part of real nation-running. 

2. Winning The Game 

You win the game with the most score. Constantly losing it in war just decreases your score and makes you less powerful. I think if someone is truly the best, it is one with stacks of land and infra that doesn't war and racks up score. Not many people do this. I have 2K infra in each of my 7 cities and I'm very high score for my size because of it.

3. Getting rich

War uses tons of money and resources. If you really want to be rich (you should, way better than war) , the best way is for you to just have tons of infra and commerce while producing resources and selling them for more cash. War uses valuable resources and makes you lose valuable infrastructure, which has to be paid for. Once it's over, even if you win, you realize how much you have lost.

So, because of the reasons above, I send a message to all leaders: NO MORE WAR! Make the game something good with building up infra, land, resources, and cash. Have lots of treaties for defense if someone really is foolish enough to fight and waste time and money! Do more roleplay! Ultimately, war is pointless and not worth it. Would you rather constantly be destroyed and miserable, or rich and strong.

Also, support my good ideas by upvoting. Thx

...Jonas. Just... No. Going to be real here, but...

The Stupid, It Burns Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Astrology to the Moon Landing "Hoax" cartoon mammal vertebrate text human behavior fictional character art

PnW is primarily focused on politics. The War part is just politics by other means. People fight for power, for recognition, and just for fun here. All of that, is usually done through war. It's even in the name of the game itself. The big numbers you get on the statistic sheets are pretty and all, but they are there in order to further war, and from there, further politics. Look at how resources are used up, alright? You don't see major price hikes and supply shortages until wars happen. And, if you don't think people roleplay, look closer. People do it all the time. It's just that they roleplay and fight. Sure, there's a little feeling of fun when you see your nation grow, buying cities, infra, land, and watching your nation grow rich. But, when that's all there is, it's boring. The game gets stale, old, and it becomes a chore, rather than a game. Back in the old days under Cromwell, I nearly left the game several times because it got so boring, and really only came back in because of random raid counters that sparked a new interest in the game. All I'd do is log in, check that there's enough food, raws, and uranium to keep my nation going, and that's all. Sure, thinking economically, war's not optimal. Numberwise, it's a massive net loss to you, often costing millions and more in resources and cash. But there's just something more... fulfilling, trying to compete with other people, seeing what you've built,  seeing what it can do (sadly, still lacking on ye olde military competence, damnit), and building relationships through tenacity and common struggle. 

To believe that the best solution to making the game more enjoyable is to rip out the entirety of the war system... I think that you miss the entire reason on what makes this game enjoyable and fun for many people here. If we just removed the ability to actually fight out wars, and just decided to purely roleplay them, well... I dunno. It'd be like trying to play chess without chess pieces or playing a card game without cards but with several magnitudes more in salt content. There'd just be no soul in doing it anymore.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emperor Jonas said:

I'm not an idiot and I'm better at this then you are. 

Stop downvoting me just because you want to kill millions of people.

 

29058C13-FAD4-4B91-BA96-7D92D6EBDEFB.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
inb4 new spy operation “Plane Hijack”

This is the 21000th post in this subform and I'm fine with it.

TRI-poloski.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd wholeheartedly suggest you to go buy Tropico 4 if you only want to hardcore nation build. It is plenty better for that and not very expensive, especially when it goes on sale.

Alternatively, Nationstates as @Dad suggested.

With that said, regarding the post itself...
 

2 hours ago, Emperor Jonas said:

Hello all. I've been playing for quite a while now, and have been in two alliances, Arrgh and TFP. While I was in arrgh,  i raided. A lot. And while I got a little bit of cash, I lost a lot of soldiers and infrastructure. As well as gas, munitions, steel, and aluminum. It was so expensive and tedious that I left and joined a more peaceful alliance, Fighting Pacifists.

I'll start off by saying that 100 days is not a significant amount of time played. Most of the significant players have at least a year under their belts, many more than that, so arguing from a position of age is not going to work in your favor.

With that said...

Soldiers losses are basically irrelevant. They are mostly used as cheap cannon fodder. Tank and Plane stats matter more, full stop. Ships too. Soldier losses are also irrelevant because this isn't like, say, Hearts of Iron 4 where you have a limited manpower pool to draw from. It's dictated on daily quotas. And soldiers take the least time to max out too.

Infra at 1k and below is pretty cheap. If it was genuinely hurting your bottom line in Arrgh, then you were either building above that, which was simply stupid in your part as it's not necessary to have such tall infra to raid; or your target selection was poor and the loot you got suffered as a result. Raiding is quite profitable (especially at ultra low city counts) if you're good at it.
 

Quote

Since I joined TFP,  I have not raided once and have built up lots of infra. I've been chatting with my gov and thinking: Why do we need war? Don't you win the game by building up infra, cities, and projects? Sure, having a military (but not using it) helps a little, but ultimately I think war is overused and bad for this game. I'll explain why.

War is an integral part of the game, in case you haven't checked the title. War is also waged for the objectives of those who wage it, be those political, economic, or simply to have fun. War also happens to drive up activity in a game which otherwise you have little reason to log in daily if you don't actively trade, raid, or do govt work for.

You don't win by any of the things you listed. The closest thing to "winning the game" would be by forming a hegemonic sphere (group of alliances allied between each other) which dominates it. But that isn't particularly fun because there's not really anyone to challenge you or to drive up political intrigue. Of course, getting cities, projects and infra (the latter to a reasonable extent) helps argument economic and military (infra not included for military; anything above 1ksh infra for military is a hindrance talking from a purely militaristic point of view) prowess, but without the proper coordination/skill to actually utilize them they are little more than a paper tiger which inflates your actual worth.

Also, no. War is underutilized. Two Globals a year is quite a slow pace.
 

Quote

1. Roleplay 
If you are the leader of a real-life nation, you wouldn't be in non-stop wars with 5 people. You would be sittingback and building, as you should be in this game. Warring decreases your approval, something extremely crucial to how happy your simulated citizens are. This is a nation-sim, roleplay is important-and realistically, constant war isn't a part of real nation-running. 

Role playing is not a relevant factor for most people in this game. They tend to go with themes, yes, but what actually keep them playing is their interaction with other people in alliances they are in (or others) and activities within the game. War is one of those activities. There's a forum section in this game dedicated for more involved roleplay. I'd suggest you check it out.

Approval in cosmetics and irrelevant. You can have -999999999999999999999999999999999999 approval and you will function just as well as a nation with 999999999999999999999999999999999999 approval.

Also, realism isn't really the main concern in this game either. Things are set up with balance first, and realism second in mind.
 

Quote

2. Winning The Game 

You win the game with the most score. Constantly losing it in war just decreases your score and makes you less powerful. I think if someone is truly the best, it is one with stacks of land and infra that doesn't war and racks up score. Not many people do this. I have 2K infra in each of my 7 cities and I'm very high score for my size because of it.

Already went over this, so I won't reiterate. 

With that said, no. Score on infra does nothing to argument your military capabilities if you've got enough infra to max aircraft (800-1000 spot). In fact, it's detrimental.

What you think is irrelevant if you're basing it on personal experience. Not only because it is very subjective, but also because yours is extremely limited compared to what other people have. And you're certainly not basing it in actual knowledge because otherwise you'd know that being inflated NS wise isn't fun in actual war. It simply leaves you hanging up dry to get plummeted by people that have more cities than you.

Quote

3. Getting rich

War uses tons of money and resources. If you really want to be rich (you should, way better than war) , the best way is for you to just have tons of infra and commerce while producing resources and selling them for more cash. War uses valuable resources and makes you lose valuable infrastructure, which has to be paid for. Once it's over, even if you win, you realize how much you have lost.

What exactly is the point of just hoarding what you produce and never using it? Especially when all you have to do is set up your production once, and log in every now and then just to make sure you have enough raws or food/uranium to not go starving or unpowered. It is simply unrewarding to do that, because you aren't proactively doing anything to generate that revenue. Exception being if you actively trade for a profit, in which case fair enough.

Resource prices have also consistently gone downwards. The only thing that considerably counters that down spiral is war, due to lesser output and higher demand.

Yes, waging war has it's costs. Especially if you foolishly overbuild in terms of infrastructure. Those costs are acceptable for whatever objective you are pursuing (already listed them). Rebuilding isn't that big of a deal. Often it's just a month, or month and half to get back where you started.
 

Quote

So, because of the reasons above, I send a message to all leaders: NO MORE WAR! Make the game something good with building up infra, land, resources, and cash. Have lots of treaties for defense if someone really is foolish enough to fight and waste time and money! Do more roleplay! Ultimately, war is pointless and not worth it. Would you rather constantly be destroyed and miserable, or rich and strong.

Also, support my good ideas by upvoting. Thx

Translation:

9GfnVzf.jpg

Edited by Shiho Nishizumi
Wrong image posted.
  • Like 4
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Emperor Jonas said:

1. Roleplay 
If you are the leader of a real-life nation, you wouldn't be in non-stop wars with 5 people. You would be sittingback and building, as you should be in this game. Warring decreases your approval, something extremely crucial to how happy your simulated citizens are. This is a nation-sim, roleplay is important-and realistically, constant war isn't a part of real nation-running. 

This is a game.
Play it like a game.
Different people have different approaches to playing the game and warring is one of them
Approval rating has no effect on your nation.

 

2 hours ago, Emperor Jonas said:

2. Winning The Game 

You win the game with the most score. Constantly losing it in war just decreases your score and makes you less powerful. I think if someone is truly the best, it is one with stacks of land and infra that doesn't war and racks up score. Not many people do this. I have 2K infra in each of my 7 cities and I'm very high score for my size because of it.

You think Fraggle has won the game?
Also, higher your score, worse it is for you.
You are basically inviting people with more cities to attack you.
People who stack up infra and land land up in TFP or Fark or Pantheon, three of the worst alliance this game has ever had.
Like ever.
 

2 hours ago, Emperor Jonas said:

3. Getting rich

War uses tons of money and resources. If you really want to be rich (you should, way better than war) , the best way is for you to just have tons of infra and commerce while producing resources and selling them for more cash. War uses valuable resources and makes you lose valuable infrastructure, which has to be paid for. Once it's over, even if you win, you realize how much you have lost.

Quiet frankly, the people with most cash on them are usually pirates, a class of people whose only source of income is wars.
Ex-Pirates carry small fortunes on themselves at all times with more stashed in their banks.
And warring in this game isnt about money all the times,
For most of the time, it is about stats.

P.S.-Pls downvote to make me most hated poster in Orbis pwease. I'm a weeb too.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emperor Jonas said:

I think the war feature should be disabled. If you read my other thread, you know why it is awful for the game and destroys growth.

Downvotes need to be turned off because people are downvoting my ideas and thoughts, and it is very disrespectful.

Developers, please listen to the masses.

Please delete and dont forget to downvote me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Alex locked this topic
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.