Administrators Alex Posted July 1, 2019 Administrators Share Posted July 1, 2019 This suggestion is pretty straightfoward - essentially, you would only be awarded Beige time if you lose defensive wars. Declaring offensive wars and losing will get you nothing. This eliminates any strategy of declaring offensive wars with the purpose of getting beiged, which has been a problem recently. It makes the war slot filling rule less ambiguous, and doesn't hurt players who are truly on the ropes in defensive wars and need the beige recovery time. I would not implement this until the major war was over. I am simply looking for feedback at this time, whether you think it is a good or bad idea. 4 2 73 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...
Limbuwan Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 War loss is still a war lose regardless of offensive or defensive. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BelgiumFury Posted July 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 1, 2019 Strategy in Pnw isn't really that advanced, it would just eliminate yet another level of strategy. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Lu Xun Posted July 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 1, 2019 (edited) Except that the beige mechanic is already broken. Players just blockade cycle or just plain let the wars expire before throwing more planes at the target. The intent of the beige mechanic is to prevent players from entering situations where they're better off just going to VM because they aren't being allowed to play anymore. Offensive beige time allows capable players a workaround for this so they can continue to fight. Removing offensive beige requires fixing the brokenness of the beige system altogether. Edited July 1, 2019 by Inst 2 22 Quote . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 Taking out offensive beige strats, is workable but you'd need to make some heavy changes to how beige works. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRebelMan Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 @Alex you said this is a problem. Then why not make the punishment for it harsher? 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted July 1, 2019 Author Administrators Share Posted July 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, TheRebelMan said: @Alex you said this is a problem. Then why not make the punishment for it harsher? It's pretty impossible to know for sure when someone is declaring an offensive war hoping to win and hoping to lose. I'm going to end up punishing a lot of people that aren't intentionally losing offensive wars, but because they benefit from it, it looks like they are doing it on purpose. 2 3 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...
Popular Post Ayayay Posted July 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 1, 2019 Anti-Memesphere: How dare sphinx use our tactics and attack nations to bait beige, let's report this to sheepy! Sheepy: Okay, well I think I have just the change to solve this issue permanently Anti-Memesphere: Wait no 12 Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TheRebelMan Posted July 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 1, 2019 11 minutes ago, Malal said: Anti-Memesphere: How dare sphinx use our tactics and attack nations to bait beige, let's report this to sheepy! Sheepy: Okay, well I think I have just the change to solve this issue permanently Anti-Memesphere: Wait no Considering you are in UPN, I am sure you would know all about tactics. What Sphinx did was cheat. What this mechanic is, well, it is a way to recuperate while fighting in wars. But then again, I'm sure you aren't that dense, and you understand that. You are just baiting in a discussion thread. 13 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valdoroth Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 People will exploit that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lu Xun Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Alex said: It's pretty impossible to know for sure when someone is declaring an offensive war hoping to win and hoping to lose. I'm going to end up punishing a lot of people that aren't intentionally losing offensive wars, but because they benefit from it, it looks like they are doing it on purpose. This has been war procedure since at least last war. Arrgh protocol is generally, if suppressed, go find neutrals or unaligns and start raiding them. You win, you get war loot, you lose, you get beiged. Is that not allowed? Edited July 1, 2019 by Inst Quote . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Elijah Mikaelson Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 (edited) @Alex War Slot & Espionage Filling Declaring war on a nation without the intention of fighting them is punishable by a nation strike and additional punishment for multiple violations. You are not allowed to declare war on nations to prevent them from being attacked by other nations. This same rule applies with spies and espionage operations. Knowingly participating in having your war or spy slots filled is also considered a violation of this rule. Would you see a nation declaring war and doing very little to no damage, and the only goal is to circle through blockades, not the same as having no intention of fighting? you should change it from fighting to no intention of trying to win the war. would this not be war slot filling and baiting to be beige, they attacked five people yet they have no ships, no tanks, no planes and a handful of troopshttps://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=117071&display=war might add this is no difference to what they claim sphinx has done. Edited July 1, 2019 by Elijah Mikaelson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kriegskoenig Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, Elijah Mikaelson said: @Alex War Slot & Espionage Filling "Declaring war on a nation without the intention of fighting them" *Snip* Would you see a nation declaring war and doing very little to no damage, and the only goal is to circle through blockades, not the same as having no intention of fighting? you should change it from fighting to no intention of trying to win the war. Here's the thing: tactics often require an intentional sacrifice for others to be able to win. If that means I "lose" my war, I'm ok with that, because the team wins in the end. IMO, that's totally different than me "not fighting," it's me fighting (however ineffectual my attacks) in a strategic way to reduce enemy defenses enough for someone else to win. Do we really want to insist that you must have "intent" (subjective, must be interpreted by admin/mods for enforcement) to "win" a war when declaring? We already know that "beiging is bad" because the enemy rebuilds if it isn't done in a strategic way. I don't think Alex ever "intended" that, but that's me interpreting that I think he wanted it to be a straightforward way to benefit the "winning" nation in war, without foreseeing the unintended effects. Now, as a result of the war mechanics and incremental changes to them causing even more convoluted strategies, we ALL (except Arrgh, or when raiding) avoid "winning" wars because "winning" too many individual wars causes the large-scale wars to be extended longer. All of these counterintuitive tactics, from the first T$/Jessica Rabbit strategies, and including MaxAir, NoShip, 1-Ship, downselling, score-capping & tiering, etc., began with clever people realizing that the war system had begun to inadvertently present disincentives to operating within "normal" war strategies. They simply did math and figured out the best M.O. based on the best outcomes. At its core, this whole thing is a reflection of deeper issues in war mechanics. I'm not sure anyone, from Alex down to any alliance with complaints, has a comprehensive plan for a complete, fair, and straightforward remake of the war mechanic to make it more logical. In short, simply changing the wording to "you must intend to win" is so subjective, and impossible with the current mechanics, as to be completely unenforceable with any degree of fairness or impartiality. It would be unfair to ask any admin or mod to consistently enforce that rule in a logically defensible way. 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Malal said: Anti-Memesphere: How dare sphinx use our tactics and attack nations to bait beige, let's report this to sheepy! Sheepy: Okay, well I think I have just the change to solve this issue permanently Anti-Memesphere: Wait no Literally none of us were complaining about this mechanic. Attacking enemy or unaligned nation's with poor beige discipline has always been a tactic and nobody to my knowledge has really complained about it. Attacking the protectorate of your direct allies and trying to pay them to beige you is something else entirely. If Smith was hitting blackfyre nation's to get beiged I'm sure you'd all be reporting him. I know I would be. 1 hour ago, Elijah Mikaelson said: @Alex Would you see a nation declaring war and doing very little to no damage, and the only goal is to circle through blockades, not the same as having no intention of fighting? you should change it from fighting to no intention of trying to win the war. would this not be war slot filling and baiting to be beige, they attacked five people yet they have no ships, no tanks, no planes and a handful of troopshttps://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=117071&display=war The problem here is there are legitimate reasons to attack someone with no hope of victory. Maybe you are going to suicide in to help someone else or just be an annoying ankle biter. Maybe you're Od and occupied but plan to missile/nuke in a guerilla campaign a la 69 day war. I suppose attacking and doing literally nothing ever wouldn't be much of a fight, but even still it is on the enemy to actually reward you with the beige. I can't see it as applying to any of the current rules, though I could see the argument for a new rule in those edge cases. I think it would be very hard to define though. Edited July 2, 2019 by Mikey 2 3 Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Lossi Posted July 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 1, 2019 Okay before you deal with beiging mechanics, maybe fix the fact that I can completely annihilate my enemies while taking zero loses if I use air against a zero air nation. Cause a friendly reminder, that even if I'm there one using it right now, that tactic is still bullshit and OP. 11 2 Quote Quote Former leader of Chocolate Castle 4/1/2021 "It's pretty easy to get abused by Rosey without being a weirdo about it" - Betilius "Rosey is everything I look for in a fighter" - partisan "I’m very much not surprised that Lossi has you blocked tbh" - @MCMaster-095 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRebelMan Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 35 minutes ago, Elijah Mikaelson said: @Alex War Slot & Espionage Fillinghttps://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=117071&display=war might add this is no difference to what they claim sphinx has done. You underestimate the power of a double buy against low city dudes. This is a valid tactic. Also, nukes and missles are valid in terms of tactics. Also, as someone already mentioned, we are at war with your side. If you want to deny that, well, idk what to tell you. What Sphinx did was literally bribe people to beige him. Thats A) morally wrong, and B ) abuse of the war mechanics. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Mikey said: Literally none of us were complaining about this mechanic. Attacking enemy or unaligned nation's with poor beige discipline has always been a tactic and nobody to my knowledge has really complained about it. Attacking the protectorate of your direct allies and trying to pay them to beige you is something else entirely. If Smith was hitting blackfyre nation's to get beiged I'm sure you'd all be reporting him. I know I would be. Mikey, you've been in SK for 5 years, you of all people should know better than to assume "allies" of allies means anything. Edited July 1, 2019 by Malal Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skittles Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, Malal said: Mikey, you've been in SK for 5 years, you of all people should know better than to assume "allies" of allies means anything. Didnt this whole war escalate because of allies of allies joining into the fray? Quote I have no idea what I'm doing but that doesn't stop me from doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lu Xun Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 Re: Sphinx: show where he paid the guys he attacked to beige him. I've checked bank records, and nothing untoward seems to have happened. Quote . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buorhann Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 @Alex - Put it on the test server and let us play around with it first. 6 Quote Warrior of Dio https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfPCFQfOnLg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Sir Scarfalot Posted July 1, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted July 1, 2019 (edited) Here’s another solution that’ll solve the issue: ALL wars result in beige. Higher resistance at the end wins. If both sides same resistance, both lose resources/infra without gaining any resources but both are beiged anyway and both nations increment their lost wars stat. turning off beige for losing offensives would mean that beige can’t be stacked enough to escape blockade lockdown. It comes down to intent and discipline right now, but my solution means lockdown can ALWAYS be escaped no matter the opponent, making it impossible to bully anyone out of existence. I would point out that I’m saying this, and have said it consistently. Spin that to your narratives if you can, IQ, but this is OOC. Edited July 1, 2019 by Sir Scarfalot 11 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redarmy Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 I feel the current war meta requires some kind of change. I'm basically losing on purpose so I can win long term. 4 Quote "Though it starts with a fist it must end with your mind." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mohammad Posted July 1, 2019 Share Posted July 1, 2019 I think you need to fix war mechanics first, and then worry about beidge........ right now a 30 city whale can demolish a 15 city guy, all thanks to the broken score system. A 30 city whale has DOUBLE the military capacity as a 15 nation. 2 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said: Here’s another solution that’ll solve the issue: ALL wars result in beige. Higher resistance at the end wins. If both sides same resistance, both lose resources/infra without gaining any resources but both are beiged anyway and both nations increment their lost wars stat. BEST IDEA EVER...... This would end the cycling of nations at 6 resistance, and would in effect make wars usefull. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted July 2, 2019 Share Posted July 2, 2019 Just now, Mohammad.badawy4 said: I think you need to fix war mechanics first, and then worry about beidge........ right now a 30 city whale can demolish a 15 city guy, all thanks to the broken score system. A 30 city whale has DOUBLE the military capacity as a 15 nation. BEST IDEA EVER...... This would end the cycling of nations at 6 resistance, and would in effect make wars usefull. There’s a few refinements that have been suggested before the last several times I’ve suggested it, but the general idea is the same it just plain makes you want to win where you can, since if you’ve won you’ve won, and if you’ve lost you’ve lost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted July 2, 2019 Share Posted July 2, 2019 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Malal said: Mikey, you've been in SK for 5 years, you of all people should know better than to assume "allies" of allies means anything. Hey, we know that even direct allies doesn't always mean something But the rules have been pretty consistently applied not just to hitting your own AA, but allies as well. Attacking a prot of a direct ally runs quite close to that line, especially considering he felt the need to ditch his own AA when doing so. To say nothing of the payment. Whether or not you think that skirts under being an infraction, it's definitely not the same as attacking enemy nations with a disincentive to beige you, in the hopes that they will mess up and do so. Edited July 2, 2019 by Mikey 2 Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. 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.