Jump to content
Alex

Remove Beige Time for Losing Offensive Wars

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Mikey said:

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. In this case a prot of a direct ally  runs quite close to that line, especially considering he felt the need to ditch his AA when trying to do it. 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.

 

Just to second Mikey here, it's a pretty big difference in baiting your enemies into beiging you than ditching your alliance (As a leader no less) to offer payment to Protectorates within your sphere to get them to beige you.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wait a sec, doesn't this just basically remove another way of winning a war with less people?

oh my more down votes pls

Edited by Sri Lanka 001
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Micchan said:

It's another "too lazy to moderate let's make the game worse" episode

Inst just got over 10 upvotes, look what you did

I upvoted Inst.

It's not the first time, but yes, he's gotten upvotes from multiple warring spheres while the suggestion has gotten downvotes from multiple warring spheres; so that's how you really know when a suggestion is an awful hecking idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wars are lost and people need time to recover. The beige system is broken? Then fix it in general but giving it only to defensive wars lost is just silly. Sometimes people over-extend either intentionally to help the war front, or unintentionally. Either way they usually get defeats. That doesn't negate the fact that the nation would need time to recover from the war just as a defensive nation might.

What's really at the heart of the problem here is that the war system favors the attacker heavily. An attacker comes in and immediately gets air superiority and then badboom badabing usually wins the war. Usually being the wording used because sometimes the defender can coordinate or the attacker messes something up and ends up losing out. However, that being said usually the attacker is going to win the war simply because of the fact that the down-declare range and the city counts allowing for quicker buy-backs etc.

Removing attacker beige won't fix that. Fixing beige system won't fix that. It's still going to be a mis-balanced war system with quite a bit of weight given to the attacker.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dwynn said:

Wars are lost and people need time to recover. The beige system is broken? Then fix it in general but giving it only to defensive wars lost is just silly. Sometimes people over-extend either intentionally to help the war front, or unintentionally. Either way they usually get defeats. That doesn't negate the fact that the nation would need time to recover from the war just as a defensive nation might.

What's really at the heart of the problem here is that the war system favors the attacker heavily. An attacker comes in and immediately gets air superiority and then badboom badabing usually wins the war. Usually being the wording used because sometimes the defender can coordinate or the attacker messes something up and ends up losing out. However, that being said usually the attacker is going to win the war simply because of the fact that the down-declare range and the city counts allowing for quicker buy-backs etc.

Removing attacker beige won't fix that. Fixing beige system won't fix that. It's still going to be a mis-balanced war system with quite a bit of weight given to the attacker.

Well, there's no reasonable way around giving weight to either the attacker or the defender. I don't think that's the balance problem. The balance problem is in terms of winning resulting in more and easier winning, which conversely means losing resulting in more and easier losing, which is what beige needs to and does begin to solve. The limitations of beige right now are that not all wars result in beige, which permits gaming the system with war expirations, suicide attacks, and the only way to stack beige for a rebuild is to either bait poor beige discipline from your enemies or cooperate (illegally) with your allies/disinterested neutrals. If we can't enforce the rules as they stand then the mechanics have to be changed to either make the rules more clear or to make breaking the rules unnecessary/non-useful.

To that end, all wars beige makes sense to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours 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

"Sphinx use our tactics"
Okay there's a huge difference between us spamming your micros for beige, and Sphinx spamming your micros for beige.  Namely the fact that the way we do it actually gives you a chance to not be retarded and bite the bait.  Coordinating with your allies to get beige is easily the equivalent to slot filling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reap what you sow.

Who knew that using the admin as a weapon in war could have consequences beyond only helping your side.

Edited by Aragorn, son of Arathorn
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time a bigger group declares on a smaller group and the smaller group figures out a way to have any sort of advantage, the bigger group complains and you respond by hamstringing the ability of anyone who has to fight outnumbered.  This would utterly cripple anyone who doesnt want to be a part of the never ending cycle of IQ vs EMC blobweb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's good news for once... Considering you all whined when I did it to escape a cycle blockade yet dozens on your side are guilty of using the same tactic, maybe you shouldn't just run to the admin and complain when things aren't going your way. 

10 hours ago, TheRebelMan said:

@Alex you said this is a problem. Then why not make the punishment for it harsher? 

 

I agree so when is half of KT and all of Oblivion going to get banned for war slot filling because according to Alex...
z6JlIVp.png

Looks like suicide attacks are off the table, ;,p 

2 hours ago, Rosey Song said:

"Sphinx use our tactics"
Okay there's a huge difference between us spamming your micros for beige, and Sphinx spamming your micros for beige.  Namely the fact that the way we do it actually gives you a chance to not be retarded and bite the bait.  Coordinating with your allies to get beige is easily the equivalent to slot filling.

I made sure I hit micros not involved in the global war, and ones that had a full 3 slots open so it didn't prevent anyone from attacking them. At the time I looked I couldn't see any treaties that showed they were allies but with some of them having 2 dozen treaties on their own I apparently missed that one was allied to ES. But the vast majority of them aren't not allies. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still get the penalty of losing a percent of your resources and infra in all your cities when losing an offensive war though...

Share this post


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

I agree so when is half of KT and all of Oblivion going to get banned for war slot filling because according to Alex..

And the entirety of NPO, BK, basically anyone that could theoretically try to fight Grumpy...

But sure, if we want to prohibit any and all suicide attacks, that can be the rule going forward. It'll 100% result in you losing this war and all future large-scale wars will be worthless to even bother fighting once either side is zeroed, leaving high tier nations completely undeclareable since any attempt would be flatly illegal, but if you want to try and use the administrator as a weapon like that then beware that doing so will have consequences beyond screwing over just your side. Alternatively we can legalize what you tried to do... which means we'd get to do it too, and we might benefit more than you can.

As previously said, there's a HUGE difference between declaring on your enemy and trying to bait them into a mistake versus declaring on a neutral/allied target with the intention of letting them beige you without interacting with your enemies at all.

Again, for the love of actual goddamn frick, all wars result in beige would solve the problems without overpowering the top bloc, whichever that may be. With that system, any side that's embattled can escape and rebuild through wanton aggression, and neither Chaos nor KETOG nor NPO nor BK nor T$ can bully anyone out of the game.

Naturally, since that would therefore mean certain parties can't win, certain parties have been and will continue to desperately try and discredit me and my ideas. Just remember: if you can destroy the game in your favor, your enemies can do the same; if you want a weapon that unfairly helps your side in your current situation then that weapon will unfairly help your enemies when they're in that situation. My OOC stance has been consistent on this, unlike some others.

3 hours ago, kosmokenny said:

Every time a bigger group declares on a smaller group and the smaller group figures out a way to have any sort of advantage, the bigger group complains and you respond by hamstringing the ability of anyone who has to fight outnumbered.  This would utterly cripple anyone who doesnt want to be a part of the never ending cycle of IQ vs EMC blobweb.

Agreed. The suggestion is pants for everyone, including IQ and neutrals.

Edited by Sir Scarfalot
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All wars resulting in beige will just result in 6 month wars on top of the present rate because wars now end too slowly. Likewise, the removal of blockade cycle mechanics also destroys the effectiveness of planestrat, meaning that updeclaring (which is already weak) becomes weak and tier superiority becomes even more powerful.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going by how many down votes compare to upvotes this got; most don't like it probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Inst said:

All wars resulting in beige will just result in 6 month wars on top of the present rate because wars now end too slowly. Likewise, the removal of blockade cycle mechanics also destroys the effectiveness of planestrat, meaning that updeclaring (which is already weak) becomes weak and tier superiority becomes even more powerful.

Wars can and will last an arbitrarily long time under current mechanics/rules, with Sphinx's exploit, with zero-tolerance of any suicide attacks, with my suggestion, or with the OP's suggestion. The only difference is what options are available for the underdog; be that being infinitely blockaded, given time for full rebuild for free, given the opportunity to stategically manuver enemies into a beige-or-be-beiged situation, given the opportunity to bait an undisciplined opponent into a costly mistake, given the opportunity to leverage large numbers of tight tiering to overcome an updeclare, or prohibited from updeclaring at all.

Personally, I think that allowing strategic manuvering and mistakes is the best of all worlds, but due to the questions involving things like paying pirates/your own protectorates to beige you, I think the only realistic solution is for all wars to result in beige.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noctis Anarch Caelum said:

You still get the penalty of losing a percent of your resources and infra in all your cities when losing an offensive war though...

Yes, but there's a reason it's called a suicide attack. In fact, losing infra in all cities is likely a benefit with the strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best solution: A ground up rewrite of the entire war system fixing the problems snowballing city advantage, the need to be beiged in order to rebuild, the massive advantage around attacking in coordination with update and the strain it puts on the server to have most military action take place in that narrow time frame.

Second best: A reduction in damage, war time and beige time. It currently takes six days to build max, two to be zeroed, and three minutes stretched over the update to be neutralized completely.

Fastest solution: a mutiny/coup mechanic. If you don't launch an offensive operation and get an immense triumph in the first day, your army rebels against you, the war ends and you lose a percentage of all unit types for your incompetency. The time extends for each combat result that isn't an IT, and for the first day you are locked into using max units no matter the attack type.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sphinx said:

Well that's good news for once... Considering you all whined when I did it to escape a cycle blockade yet dozens on your side are guilty of using the same tactic, maybe you shouldn't just run to the admin and complain when things aren't going your way. 

I agree so when is half of KT and all of Oblivion going to get banned for war slot filling because according to Alex...
z6JlIVp.png

Looks like suicide attacks are off the table, ;,p 

I made sure I hit micros not involved in the global war, and ones that had a full 3 slots open so it didn't prevent anyone from attacking them. At the time I looked I couldn't see any treaties that showed they were allies but with some of them having 2 dozen treaties on their own I apparently missed that one was allied to ES. But the vast majority of them aren't not allies. 

 

It's only the same tactic if you abstract so far as to not consider the alliances involved. So shut up. There's a major difference between attacking members of the enemy coalition and attacking those uninvolved. The latter should be taking such decs as potential war actions against their AAs, and as such they'd be contacting your FA department and arranging peacing out or joining the war against you, as they're uninvolved. After all, your actions are Hostile actions against them, and as such would be more than adequate for an RoH. The fact that we're yet to see any such actions is interesting, and suggests that they're getting some kind of benefit from beiging you at minimum. The former is a literal standard war action, and given current game mechanics, it's up to your coalition and coalition milcom to effectively beige cycle those nations. 
As such, in the first case, you would get beige cycled by anyone comptent, in the 2nd, you're effectively extending the war to include these uninvolved AAs.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe have a flag that prevents the beige timer from counting down while there’s still defensive wars on your nation? But also allows it to still count down if you have any offensive wars on someone?

To be frank this suggestion was honestly probably ill timed. Especially with the ongoing war at the moment.

Anyways, idk, any changes of preventing beige time in offensive wars will need to be included additional revamp of defensive wars or the beige mechanics in general. Any such changes, will of course, have to be community tested. And be put into effect while there’s already a global war going on. Just make sure to start another tournament on the test server when you do so @Alex

Edited by LordInfinitius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I hate most are band aid fixes that don't even acknowledge the larger reasons why something is a problem, and why they will continue to be a problem. Anyone that's paying attention can read different players opinions and examples, and scientifically piece together the truth. As much as possible anything that can be done by the in-game mechanics, should be allowed, and anything that is a problem should be addressed in the game design. Moderation should not be necessary.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

[snip]

Fastest solution: a mutiny/coup mechanic. If you don't launch an offensive operation and get an immense triumph in the first day, your army rebels against you, the war ends and you lose a percentage of all unit types for your incompetency. The time extends for each combat result that isn't an IT, and for the first day you are locked into using max units no matter the attack type.

I actually like this idea and it needs to be explored and fleshed out more.

 

1 hour ago, Valkorion Baratheon said:

[snip]

Some suggested that in any war, the side with less resistance after expiration gets beige no matter what. That might be the better way of going about overhauling the beige system.

[snip]

And this would be a better change to the beige system than removing offensive beige.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's face it, this is just another bandaid to try and stop a leaking pipe.

I say the fix needs to be a revamp of the war system in full, right now everything is planes, planes and more planes, beige is the least of the problems, with credits now holding someone blockaded won't matter, so the only reason someone would now let a war expire instead of ending it is all about planes being rebuilt.

The reason people do not beige is so the other person can not build planes as planes win wars.

@Alex if you fixed the war system so things like Ships support ground control, So Ships, tanks, men and even just large land make it so the attacking nation lose a lot more planes even if they do not have any planes, you will find people will then fight to win a war than simply to hold someone down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • 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.