Jump to content

REMOVE BANK LOOTING


Arawra
 Share

Recommended Posts

Problem: offshores are a pain in the ass to maintain, and cause moderation issues.

Solution: remove bank loot = no more incentive to create/maintain offshores.

Compensation: adjust beige loot to be an additional 2%, so, 18% with pirate + raid vs turtle, 16% with pirate + raid vs anything not moneybags, 12% with raid + pirate vs moneybags... You get the idea.

Edited by REAP3R
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respectfully disagree
Bank looting is an incentive for raiding, and raiding is part of the game to recycle resources stored in abandoned nations/alliances
Offshores are a problem that should be handled in another way, not taking bank loot completely out
One could argue that they aren't even a problem, since there are ways to go around it and to loot them (that's how infamous Bank Looters do it)

Edited by Dreki
grammar
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Dreki said:

I respectfully disagree
Bank looting is an incentive for raiding, and raiding is part of the game to recycle resources stored in abandoned nations/alliances
Offshores are a problem that should be handled in another way, not taking bank loot completely out
One could argue that they aren't even a problem, since there are ways to go around it and to loot them (that's how infamous Bank Looters do it)

Yeah, the effect this would have on raiding was considered, my proposal to compensate for that effect was to increase the regular beige loot by an additional 2%, and on good targets, this may prove to yield more loot than what bank loot would have. In my opinion, it's actually a buff to raiding, at least, for those who can find good targets. There are other solutions to be proposed I'm sure, but so far this one I've found to be easy in implementation and a buff to raiding, which is always nice. One big problem with offshores is they require moderation involvement at times when things enter the gray area, the outcome of which, seemingly decided by the flip of a coin. This consumes Alex's time, better spent on development, and in some cases causes discontent among the community, feeling he made the wrong call.

23 minutes ago, Sun Tzu said:

no that is a bad idea, the bank loot is only like a .35% it is almost nothing

down vote.png

Bank loot correlates with nation score vs alliance score with some added RNG, as far as I know. The 2% added bonus to the current raid war-type is a 20% increase from the current 10% which I believe counteracts the removal of bank loot. Against some targets, the proposed change would have them yield more beige loot.

Edited by REAP3R

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres nothing Wrong with how things are, and there's no point changing/removing/adding so many mechanics etc because humans cant keep shiz in their pants, like the automated banking/bots and w/e etc which im gonna assume this is coming from as a base, moot point issue is always going to be the Human end of things in alot of cases, (like the beige "issue" and the banking "issue" and the exploit "issues", the way >people< use the mechanics/war system differently to each-other "issue". even the exploits/MAP bs is just people being people, alex can't do much about how humans go about things/what they do, so we can sit here for years trying to "fix" never ending issues, and im going to go back to ignore all these game suggest forums for my own sake lol just my opinion/view here ? nani double standard bs, worlds a contradiction/made up of them, get used to it

Edited by Unwanted

-SAXON-

-Warband Leader of the Nordic Sea Raiders-

Niflheimr%20riki.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Unwanted said:

Theres nothing Wrong with how things are, and there's no point changing/removing/adding so many mechanics etc because humans cant keep shiz in their pants, like the automated banking/bots and w/e etc which im gonna assume this is coming from as a base, moot point issue is always going to be the Human end of things in alot of cases, (like the beige "issue" and the banking "issue" and the exploit "issues", the way >people< use the mechanics/war system differently to each-other "issue". even the exploits/MAP bs is just people being people, alex can't do much about how humans go about things/what they do, so we can sit here for years trying to "fix" never ending issues, and im going to go back to ignore all these game suggest forums for my own sake lol just my opinion/view here ? nani double standard bs, worlds a contradiction/made up of them, get used to it

It's true that the issue stems from our playerbase, but that's just what happens, they will continually work to optimize and perfect the meta, some will abuse the mechanics, is what it is. The easy fix is to remove that mechanic and compensate the people who would be negatively impacted by it, which is what I tried to accomplish here. In all honesty, I was in a voice chat and this topic came up, I proposed the same thing I proposed here as a fair change that would fix the problem, and one of the people in the chat said it was a good idea and that I should post it, and so here we are. This change isn't entirely foreign either, it was proposed a while back and Alex took major interest in it, I figure, if he's probably going to change it anyway, he should at least do it 'right.'

Edited by REAP3R
  • Thanks 1

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tldr if we can't have it/dont have it then noone can/if it doesn't hurt us it can stay/if it does change it etc etc.... "yay" to more of this being splooged all over this game

Edited by Unwanted

-SAXON-

-Warband Leader of the Nordic Sea Raiders-

Niflheimr%20riki.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2019 at 6:05 PM, REAP3R said:

Yeah, the effect this would have on raiding was considered, my proposal to compensate for that effect was to increase the regular beige loot by an additional 2%, and on good targets, this may prove to yield more loot than what bank loot would have. In my opinion, it's actually a buff to raiding, at least, for those who can find good targets. There are other solutions to be proposed I'm sure, but so far this one I've found to be easy in implementation and a buff to raiding, which is always nice. One big problem with offshores is they require moderation involvement at times when things enter the gray area, the outcome of which, seemingly decided by the flip of a coin. This consumes Alex's time, better spent on development, and in some cases causes discontent among the community, feeling he made the wrong call.

Bank loot correlates with nation score vs alliance score with some added RNG, as far as I know. The 2% added bonus to the current raid war-type is a 20% increase from the current 10% which I believe counteracts the removal of bank loot. Against some targets, the proposed change would have them yield more beige loot.

There are plenty of alliances that are inactive but their bank loot is amazing (nation loot zero to none cause all the money is in the alliance.)

The only positive to your suggestion is that alliances will not create offshore's, the rest is negatives... 

I'm an alliance leader, and I've raided, and I personally see an issue with it on both sides.

As an alliance leader, if banks can't be looted, I am going to keep the money in my alliance bank, and I'm only going to send out the bare minimum, wc's will become small, and members will not be allowed to have money on them. That also means that my enemies in war will be doing similar tactics, meaning that there is little way to get loot or progressive in warfare, slowing down an already extremely slow part. (At least now there's some sort of "let's keep a wc on members so that they're aren't reliant on the bank...", that would be gone, and that would annoy me greatly. (No member or gov member would ever have money on their nation cause they can just hide it away.)

As a raider, I hold similar issues. If there is no way to tap into that stronghold of money, a lot of nations won't be considered raid-worthy. Raid targets will decrease, and with the surging number of raiders, all raiders will have issues...

Overall, I believe this suggestion to be bad. Downvote

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, CitrusK said:

Vitamin C

Agree with alot of this, still would be good to not proxy ruin/burn the game/mechanics to the ground b4 ppl bail to other projects just so noone has anything left to play ❤️

Edited by Unwanted

-SAXON-

-Warband Leader of the Nordic Sea Raiders-

Niflheimr%20riki.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, CitrusK said:

There are plenty of alliances that are inactive but their bank loot is amazing (nation loot zero to none cause all the money is in the alliance.)

The only positive to your suggestion is that alliances will not create offshore's, the rest is negatives... 

I'm an alliance leader, and I've raided, and I personally see an issue with it on both sides.

As an alliance leader, if banks can't be looted, I am going to keep the money in my alliance bank, and I'm only going to send out the bare minimum, wc's will become small, and members will not be allowed to have money on them. That also means that my enemies in war will be doing similar tactics, meaning that there is little way to get loot or progressive in warfare, slowing down an already extremely slow part. (At least now there's some sort of "let's keep a wc on members so that they're aren't reliant on the bank...", that would be gone, and that would annoy me greatly. (No member or gov member would ever have money on their nation cause they can just hide it away.)

As a raider, I hold similar issues. If there is no way to tap into that stronghold of money, a lot of nations won't be considered raid-worthy. Raid targets will decrease, and with the surging number of raiders, all raiders will have issues...

Overall, I believe this suggestion to be bad. Downvote

I'm aware that some bank's can be looted for big amounts, we've seen it in the course of the war, but we've also seen a lot of offshores which is the main problem being addressed. As for the rest, I would argue that increasing beige loot is a positive for raiders and non raiders alike, though I do understand there are some negatives to this proposal, whether you believe the negatives outweigh the positives, is up to you. Just for clarity sake, these are the negatives I can see:
-Big bank heists no longer possible.

-Low tier raiding is less profitable (because the loss of bank loot is not fully compensated by the 2% increase of beige loot).

-Alliances can safely store all their reserves with no external access point (though they can already do this if they understand how to offshore proper).

-less punishment for keeping around inactives.

Compared to the positives:

-No more offshoring (beneficial to moderation and alliances that've had to constantly maintain said offshores).

-Buff to mid+ tier raiding (higher percent on beige loot means a significant loot increase especially against good targets, carrying lots of stuff).

-Drain your opponents faster in war.

-Removes moderation further from in-game politics (they no longer need to make decisions regarding offshores which can at times be dividing amongst the community).

-PnW businesses can flourish (their capital comprised of consumer funds will be secure).

Note: if there are more pros or cons you think of, please let me know and I'll amend the list.

As for the warchest situation, it's practically already the case that alliance banks can't be looted thanks to proper offshoring, and it's also already the case that some alliances keep small warchests with their members, a bare minimum. You can make the call whether or not to let them keep a bigger warchest or more cash on them, but it's not relevant to this change.

Just to clarify, I'd consider myself a raider just like you, and the other day my alliance profited immensely off the bank looting of some micro we thrashed so this isn't a biased proposal I'm making here. First I'd argue this change does not make a lot of nations less raid-worthy, at least, I've not often declared on a nation thinking their bank would be the main source of my spoils, I'd then argue that this opens up more targets to raid because of the additional 2% beige bonus since they will yield more profits and actually become... well, profitable.

Edited by REAP3R

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, REAP3R said:

hmmm

I disagree.

How will this buff mid tier raiding ? The inactives will have their wc looted already. Those who keep fighting, winners will keep their wc in bank and keep the bare minimum while losers has nothing to gain with their soldiers only option. This will make this whole war from overpowered planes to planes only.

considering above scenario, there will be no Rss drain as u claim there to be.

Pw businesses are irrelevant to game and should not be factored in.

This change will put an end to small window of bank loot altogether and punish losing side to fight. No matter how small the bank loot is from winning inactive nation, there’s still a lot and at most cases those are enough to keep our nation fighting.

That 2% beige bonus is nothing if the defender carries nothing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Limbuwan said:

I disagree.

How will this buff mid tier raiding ? The inactives will have their wc looted already. Those who keep fighting, winners will keep their wc in bank and keep the bare minimum while losers has nothing to gain with their soldiers only option. This will make this whole war from overpowered planes to planes only.

considering above scenario, there will be no Rss drain as u claim there to be.

Pw businesses are irrelevant to game and should not be factored in.

This change will put an end to small window of bank loot altogether and punish losing side to fight. No matter how small the bank loot is from winning inactive nation, there’s still a lot and at most cases those are enough to keep our nation fighting.

That 2% beige bonus is nothing if the defender carries nothing.

There is always an influx of targets as people continue to go inactive, but even then, more loot is more loot and I already explained that offshores if done proper can prevent you from looting significant bank loot anyway. Additionally, not every player keeps the bare minimum because not every player understands these mechanics through and through, so raiders capitalize off their mistakes. I don't see how removing bank loot affects soldier-only given the prior statement, and I don't see how it affects the plane strategy either.

The resource drain will occur at the start of wars when warchests are still fresh, not 6-7 months into the war like we are currently.

I wouldn't say PW businesses are irrelevant to the game, they play a niche role in the community and are beneficial to a lot of players. They add variety to the game and I'd say they were worth a mention.

I think it's obvious the change would put an end to the small window of bank loot, that was mentioned in my list of cons. In my case, bank loot is usually not a lot unless from an alliance that doesn't understand how to offshore proper, I think the extra beige loot would be of more benefit to raiders overall.

If you're raiding people who carry nothing then you're not raiding properly. (Edit: Don't want this to be misconstrued, I meant 'you' in a general sense, not you as a player)

 

Edited by REAP3R

Look up to the sky above~

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, separate from game balance, opportunity, "it's a cool thing to be able to do" concerns, removing alliance bank looting would eliminate the need for rules around alliance bank hiding, which are notorious for generating controversy almost every single time they get applied.

  • Upvote 1

Le1AjCa.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2019 at 8:44 PM, Sun Tzu said:

no that is a bad idea, the bank loot is only like a .35% it is almost nothing

All the more reason to allow the game to run as it's intended to.

On 12/19/2019 at 9:05 PM, REAP3R said:

Yeah, the effect this would have on raiding was considered, my proposal to compensate for that effect was to increase the regular beige loot by an additional 2%, and on good targets, this may prove to yield more loot than what bank loot would have. In my opinion, it's actually a buff to raiding, at least, for those who can find good targets. There are other solutions to be proposed I'm sure, but so far this one I've found to be easy in implementation and a buff to raiding, which is always nice. One big problem with offshores is they require moderation involvement at times when things enter the gray area, the outcome of which, seemingly decided by the flip of a coin. This consumes Alex's time, better spent on development, and in some cases causes discontent among the community, feeling he made the wrong call.

Bank loot correlates with nation score vs alliance score with some added RNG, as far as I know. The 2% added bonus to the current raid war-type is a 20% increase from the current 10% which I believe counteracts the removal of bank loot. Against some targets, the proposed change would have them yield more beige loot.

I also think we should keep our current system.

GICjEwp.gif

Link to comment
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...
 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.