Jump to content
Alex

Change City Score and Increase Military Rebuy Time to 1/3 Daily

Updating Nation Score Formula and Increasing Military Rebuy Speed  

257 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

It's a war situation I'm talking about: 
Well you imagine 3 nations with 30 cities declaring on 3 nations with 15 cities, what would the outcome be? Easy fight
Each of those with 15 nations would be taken down real quick, and being pinned down there and most likely blockaded and zerod - the 3 nations with 30 cities could drop again, and double buy and hit another 2 targets.. You get the point?

They wouldn't do that. Maybe you would, because you're bad at the game and at milcom, but any intelligent milcom department would actually pair said hypothetical c30s on their targets with, probably c11s and 12s if they could. Makes the few whales they have, because whales are rare, more effective overall in a large picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

They wouldn't do that. Maybe you would, because you're bad at the game and at milcom, but any intelligent milcom department would actually pair said hypothetical c30s on their targets with, probably c11s and 12s if they could. Makes the few whales they have, because whales are rare, more effective overall in a large picture.

I'm just speaking facts, this isn't about me or Pantheon get over it and actually speak some facts instead of just talking crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

I'm just speaking facts, this isn't about me or Pantheon get over it and actually speak some facts instead of just talking crap.

These are facts. You are incompetent, and therefore the "facts" you speak are inaccurate. This is before we point your hypothetical either requires the c15 to be bloated on score, or the whales to sell down to nothing, meaning c18-20s could jump on, take GC, and maintain it because a whales 2/3 buy at c30 isn't enough to reliably break it, and is too expensive for that cost.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

It's a war situation I'm talking about: 
Well you imagine 3 nations with 30 cities declaring on 3 nations with 15 cities, what would the outcome be? Easy fight
Each of those with 15 nations would be taken down real quick, and being pinned down there and most likely blockaded and zerod - the 3 nations with 30 cities could drop again, and double buy and hit another 2 targets.. You get the point?

They would get over run now too. The difference is the counters in the city 30s would be more effective. In almost any scenario a group of larger nation's can beat an equal group of less city nation's. However with the proposed changes the city 15s will be back in the fight for round 2 and the city 30s should be countered and beaten 9vs3 by the city 15 alliance mates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different recruitment rates for different units makes the game more interesting, instead of them all being the same. I believe most of the people that want a higher recruitment rate are frustrated at the ability to be pinned down. Instead maybe increase the recruitment rate for 2.1 days when a nation is in beige or when a defensive war has expired. This would give the ability for nations to rebuild their military.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

I'm just speaking facts, this isn't about me or Pantheon get over it and actually speak some facts instead of just talking crap.

You do realize that more cities *should* give you an advantage in a war... right?

Downdeclaring isn't some inherently game-breaking thing, and a score boost to cities would restrict down-declaring moreso than it already is. A faster rebuy is good for everyone because it helps nations get back in the game quicker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Menace said:

Different recruitment rates for different units makes the game more interesting, instead of them all being the same. I believe most of the people that want a higher recruitment rate are frustrated at the ability to be pinned down. Instead maybe increase the recruitment rate for 2.1 days when a nation is in beige or when a defensive war has expired. This would give the ability for nations to rebuild their military.

I've never actually heard someone suggest higher recruitment rate in beige ?

@Alex this here is a novel and unique idea that could fix the problem of people being pinned, add this and make a slight change to beige so all wars end in some amount of beige, and pinning until end of time no longer possible ?

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the game is called Politics and War and people being able to rebuild 2/3 on a double buy and the come backs would keep coming and coming in a war & that war might be endless because of either side thinking they might have a chance since they can max rebuild air in 3 days and are close to a win(until either side goes bankrupt obviously) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to see an increase to production amount and an increase in production cap. Perhaps even a soft cap for total production.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

Well, the game is called Politics and War and people being able to rebuild 2/3 on a double buy and the come backs would keep coming and coming in a war & that war might be endless because of either side thinking they might have a chance since they can max rebuild air in 3 days and are close to a win(until either side goes bankrupt obviously) 

excellent, let the war end with one side going bankrupt.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dryad said:

excellent, let the war end with one side going bankrupt.

Well, clearly the bigger the alliance the richer they are - as said, this would only benefit the high tier alliances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

Well, the game is called Politics and War and people being able to rebuild 2/3 on a double buy and the come backs would keep coming and coming in a war & that war might be endless because of either side thinking they might have a chance since they can max rebuild air in 3 days and are close to a win(until either side goes bankrupt obviously) 

Two or three coordinated attackers can typically zero out an opponents planes in a blitz. So no, I don't see wars being a back and forth from this update. It will just help close the gap between skill/knowledge/effort and timing.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Roberts said:

Two or three coordinated attackers can typically zero out an opponents planes in a blitz. So no, I don't see wars being a back and forth from this update. It will just help close the gap between skill/knowledge/effort and timing.

Why the only ones wanting this planes re-buy change is a minority of players with approx 50-60 players total...
While the majory is seeking to have a fair game play, even war wise.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second part about 1/3 sounds stupid, 1/4 is more reasonable but i still prefer the current stystem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SixSadistic66 said:

Why the only ones wanting this planes re-buy change is a minority of players with approx 50-60 players total...
While the majory is seeking to have a fair game play, even war wise.

The only ones opposing are The Swamp/former Farksphere really, sooooo

Need a citation on that claim.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

The only ones opposing are The Swamp/former Farksphere really, sooooo

Need a citation on that claim.

Not really, it's true that moving city score range from 50 to 100 will slightly reduce the very much bigger nations declaring on very low ones.. but the change in the plane military re-buy still gets us to the point where we are now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why was this even proposed? This'll be diastrous for everyone not in the whale tier. Vote NO! 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks good. This will help out the newer nations for sure. It'll put them on more equal footing with people of their same ability/capital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SixSadistic66 said:

Well, the game is called Politics and War and people being able to rebuild 2/3 on a double buy and the come backs would keep coming and coming in a war & that war might be endless because of either side thinking they might have a chance since they can max rebuild air in 3 days and are close to a win(until either side goes bankrupt obviously) 

Getting players from Swamp who barely understand the log in mechanics, let alone the war mechanics, to come brigade the vote doesn't mean the update isn't warranted.

When the "majority" don't even go to war except once per five years, I don't think they should get a vote.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Opera-Snapshot-2020-04-01-150838-politic

Whales and pirates that want the change vs. the sphere screwed by it... This picture looks vaguely familiar.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SixSadistic66 said:

Well, the game is called Politics and War and people being able to rebuild 2/3 on a double buy and the come backs would keep coming and coming in a war & that war might be endless because of either side thinking they might have a chance since they can max rebuild air in 3 days and are close to a win(until either side goes bankrupt obviously) 

Faster double buys doesn’t necessarily mean that the side that’s down automatically wins, but rather if the side that’s down understands the war mechanics, they still have a chance. If a c30 is pinned by 3 c20s with 1800 air each, and the c30 has Propaganda Bureau, then the c30 can buy 1980 air in a double buy. The c30 could get a few moderates on one his attackers if they’re lucky, but then the other 2 would just kill them again. Even if you have 3 c30s pinned down by the same 3 people, the most likely outcome would be that both sides end up getting zeroed, unless one side can take and keep ground control.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed on the first part, oppose the second part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Vein said:

9bc5bf541aa4871f3f94e79ccc779491.png
From the looks of it, there are already alot of people who are keen on this, this will not only make the game more fast paced, interesting and strategical, but wars will last shorters meaning we wont have an dial up 2.0. 100% should go forward with this.

That was an hour in, have patience. :v

 

3 hours ago, Zoot said:

Alright, so while I agree with Alex's reasons for these changes, i am afraid that they will end up having the opposite outcome.

First let us take the city score change increase. This change is likely to force alliances to tier their nations even heavier than is already the case since it will make it harder to support people if you do not have the same or almost the same number of cities. This will cause certain alliances or groups of alliances to end up largely in control of certain tiers when it comes to war, similar to what we have seen in previous wars, but to an even larger degree. The issue with this is that, unlike in previous wars, the increased score from cities, makes it harder to hit outside your tier, meaning the side in a war that controls the upper tier will have a harder time downdeclaring and the side that holds the lower tier will have a harder time updeclaring. This will cause the stalemate effect we have seen in previous wars to become even worse as neither side will have the ability to get a decisive advantage over the other.

Secondly, let us look at the plane rebuy time (because honestly none of the rest matters at all). Planes are already over powered and making them quicker to buy will do nothing to help that situation. But let us look at the specific reason many are citing, the ability to "make a comeback". In theory that is all fine and good, but in reality what this basically does is make it impossible to hold down large nations, thus giving an advantage to nations with higher city counts. It is already made harder by the city score change since it means you'll have less people able to help hold down large nations and added to that the large nations ability to instantly buy to 2/3 max planes makes it nearly impossible. It means that in order to hold down a large nation you will need nations with similar city counts in order to do it and if you don't have those you are simply out of luck. It will make it near impossible to decisively beat alliances with a higher tiering than your own.

So my opinion is that while I totally agree with the intentions of these proposed changes, I don't think they will have the desired outcome, but rather an outcome that is detrimental to the game.

Well said by Zoot. I'd be curious to see the "yes voters" address the above specifically. 

Edited by Kurdanak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kurdanak said:

Well said by Zoot. I'd be curious to see the "yes voters" address the above specifically. 

Sure :)

3 hours ago, Zoot said:

Alright, so while I agree with Alex's reasons for these changes, i am afraid that they will end up having the opposite outcome.

First let us take the city score change increase. This change is likely to force alliances to tier their nations even heavier than is already the case since it will make it harder to support people if you do not have the same or almost the same number of cities. This will cause certain alliances or groups of alliances to end up largely in control of certain tiers when it comes to war, similar to what we have seen in previous wars, but to an even larger degree. The issue with this is that, unlike in previous wars, the increased score from cities, makes it harder to hit outside your tier, meaning the side in a war that controls the upper tier will have a harder time downdeclaring and the side that holds the lower tier will have a harder time updeclaring. This will cause the stalemate effect we have seen in previous wars to become even worse as neither side will have the ability to get a decisive advantage over the other.

Firstly you are wrong about last wars problem being a stalemate situation. A stalemate with no side dominating the other would have been great compared to what actually happened, namely one sided being sat on with no way of turning the tides for months.

Another thing you are mistaken about is that updeclaring would become more difficult. This score change would be a buff to updeclaring, because getting into range of someone with less than 1.75 times your city-count will become easier. I do not think that this is positive, because it will make dragging down whales easier who were already helpless last war.

I also think that the effect this has on downdeclaring comes with a bunch of issues most importantly that it will become easier to pin people down.

As a standalone change I think increasing city score would be very negative, BUT it synergizes well with the second change and in fact is kinda needed to balance it.

Increasing the daily rebuy will be a huge buff to owning cities and that buff should be reflected in the score that a city gives. So it sucks atm but with the second change this has to come along.

3 hours ago, Zoot said:

Secondly, let us look at the plane rebuy time (because honestly none of the rest matters at all). Planes are already over powered and making them quicker to buy will do nothing to help that situation. But let us look at the specific reason many are citing, the ability to "make a comeback". In theory that is all fine and good, but in reality what this basically does is make it impossible to hold down large nations, thus giving an advantage to nations with higher city counts. It is already made harder by the city score change since it means you'll have less people able to help hold down large nations and added to that the large nations ability to instantly buy to 2/3 max planes makes it nearly impossible. It means that in order to hold down a large nation you will need nations with similar city counts in order to do it and if you don't have those you are simply out of luck. It will make it near impossible to decisively beat alliances with a higher tiering than your own.

So my opinion is that while I totally agree with the intentions of these proposed changes, I don't think they will have the desired outcome, but rather an outcome that is detrimental to the game.

You are wrong about the city score change making it harder to hold down whales. In fact it is the very opposite and will make it way easier because in their zeroed state their high city count will inflate their score and keep them in range of people to keep them down.

But you are of course correct saying that this 1/3 rebuy change is a significant buff to whales. I would however not say that this is a bad thing. It's in fact very unhealthy for the game when people can be effectively sat on for months with no way to get out of their situation. I would say that enabling them to fight back is not a bad thing, rather its very needed. What needs to be ensured however is that whales can't completely dominate everyone else now. The change to score given by cities comes into play here, because it makes it harder for whales to downdeclare too far and then completely crush the lower tiered opponent they declared on. I think it is up to debate if the 100 score increase is enough though to balance it. Generally though I think this problem is overstated by most people antagonizing the rebuy idea here, because for one I'm fairly sure whales won't decom 70% of their military all the time to downdeclare and then double-buy, because this kind of decomming will actually be very expensive and crushing midgets is usually not that high priority. Then the other thing is that in this game there exists more low-tier than mid-tier and more mid-tier than high-tier and that generally the high tier nations will find themselfes outnumbered and beaten by good coordination from their lower tiered opponents. Personally as a c35 nation I do not see myself being invulnerable to counters after the change at all, if I get slotted by 3 nations then all of those will have the rebuy change applied to them as well.

What the change definitely does accomplish, is that if you find yourself zeroed it will become more easy to get back up as you do not need 6 days of beige anymore to max out. This is very good because you wont find one side of a war being dead for months anymore.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

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.