Jump to content

5/14/2020 - 4 New Projects, Nation Score Change, and more


Alex
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, The Boofinator said:

when ytou look at the complete picture planes are def NOT the moist expensive (when you factor in not just the cost of the planes but the materials as well) as compared to tanks and ships, those two far outpace planes and tanks by a longshot when you add in the cost of buying tens of thousands of units of steel at 4k+ ppu

You aren't getting it. People aren't buying tanks like that. You have to be looking at builds and 90% of the ones I've seen have planes only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys guys guys an girls stop for a moment

No more ground control able to stop 1/3 of your air, air control still can limit tanks to 50%

Just take air control and keep some tanks, the enemy will never be able to kill your air

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Akuryo said:

Good to see having more than 20 cities has now been reaffirmed as pointless and laughably stupid by the admin himself.

@Alex of that 4000 before the spike, less than half were actually a relevant participatory party of the game. Even including garbage micros that had no chance of going anywhere, it topped out at around 1500. The rest were, generally, quickly added to the pool of inactives or are those occasional, rare random city 2s or 1s that stay allianceless and just do whatever it is they're doing.

So yeah, it was doing pretty badly actually. Also, you nerfed planes way too hard for the score buff they got, and made tanks practically worthless in score while being able to club as many planes as an IT with a bad kill roll, and all with 1 less MAP required.

 

Oh, and thanks to the plane reduction, harpooning upper tier whales is even easier. "Ah but proportionally you have the same amount more as before!" War mechanics don't know proportions unfortunately, they know raw numbers. I went from having 450 planes on a c20 to 375. It was already very possible for c20s to take me down anyway, you just went and made it easier. Infact, city 15/16 could probably do it now, whereas before most MA departments wouldn't even try with anything less than 18s.

 

Oh, and because my score minus my overnax planes actually went down, it's actually not anymore difficult nor even close to impossible for those theoretical c15/16s to get to me. 

 

And steel prices are going to skyrocket because a massive stockpile will be necessary. Particularly for people like me who are now easier than ever no matter what I do to take down. If I want to be relevant after that I should definitely consider 100k+ steel as my warchest.

 

 

If CotL would oblige with a lack of counters, I'm sure we could throw nations at you and see what city count it takes to defeat you 1v1, if that's something you'd be interested in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, namukara said:

If CotL would oblige with a lack of counters, I'm sure we could throw nations at you and see what city count it takes to defeat you 1v1, if that's something you'd be interested in.

I honestly considered this myself but hadn't brought it up yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Micchan said:

Guys guys guys an girls stop for a moment

No more ground control able to stop 1/3 of your air, air control still can limit tanks to 50%

Just take air control and keep some tanks, the enemy will never be able to kill your air

Except that as of right now, air superiority does not limit tanks effectiveness against aircraft, only against other ground. 

I'm hoping this wasn't the intended set up. @Alex

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Chief Financial Officer of The Syndicate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Akuryo said:

I honestly considered this myself but hadn't brought it up yet. 

Yeah, obviously no nukes because that wouldn't test anything and would just be idiotic on either side, but a few test wars between willing participants could be useful, not on the artificial environment of the test server. Everyone participating could put some money in a pot so we're playing for to win something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Justin076 said:

It's becoming quite clear to me that absolutely none of these changes were tested and simulated as to how they would take affect. The carelessness with just going in and manipulating a few values in the coding and slapping the branding of an "game fixing update" is absurd. Had these changes actually been tested, I pray that they would never have been considered. 

Just to bring attention to some of the issues uncovered thus far:

> Air Superiority doesn't affect tanks effectiveness against aircraft (tanks against aircraft, sounds crazy even saying that in a sentence). 

> The kill rates have been nerfed but casualties haven't. The kill ratios in an immense triumph ground attack are literally 1:1. 

> It's virtually impossible to zero a nation with three fully maxed nations slotting them. 

> With no changes to resource use in attacks by units and  no change to inflicted casualties but yet a massive nerf to kills, you often will net negative in any IT dogfight? It's literally costing more in resources than you can possibly kill because of how much kills have been nerfed. 

These are just a few, more to come.....

 

Actually, to build off of that, it basically deletes the first strike advantage entirely.

Zeroing is nigh impossible without downdeclares which have been made far more difficult, the cost to even attack is more than the damage you do no matter what, and because you MUST 3 slot people to have any chance at all, you can't offset numerical inferiority with superior coordination and first strike.

What's the reason to go to war now? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Akuryo said:

Actually, to build off of that, it basically deletes the first strike advantage entirely.

Zeroing is nigh impossible without downdeclares which have been made far more difficult, the cost to even attack is more than the damage you do no matter what, and because you MUST 3 slot people to have any chance at all, you can't offset numerical inferiority with superior coordination and first strike.

What's the reason to go to war now? 

It could be said though that the first strike advantage was harmful in globals, as it essentially led to one side being unable to bring themselves back no matter what strategy they had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, namukara said:

It could be said though that the first strike advantage was harmful in globals, as it essentially led to one side being unable to bring themselves back no matter what strategy they had.

And part of the proposed changes that weren't included in this package of hogshit was changing rebuy times or even beige function to offset that in later rounds.

But the first strike advantage was crucial to the vitality of the game. It made taking risk and being the aggressor worth doing. But if it conveys no advantage and indeed, hurts you more than then, why the hell bother with it 😛

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, namukara said:

It could be said though that the first strike advantage was harmful in globals, as it essentially led to one side being unable to bring themselves back no matter what strategy they had.

First strike advantage used to come at a significant political cost, before everything was cordoned off into two distinct spheres. There is also the fact that getting counter blitzes could leave the original target practically invincible as their slots would be full of non functional nations.

The defending side has come out on top in multiple wars. Alliances have come back on top 1v1 after getting blitzed. It wasn't the be all end all of warfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The past two globals are case example of it not being such. NPOLT I needn't elaborate. Surf's Up largely came down to how NR et all hit. If they had hit the overextended people rather than easy pads, that war would've not gone the way it did.

But yes, this is Alex coming up with 50000 different changes that addressed XYZ complaints (many of which were very specific/situational) that he couldn't be fricked to test (as is becoming increasingly apparent to me), either individually or as a bundle, and pushed to go live haphazardly for no good reason other than to claim he's doing something. I suppose that having a huge changelog looks more impressive than having just one or two lines.

  • Upvote 1
 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Epi said:

Inb4 a space expansion where we discover all of NPO was beta testing the Dark side of the moon.

But no these changes aren't from left field. The vast majority of non-IQ wanted anti-aircraft on ships or soldiers for a very very long time.

The score changes were equally as demanded. 

Idk about the specific casualty formula but we did need to slow things down. From memory Alex and Prefontaine were discussing adding in smaller battles that cost little to no Maps to make up for the reduction. But over greater length of time to make it more engaging. 

If you're just going to post an idiotic nothingburger of a statement, don't bother.

A vast majority of them very clearly also didn't want this to the extent Alex has taken it, your "point" if you could even call it that is worthless and applies to no one.

The score changes were demanded in a vacuum of themselves not considering the other changes that occurred here because nobody had even brought them up yet. Yet another irrelevant point that doesn't actually address any problems and thinks it can be clever by pretending this is exactly what everyone asked for instead of adding numerous individual things together into a ball of trash.

What they're discussing is also irrelevant. It's not here now, it's not even publicly listed or described anywhere to my knowledge, and nobody here has any faith in not being implemented poorly.

 

If your changes only make sense and don't break everything with a couple extra additives months down the line, then wait until those additives are ready, instead of this retarded attention whoring behavior shooting out half baked trash heaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are people worried about the meta changing, its good for the game.  If the game was the same from launch to now we wouldn't have seen a lot of Strats that have came out for a long period of time. NPO's turtle Strat, to Arrgh's submarine Strat, to tS's Aircraft only, each Strat changes the game and bring in a new competitor and a new storyline along with it.

 

So I like the changes, some things will of course have to be tweaked but for the most part, lets go into the abyss together!

  • Like 1

IMG_2989.png?ex=65e9efa9&is=65d77aa9&hm=

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kastor said:

Why are people worried about the meta changing, its good for the game.  If the game was the same from launch to now we wouldn't have seen a lot of Strats that have came out for a long period of time. NPO's turtle Strat, to Arrgh's submarine Strat, to tS's Aircraft only, each Strat changes the game and bring in a new competitor and a new storyline along with it.

 

So I like the changes, some things will of course have to be tweaked but for the most part, lets go into the abyss together!

There’s a difference between not wanting change and not wanting to see a terrible update implemented into the game.

This update ruins the war system, which will obviously ripple through other areas of the game.

  • Upvote 1

Chief Financial Officer of The Syndicate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When looking at balance issues, there is virtually no way to make a 1v1 balanced while making a 3v1 reasonable without making it so the more people you have in your defensive slots the less damages happen. And nerfing damage because you're fighting more people is flawed in of itself. This is also a game where 1v1's don't really happen. It's about handling your 3 defensive slots being filled. At any moment someone could be fighting a 3v1, and under the previous system, effectively be out of the war within 60 seconds. That's why the damage metrics have switched to being focused on damage relative to daily rebuy amounts. 

  • Soldiers: Avg 25% killed per attack. 3 players opening blitz, 150% daily buy of soldiers killed. 1 full day of attacks 300% of soldiers killed (that's all of them)
  • Tanks: Avg 40% killed per attack. 3 players opening blitz, 240% of daily buy tanks killed (500% is what they can field max). 1 Full day of attacks, 480%
  • Planes: Avg 52% killed per dogfight. 3 players opening blitz, 156% of daily buy for planes. 1 full day of dogfights, 468% (again max is 500% units you could have)
  • Ships: Avg 52% killed per attack. 3 players opening blitz, 156% if daily buy for ships. 1 full day of naval attacks, 468%. 

Looking at things in a 2v1:

  • Soldiers: Avg 25% killed per attack. 2 players opening blitz, 100% daily buy of soldiers killed. 1 full day of attacks 200% of soldiers killed (out of 300%)
  • Tanks: Avg 40% killed per attack. 2 players opening blitz, 160% of daily buy tanks killed. 1 Full day of attacks, 320%
  • Planes: Avg 52% killed per dogfight. 2 players opening blitz, 104% of daily buy for planes. 1 full day of dogfights, 312%
  • Ships: Avg 52% killed per attack. 2 players opening blitz, 104% if daily buy for ships. 1 full day of naval attacks, 312%.

Max rebuys you can have for soldiers on hand is 300%, for tanks/planes/ships is 500%. 

  • Like 1

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

And these fights will be fights of attrition for the simple reason that you can't really zero someone, let alone pin them, if they have the resources to spend. 

Sweet, you can't pin someone down forever if they have the means of fighting back? That sounds pretty fantastic considering you could lose the war while you were asleep. Thanks!

48 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

And if you do get 0'd because you went broke on, example, steel; you can't even fight back anywhere near as well as you could under the old system, due to cities being the main NS contributor. You'll be in range of people with similar city counts as you, who are nonetheless maxed (provided similar infra counts). So congratulations on stripping those people from any tools for fighting back, other than nuke turreting.

If you get 0'd in the old system you could only fight back by missile/nuke turreting regardless of score ranges and if you had the resources to rebuild or not. Unless you mean coming out of beige without military and a 10-25 city advantage on people and double buying to hit them. Again sounds fantastic that massive down declares have been nerfed. Thanks for the congrats! 

48 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Were these factors considered at all? No. 

Oh cool, you were in the meetings and privy to the things considered and discussed. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

Sweet, you can't pin someone down forever if they have the means of fighting back? That sounds pretty fantastic considering you could lose the war while you were asleep. Thanks!

If you get 0'd in the old system you could only fight back by missile/nuke turreting regardless of score ranges and if you had the resources to rebuild or not. Unless you mean coming out of beige without military and a 10-25 city advantage on people and double buying to hit them. Again sounds fantastic that massive down declares have been nerfed. Thanks for the congrats! 

Oh cool, you were in the meetings and privy to the things considered and discussed. 

You don't sound emotionally invested in this trainwreck of an update at all.

Losing in your sleep doesn't justify making it practically impossible to lose a defensive war.

This is a very complicated and obtuse attempt to fix a minor problem by not accomplishing anything remotely effective. 

 

  • Upvote 1

One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

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.