Jump to content

Beige/slots replacement


Dryad
 Share

Recommended Posts

Since beige is gone now, I'm posting my idea for a replacement.

Remove warslots as well and replace both beige and slots with a buff/nerf mechanic.

The idea is if you declare an offensive war you get a nerf and if you get declared on you get a buff. You could declare a lot of wars but doing so will stack debuffs on you and at the same time hundreds of people could hit you but they would also stack hella buffs on you. As for the beige replacement, I'd say once a war expires it would just maintain any buff from a defensive war for another couple days or whatever after expiry. Important is the balance that the attacker gets a debuff similar to the buff the defender gets. This way an ally could attack an ally and their buffs would just cancel each other out sort of. Ideally this would just make moderating it unnecessary. It would address other stuff too e.g. balance out the attacker advantage somewhat by giving defenders the buff vs debuff advantage.

That's the basic concept, obviously there is a ton of math that would have to be done to get balance right and there would be a lot of other stuff to adjust but I know people don't like reading so I'll leave it at this for now and not go super indepth. Idea should be clear.

Edited by Dryad
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 2

Biggest-Bloc-1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disincentivizing aggressive action has, and always will be, a moronic idea from the start.

The reason people have asked for unlimited offensive slots before is because the nerf is fighting 11 people at once. There doesn't need to be anything else, especially with downdeclares being basically impossible.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Akuryo said:

Disincentivizing aggressive action has, and always will be, a moronic idea from the start.

whether it's a disincentive depends on the actual numbers. without slots you could also blitz a person with 20 instead of 3 people.

Biggest-Bloc-1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dryad said:

whether it's a disincentive depends on the actual numbers. without slots you could also blitz a person with 20 instead of 3 people.

And you would attrition yourself to death, simply because you'd be far depleted even by like the 6th guy.

Not to mention, this would discourage declaring upwards, as you would not only have to deal with a larger military than you own, but also a negative modifier to add on top of it.

Aggression is what moves things around; discouraging it leads to stagnation and a boring game. 

 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

And you would attrition yourself to death, simply because you'd be far depleted even by like the 6th guy.

thats not true though. i mean assume that there was no debuff at all. Now having no slots would be absolutely insane offensive wise because you could just get as many people on a target as you need to zero them immediately. Now with a buff it totally depends on the number. Some amount would be so low that it's irrelevant and some numbers would be so high that it disincentivizes aggression. Obviously there will also be a sort of golden middle.

Edited by Dryad

Biggest-Bloc-1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dryad said:

thats not true though. i mean assume that there was no debuff at all. Now having no slots would be absolutely insane offensive wise because you could just get as many people on a target as you need to zero them immediately. Now with a buff it totally depends on the number. Some amount would be so low that it's irrelevant and some numbers would be so high that it disincentivises aggression. Obviously there will also be a sort of golden middle.

There's no point in assuming a non-debuffed variant, as this mechanic is being bundled with the removal of offensive slots. One wouldn't go without the other, and as such, both are discussed in tandem. But yes, make the debuff too weak, and it can turn out to be overpowered (especially beyond the initial blitz, given that blitzes often are high traffic peaks which lead to a slow response, and therefore have led to people even missing buys or a second declare in the past). Which is why, alongside the entire reason for Alex making the casualty changes being to avoid nations dying instantly, I think that he'd go ham with it, and therefore cripple offensive. I also don't think that a person who just knee jerk removed an essential mechanic is capable of of the fine tuning required for this sort of debuff to hit the proper sweetspot it'd require.
 

 
G3.gif.d8066d8dc749ad2d0835fe69095fa73b.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.