Jump to content
Alex

Beige Replacement - Relief Mechanic Not Tied to Losing Wars

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Actually nvm. I'd rather write something up properly first. uwu

Edited by Mitsuru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'One way of tracking a player’s status is by how their infrastructure or military units change over time. Selling infrastructure would not apply to this. The main goal in a nation-to-nation war is to destroy the opponent’s military units and infrastructure."

Um. raiding tries to accomplish the taking of loot. So would we assume that those with 0 troops would not receive a beige timer.

So pirates who use ships only could essentially perma raid someone because they aren't losing enough military.

This system addresses a good chunk of issues but not all of them. Especially on the wars where the defender doesn't loose much infra.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So instead of making the "beige meter" based on infra loss, we could do for example, you get 1 day added to your beige meter for every defensive war that you have. and you can also make it so that the beige meter must be used within a week or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it needs to be tied to a percentage of infra rather than an amount of infra.  If you win a war and cause 4% infra damage across the board, that should be the same amount of beige time given, regardless of what your infra level was.  And I do think that should roll off over time, you shouldn't be able to keep a bank from one war and carry it over to use months later.  

I'd also like to consider a "window of time" after your beige bank is activated for any more defensive wars to be declared on you (unless you are in none).  What I'd want to avoid is let's say I have a counter set up of three people, the first person declares and then the opponent goes to beige bank.  My other two guys can't get in and the first guy might be overmatched.  I think a 2-turn window or something to allow somewhat of a "last-call" on defensive wars should be allowed to avoid that scenario.  

There should also be transparency about how much beige bank time nations have, so opponents can strategize accordingly and have the formulas well-known so people know the impact their attacks will have on their opponent's bank. 

 

I expect you wouldn't have to use your entire bank all in one shot, but could choose the number of days of it to utilize?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the concept, I would like to see beige time earned for infra destroyed (at a reduced rate) to incentivize attacks that do infra damage but not much unit damage (missles, nukes, navals) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if you make beige based off damage and the nation income post war and scrap the beige bank idea. It seems overly complex and generally when a rule is overly complex it leaves room to be exploited. I'm too dumb to think of any but I'm sure given enough time the bright minds will figure it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

To add on to my last post, this was posted by Alex in the dev team channel and shot down by several dev team members, with the only potential revision to make it workable is making it based on unit damage. Both of these were ignored here, and I've already been DMed by another dev team member who agreed that he doesn't appreciate being used as a barrier for Alex's ideas when infact he also opposed them.

@Akuryo The dev team has identified several problems with the modified beige system, with the most notable being that people will still want to lose wars to get beige. We'd ideally like to change this, thus the support for reserve system. Another idea was to have beige bank, but like modified beige problems were identified with that (namely, wars going from blitz-to-blitz with entire alliances entering and leaving beige at once). 

Edited by Changeup
responding to akuryo
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you pretend to care about feedback, when you just ignore that which you don't like, public or otherwise?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn’t this make the different ways to destroy infra more useless. Like for example if I launch 4 nukes at someone and destroy 20% of their infra that just means they get a crazy amount beige time. Also it makes attrition wars worse because you do more infra damage and people get more beige time

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally you paid some attention to what the community has to say

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Maybe I missed something but how does this prevent people from declaring war then activating their beige preventing counters from being sent?

Edited by Viselli
Switched a word
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

At first glance the beige bank mechanic seemed workable and I really liked the idea and reasoning behind it. However, I think this might fail to accomplish your goal of giving alliances the ability to fight a counter offensive. When the losing coalition decides to enter beige en-masse and prepare for their counter offensive, the opposing coalition can enter beige a few hours or days after the losing coalition does. The losing coalition will exit beige, milled up, but unable to attack the other coalition who is still in beige and the winning coalition now have a 24 hour time window to exit beige and re-blitz the originally losing coalition, rendering the ability to counter blitz ineffective.

Edited by Hime-sama
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hime-sama said:

At first glance the beige bank mechanic seemed workable and I really liked the idea and reasoning behind it. However, I think this might fail to accomplish your goal of giving alliances the ability to fight a counter offensive. When the losing coalition decides to enter beige en-masse and prepare for their counter offensive, the opposing coalition can enter beige a few hours or days after the losing coalition does. The losing coalition will exit beige, milled up, but unable to attack the other coalition who is still in beige and the winning coalition now have a 24 hour time window to exit beige and re-blitz the originally losing coalition, rendering the ability to counter blitz ineffective.

But would the winning side have any beige time banked up to use if they've been winning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Lord Tyrion said:

But would the winning side have any beige time banked up to use if they've been winning?

I only watched the video, but as far as I know there was no mention of expiry for built up beige, so I would think they should have some amount of beige, enough where they can beige after their opponent and come out to re-blitz them.

Edited by Hime-sama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Changeup said:

How come you completely ignored all dev team proposals and went straight to yours, with the most supported solution from the dev team as a one sentence afterthought?

I did not do that. I simply posted a thread asking for more feedback - you of all people, being included in the dev team, should no that no decisions have been made at this point.

Having a public discussion with the community to gather feedback =/= ignoring all dev team proposals.

51 minutes ago, Lord Tyrion said:

I think it needs to be tied to a percentage of infra rather than an amount of infra.  If you win a war and cause 4% infra damage across the board, that should be the same amount of beige time given, regardless of what your infra level was.  And I do think that should roll off over time, you shouldn't be able to keep a bank from one war and carry it over to use months later.  

I'd also like to consider a "window of time" after your beige bank is activated for any more defensive wars to be declared on you (unless you are in none).  What I'd want to avoid is let's say I have a counter set up of three people, the first person declares and then the opponent goes to beige bank.  My other two guys can't get in and the first guy might be overmatched.  I think a 2-turn window or something to allow somewhat of a "last-call" on defensive wars should be allowed to avoid that scenario.  

There should also be transparency about how much beige bank time nations have, so opponents can strategize accordingly and have the formulas well-known so people know the impact their attacks will have on their opponent's bank. 

 

I expect you wouldn't have to use your entire bank all in one shot, but could choose the number of days of it to utilize?

Yes, I was thinking it being percentage based as well, rather than absolute amounts of infrastructure.

Having a window of time where you could still be declared on after activating (i.e. having a delay on it going into effect) is a great solution to that problem. Good idea.

I agree, it would be public information. As for being forced to use it all in one shot - that was essentially my thought for simplicity sake but it wouldn't necessarily need to be that way.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Changeup said:

To add on to my last post, this was posted by Alex in the dev team channel and shot down by several dev team members, with the only potential revision to make it workable is making it based on unit damage. Both of these were ignored here, and I've already been DMed by another dev team member who agreed that he doesn't appreciate being used as a barrier for Alex's ideas when infact he also opposed them.

@Akuryo The dev team has identified several problems with the modified beige system, with the most notable being that people will still want to lose wars to get beige. We'd ideally like to change this, thus the support for reserve system. Another idea was to have beige bank, but like modified beige problems were identified with that (namely, wars going from blitz-to-blitz with entire alliances entering and leaving beige at once). 

I did bring it up in the dev team channel and we had a discussion - I would say that is far from having conclusively "shot down" the idea. Bringing this idea forward for more public feedback is a good idea because it gives others a chance to think about it and spur their own ideas / suggestions.

The crux of this idea is that losing wars does not give you beige. The point is that beige is not tied to winning or losing wars to ensure that incentives are aligned properly. The same is true in the reserves system.

29 minutes ago, Shiho Nishizumi said:

Why do you pretend to care about feedback, when you just ignore that which you don't like, public or otherwise?

I do value community feedback, hence the point of this thread (and many others, as well as the existence of the forum and game suggestions subforum.) Just because I don't always agree with feedback doesn't mean that I ignore it. Suggestions almost always have very vocal critics and rarely is a consensus on anything ever reached. At the end of the day it comes to me to make decisions on the direction of development.

18 minutes ago, Viselli said:

Maybe I missed something but how does this prevent people from declaring war then activating their beige preventing counters from being sent?

The way I wrote it out it doesn't, but @Lord Tyrion had a good idea to fix that issue by essentially implementing a delay between when the beige was activated and when it goes into effect.

6 minutes ago, Hime-sama said:

I only watched the video, but as far as I know there was no mention of expiry for built up beige, so I would think they should have some amount of beige, enough where they can beige after their opponent and come out to re-blitz them.

My thinking was that it wouldn't accumulate forever - it would be based on the last X days (7?) of damages. If you hadn't been in any wars in the past 7 days, then your meter would be at 0 for example (no beige time available.)

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This thread basically already proposed the idea of a beige bank. Others have already given solid feedback in that thread and in this thread. I personally do not think this beige bank idea will pan out the way you think it will. I also don't think unlinking beige from losing wars is a good idea.

 

Please please please just move the test server changes on to live while removing the one or two pieces that turned out poorly. There was a whole feedback thread about those beige changes as well.

Please please please fix the broken score change.

 

 

I think the community at-large has either become overtly frustrated by these threads, or has begun overtly avoiding this section of the forums altogether because we've been at such a rapid-fire pace lately with several large suggestions and a few huge actual changes to multiple different systems - many of those changes needing to be retuned because they proved too powerful in one direction or the other. I don't want important pieces to get left behind because certain members of the dev team or whoever is excited to move on to the next "project."

Edited by Roberts
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

13 minutes ago, Alex said:

My thinking was that it wouldn't accumulate forever - it would be based on the last X days (7?) of damages. If you hadn't been in any wars in the past 7 days, then your meter would be at 0 for example (no beige time available.)

I think you ought to further consider basing the "meter" on unit losses, damages, or military score loss over time. I think that will disincentivize people from allowing themselves to be openly navaled either by enemies, allies, or random opponents, essentially stopping winners from being able to accumulate beige time since they will in most cases not be losing military, but can still lose infrastructure to naval attacks, missiles, nukes, ground double buys, etc.

Edited by Hime-sama

Share this post


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

I do value community feedback, hence the point of this thread (and many others, as well as the existence of the forum and game suggestions subforum.) Just because I don't always agree with feedback doesn't mean that I ignore it. Suggestions almost always have very vocal critics and rarely is a consensus on anything ever reached. At the end of the day it comes to me to make decisions on the direction of development.

You mean the ones you invariably go radio silent on because you can't back up your stance?

Given my grasp on the whole situation (I've been inquired a fair bit over the past week for stuff pertaining to this), it honestly sounds like you're just bypassing the disagreements by the dev team and coming here to try to gain some traction for stuff that only you and Pre think that is good.

  • Upvote 3

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.