Aisha Greyjoy Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I'd like to see an option for an alliance to officially declare war via an in-game mechanic. The benefit? Maybe alliances at war with each other can have a -35%/+100% war range instead of the current range. This would also facilitate better war ranges at the top of the spectrum somewhat. 3 Quote Duke of House Greyjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeon Helikos Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I quickly clicked on the title because I thought this was a DoW hahaha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iljohn Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I would also like it if you do a alliance war that it shows the infa destroyed and the troops lost on both sides to get more of a feel of who's winning 1 Quote (^。^)y-.。o○ (-。-)y-゜゜゜ this is how i make my cloud http://i1371.photobucket.com/albums/ag291/petgangster/efb30519-f381-4330-a62b-11db0d2a058b_zpscilyk2rj.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanislaw Sikorski Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I would also like it if you do a alliance war that it shows the infa destroyed and the troops lost on both sides to get more of a feel of who's winning It should be based on who has won the most wars between nations instead. If a nation suffered huge losses that would have too much of an effect on deciding the winner for just one nation losing a war with heavy losses. Quote Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speaker Faris Wheeler Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I thought you were declaring war on somebody Aisha Quote Peace will never be accomplished without war, but war cannot happen without peace.... or something like that idk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 It should be based on who has won the most wars between nations instead. If a nation suffered huge losses that would have too much of an effect on deciding the winner for just one nation losing a war with heavy losses.losing a war sucks but it's a good thing if you're getting you're ass kicked because you get 5 full days to rebuild. Infra costs quite a bit and is what people are using to decide who has won/lost a war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aisha Greyjoy Posted November 3, 2014 Author Share Posted November 3, 2014 I thought you were declaring war on somebody Aisha Are you volunteering? 1 Quote Duke of House Greyjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speaker Faris Wheeler Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Are you volunteering? No I am not Quote Peace will never be accomplished without war, but war cannot happen without peace.... or something like that idk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I actually think that that's a meritorious suggestion. Quote ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [10:47] you used to be the voice of irc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geronimo Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I like this idea. Hopefully Sheepy will come up and make it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reagan Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I don't want to see the war ranges changed, regardless of whether it's an alliance war or individual war. Otherwise, more in game options are always nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hansarius Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 It should be based on who has won the most wars between nations instead. If a nation suffered huge losses that would have too much of an effect on deciding the winner for just one nation losing a war with heavy losses. Ironically, the amount of defeated nations in an alliance war isn't that interesting unless it is overwhelmingly one-sided (in which case you hardly need it sumarized) It's optimal to keep an enemy out of beige so that you can keep attacking him and have other nations declare on him when the war runs out. But having alliance wars an in game mechanic could be an interesting addition, as well as the suggested war-time statistics of forces and infra lost. Maybe another addition could be made that there's an option to look up all enemy nations within range and slots open? Quote “Be your friend’s true friend. Return gift for gift. Repay laughter with laughter again but betrayal with treachery.”― Hávamál Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Juan Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Ironically, the amount of defeated nations in an alliance war isn't that interesting unless it is overwhelmingly one-sided (in which case you hardly need it sumarized) It's optimal to keep an enemy out of beige so that you can keep attacking him and have other nations declare on him when the war runs out. But having alliance wars an in game mechanic could be an interesting addition, as well as the suggested war-time statistics of forces and infra lost. Maybe another addition could be made that there's an option to look up all enemy nations within range and slots open? I like that idea, saves having to do target lists and the like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.