Content Announcement: Smaller updated, larger update

[Prefontaine]

Content from this thread is being separated into two different updates to get the easier to code content out first and not delaying the larger code-intensive work later. 

LATER:

• Beige rework. Test server tournaments targeted for the second half of June.
• Tutorial Rework. 
• Baseball Changes. (May end up going in the sooner category)

SOONER:

• New Project: Metropolitan Planning
  Requirement: City 21 or higher, Urban Planning, Advanced Urban Planning.
  Effect: Reduces City costs by $150,000,000 per city, stacks with UP and AUP.
  Cost: 
  Aluminum: 60,000
  Steel: 40,000
  Uranium: 30,000
  Lead: 15,000
  Iron: 15,000
  Bauxite: 15,000
  Oil: 10,000
  Coal: 10,000
• New Project: Military Salvage
  Effect: When you declare an attack and are victorious, recover 5% of lost steel/aluminum from units in that attack.
  Cost:
  Cash: $20,000,000
  Aluminum: 5,000
  Steel: 5,000
  Gas: 5,000
• New Project: Fall Out Shelter
  Requirement: Research and Development Center, Clinical Research Center
  Effect: 
  -Reduces damage from nuclear missiles by 10%.
  -Reduces fall-out length in a city by 25%
  -Maximum radiation impact on food is 90% (can always produce 10% of food)
  Cost:
  Cash: $25,000,000
  Food: 100,000
  Lead: 10,000
  Steel: 10,000
  Aluminum: 10,000

Quality of Life:

• When a nation deletes during a war, part of that nations resources goes to those fighting it. 50% split among the nations fighting
• Make Leader name and Nation name consistent. You can have different names but all interaction (like bank trades) will go through use names. 
• Alliance (and shared market) trades get merged into the global trade screen and include a special indicator or color.
• Nations in alliances that have a treaty to your alliance will appear with an indicator or color on the market to show "ally" trades
• For the bulk import feature, have the default be to all cities but give the option to select which cities to import to. Cities may have differing infra levels/improvement slots, especially during war, or people may want different builds for different cities - but still across multiple cities - so allowing them to choose which cities the import applies to would make things easier.
• Allow for the "$" and commas to be ignored when inputting values and/or allow for k,m,b to be used to send cash/resources (i.e. 1m instead of 1000000 to send 1 million food).

Embargoes: 

• Alliance leaders will be able to issue alliance-wide embargoes of a nation or an alliance. All members of the alliance will receive a notification of this. Nations can manually cancel the embargo.

Trade:

• Players can have at most 3 active buy offers and 3 active sell offers for a single resource. (Credits excluded)
• If a player has multiple trade offers for the same amount due to trying to buy/sell a large amount of resources above the posting limit, these trades will count as a single trade. (Example: Someone posts 5 offers of 1M food at 100 PPU to effectively post 5M food at 100 PPU - This counts as 1 trade offer for the counting)
• If a player attempts to post a 4th trade offer for a specific resource, that trade attempt will fail and the nation will need to select which trade offer they want to delete.
• This does not impact private trades or shared alliance markets, only global market trades. 

Navy:

• Upkeep reduced by 10%
• Ammo cost reduced from 3 -> 2.5
• Gas cost reduced from 2 -> 1.5

 

Edited May 10, 2022 by Prefontaine

[Seifer]

Time to go 0003

[Hodor]

On 5/2/2022 at 5:58 PM, Prefontaine said:

For the bulk import feature, have the default be to all cities but give the option to select which cities to import to. Cities may have differing infra levels/improvement slots, especially during war, or people may want different builds for different cities - but still across multiple cities - so allowing them to choose which cities the import applies to would make things easier.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[BelgiumFury]

On 5/2/2022 at 11:58 PM, Prefontaine said:

• Players can have at most 3 active buy offers and 3 active sell offers for a single resource. (Credits excluded).

Can someone explain to me why credits should be excluded here; as far as I'm concerned 20 different credit prices are just as annoying.

On 5/2/2022 at 11:58 PM, Prefontaine said:

• When a nation deletes during a war, part of that nations resources goes to those fighting it. 50% split among the nations fighting

If someone actually deletes, everything should be distributed to the nations fighting. If you delete you are a wussy and deserve it.

On 5/2/2022 at 11:58 PM, Prefontaine said:

Navy:

• Upkeep reduced by 10%
• Ammo cost reduced from 3 -> 2.5
• Gas cost reduced from 2 -> 1.5

Although this is nice and sweet; i don't think that this will structurally fix the issues that Naval has. 

That issue is that it has no place at all in the Global War meta, it will just make the cost of mismanaging ships and destroying infra cheaper. Which seems like a non solution.
Ships need a buff / mechanics change that will make them more useful and or more interesting to be used in meta war situations, during the early stages of the war.

Currently they are only good in three situations:
- Destroying loads and loads of infra if you have a lot of cities (this will be buffed quite a bit as ships are cheaper to use now). 
- Blockading (In the deciding stages of a global war this is very rarely useful).
- One shipping (this is only useful if your opponent is absolute shit).

Just to be clear: I am not opposed to this change (I don't really care much for it); i just don't think it's actually going to do a lot.

 

 

---

 

Those are the three comments I have; I think these changes are mostly very good and or interesting.

[SleepingNinja]

On 5/2/2022 at 5:58 PM, Prefontaine said:

SOONER:

• New Project: Metropolitan Planning
  Requirement: City 21 or higher, Urban Planning, Advanced Urban Planning.
  Effect: Reduces City costs by $150,000,000 per city, stacks with UP and AUP.
  Cost: 
  Aluminum: 60,000
  Steel: 40,000
  Uranium: 30,000
  Lead: 15,000
  Iron: 15,000
  Bauxite: 15,000
  Oil: 10,000
  Coal: 10,000

 

I'm not against adding this.. but why is it currently cheaper/sameish price as AUP? Up the cost another 300-500M.

[Jacob Knox]

5 minutes ago, SleepingNinja said:

I'm not against adding this.. but why is it currently cheaper/sameish price as AUP? Up the cost another 300-500M.

AUP costs, with current market prices, about $550m. This would cost about $614m. (For reference.)

[CaesarGorandius]

19 minutes ago, BelgiumFury said:

Although this is nice and sweet; i don't think that this will structurally fix the issues that Naval has. 

That issue is that it has no place at all in the Global War meta, it will just make the cost of mismanaging ships and destroying infra cheaper. Which seems like a non solution.
Ships need a buff / mechanics change that will make them more useful and or more interesting to be used in meta war situations, during the early stages of the war.

Currently they are only good in three situations:
- Destroying loads and loads of infra if you have a lot of cities (this will be buffed quite a bit as ships are cheaper to use now). 
- Blockading (In the deciding stages of a global war this is very rarely useful).
- One shipping (this is only useful if your opponent is absolute shit).

Just to be clear: I am not opposed to this change (I don't really care much for it); i just don't think it's actually going to do a lot.

 

 

---

 

Those are the three comments I have; I think these changes are mostly very good and or interesting.

I wonder if something along the lines of allowing you to use Navies / Air Forces to support ground runs; like when you choose a ground run you can choose a support method (Armored, Naval, or Air) and each method has different strengths and weaknesses in combat giving a bit more depth to fighting a war.

[SleepingNinja]

9 minutes ago, Jacob Knox said:

AUP costs, with current market prices, about $550m. This would cost about $614m. (For reference.)

That's exactly my point, it's supposed to be the next level up. There should be at least a 200-300M difference in price for something that requires the prior project.

[Dullard]

Add in 3 mill food to the cost of next UP

[Kevanovia]

On 5/2/2022 at 4:58 PM, Prefontaine said:

 

Embargoes: 

• Alliance leaders will be able to issue alliance-wide embargoes of a nation or an alliance. All members of the alliance will receive a notification of this. Nations can manually cancel the embargo.

 

I think individual nations manually being able to cancel an alliance embargo is a bummer.

[Callisto]

If Metropolitan Planning is to exist, I think it should have an ROI similar to the other two projects (around 5 to 6 cities depending on the market). It's current cost is way too low in comparison to the projects that come before it. I also think that there should be more emphasis on a cost of raws as opposed to refineds, since the purpose of these projects more than anything else is to serve as a resource sink, Steel and Aluminum already have major resource sinks (wars) while raw resources such as Iron, Coal, Bauxite, and so on and so forth, seem to be lacking in terms of major resource sinks. As we can see from: https://politicsandwar.com/world-graphs/graphID=14 raw resources such as Iron have only steadily increased over time, with some rather sharp increases as of late, without any large dips, while steel and aluminum see major dips around the time that any major war occurs. With the introduction of that new RPC project, I also think that it is paramount that the game has major raw sinks, in order to ensure that raw resources are something that is actually worth making and selling for these new nations with the projects. 

[darkblade]

I would say that MP should reduce city costs by 200m. Other than that, really excited to see all this content come out eventually.

[Prefontaine]

Rather than mass quoting I'll just tackle some of the general points thus far. 
 

• Credits are excluded because they're not a fast-paced traded commodity and act differently that other aspects of the game, if credit spam becomes a problem it will be easy to include it in the restriction.
• Deleting could be a method to syphon funds if a pinch to lower tier nations. Nation A is losing to nation B and is blockaded, create a small nation and bump it up enough to declare on Nation A and then delete to funnel them cash. Losing 50% of that cash/rss is a deterrent. I know this seems unlikely, but trying to prevent exploiting.
• Navy is being tweaked slightly because possible more impactful changes may happen when beige is remodeled. There are ideas for damage roll-over and increased improvement destruction options to make naval more impactful.
• The largest complaint with UP/AUP was the cost being too high, we lowered the cost and lowered the benefit. Since C22 costs about 240M with cost reductions this project should be alleviating around 200M per city, but we decreased requirements (doesn't mean prices won't increase initially from demand on those resources). Thus 150M cost with an ROI of around 4-5 cities purchased. For someone getting that right away the cost is under a billion before ROI, for a whale, you're closer to the 12-15B before ROI. 
• We moved away from food cost because other areas needed some resource sinks and food is largely produced by whales, we didn't want whales to profit as much off of the sale of resources to fund the project.

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

4 hours ago, BelgiumFury said:

Currently they are only good in three situations:
- Destroying loads and loads of infra if you have a lot of cities (this will be buffed quite a bit as ships are cheaper to use now). 
- Blockading (In the deciding stages of a global war this is very rarely useful).
- One shipping (this is only useful if your opponent is absolute shit).

It matters for me in that naval's are so expensive that its better to launch air at infra than to launch a naval attack as the cost to do maybe 15-25% more infra damage is about 2x the cost of running an airstrike.

To the point that I only really run navals to flex on somebody and put up a large number to brag about.  I would have to run the numbers to see what it looks like with the change, but hopefully this makes it a little less painful to run naval attacks now.

[Kosta]

I look forward to seeing this update in 2024. Good stuff. 

[Death LordSK]

10 hours ago, Kosta said:

2024

Did you forget a 0? 

[BelgiumFury]

12 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

It matters for me in that naval's are so expensive that its better to launch air at infra than to launch a naval attack as the cost to do maybe 15-25% more infra damage is about 2x the cost of running an airstrike.

To the point that I only really run navals to flex on somebody and put up a large number to brag about.  I would have to run the numbers to see what it looks like with the change, but hopefully this makes it a little less painful to run naval attacks now.

Yeah it might make it better in that situation (as mentioned in point one); but my point was is that in that case the war is already "won", so the relevance is less than what i'd like it to be (about the same relevance as planes and tanks).

[Prefontaine]

On 5/10/2022 at 7:04 PM, Kosta said:

I look forward to seeing this update in 2024. Good stuff. 

Target is middle of next month. I appreciate your constant cynicism.

[Majima Goro]

On 5/3/2022 at 3:28 AM, Prefontaine said:

New Project: Fall Out Shelter
Requirement: Research and Development Center, Clinical Research Center
Effect: 
-Reduces damage from nuclear missiles by 10%.
-Reduces fall-out length in a city by 25%
-Maximum radiation impact on food is 90% (can always produce 10% of food)
Cost:
Cash: $25,000,000
Food: 100,000
Lead: 10,000
Steel: 10,000
Aluminum: 10,000

The ones who'll buy it are whales. I thought we are trying to make nerf whales, not make them profit significantly during globals. They make a lot already.
Plus, in a few years, nuclear winter would be gone since  more or less everyone would have 30 cities due to Metro Project and making food. 
Global nuclear winter could be a big thing and we just throwing a good mechanic under the bus cuz newbies can't produce food?

[Shakyr]

On 5/16/2022 at 12:36 AM, Majima Goro said:

The ones who'll buy it are whales. I thought we are trying to make nerf whales, not make them profit significantly during globals. They make a lot already.
Plus, in a few years, nuclear winter would be gone since  more or less everyone would have 30 cities due to Metro Project and making food. 
Global nuclear winter could be a big thing and we just throwing a good mechanic under the bus cuz newbies can't produce food?

Personally, as a whale who pretty much exclusively produces food, I have no issues with losing production due to nuclear wars.

What I have an issue with is the fact that only food is discriminated against. I'd much rather radiation was applied fairly across the board, for all resource production.

On a side note Prefontaine, you missed the chance for a nice little easter egg: "Soldiers in nuked cities are less likely to die and kill more enemies, due to wearing power armor to negate radiation."

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

1 hour ago, Shakyr said:

Personally, as a whale who pretty much exclusively produces food, I have no issues with losing production due to nuclear wars.

What I have an issue with is the fact that only food is discriminated against. I'd much rather radiation was applied fairly across the board, for all resource production.

On a side note Prefontaine, you missed the chance for a nice little easter egg: "Soldiers in nuked cities are less likely to die and kill more enemies, due to wearing power armor to negate radiation."

Remember food is the only resource that scales based on land, where the other resources have a hard limit.  So nuclear fallout is a good balance mechanism for it.

[Shakyr]

12 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

Remember food is the only resource that scales based on land, where the other resources have a hard limit.  So nuclear fallout is a good balance mechanism for it.

Link land to improvements instead of Infrastructure and then allow uncapped resource improvements, providing you have the Land available (though you'll be soft-capped by pollution).

In the short term, scale other raw resources to land. Maybe manufacturing can scale to commerce rate. I'm quite alright with other resources getting a buff, if it means that food is no longer discriminated against.

Not to mention that nuclear fallout is one of the most underutilized mechanics in this game. It needs something to make people actually fear a nuclear winter.

[Majima Goro]

On 5/23/2022 at 5:59 PM, Shakyr said:

What I have an issue with is the fact that only food is discriminated against. I'd much rather radiation was applied fairly across the board, for all resource production.

How does radiation affect coal blocks or any inorganic things for the matter? I think what you really mean is radiation should affect global disease rates as well, something I would very much like to see.

 

Imagine global nuclear winter and everyday it goes on, say 10% of your then population dies off. Moreover, building efficiency should depend on your population, each improvement needing a minimum number of people to work, below which, production is scaled down proportionally. It would make global conflicts actually have a global effect, hurting everyone instead of just the people involved. It would pave the way for smaller and shorter conflicts because a big one would be devastating for both sides. Not only this, such a change would make nukes very much more powerful than they are currently, leading to treaties to limit nuclear weapon usage and such.

 

I hope this change is implemented

 

[Jacob Knox]

13 hours ago, Shakyr said:

Link land to improvements instead of Infrastructure and then allow uncapped resource improvements, providing you have the Land available (though you'll be soft-capped by pollution).

In the short term, scale other raw resources to land. Maybe manufacturing can scale to commerce rate. I'm quite alright with other resources getting a buff, if it means that food is no longer discriminated against.

Not to mention that nuclear fallout is one of the most underutilized mechanics in this game. It needs something to make people actually fear a nuclear winter.

How to Plummet Raw RSS Value: A 2 (3?) Step Guide

13 hours ago, Shakyr said:

Not to mention that nuclear fallout is one of the most underutilized mechanics in this game. It needs something to make people actually fear a nuclear winter.

This part I kind of agree with though

3 hours ago, Majima Goro said:

Imagine global nuclear winter and everyday it goes on, say 10% of your then population dies off. Moreover, building efficiency should depend on your population, each improvement needing a minimum number of people to work, below which, production is scaled down proportionally. It would make global conflicts actually have a global effect, hurting everyone instead of just the people involved. It would pave the way for smaller and shorter conflicts because a big one would be devastating for both sides. Not only this, such a change would make nukes very much more powerful than they are currently, leading to treaties to limit nuclear weapon usage and such.

While mildly convoluted and probably mildly annoying/difficult to actually implement, I think I like this idea lol.

[Shakyr]

11 hours ago, Majima Goro said:

How does radiation affect coal blocks or any inorganic things for the matter? I think what you really mean is radiation should affect global disease rates as well, something I would very much like to see.

Radiation affects the workers, which decreases the production rate. Sure it doesn't affect the resource directly, but there is no resource that will collect itself (unless Sheepy wants to give us an AI project).

11 hours ago, Majima Goro said:

Imagine global nuclear winter and everyday it goes on, say 10% of your then population dies off. Moreover, building efficiency should depend on your population, each improvement needing a minimum number of people to work, below which, production is scaled down proportionally. It would make global conflicts actually have a global effect, hurting everyone instead of just the people involved. It would pave the way for smaller and shorter conflicts because a big one would be devastating for both sides. Not only this, such a change would make nukes very much more powerful than they are currently, leading to treaties to limit nuclear weapon usage and such.

Sure, having global radiation affect the disease rate is another way to go about it. You'd have to be very careful with deciding your minimum number of people to work though. Too few and you may as well not bother. Too many and you screw over low infrastructure builds.

7 hours ago, Jacob Knox said:

How to Plummet Raw RSS Value: A 2 (3?) Step Guide

Can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. Most changes will screw with resource prices (UP/AUP was great for Food prices), to one degree or another. It's not a reason to outright reject sensible solutions, though.

Most of the resource production improvements would be softcapped by pollution (as anyone who's tried to build everything has found out), but you could leave in a hard cap of x (where x is a nice point above the softcap) if only so people don't break the game.

Could even be a good chance to reintroduce the Approval Rating (useless stat). Too many improvements taking up land, your people get unhappy and bad things happen.