Jump to content

Declare Range Modifiers


Prefontaine
 Share

Recommended Posts

Its a good idea, but if a c30 with 1k infra downdeclares on a c20 with 2k+ infra, the c20 will still be taking the losses, furthermore, u are going to have a few people who just like the idea of nuking people and imagine a c15 declaring on a c20 with 2.5k infra, 25% difference in cities, 12.5%modifier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Venusbutre said:

Its a good idea, but if a c30 with 1k infra downdeclares on a c20 with 2k+ infra, the c20 will still be taking the losses, furthermore, u are going to have a few people who just like the idea of nuking people and imagine a c15 declaring on a c20 with 2.5k infra, 25% difference in cities, 12.5%modifier. 

The change does not impact damage done by projectiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Venusbutre said:

Its a good idea, but if a c30 with 1k infra downdeclares on a c20 with 2k+ infra, the c20 will still be taking the losses, furthermore, u are going to have a few people who just like the idea of nuking people and imagine a c15 declaring on a c20 with 2.5k infra, 25% difference in cities, 12.5%modifier. 

Quote

The third and final area of the war system up for rework is the declare ranges, huge down declares have long been an issue. A hard limit on down declares would solve the issue but is widely disliked, thus a modifier will be present for up and down swings in war. This modifier will impact infra damage dealt and unit damage dealt but units (not missiles/nukes).

 

1 minute ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

If you are going to nullify the advantage of having more cities, why not just remove the city mechanic all together?

50% is not nullifying. It also does not impact the roll success rates.

Edited by Prefontaine
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the intent of the change to nerf the losing side of a war even more than they already get nerfed by being cycled, or is that just a side effect? Conversely if you're on the winning side of a war, at some point you can't do anything but updeclare because no targets your size are in range anymore. Does that really warrant some sort of reward, particularly when updeclaring on a zeroed target?

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WarriorSoul said:

[citation needed]

Are we just nerfing for the sake of nerfing, then? This seems like an entirely arbitrary change with little justification.

You think the current way that a c40 can down declare on c20’s, is okay?

(obviously not a 3200+ infra, militarized c40+)

Edited by His Holy Decagon
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, His Holy Decagon said:

So, my impression is that this is to help dampen the effects of someone far larger wiping you out “as easily”, right?

A simplification, but yes. 

 

5 minutes ago, WarriorSoul said:

[citation needed]

Are we just nerfing for the sake of nerfing, then? This seems like an entirely arbitrary change with little justification.

The justification is in the OP. Massive down declares have been a long standing problem.

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, His Holy Decagon said:

You think the current way that a c40 can down declare on c20’s, is okay?

(obviously not a 3200+ infra, militarized c40+)

Yes, obviously, otherwise I wouldn’t have said anything. The idea that a nation should be subjected to such a disadvantage due only to its larger size is asinine.

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, WarriorSoul said:

Yes, obviously, otherwise I wouldn’t have said anything. The idea that a nation should be subjected to such a disadvantage due only to its larger size is asinine.

They will still get their overwhelming number of units advantage, still get the same chance for victory rolls in the IT -> UT range, they just kill a percentage less of the units they would kill. 

  • Upvote 1

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lord Tyrion said:

If the main thing we're trying to prevent is massive downdeclares, then just put in a safety guard for that only.  Make it so beyond score range, you can only downdeclare on a nation with X% less than your current city count.  Done.

But this modification of kills is crazy.  Let's say a C30 is in wars with a bunch of people and down to 500 planes, then gets declared on by a c25 who has way more planes AND gets a 15% modifier on top of that advantage.   Why?  How ridiculously punitive.  

We floated the idea and there was backlash against hard caps. We therefore explored softer caps.

I find it insane that a partially milled c20ish nation can be hit by a fully milled c40 rn. More so than what you are suggesting.

  • Upvote 1

[11:52 PM] Prefontaine: But Keegoz is actually bad. [11:52 PM] Prefontaine: He's my favorite bad leader though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, WarriorSoul said:

Yes, obviously, otherwise I wouldn’t have said anything. The idea that a nation should be subjected to such a disadvantage due only to its larger size is asinine.

I think “disadvantage” and “less of an advantage” aren’t synonymous 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Keegoz said:

We floated the idea and there was backlash against hard caps. We therefore explored softer caps.

I find it insane that a partially milled c20ish nation can be hit by a fully milled c40 rn. More so than what you are suggesting.

This suggestion doesn't change that at all.  The c40 can still hit the c20ish nation in this scenario, they just might lose a few more troops in that process.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, cadn said:

To me it seems a bit excessive. Giving a defensive modifier to the the smaller nation would make more sense to me

They do get a defensive modifier if they're declared on. Attacker getting a % reduction in damage is the same as the defender getting a % reduction in units lost.
 

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Prefontaine said:

They will still get their overwhelming number of units advantage, still get the same chance for victory rolls in the IT -> UT range, they just kill a percentage less of the units they would kill. 

So the winning side still wipes the losers relatively easily, and but now losing downdeclares, which are a reliable method for the losing side to scrape back some ground, get nerfed by nature of getting their troops swarmed even more.

 

5 minutes ago, Keegoz said:

We floated the idea and there was backlash against hard caps. We therefore explored softer caps.

I find it insane that a partially milled c20ish nation can be hit by a fully milled c40 rn. More so than what you are suggesting.

Basically the only circumstance under which something like this happens is when a losing coalition is trying to gain *any* ground on the winning one. It’s not like you have constant 20 city down-declares from the winning side looking to further impose. That sort of reach is nearly impossible after a week or two of fighting.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm generally in favor of this kind of change. Some things to note:

  • If a coalition is losing, they will typically have less infra (from it being damaged) and units (from being killed). Thus, with current score ranges, the losing side will generally be fighting nations with less cities than them; increasing the advantage for the winning side. 
  • Downdeclares are problematic if both nations have military. This affects the war regardless of that. It also affects updeclares. (e.g. a full mill c20 ganking a zeroed c30)
  • In the c1-10 range, buying cities isn't a too uncommon strategy. There would be issues if the modifier is determined upon declaration and the nation buys cities. (incorrect, didn't read)

edit: More thoughts

  • Score could be more based on military strength (including possible rebuys) not cities, infra, or projects that are militarily irrelevant
  • 50% seems a bit large, maybe reduce to 25%?
  • It would make more sense to base the modifier on score, not cities, so as not to disadvantage the losing side. 
Edited by Borg
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Lord Tyrion said:

Let's say a C30 is in wars with a bunch of people and down to 500 planes, then gets declared on by a c25 who has way more planes AND gets a 15% modifier on top of that advantage.   Why?  How ridiculously punitive.  

I would have to agree with this; I am a c10 and not too many nations have actually declared on me because I usually have a fully capped military (not right now lol), but if someone were to declare war on me right now, if they had fewer cities than me and this update applied to nations with fewer than 10 cities, the kills would be way too high for me to be able to win the war. 

14 minutes ago, cadn said:

To me it seems a bit excessive. Giving a defensive modifier to the the smaller nation would make more sense to me

Yes, I think this would be a good idea.

  • Upvote 1

This is a signature.

That's all I have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WarriorSoul said:

So the winning side still wipes the losers relatively easily, and but now losing downdeclares, which are a reliable method for the losing side to scrape back some ground, get nerfed by nature of getting their troops swarmed even more.

You need to be more specific than "the winning side", what makes the winning side the winning side is very much important to the core of this change. If the winning side is simply winning because they have more high tiered nations this will impact how easy it is for them to be the winning side. Your "scrape back some ground" reference doesn't really exist in wars as it stands, it becomes a turtle nuke/missile war which this change doesn't really impact. 


If you're only argument is effectively a scenario that doesn't really happen, you may want to reconsider your view point. 

2 minutes ago, Borg said:
  • In the c1-10 range, buying cities isn't a too uncommon strategy. There would be issues if the modifier is determined upon declaration and the nation buys cities.

This change doesn't take place until above C10. Additionally the modifier is calculated before each attack.

  • Upvote 1

scSqPGJ.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.