Why The War Mechanic Should be Removed

[darkblade]

I am writing today to address a growing concern that many of us in the Politics and War community have been discussing recently with the WELP vs ODOO war. It pertains to the inclusion of the "War" mechanic in the game, and I am here to demand its removal for the sake of a more balanced and enjoyable gaming experience.

While I understand that war is a fundamental aspect of Politics and War, it has become increasingly clear that this feature is causing more harm than good. Here are some of the key reasons why I believe it should be removed:

1. Unfair Advantage for Whales: The current war system heavily favors Whales, making it nearly impossible for newcomers or smaller nations to compete. This creates an unfair power dynamic that discourages new players from joining and enjoying the game.

2. Resource Imbalance: The constant warfare makes food prices skyrocket and makes it difficult for nations to sustain their economies without food. This results in a never-ending cycle of conflict that limits new players' ability to develop their nations in other ways.

3. Lack of Diplomacy: The focus on war often overshadows diplomacy and negotiation, which are essential elements of the political simulation genre. Removing the war feature would encourage players to explore diplomatic solutions and alliances, making the game more diverse and engaging.

4. Toxicity and Tensions: Wars in Politics and War often lead to toxic interactions, disputes, and personal conflicts among players. Removing the war feature would mitigate these tensions and foster a more positive and friendly gaming environment.

5. Quality of Life Improvement: Removing the war feature would free up valuable development resources that could be allocated to improving other aspects of the game, such as trade, politics, and nation-building.

I propose that Alex consider a complete removal of the war feature or, at the very least, a substantial overhaul that addresses these issues. This would not only make Politics and War a more enjoyable experience for all players but also encourage a more diverse player base and foster a healthier and more engaging community.

I urge my fellow players to voice their opinions on this matter and join me in calling for a reevaluation of the war feature. Let's work together to make Politics and War a better game for everyone.

Edited October 7, 2023 by darkblade

[AustinH]

this would.make the game hella !@#$in boring

[Themonia]

I agree with this suggestion fully. Perhaps, we can even rename the game to NationSt- I mean NationRepublics.

[darkblade]

2 minutes ago, AustinH said:

this would.make the game hella !@#$in boring

I appreciate your response and understand your concern about potential boredom if the war feature were to be removed from Politics and War. It's important to acknowledge that the game's developers should aim to strike a balance between maintaining the game's excitement and addressing the issues that have been raised.

While I advocate for the removal or overhaul of the war feature, I don't necessarily mean to remove all aspects of conflict and competition from the game. There could be alternatives or adjustments that maintain the excitement while mitigating the problems associated with the current system.

For instance, the game could introduce new forms of conflict resolution or resource competition that are less detrimental to smaller nations and new players. This way, we can preserve the competitive spirit of Politics and War while also making it more inclusive and engaging for a wider range of players.

The goal should be to create a game environment where diplomacy, strategy, and nation-building are equally important alongside the potential for conflict. By finding a middle ground, we can ensure that Politics and War remains both exciting and accessible to all players.

I encourage further discussion on this matter to explore potential solutions that address everyone's concerns and maintain the game's entertainment value.

[Kohai Ky]

I couldn’t have worded it any better myself.

If you want to get good at the game, you should always be looking at the roi, did someone say war. Good thing vm is in my muscle memory bro.

Let’s be real it’s a farming simulator, retention will grow.

 

The more units destroyed a player has, the worse they are at the game. Who would ever declare that war. Do you know how much that infrastructure cost. 3800 infra isn’t cheap.

anyone that has ever went on the offensive should be banned. And since Alex needs his credit money we can’t do that, so the only solution is removing war.

 

If you disagree with me, it’s because you literally have no IQ

 

#GitGud #LoveNotWar

[Insert Name Here]

Arrgh in particular would approve of that message. I look forward to playing Politics and .

[Avatar Patrick]

While I appreciate the concerns raised about the impact of the war mechanic in Politics and War, I'd like to offer a counterargument in favor of its retention:

1. Realism and Authenticity: Politics and War aims to simulate the complexities of politics and international relations. War is an integral part of real-world politics, and its inclusion in the game adds a layer of authenticity. Removing it might strip away a crucial aspect that mirrors the challenges nations face in reality.

2. Strategic Depth: The war mechanic introduces strategic depth to the game. Nations must carefully consider their actions, alliances, and resource management during conflicts. This complexity adds layers of decision-making, making the game intellectually stimulating for players who enjoy strategic thinking.

3. Dynamic Player Interaction: Wars create dynamic player interactions, forcing nations to adapt, negotiate, and form alliances. Removing the war feature might lead to a more stagnant and less interactive game environment. The unpredictability of conflicts fosters adaptability and innovation among players.

4. Player Agency: War provides players with a powerful tool to shape the political landscape. Removing it might diminish the sense of agency and control that players have over their nations. The ability to engage in warfare allows players to influence the world around them actively.

5. Economic Challenges as Gameplay Element: While it's true that wars can impact the economy negatively, this economic challenge adds another layer of strategy. Nations must find ways to navigate through resource imbalances, fostering creativity and adaptability.

Instead of outright removal, perhaps the focus could be on refining and balancing the war mechanic to address some of the concerns raised. This way, the game can maintain its authenticity and strategic depth while ensuring a more enjoyable experience for players of all sizes and experience levels.

[Ryken]

I only agree with you saying that the war mechanic can be reworked, other than that though I don't agree with this at all. 
Removing the whole war system is way too drastic and will eventually kill the community. New players won't be interested in a game called Politics and War with no war. 

Make some minor changes to war sure but no way should we even think about the war mechanic should be removed

[Insert Name Here]

15 minutes ago, Ryken said:

I only agree with you saying that the war mechanic can be reworked, other than that though I don't agree with this at all. 
Removing the whole war system is way too drastic and will eventually kill the community. New players won't be interested in a game called Politics and War with no war. 

Make some minor changes to war sure but no way should we even think about the war mechanic should be removed

 

Don't worry friend, people wouldn't be disappointed if you removed war (or politics for that matter) from a game that has both "Politics" and "War" in the name.

Think of it this way: would you be mad if you bought a cheeseburger, and it neither had cheese, nor was it a burger?

Edited October 7, 2023 by Insert Name Here

[Cassius Vorenius]

.

Edited October 8, 2023 by Cassius Vorenius

[Xavier Renarus]

quite a mid shitpost

[Nyx]

Yes, it's time for "Politics and Farm"!

Edited October 7, 2023 by Nyx

[darkblade]

7 hours ago, Xavier Renarus said:

quite a mid shitpost

reviving the forums one shitpost at a time :serious:

[Maravarman III]

nice chatgpt-generated suggestion btw.

anyways please explain how the media, a relatively new aa is not doing bad while you claim that wars heavily favors whales

[Fulcrum]

As a veteran war dodger who has not participated in any war for a decade, I celebrate this suggestion! In fact, I couldn't agree more. Warfare in this game is like that one crazy neighbor who insists on mowing their lawn at 7 AM on a Sunday - it just ruins the peace and quiet of our virtual world.

Let's face it, warfare is the ultimate buzzkill. Not only does it wreck your nation's infrastructure faster than you can say "repair bill," but it's also the fastest way to drain your bank. I mean, why should I spend my hard-earned virtual currency on rebuilding when I could be investing in fancy virtual palaces? It's not like the alliances in this game are the UN or anything. No one's rushing to help you rebuild your nation, even if you're their best friend in real life. It's every nation for themselves, and it's a dog-eat-dog world out there.

And don't even get me started on the radiation fallout. It's like trying to microwave popcorn with the door open - a recipe for disaster. The food production goes down the drain, and suddenly, we're facing mass famines in small, food-producing nations. It's a catastrophe of epic proportions!

So, yes, let's do away with warfare and bring back peace and prosperity to our virtual nations. Maybe we can all join a virtual knitting club or something instead. Who's with me?

[Buorhann]

We need to start a petition to stop this madman from ruining the pristine space of this forum with such threads like this.

[Kastor]

I actually think they should uncap spies and change the cost of them (ie: the more spies the more money they cost, the less spies the cheaper they cost.) 

[Buorhann]

7 hours ago, Kastor said:

I actually think they should uncap spies and change the cost of them (ie: the more spies the more money they cost, the less spies the cheaper they cost.) 

Ooo, go back to the days of having hundreds of spies?!

[Diocletian]

Literally the only gripe I have with the revamped war system is how stupid unpredictable the RNG has gotten. There's zero reason you get a 40 some to 100+ death/kill rate (planes) and the very real possibility of a pyrrhic victory. Aside from that, though, I think most of your suggestions would make this game even more boring. Alex doesn't want a boring and disengaged community, nor do I.

Edited October 10, 2023 by Diocletian

[Wendell]

While I do agree longer peace is needed instead of constant warfare (especially in 30 day intervals) , I don't believe war should be removed from the game. It is something that balances the slow politics that takes years to achieve any progress sometimes. Wars are fast and decisive like it should be. 

I can agree with the CBs being very shallow. There needs to be a bit more content, behind the scenes, of creating a reason to war. Not just "oh we happen to be in a different sphere let's fight". There was a period in this where wars happened for a real reason like a political grudge, groups of nations not honoring their treaties, secret treaties, poaching, debt owed, or even being very aggressive (economically, politically or militarily) towards too many other alliances. The reasons should be unique and catchy, not boring and bland. 

[Fafnir]

You can just buy food. As long as the benefit from having food outweighs the costs from buying it you are just hurting yourself by not having it.

[TwoBadgersInASack]

Please let this be a shitpost 🙏