Vellocet Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Such destructive force should make people think twice before declaring war, and have a valid CB for that reason. War should not be taken lightly. The system can be tweaked, but do we actually want the war to pinch, or really hurt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reagan Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Such destructive force should make people think twice before declaring war, and have a valid CB for that reason. War should not be taken lightly. The system can be tweaked, but do we actually want the war to pinch, or really hurt? I would think you would want a war to hurt a nation, but not cripple them to the point that they can't rebuild in a fair amount of time. We don't want people leaving the game because they lost months worth of work in a week's worth of attacks. This is why I do like the anarchy system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). You can continue to get gangbanged, but once you hit anarchy, the attack types become severely limited. I believe it's just cruise missiles at that point, but I could be mistaken. On the flip side, war should (and does) cost money, but it shouldn't be so costly that it's not worth bothering with. Nations must purchase barracks and other improvements, and then pay upkeep on soldiers, tanks, and so forth...and even more while at war. That's already a hit to the nation's bottom line. So, there should be spoils of war, where the winner can not only damage their opponent, but also gain something in return. Otherwise, you've proven a point by "beating" your opponent, but you've suffered as well and got nothing back to show for it. It could be a small percentage of resources, land, money, or whatever seems fair...and not enough that it makes war so profitable that it becomes a viable alternative for nation growth. It's all a very delicate balance, but I believe we can achieve it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Such destructive force should make people think twice before declaring war, and have a valid CB for that reason. War should not be taken lightly. The system can be tweaked, but do we actually want the war to pinch, or really hurt? I would think you would want a war to hurt a nation, but not cripple them to the point that they can't rebuild in a fair amount of time. We don't want people leaving the game because they lost months worth of work in a week's worth of attacks. This is why I do like the anarchy system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). You can continue to get gangbanged, but once you hit anarchy, the attack types become severely limited. I believe it's just cruise missiles at that point, but I could be mistaken. You're worse than mistaken; there is absolutely no truth to what you said here about the war system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). All anarchy does is prevent offensive war declarations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reagan Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Such destructive force should make people think twice before declaring war, and have a valid CB for that reason. War should not be taken lightly. The system can be tweaked, but do we actually want the war to pinch, or really hurt? I would think you would want a war to hurt a nation, but not cripple them to the point that they can't rebuild in a fair amount of time. We don't want people leaving the game because they lost months worth of work in a week's worth of attacks. This is why I do like the anarchy system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). You can continue to get gangbanged, but once you hit anarchy, the attack types become severely limited. I believe it's just cruise missiles at that point, but I could be mistaken. You're worse than mistaken; there is absolutely no truth to what you said here about the war system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). All anarchy does is prevent offensive war declarations. Really? Damn, it has been a while and my memory sucks. Well, it still sounded good on paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiratePaul Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 Such destructive force should make people think twice before declaring war, and have a valid CB for that reason. War should not be taken lightly. The system can be tweaked, but do we actually want the war to pinch, or really hurt? I would think you would want a war to hurt a nation, but not cripple them to the point that they can't rebuild in a fair amount of time. We don't want people leaving the game because they lost months worth of work in a week's worth of attacks. This is why I do like the anarchy system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). You can continue to get gangbanged, but once you hit anarchy, the attack types become severely limited. I believe it's just cruise missiles at that point, but I could be mistaken. You're worse than mistaken; there is absolutely no truth to what you said here about the war system in (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). All anarchy does is prevent offensive war declarations. Really? Damn, it has been a while and my memory sucks. Well, it still sounded good on paper. If you don't have enough soldiers then you cannot attack or be attacked. You were close. It is hard to build an army while in anarchy. DO WHAT YOU WANT CAUSE A PIRATE IS FREE! YOU ARE A PIRATE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted January 14, 2014 Share Posted January 14, 2014 If you don't have enough soldiers then you cannot attack or be attacked. You were close. It is hard to build an army while in anarchy. Completely false again. Anarchy has no effect on troop conscription costs or limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderdick Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'd like to suggest the ability to conquer cities; that is, in a set of circumstances you could steal an enemy's city. This isn't as crippling as it sounds for the loser, as cities cost less to build the fewer you have (so rebuilding isn't too costly) while the winner adds a costly city to his nation without having to pay the ever increasing costs for one. Obviously it would have to be tempered -- a maximum loss of one city per war, or per month, or whatever -- and it wouldn't be something that happens every time. But I've always thought that would be an interesting facet of a nation simulator; wars over actual territory. Maybe stealing a city from a country on another continent would even let you acquire resources you can't otherwise harvest? It needs work, but I think it would be a neat aspect of the war system. Acting Chairman of Solidarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagnarBuliwyf Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'd like to suggest the ability to conquer cities; that is, in a set of circumstances you could steal an enemy's city. This isn't as crippling as it sounds for the loser, as cities cost less to build the fewer you have (so rebuilding isn't too costly) while the winner adds a costly city to his nation without having to pay the ever increasing costs for one. Obviously it would have to be tempered -- a maximum loss of one city per war, or per month, or whatever -- and it wouldn't be something that happens every time. But I've always thought that would be an interesting facet of a nation simulator; wars over actual territory. Maybe stealing a city from a country on another continent would even let you acquire resources you can't otherwise harvest? It needs work, but I think it would be a neat aspect of the war system. I really like that part, however I'm unsure how hard that'd be to code. But being able to conquer cities in another continent to harvest resources from that side sounds great. However, I do suggest if this is ever implemented, that when you conquer a city, the infra and land is destroyed by 2/3. So indeed you do steal a city, however it's not quite what it was before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wonderdick Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I'd like to suggest the ability to conquer cities; that is, in a set of circumstances you could steal an enemy's city. This isn't as crippling as it sounds for the loser, as cities cost less to build the fewer you have (so rebuilding isn't too costly) while the winner adds a costly city to his nation without having to pay the ever increasing costs for one. Obviously it would have to be tempered -- a maximum loss of one city per war, or per month, or whatever -- and it wouldn't be something that happens every time. But I've always thought that would be an interesting facet of a nation simulator; wars over actual territory. Maybe stealing a city from a country on another continent would even let you acquire resources you can't otherwise harvest? It needs work, but I think it would be a neat aspect of the war system. I really like that part, however I'm unsure how hard that'd be to code. But being able to conquer cities in another continent to harvest resources from that side sounds great. However, I do suggest if this is ever implemented, that when you conquer a city, the infra and land is destroyed by 2/3. So indeed you do steal a city, however it's not quite what it was before. Well, presumably by the time you've conquered the city you've destroyed most of the infra already, so that may not be necessary. Acting Chairman of Solidarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ataraxis Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Hmmm you could theoretically "city-farm" due to the vastly decreased costs of conquering a city at around 6+ cities, just agree with another guy in your alliance and conquer away, sending aid money to build more cities at a cheaper price. Tech dealing, anyone? #6 in P&W Beta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Moldavi Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Guys, Let's all take a deep breath. This is a work in progress. We are in the testing phase. Try not to get too emotionally involved with your nation as this point. Everything is going to be reset and ALL OF US will be starting from scratch. Hey, I got cut in half myself in the last two days. Yes the damage was excessive, but guess what. Sheepy saw what was happening and he is making adjustments. This game will get better and better. Why? Because the guy who designed really wants it to work. He is here nearly everyday and is always fixing stuff. Do I agree with all of his decisions? No, but so what. It is his game and I for one am grateful that he is taking the time to do this. I think everyone knows that, but was merely pointing out what you said. How else would he know about the excessive damage if we did not point it out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethan Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Value of the army should be calculated by nation power That wouldn't make any sense. You have 10 soldiers and I have 100,000 but because your score is higher than mine by a factor of 1000 you win the battle? I don't think so. I can actually see a point here. While not calculated solely on nation power, maybe total infra should be a slight modifier on the roll to simulate the total technology level of the military? A high population does not mean superior technology. A prime example would be spanish conquistadors, the indigineous populations they faced far outnumbered them, but the Spanish obviously had better weaponry and tactics. Good point, I'll take that. Perhaps an average commerce rating as a modifier? That could be a more accurate indication of a country's wealth or advancement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.