Jump to content

1/22/2015 - Treasures


Alex
 Share

Recommended Posts

no.gif

 

F*** me damn it! I like the treasures, but I don't like the forcing nations into a possible war scenerio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

This change isn't meant to eradicate neutrals from the game.

 

Ummmmmmmm.......

 

 

It simply is aimed at increasing their participation in the politics & war aspect of the game.

 

they will be forced into choosing whether to defend their nations that spawn treasures or allow them to be defeated in war and let the other alliances take them, etc.

 

Your statements kinda contradict themselves!!!!! If the change isn't to eradicate neutrals then we wouldn't be forced into a possible war scenerio, you might as well just come out and say that the change is actually to eradicate neutrals!

 

One other thing, I'm tired of seeing mostly updates towards the war part of the game, where is the politics? I'd like to be able set laws up for my nation, or experience or more political side to the game besides war.

 

tumblr_ltvvtpeAYx1qjokxe.gif

 

I decline any treasures being given to me damn it!

 

cleese-tantrum-o.gif

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, to be honest it's not possible to have all 30. It takes almost a full day to get a defeat, a nation is limited to 5 offensive wars and 3 defensive. It would require coordination to get a bunch of them at once.

  • Upvote 1

duskhornexceptional.png.d9e24adf7f0945530780eee694428f27.png

 

He's right, I'm such a stinker. Play my exceptional game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the current settings, the alliance bonus needs to be significant to make it work. Like for every 3 treasures, the alliance gets +10% income. You want it to be practically punitive to not have treasures. 

 

That being said, it's not to say neutral alliances/nations would be left completely in the dust. More war means a greater demand for resources, so neutrals can sell those things to make up for a treasure deficit.

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love this update and can't wait for it to be fully implemented.

Another idea: How about giving treasures unique effects?

For instance, the Teracotta Army treasures grants a +5% land on all your cities.
Honjo Masamune, a badass katana, gives a +10% military strength bonus.
Mona Lisa, an iconic painting, gives you a +3% in each city population (think of it as an influx of tourism because of the painting).
Another treasure could reduce expenses, increase a certain resource production, etc.

And the Gems can have the same gross income effect (since I am running out of ideas). :P

  • Upvote 1

aphelion3_zpsonpnqy10.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

With the current settings, the alliance bonus needs to be significant to make it work. Like for every 3 treasures, the alliance gets +10% income. You want it to be practically punitive to not have treasures.

 

That being said, it's not to say neutral alliances/nations would be left completely in the dust. More war means a greater demand for resources, so neutrals can sell those things to make up for a treasure deficit.

I like this idea

T7Vrilp.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F*** me damn it! I like the treasures, but I don't like the forcing nations into a possible war scenerio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's the point. At some point higher up, war is not profitable at all. They don't participate in any wars. 

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nope utter useless change yea you can get a 9% income increase wow fancy but you risk losing soooooo much infra 

completely not worth it also who is gonna declare war on an alliance for lets say 5 treasures so at best a 50 % income on one of their players?

 

there are soo many good suggestions posted throughout this forums that are waiting to be implemented but this is useless shit :D

tumblr_n08c8brOmX1sk379io6_250.gif

Going for top nation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only that, but every single day 1 of these respawns to another random nation. Its just not gonna happen.

Wait, they each reset after 30 days?

And on different days in different ways?

Damn dawg, that be cray

MR BOOTY IN DA HOUSE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 days and they go away. This was supposed to help create war, because people will want these things. All these will do is sit in a nation for 30 days, then move someone else unless they're in a micro alliance with no treaties, an inactive, or an unaligned. No one is going risk an alliance war for a couple % bonuses here and there. I'd imagine 1 round of alliance wars will currently total over 100 million in damages at least. So risk that much damage to gain 9% for 30 days? This "feature" does zero towards what it was intended. Even if having 3 of them boosted the alliance revenue 10% it wouldn't be close to worth while.

 

What started as a good idea that actually had me excited to plot some wars to obtain these has now become pointless and worthless.

Edited by Prefontaine
  • Upvote 5

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I propose that perhaps instead of a fixed time frame, you give each treasure a 1% chance per day of re-spawning.

 

That would be a 50% chance of it re-spawning before 69 days. 

 

With a 1% chance of re-spawn per day you'd have:

 

1% chance of respawning in 1 day.

10% chance of respawning in 10 days

26% chance of respawning in 30 days

46% chance of respawning in 60 days

60% chance of respawning in 90 days

84% chance of respawning in 180 days

 

With 30 treasures, around 8 should respawn on average every month at this rate.

 

Someone might not fight for a treasure if they know for certain it will expire in 10 days. However he or she might do so if it's based on a probability factor.

 

This should be on top of incorporating a significant alliance bonus.

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even with that idea PB, I still don't see this causing large scale wars. All I see it doing is promoting bullying of weaker nations/alliances. That and a headache for neutrals (tee-hee).

Edited by Prefontaine

scSqPGJ.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally still dont see the point of having them respawn at all.

 

Then you really would get situations where someone can have all the treasures. Then, since there are no respawns, anyone who defeated the person with all the treasures would themselves end up with all the treasures. 

 

Someone with 1 treasure fights a person with 1 treasure. The winner has 2 treasures.

A person with 2 treasures fights a person with 1 treasure. The winner has 3 treasures.

...

A person with 29 treasures fights a person with 1 treasure. The winner has 30 treasures.

A person with 30 treasures fights someone with 0 treasures. The winner has 30 treasures.

 

This is in addition to the treasures essentially making their way to the top tiers and never leaving.

 

 

Even with that idea PB, I still don't see this causing large scale wars. All I see it doing is promoting bullying of weaker nations/alliances. That and a headache for neutrals (tee-hee).

 

I'm not a political puppet master or anything, but I would think bullying weaker alliances would fail the moment they start making treaties with larger alliances.

Edited by Princess Bubblegum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<snip>

Gotcha.

 

Why not just set a limit on how many a single nation can hold and max the alliance bonus with a set of X, any obtained passed X only effects the nation itself that's holding it. That will give multiple alliances a chance for bonus, while keeping them spread out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Treasures will be spawned randomly before going live.

 

The current treasure holders were just those who happened to be on IRC at the time and gave their nation links.

 

This was just to test it out.

Okay, so who in the hell gave him mine then? ;)

"It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I propose that perhaps instead of a fixed time frame, you give each treasure a 1% chance per day of re-spawning.

 

That would be a 50% chance of it re-spawning before 69 days. 

 

With a 1% chance of re-spawn per day you'd have:

 

1% chance of respawning in 1 day.

10% chance of respawning in 10 days

26% chance of respawning in 30 days

46% chance of respawning in 60 days

60% chance of respawning in 90 days

84% chance of respawning in 180 days

 

With 30 treasures, around 8 should respawn on average every month at this rate.

 

Someone might not fight for a treasure if they know for certain it will expire in 10 days. However he or she might do so if it's based on a probability factor.

 

This should be on top of incorporating a significant alliance bonus.

 

I really like this idea i think it would work while serving its purpose. If you didnt talk about this i think everytime it changes hands it would reset on when it would respawn but we can shorten the days a bit. So what about having this a bit shorter day wise but for every time someone gets one. If you get my vibe.

 

I do like this idea a lot though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think adding a few more bonuses for some will add more competitiveness to them. I mean a bonus is nice for income but i think like suggested before having some uniqueness for a few of them would be nice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 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.