Phiney Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) I think its a big change so people are gunna be a bit shocked. But give it a lil bit, think this is actually not a bad change all in all. Well done I think. Edit: just to say I like the change to base missile damage a little bit on land, since before land was useless. Good change there. Edited February 25, 2015 by Phiney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRBOOTY Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Thanks for responding so quickly! I think this is a good sign for the game that our head admin is so shifty When it comes to the good of the game, it's vital that you don't keep things the same And I applaud you for this quick change MR BOOTY IN DA HOUSE http://i.imgur.com/R5WWAB1.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Sigh. You couldn't just remove them from the MAP system? Missiles will still be what the vast majority of attacks will be for. I mean, it's your game, but you keep turning my suggestions into garbage implantation. Your suggestion was garbage, even your own alliance mates agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adama Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I do think removing missiles from the MAP system is something you should still consider. It would be much more fun to have people be able to focus on conventional combat and throw missiles in a limited fashion. A step in the right direction though. If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a roll. There is one you will follow. One who is the shining star, and he will lead you to beautiful places in the search of his own vanity. And when there is no more vanity to be found, he will leave you in darkness, as a fading memory of his own creation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belisarius Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Lol, there is a nerf and then there is this. Making such huge changes is never wise. I do like a lot of them, the score change was necessary, but you also need to change the stupid 75% updeclare range as well (while only having a 25% downdeclare). But the upkeep 300% increase is very severe. Did you really need all of these nerfs? A simple nerf to the dmg output or bumping the dome would've been enough. If you are going to change things so drastically you really should allow nations to refund their missiles purchases, as this clearly will cost us with stockpiles a lot of cash/resources in decomming. I agree with Placentica. This is an extremely rash nerf. The upkeep alone will be the biggest deterrent in having missiles, more so than the utility of the Iron Dome. What is the use of that if ALL The other changes will accomplish what you need them to do? 1 http://i.imgur.com/K3xCRAP.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) If you have a reasonable amount of missiles such as the amount you can use in a war, the upkeep is fine. Just because you guys have gone overboard and got 5 wars worth doesn't mean the change is wrong, it means they were much too cheap to hold before. You don't need 30 missiles, you will never get through them in one big war. Edit: plus, you guys don't have 30 odd missiles cos its needed, you had it cos you could. Now you can't. Edited February 25, 2015 by Phiney 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shellhound Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Your suggestion was garbage, even your own alliance mates agree. If your butthurt lasts longer than 3 weeks, you should go see a psychiatrist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Question sheepy, since you given us the missile damage formula could we get the aircraft damage formula? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simmons Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malice Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Very interesting. I like that you are trying to balance things based on feedback Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthesis Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 They are all reasonable changes, but I agree, altogether at once is too soon, they should have been spread out, so as to see the effect they have over time. There are too many big changes for this to be a good idea right now. The scoring idea is good, and I agree the upkeep was probably a bit low, but triping the costs is probably overkill. Reducing the damage, and increasing iron dome ability should be enough of a change for now. Preventing people from attacking back is an interesting idea, but I think with the Iron Dome effectivness change, this is negated, and just makes the defender even less likely to come out from a losing battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Placentica Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) If you have a reasonable amount of missiles such as the amount you can use in a war, the upkeep is fine. Just because you guys have gone overboard and got 5 wars worth doesn't mean the change is wrong, it means they were much too cheap to hold before. You don't need 30 missiles, you will never get through them in one big war. Edit: plus, you guys don't have 30 odd missiles cos its needed, you had it cos you could. Now you can't. Imagine you log into your nation to find that your project(s) upkeep is now $500,000 a day. You now regret ever buying a project but there isn't much you can do other than to sell it and lose several million dollars. Overall the changes are better than before, but I don't like how they were implemented. I would respect this change more if Sheepy would've given some notice and allow nations to sell back their missiles stockpiles at no cost. Edited February 25, 2015 by Placentica 1 Hello! If you don't like this post please go here: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Imagine you log into your nation to find that your project(s) upkeep is now $500,000 a day. You now regret ever buying a project but there isn't much you can do other than to sell it and lose several million dollars. Overall the changes are better than before, but I don't like how they were implemented. I would respect this change more if Sheepy would've given some notice and allow nations to sell back their missiles stockpiles at no cost. Oh yea I'm not debating it would have been a shock, but you guys were hoarding for seemingly the sole reason of boosting score. I agree maybe some notice would have been better, but what's done is done now I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Imagine you log into your nation to find that your project(s) upkeep is now $500,000 a day. You now regret ever buying a project but there isn't much you can do other than to sell it and lose several million dollars. Overall the changes are better than before, but I don't like how they were implemented. I would respect this change more if Sheepy would've given some notice and allow nations to sell back their missiles stockpiles at no cost. Also the fact that I went ironworks instead of iron dome because the failure rate was only 25%. Now that it's 50%, I just spent quite a bit of cash for something I'll now have to decomission. >_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 You're at 14.3k infra, selling the ironworks seems foolish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 You're at 14.3k infra, selling the ironworks seems foolish. Maybe I want nukes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) Maybe I want nukes. Well you can't blame Sheepy for your bad choices then, getting nukes that is. Edited February 25, 2015 by Diabolos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Well you can't blame Sheepy for your bad choices then, getting nukes that is. First of all, I never asked your opinion on how I should run my nation. Second, the fact stands that I made a calculated decision on one project over another, and now those calculations are obsolete. If I choose to decommission a project because of these updates, none of the cash or resources I paid are refunded. Now, you may say, I'm at 14,300 infra and can just buy the extra infra for the iron dome, however what about the other people that are at 10,000 infra who just wasted their 2nd project slot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 First of all, I never asked your opinion on how I should run my nation. Second, the fact stands that I made a calculated decision on one project over another, and now those calculations are obsolete. If I choose to decommission a project because of these updates, none of the cash or resources I paid are refunded. Now, you may say, I'm at 14,300 infra and can just buy the extra infra for the iron dome, however what about the other people that are at 10,000 infra who just wasted their 2nd project slot? Just ignore the troll, he's beneath you, and everyone else and will likely go the way of the lambda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 First of all, I never asked your opinion on how I should run my nation. Second, the fact stands that I made a calculated decision on one project over another, and now those calculations are obsolete. If I choose to decommission a project because of these updates, none of the cash or resources I paid are refunded. Now, you may say, I'm at 14,300 infra and can just buy the extra infra for the iron dome, however what about the other people that are at 10,000 infra who just wasted their 2nd project slot? Complain in private to yourself then if you don't want tips on how to overcome problems you're complaining about. Most nations at 10000 infra and around that have only 1 project or no project at all, they're in a great position to take advantage of this change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) Option 1, 2, 5 are all good for me, and good to know that missiles can now be resisted when all 3 area were controlled.(it almost unlikely to be happened if you are on the side of winning, but it means the loser have less chance to turn the table back?) also, I just saw many missiles collectors scores have significiantly declined, but the missile overall is still "devastating at some poin Nukes maybe better since the maintain cost is now "cheaper" compared to a missile. Edited February 25, 2015 by Arthur James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 So how does the Iron Dome work? I know it has a 50% chance of taking out incoming missiles, but what does it use to take those missiles out, a laser, missiles? If it uses missiles as interceptors and with the chance of knocking down incoming stuff has doubled, to me that would suggest more missiles are being shot out, having missiles now has increased in upkeep costs, has the upkeep cost for the Iron Dome increased based on what it uses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firetrout Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 So how does the Iron Dome work? I know it has a 50% chance of taking out incoming missiles, but what does it use to take those missiles out, a laser, missiles? It works just like the real one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldie Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 What's wrong with encouraging a first-strike system? That favors war preparation, brings down inflation, and reduces stagnation of sitting around waiting for the other guy to make the first move. Amen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) Excellent changes, Sheepy. I do, however, think that raising the upkeep costs of missiles even more should be on the table. And I say this as someone who has missiles. So clearly I'd be hurting myself too. Call me. Edited February 25, 2015 by Ashland 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [10:47] you used to be the voice of irc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts