George W. Bush Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 The title is a tad misleading. Anyways, I've been trying to think of something that would make wars useful regardless if you lose infrastructure or not, without using anything that is currently in the game. What I have just thought of is really quite simple however. If I'm not mistaken, cities in this game slowly grow. This would be used in the sorts of a meter. The meter goes from -25 to 25, in which every nation would start at -25. Each point below zero would add 1% to population growth(this is of course substitutable, but I wasn't sure if daily cash revenue would sound too OP), and each point above zero would give a 1% combat bonus to the troop of your choice. The four choices obviously being soldiers, tanks, ships, aircraft. You would earn points based on how many wars you fought, win or lose, in the past month. However, this does not count expired wars or wars that peace was made. The points you earn would expire after x amount of days. I haven't though of a way to balance the point system, or the amount of days after the war the points last, but I'd like to see opinions on this first. 1 Quote You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex. #FA_Problems Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding. If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Jong-Il Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 If I was more intelligent, and knew what you were saying, I'd probably agree with this Quote The many forms of proof regarding Kastor's sexuality: - Kastor: I already came out the closet. - MaIone: I'm gay * MaIone is now known as Kastor - Henri: i'm a !@#$it Skable: the !@#$ is a codo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George W. Bush Posted April 9, 2015 Author Share Posted April 9, 2015 How about it starts at 0? Perhaps it could, but what would give you points going into the peace bonuses? Quote You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex. #FA_Problems Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding. If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Fire Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I don't get it... Quote _________________________________________________________________ <Jroc> I heard \ is an anagram of cocaine<\> I can't be rearranged into a line, I already am a line. --Foxburo Wiki-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Sterling Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I don't get it... shut up Tom Hanks. You are not a big guy Quote Genesis, best band NA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooves Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) Uhh... If I'm understanding this right. You're basically putting a peace and war bar that fills based on how long you've been at peace or war. The more wars you've been in 25%, you gain more troop combat strength of your choosing. While the longer you've been at peace -25%, you'll get more population growth in your cities. I'm confused... Edited April 9, 2015 by Hooves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George W. Bush Posted April 9, 2015 Author Share Posted April 9, 2015 Uhh... If I'm understanding this right. You're basically putting a peace and war bar that fills based on how long you've been at peace or war. The more wars you've been in 25%, you gain more troop combat strength of your choosing. While the longer you've been at peace -25%, you'll get more population growth in your cities. I'm confused... It's essentially what you just said, only I used population more as example, because I couldn't really think of any other bonuses other than revenue bonuses, which I thought might be a bit OP. I don't care if the final product is a bit different than what I suggested. Quote You're no longer protecting the II? We have still teamed with II and TAC (and others) to rival The Covenants. This is getting complex. #FA_Problems Big problems for TSG. Really, not kidding. If Casey and Cyradis are King and Queen does that mean they're married? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur James Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I would support the idea when at -25, you got +1% max. population bonus, and slowly decline unto no bonus when reaching 0, and then combat bonus gain at max. when reaching +25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pol Pot Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 i disagree this is political problem and community problem not in game problem i dont think it would increase wars much other then making it more profitable for raiders or driving away people from game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.