Infra/City Caps

[Kastor]

Since obviously being too big and having more cities then someone else can give you an advantage, I propose that we have a Infra cap of 3,000 per city and City cap of 15. Remember, having more cities and down declaring gives you an unfair advantage, and we need the game to be -even- for everyone.

 

Note: This is a real suggestion, I want player's consideration on if this is a good idea or not.

[Tali]

Worst idea ever.

[Aenir]

Those are rather high, don't you think? I imagine most people won't reach those for a long time, if ever. 2k infra and 10 cities would still let people make 4 national projects while getting full use out of Nuclear Power Plants. It would also prevent people from being able to get every improvement by having absurd amounts of infrastructure.

[Rozalia]

It's a "dynamic" so I have to agree. Let us wait on what the shining ones think first though. 

 

Aenir makes a good point.

Edited July 10, 2015 by Rozalia

[LordRahl2]

Good concept.  I agree with lowering the cap like Aenir suggested.  Selecting the wisest projects would improve gameplay as well.

 

This will also help people into the meta game by focusing their efforts on their alliance.

 

If people are over this cap they can be well compensated for it.

[stetonic]

Yeah 10 cities and 2k infra so everyone is equal seems very fair and once you hit that cap you can buy a second account and create a world wide network of nations.So you can battle over who owns what continent.

[Kastor]

Good concept.  I agree with lowering the cap like Aenir suggested.  Selecting the wisest projects would improve gameplay as well.

 

This will also help people into the meta game by focusing their efforts on their alliance.

 

If people are over this cap they can be well compensated for it.

I think $2m for 100 infra over works out well? Alas, think of all the time and effort put into it that is now wasted....oh well, they're getting paid for it.

[LordRahl2]

I think $2m for 100 infra over works out well? Alas, think of all the time and effort put into it that is now wasted....oh well, they're getting paid for it.

 

I am unsure what the cost for 100 over 2k etc costs.  But given the standard of ignoring the time value of money previously applied to certain changes I think it is well within reason to use $2m as a starting point.

[Yenroh]

First I'd like to point out...why not make the "cap" something pretty high that people won't achieve for a while. Doesn't that make the nation building aspect of it more exciting for a longer period of time? Why make a cap that everyone can achieve relatively easily and then all sit around wondering what next to do because there's a cap in the first place?

 

I'm against the idea of implementing a cap myself, gives me less to strive for in terms of nation building, especially if it's something pretty low.

[Kastor]

First I'd like to point out...why not make the "cap" something pretty high that people won't achieve for a while. Doesn't that make the nation building aspect of it more exciting for a longer period of time? Why make a cap that everyone can achieve relatively easily and then all sit around wondering what next to do because there's a cap in the first place?

 

I'm against the idea of implementing a cap myself, gives me less to strive for in terms of nation building, especially if it's something pretty low.

I disagree with your entire post. We need to make the game EVEN for EVERYONE. It is Sheepy's wish.

[Baboon]

<Henri> Yenroh[VE]: you're taking my idea too seriously

<Henri> its not meant to be serious

<Henri> Get with the program

<Henri> That was just so I didn't get warned.

 

Locked and warned