Must be off of beige for two days before declaring wars

[Azaghul]

Right now being beiged is often seen as being an advantage.  And aside from the loot or very select circumstances, it makes little practical sense to beige someone because you don't get much out of it.  A beiged nation is immune from being declared on, can arm up, and then can go back in declaring wars at the time of their choosing.

 

My suggestion is to require nations who get off beige to wait 2 days / 24 turns before they can declare offensive wars after they leave beige.  During that time they are subject to defensive wars, were they could be beiged again.  This gives people an incentive to keep an opponent on beige, while preserving the intent behind beige of giving people a chance to have a breather and arm up again.

[Alex]

I kind of like this idea. Would add a new dynamic to wars. Let's see what other players think.

[martiy]

I agree something should be changed about being beige...seems odd that 'winning' the war gives the enemy the bigger advantage of immunity (in a larger alliance war scenario at least)

Edited August 4, 2015 by martiy

[Codonian]

Great idea, Should definitely be implemented

[Emmad]

Honestly don't care for the idea. I can't see how it would change things much from how they are with the current setup. If anything it's a double-edged sword because it gives the enemy additional time to rebuild unless you can dedicate war efforts on them. Keeping people at war would still be the best option.

[Hooves]

Don't really know how to feel about this. I completely agree with the reasoning behind this, especially concerning that putting someone on beige only helps them out. Even going as far as messaging your enemy to beige you if you're in a losing war. Which just doesn't sit right with me at all. As long as they are subject to defensive wars, this does sound tempting.

[Bollocks]

I like the idea.

[TellUrGrlThx]

I feel like it favors the winning side a little. What if they stay the full 5 days of beige?

 

As it stands, I feel like it's a mechanic that shouldn't be changed since it isn't that big of an issue.

[Dan77]

I don't like this.  It gives people the opportunity to repeatedly beat down a nation that has already lost.

 

The game mechanics give a massive advantage to the attacker and this just places the beiged nation into a situation where they are unable to fight back properly.

 

What if they were involved in 3 wars for example.  They win 2 of the wars and lose the other which turns them to beige.  Under this proposal, even though they may have the upper hand in the war overall, they are a sitting duck for others to gain attacking advantage over them.

 

Alliances can then set up so that only 1 guy needs to beat an opponent, knowing that they can triple declare on them when they come off beige.

 

I much prefer the system as it is.

[Karrde]

Being beiged at the moment gives a minor advantage to a nation that has already suffered a major disadvantage in losing a war, and gives an opportunity for them to rebuild and pick a battle of their choosing.

 

To me that sounds about right, and gives even someone on the receiving end of a stomping the opportunity to hit weaker targets and have some fun or be of some use to their side.

[stetonic]

How does being sent to beige during an alliance war give you an advantage.You are more than likely involved in 3 defensive wars.So 1 of your attackers sends you to beige to stop you declaring against anyone else in his alliance.While the other 2 attackers just beat on you for the rest of the war.So even tho you are beige you still can't rebuild.As you are still getting a kicking.

 

Maybe you should be involved in a major alliance war and see what its like to take a beating before you try and add a rule that just makes it so the losing nation has to take an even bigger beating and not be able to at least get some hits in on smaller nations involved in that war.When he gets of beige

[Jon Snow]

Maybe this needs cleared up for some reason....but the way I'm reading this is someone is is beiged has to wait the 5days to turn back to their normal color....plus and additional 2 days to declare offensive wars.

 

This means a total of 7 days before they are able to declare offensive wars again. Meanwhile they can still be declared on and then beiged again before they can even launch a counter attack

 

Honestly, while it sounds like a nice suggestion, i have to put my vote againsy this. Defenders are alrdy placed at a large disadvantage and this will just place more favor towards dog piling style of warfare as the defenders won't have a chance to respond

Edited August 4, 2015 by Jon Snow

[Kadin]

wait a second, why do we need this? Beige itself is supposed to be the cooldown period..

 

I think this idea is terrible, and only puts your nation at risk of further declarations with no option for pre-emptive strikes. Please do not implement this idea!

 

Honestly, the only benefit to this change is that it allows you to have no control over your members' actions during an alliance war and not get bitten in the ass for it. Please stop dumbing down this game. There should be incentives for having a COMPETENT alliance, not workarounds designed to allow you to build crappy ones!

Edited August 4, 2015 by Kadin

[Callisto]

I don't like this idea, it would slow down the dynamic of war, Honestly, if a person wants to declare war, they should be able to as long as they aren't on beige.

[Wayne]

We don't need sitting ducks!  The attacker already has the advantage, him and his mates don't need a free two days of jumping recently unbeiged players.  I'd rather see the rebuild limits tweaked and allow the defender to actually defend himself.

[Dalinar]

I don't like this idea, it would slow down the dynamic of war, Honestly, if a person wants to declare war, they should be able to as long as they aren't on beige.

 

I agree with this. The current beige system is fine, like some of the Mensa members in this thread have said I think it gives the alliance on the defense a chance to fight back.

[Sweeeeet Ronny D]

I would much rather set the beige timer on the same timer as the color timer, so that you cant just switch out of beige whenever you want, but are forced to stay in beige for a few days.

 

if you are in a war, and have gotten beaten down and sent to beige, you are now forced to be wide open to attack for 2 days after you get out of beige before you can counter attack?  Forget about it, that is crazy.

[Azaghul]

I don't like this.  It gives people the opportunity to repeatedly beat down a nation that has already lost.

 

The game mechanics give a massive advantage to the attacker and this just places the beiged nation into a situation where they are unable to fight back properly.

 

What if they were involved in 3 wars for example.  They win 2 of the wars and lose the other which turns them to beige.  Under this proposal, even though they may have the upper hand in the war overall, they are a sitting duck for others to gain attacking advantage over them.

 

Alliances can then set up so that only 1 guy needs to beat an opponent, knowing that they can triple declare on them when they come off beige.

 

I much prefer the system as it is.

Current mechanics allow you to repeatedly beat someone down, you just don't beige them and keep declaring wars.

 

Being beiged at the moment gives a minor advantage to a nation that has already suffered a major disadvantage in losing a war, and gives an opportunity for them to rebuild and pick a battle of their choosing.

 

To me that sounds about right, and gives even someone on the receiving end of a stomping the opportunity to hit weaker targets and have some fun or be of some use to their side.

The thing is you can still loose a war (not in the official sense but in a practical you loose every battle and take a ton of damage while dishing out little to none sense) without being beiged.

 

I'd like to see more ways for people on the wrong side of a curbstomp to fight back to some degree, but I don't think tilting the scales on "loosing" a war so that it's a net positive a looser is the way to do it.  It creates all sorts of perverse incentives.  Especially some cheating like I saw in the last war, where people would "raid" or be "raided" by friends deliberately so that they could get to beige and be immune from defensive wars, while still effectively being able to declare offensive wars whenever they want.

 

How does being sent to beige during an alliance war give you an advantage.You are more than likely involved in 3 defensive wars.So 1 of your attackers sends you to beige to stop you declaring against anyone else in his alliance.While the other 2 attackers just beat on you for the rest of the war.So even tho you are beige you still can't rebuild.As you are still getting a kicking.

 

Maybe you should be involved in a major alliance war and see what its like to take a beating before you try and add a rule that just makes it so the losing nation has to take an even bigger beating and not be able to at least get some hits in on smaller nations involved in that war.When he gets of beige

Depends on when those other two wars expire.  Beige lasts for 5 days, wars last for 5 days.

 

In your 3 defensive war scenario, they still will get a chance to arm back up in on the ground during those 4-5 days after being beiged while fighting those other two nations, because those two nations will want to avoid beiging him again and are thus limited in their GAs.  So that person will be able to come off beige close to fully armed on the ground (at least on soldiers, possibly on tanks depending on air strikes).  It takes 12 turns to beige someone after declaring war, so they basically have 12 turns to try to avoid new defensive wars and starting to loose GAs.

 

As above, I'd like to see more ways for the loosing side to fight back, but creating perverse incentives (including to cheat) by making beige so attractive isn't the right way to do it.

 

Maybe this needs cleared up for some reason....but the way I'm reading this is someone is is beiged has to wait the 5days to turn back to their normal color....plus and additional 2 days to declare offensive wars.

 

This means a total of 7 days before they are able to declare offensive wars again. Meanwhile they can still be declared on and then beiged again before they can even launch a counter attack

 

Honestly, while it sounds like a nice suggestion, i have to put my vote againsy this. Defenders are alrdy placed at a large disadvantage and this will just place more favor towards dog piling style of warfare as the defenders won't have a chance to respond

You can get off beige before the 5 days is up.

 

wait a second, why do we need this? Beige itself is supposed to be the cooldown period..

 

I think this idea is terrible, and only puts your nation at risk of further declarations with no option for pre-emptive strikes. Please do not implement this idea!

 

Honestly, the only benefit to this change is that it allows you to have no control over your members' actions during an alliance war and not get bitten in the ass for it. Please stop dumbing down this game. There should be incentives for having a COMPETENT alliance, not workarounds designed to allow you to build crappy ones!

You can't control if someone is "raided" or "raids" someone else for the purpose of having their friend beige them.  That happened last war.  And it's probably too much for the mods to try to prevent just by rules on slot filling.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Azaghul