Aerys Targaryen Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 The battle range in upper tier currently does not serve the purpose. So here is my suggestion to improve that. Nation score should be based on money we spend during each upgrade/new cities. Money spent for 3rd city is higher than money spent for 2nd city, so score increase after building 3rd city should be higher than score increase after building 2nd city and so on for other cities as well. The same rule can be applied for infrastructure too, example: infra jump from 2000 to 2100 should increase score more than infra jump from 500 to 600. This way, nation score in top tier will have bigger intervals than what we see now, thereby preventing huge nations from downdeclaring on small nations. This makes war range -25%/+75% of nation's worth. tl;dr Nation score should be proportional to money spent on the nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kastor Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 The battle range in upper tier currently does not serve the purpose. So here is my suggestion to improve that. Nation score should be based on money we spend during each upgrade/new cities. Money spent for 3rd city is higher than money spent for 2nd city, so score increase after building 3rd city should be higher than score increase after building 2nd city and so on for other cities as well. The same rule can be applied for infrastructure too, example: infra jump from 2000 to 2100 should increase score more than infra jump from 500 to 600. This way, nation score in top tier will have bigger intervals than what we see now, thereby preventing huge nations from downdeclaring on small nations. This makes war range -25%/+75% of nation's worth. tl;dr Nation score should be proportional to money spent on the nation. This is not a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerys Targaryen Posted August 29, 2015 Author Share Posted August 29, 2015 This is not a good idea. I couldn't spot any reasons in your comment Care to give some? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 The counter argument is that younger military prepared nations will not be able to conduct coordinated strikes against unprepared older nations. This would be a bad change for the current war system. This applies to all so called 'tiers'. 1 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerys Targaryen Posted August 29, 2015 Author Share Posted August 29, 2015 The counter argument is that younger military prepared nations will not be able to conduct coordinated strikes against unprepared older nations. This would be a bad change for the current war system. This applies to all so called 'tiers'. As of now, your point is valid. But as game gets old, nations in the top tier gets exposed to bigger and bigger war range. It is easy for a nation with score of 1000 to defend against a nation with score of 1333, but its difficult for a nation with score of 3000 to defend against another nation with a score of 4000. Your argument is based on a situation where young military nation declares war on an ill prepared bigger nation. What if well prepared big nation declares war on less/well prepared small nation (in top tier), which is totally possible after a few months? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 As of now, your point is valid. But as game gets old, nations in the top tier gets exposed to bigger and bigger war range. It is easy for a nation with score of 1000 to defend against a nation with score of 1333, but its difficult for a nation with score of 3000 to defend against another nation with a score of 4000. Your argument is based on a situation where young military nation declares war on an ill prepared bigger nation. What if well prepared big nation declares war on less/well prepared small nation (in top tier), which is totally possible after a few months? Not really it is based on how the 3000 and 4000 nations are built. Same truth as the 1333 vs 1000. Both represent player decisions in game based on the fixed number of mil facilities per city. As I said, my point holds true for every 'tier'. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 Something needs to be done somehow. I have 11 cities and was declared on twice by people with 12-13 cities. Quote "We pull in money, new recruits, all just to combat cipher, rubbing our noses in bloody battlefield dirt, all for revenge." "Why are we still here? Just to suffer? Every night i can feel my leg, and my arm, even my fingers. The body i've lost, The comrades i've lost, won't stop hurting... it's like they're all still there... You feel it too, don't you?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerys Targaryen Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) Not really it is based on how the 3000 and 4000 nations are built. Same truth as the 1333 vs 1000. Both represent player decisions in game based on the fixed number of mil facilities per city. As I said, my point holds true for every 'tier'. Still you are taking a particular situation to argue this is wrong. It won't be always young militarized nations attacking unprepared old nations. We can have prepared nation, unprepared nation, big nation and small nation, so a combination of them gives four unique nations like Unprepared small nation (USN) Unprepared big nation (UBN) Prepared small nation (PSN) Prepared big nation (PBN) War could be between USN declaring war on USN USN declaring war on UBN USN declaring war on PSN USN declaring war on PBN UBN declaring war on UBN UBN declaring war on USN UBN declaring war on PSN UBN declaring war on PBN PSN declaring war on PSN PSN declaring war on USN PSN declaring war on UBN PSN declaring war on PBN PBN declaring war on USN PBN declaring war on UBN PBN declaring war on PSN PBN declaring war on PBN What you are talking about is case 11, but in future war can be fought between any kind of nations. For every new city with 2000 infrastructure, nation score increases by just 125. Nation with score of 4000 can have at least 4 extra cities than a nation with 3000 cities and both the nations can be perfectly built. (4 cities contribute to 500 nation score and if both nations are well built, then the nation score can increase by another 500 due to military). A nation with 3000 score does not stand a chance against a nation with score of 4000, provided both are militarized to their maximum extend. Edited August 30, 2015 by Aerys Targaryen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerys Targaryen Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 Something needs to be done somehow. I have 11 cities and was declared on twice by people with 12-13 cities. In your case, you are not prepared. The same thing can happen to someone with 12-13 cities if they were declared by a nation with 11 cities and a powerful military. What I'm worried about it is, one nation with 'x' cities and another nation with 'x+4' (or more) cities fighting with each other, which can happen in future if the war range is not changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 In your case, you are not prepared. The same thing can happen to someone with 12-13 cities if they were declared by a nation with 11 cities and a powerful military. What I'm worried about it is, one nation with 'x' cities and another nation with 'x+4' (or more) cities fighting with each other, which can happen in future if the war range is not changed. right *now* i'm not prepared. I was full military when i was declared on and lost my soldiers, air, sea, etc. within a day. partially because of the broken down declare. Quote "We pull in money, new recruits, all just to combat cipher, rubbing our noses in bloody battlefield dirt, all for revenge." "Why are we still here? Just to suffer? Every night i can feel my leg, and my arm, even my fingers. The body i've lost, The comrades i've lost, won't stop hurting... it's like they're all still there... You feel it too, don't you?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 right *now* i'm not prepared. I was full military when i was declared on and lost my soldiers, air, sea, etc. within a day. partially because of the broken down declare. I wouldn't say that's the reason, it can perfectly well happen the same with up declares, all you need is coordination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck Turgidson Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Seems to me that the war range should be based on the number of cities - ie 11 cities could only get declared by nations with 10. 11, or 12 cities. at that level infrastructure level is a matter of choice - you'll probably be able to 100% militarize if needed. 1 Quote Are you originally from Earth, too? Proud owner of Harry's goat. It's mine now. I now own MinesomeMC's goat, too. It's starting to look like a herd. Yep, it is a herd. Aldwulf has added his goat, too, and it ain't Irish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Still you are taking a particular situation to argue this is wrong. It won't be always young militarized nations attacking unprepared old nations. We can have prepared nation, unprepared nation, big nation and small nation, so a combination of them gives four unique nations like Unprepared small nation (USN) Unprepared big nation (UBN) Prepared small nation (PSN) Prepared big nation (PBN) War could be between USN declaring war on USN USN declaring war on UBN USN declaring war on PSN USN declaring war on PBN UBN declaring war on UBN UBN declaring war on USN UBN declaring war on PSN UBN declaring war on PBN PSN declaring war on PSN PSN declaring war on USN PSN declaring war on UBN PSN declaring war on PBN PBN declaring war on USN PBN declaring war on UBN PBN declaring war on PSN PBN declaring war on PBN What you are talking about is case 11, but in future war can be fought between any kind of nations. For every new city with 2000 infrastructure, nation score increases by just 125. Nation with score of 4000 can have at least 4 extra cities than a nation with 3000 cities and both the nations can be perfectly built. (4 cities contribute to 500 nation score and if both nations are well built, then the nation score can increase by another 500 due to military). A nation with 3000 score does not stand a chance against a nation with score of 4000, provided both are militarized to their maximum extend. Alright, you sold me. But could you turn your idea into a specific formula? I do not think it should be based on the raw number of cities as suggested above. How about a cap like can DoW down at -25% of score if and only if your number of cities - target number of cities is equal to or less than X. Then we can figure out X, maybe 3? Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buck Turgidson Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 That fella who said we should it should be based on the number of cites had it right on. Quote Are you originally from Earth, too? Proud owner of Harry's goat. It's mine now. I now own MinesomeMC's goat, too. It's starting to look like a herd. Yep, it is a herd. Aldwulf has added his goat, too, and it ain't Irish. 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.