Greatnate Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 But if you have less than 1000 inf per city there's no chance you're getting full military... You just don't have the population. Your argument is flawed. Sheepy !@#$ed with the tank cap, you can hit max at 750 infra now if you hate your income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Sheepy !@#$ed with the tank cap, you can hit max at 750 infra now if you hate your income. I'd believe you if I wasn't currently capped at 750 tanks under my max with only one city under 1k infra. Edited October 31, 2015 by Phiney 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatnate Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'd believe you if I wasn't currently capped at 750 tanks under my max with only one city under 1k infra. Actually, it looks like it was grabbing the population correctly, just that your population is updated when you view your nation page. In any case, what I've done is increased the limit to 3%, and that'll roll out in the next patch so this will likely never be an issue again. Post in tech support, cause that change was supposed to go live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Oh, so they'll sell ALL of their improvements just to buy the military ones? Sounds like a big deal. EDIT: I've also never made this suggestion before. So good job on being extra wrong. I don't know why you're responding to my post as you never read my post. You're suggesting destroying a lot of the improvements in war, why wouldn't they sell whatever they have left in order to fight the war better. But yeah, you're illiterate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I don't know why you're responding to my post as you never read my post. You're suggesting destroying a lot of the improvements in war, why wouldn't they sell whatever they have left in order to fight the war better. But yeah, you're illiterate. Regardless this is all pretty moot as it's still not a viable tactic as you yourself are demonstrating right now, if you have negetive income (which you would with lots of military and under 800 inf per city, I do and I have lots more inf than that) you're gunna lose power in your cities and not be able to build military back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Regardless this is all pretty moot as it's still not a viable tactic as you yourself are demonstrating right now, if you have negetive income (which you would with lots of military and under 800 inf per city, I do and I have lots more inf than that) you're gunna lose power in your cities and not be able to build military back. That's a bit difference because it is commerce and civil improvements doing that, not military units. Military units would actually be affordable below 800 infra if you removed a lot of civil and commerce improvements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I don't know why you're responding to my post as you never read my post. You're suggesting destroying a lot of the improvements in war, why wouldn't they sell whatever they have left in order to fight the war better. But yeah, you're illiterate. You're allowed to be wrong all you want. It doesn't make you right however. Improvements need to be destroyed more regularly, the only time an attack does any real damage to improvements is when a nuke hits a nuke plant. Outside of that it needs to be greatly ramped up to cause any meaningful result. If you don't understand that you're simply disagreeing with me because of your hatred for me, or you simply do not understand. But by all means, keep trying to troll me. You're adorable. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spite Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Wars will be over a lot more quickly that's for certain. In the last big war (which my side won) I was nevertheless in negative income by the end (pre-rollback) because of the cost of maintaining Mensa level military forces. God knows what it would have been like if half my commerce had got flattened. Quote ☾☆ Priest of Dio just because the Nazis did something doesn't mean it's automatically wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) You're allowed to be wrong all you want. It doesn't make you right however. Improvements need to be destroyed more regularly, the only time an attack does any real damage to improvements is when a nuke hits a nuke plant. Outside of that it needs to be greatly ramped up to cause any meaningful result. If you don't understand that you're simply disagreeing with me because of your hatred for me, or you simply do not understand. But by all means, keep trying to troll me. You're adorable. That's just dumb, if I did hate you I would disagree with you on all that other stupid crap that you suggest but I don't post in suggestion threads I don't care about. (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) does improvement destruction right and P&W does improvement destruction reasonably well. Your ideas for the game usually aren't good, your views aren't perfect so stop acting like a know it all arrogant moron calling people butthurt because they think your idea doesn't work. Your suggestion is a fantasy that doesn't even try to be balanced. Your suggestion clearly isn't good if your defense is saying the counter argument is adorable, butthurt, trolling and full of hatred. I'd give you marks for being diverse anyway. Edited October 31, 2015 by Clarke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phiney Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) That's a bit difference because it is commerce and civil improvements doing that, not military units. Military units would actually be affordable below 800 infra if you removed a lot of civil and commerce improvements. Power Plant Upkeep $304,500.00 Resource Prod. Upkeep $308,400.00 Military Upkeep $2,918,535.00 City Improvement Upkeep $816,000.00 Disagree. As spite said, if you got rid of your commerce improvements you would be making even less money so it would compound my point, not contradict it. Edited October 31, 2015 by Phiney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Unless you have a shit load of cash stasthed away, you won't be running a decent military after having your infra knocked down to lower ranges. I lost around 500 infra in each city and by the end of a winning war I was struggling to field a full army. There was pretty much zero chance of me rebuilding my losses sustained during winning battles, due to being well over my pop limit. So yes, while you'll be able to beat down a few guys in the lower ranges, it woudn't be long before you were ground down and overwhelmed. Quote ☾☆ Warrior of Dio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 (edited) Power Plant Upkeep $304,500.00 Resource Prod. Upkeep $308,400.00 Military Upkeep $2,918,535.00 City Improvement Upkeep $816,000.00 Disagree. As spite said, if you got rid of your commerce improvements you would be making even less money so it would compound my point, not contradict it. Well that's if you build to 800 infra then the cost of power, resource and city improvement upkeep isn't as significant if you're making cash. However the issue with building to 800 infra is that the score is going to significantly reduce the advantage you have and put you well out of range of low tier nations which is what is thread is mainly about regarding nations with a shitload of cities and projects in range of weaker nations. For you it is a bit difference since your side controls the mid tier solidly around 1000 score and upwards so your main concern is military bills and you don't have to worry about stronger nations attacking you and getting the better of you or being overrun by 3 decent sized opponents. If a large nation ends up in the low tier building up to 800 infra is a bad idea as it send them right back into the mid tier. Edited October 31, 2015 by Clarke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatnate Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Well that's if you build to 800 infra then the cost of power, resource and city improvement upkeep isn't as significant if you're making cash. However the issue with building to 800 infra is that the score is going to significantly reduce the advantage you have and put you well out of range of low tier nations which is what is thread is mainly about regarding nations with a shitload of cities and projects in range of weaker nations. For you it is a bit difference since your side controls the mid tier solidly around 1000 score and upwards so your main concern is military bills and you don't have to worry about stronger nations attacking you and getting the better of you or being overrun by 3 decent sized opponents. If a large nation ends up in the low tier building up to 800 infra is a bad idea as it send them right back into the mid tier. 800 infra without commerce buildings only pulls in $50K per city. Full military (no ships) costs $200K per city at war and then you have another $10.5K/city for the nuke plant. You would be hemorrhaging money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace and War Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Well if one improvement was destroyed per 100 infra damage each well, Nations would certainly get out of the war faster. Alot faster. Sounds depressing really because one good blitz could knock you out of the war for good. What Alliance is going to want to give you money to build up your infrastructure to buy improvements again just to try to build up your army again. All the while having negative income the whole time. I'm all for having improvements destroyed in war, its logical that these things would be blown up with infrastructure. But its probably a pretty bad idea to have one improvement destroyed for every 100 infrastructure. Cause that would just be pretty lame honestly. Quote "Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'd like to see something done about this. 1 improvement per 100 infra is probably too much, but buffing up how many improvements are destroyed would be good. Letting people target certain types of improvements with nukes and ground might help. And maybe letting planes target improvements? Another approach could be to limit the effectiveness of military improvements if your improvement count in a city is significantly over your improvement slot count. For example: Military efficiency multiplier = (Improvements in a city / improvement slots in a city) * 2 If military improvement effectiveness < 1, military buying potential and military maximums are multiplied by the military improvement efficiency multiplier. It wouldn't kick in until you lose more than half the infra needed to sustain your current improvements, so you could still lose a lot of infra before this kicked in. And you could also mitigate it by getting rid of improvements you don't need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Your suggestion clearly isn't good if your defense is saying the counter argument is adorable, butthurt, trolling and full of hatred. I'd give you marks for being diverse anyway. No, you just refuse to understand any point I make, so I let everyone else make them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 I'm all for having improvements destroyed in war, its logical that these things would be blown up with infrastructure. But its probably a pretty bad idea to have one improvement destroyed for every 100 infrastructure. Cause that would just be pretty lame honestly. It's 1 for the first 100, another 1 for the next 200. Numbers can always be stretched range wise too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace and War Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 It's 1 for the first 100, another 1 for the next 200. Numbers can always be stretched range wise too. Oh I understand now, yeah I could live with that. Quote "Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spooner Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 Suggestion: An immense triumph via air automatically destroys 1 improvement? Quote ☾☆ High Priest of Dio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 isn't the defender already at a huge disadvantage, now you guys want to wipe out their improvements as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatnate Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 We could at least bring Airstrike and Naval improvement damage to a level similar to ground attacks. At least 13.3% of improvement destruction as a minimum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beowulf the Second Posted November 1, 2015 Author Share Posted November 1, 2015 (edited) isn't the defender already at a huge disadvantage, now you guys want to wipe out their improvements as well? Already addressed. Read the original post. <3 Edited November 1, 2015 by Beowulf the Second Quote 01:58:39 <BeowulftheSecond> Belisarius of The Byzantine Empire has sent your nation $0.00, 0.00 food, 0.00 coal, 0.00 oil, 0.00 uranium, 0.00 lead, 0.00 iron, 0.00 bauxite, 0.00 gasoline, 0.00 munitions, 1,000.00 steel, and 0.00 aluminum from the alliance bank of Rose.01:58:46 <BeowulftheSecond> someone please explain 01:59:12 <%Belisarius> sleep deprivatin is a !@#$ @_@01:59:14 — %Belisarius shrugs01:59:18 <BeowulftheSecond> we're at WAR. WE ARE BURNING EACH OTHER'S PIXELS 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.