Jump to content

superfalconpunch

Members
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Leader Name
    superfalconpunch
  • Nation Name
    Wingland
  • Nation ID
    70739

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name: playerwhoplays

superfalconpunch's Achievements

New Member

New Member (1/8)

2

Reputation

  1. Thanks, I AM in an alliance that helps to cover that kind of thing with a stable upper tier. In case you haven't noticed, people like Arrgh! (shameless callout of the most well known one) and other pirate alliances like them don't always care. They pull BS downdeclares and then buy back up out of range, and every bit of loot they steal goes to a bank, be it the alliance bank or a bank nation. They don't care how much damage they take because other raids will cover the cost even if it's bust. It doesn't have to be "profitable" if that target has money to loot. They can't lose anything, so there's no real cost to them, giving them whatever they want to do it over and over and over and over. Just because we can counter this exploit in the war range system doesn't mean all alliances can. To say that large nations should have an advantage over all others just because they've been playing longer is understandable, sure, but it's also incredibly selfish. Lower tier players at this point in time still need some kind of extra layer protecting them, and if you have a better solution I'd love to hear it. And beyond just that, it'd be incredibly dumb to say something like "old nations deserve advantages over all other players" because it just sounds greedy...though I suppose a Grumpy Old Man might fit that bill, huh. Oh, and this change isn't specifically to make my life easier. It's to make life easier for hundreds of players who don't have the means to survive this.
  2. Without replying and clogging up this poor forum page more, let me build a scenario. You're a player who's making good progress. You're in a nice alliance, got some raids goin against neutrals and unaligned nations. Your military is, eh, 2/3 of max and you have 10 cities. This should put you at 100,000 soldiers, a sizeable airforce and navy, and a fair amount of tanks, doing the math if you have max factories for...whatever reason you'd have 8375. One day, after you wake up and eat your breakfast or whatever your morning ritual is, you log on to see that a nation with 20 cities has declared on you, and has twice as many soldiers as you, very nearly as many tanks, and enough planes and ships to thwart your operations altogether. An alliance member mentions that they used what is essentially an exploit to the war system, selling off all their military, declaring on you, and then quickly double buying so that you can't hurt them. The only members that can tangle with them now are the ones up at 18 or so cities themselves, and your military has already been stomped underfoot, so you can't hire enough troops to fight back. Instead you're forced to wait and watch until either the person becomes largely indestructible to your alliance, lest they get properly countered, or they get brought back low enough that you can turn the tides. I guarantee you that around 8 times out of 10 the first option comes into effect. It's completely unfair that a player can so easily scrape off their power, declare on someone who couldn't ever have a prayer of winning, and then immediately soar back out of that range in military strength. This is the problem I'm trying to fix. It's not a simply one-on-one war issue, it's not a case of "you should've been better prepared", it's a complete and utter disgrace of a tactic to use and it NEEDS to be discouraged or, in my eyes here, removed. Also, Sketchy, in my personal experience the player with way more cities generally wins because they simply have more troops. They can repurchase more, they can especially double-buy more, and at the end of the day they still have an advantage as long as they keep their military topped up. Also, weren't you just complaining that updeclaring was the issue, not downdeclaring? Or did I misunderstand your argument?
  3. Updeclaring is still a thing and not being removed in any way via my suggestion. I ONLY asked for a LOWER city limit, not an upper one too. A 20 city nation can still be declared on by one with 9, just not the other way around. I also never suggested any sort of removal of the Nation Score system, so yes, it WOULD push you out of range if you took enough damage. Lastly I never implied it was solely a 1vs1 scenario, because in the end one player with 20 cities will easily crush three players with 10 each. You're right, I did really screw up my calculations there...should've been more along the lines of 20 cities with propaganda and max military hiring over 100k soldiers and 6000 tanks at once. Either way, still ridiculous for someone with a low city count to even hope to counter. As far as pirates go, I do see where you're coming from, but pirates get countered to make up for those weaknesses if you're in just about any alliance. If a player isn't maintaining a strong military that's on them, of course, but if they ARE holding their maximum military and suddenly this player declares on them, double buys to 200,000+ soldiers and a whopping 12000 tanks, and however many planes and ships, then that's completely unfair if they physically can't counter it. What little standing military they do have gets blown away instantly and they have no choice but to turtle and plea for help. As far as after an alliance war goes...I didn't consider that, and it's actually a great counterpoint. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I suppose that player would have to use the beige period (if they actually get one) to build their military ASAP, and if not double buy as soon as possible and hope for the best. I'll have to think on that one. A recent defeat could lower the city requirement temporarily but that's getting into the realm of "How do you even program that in?". All in all, best counterargument so far.
  4. So you... A. Think it's fair that someone who can suddenly buy 300,000 soldiers and 12,500 tanks can declare on someone who is able to draft less than half that B. Believe that low tier players won't raid other low tier players Did I catch that clearly?
  5. With that link removed, I'd love to hear what you guys think.
  6. It's no secret that some certain alliances (a few in particular) have been abusing the Nation Score to attack low power players and then absolutely destroy them with insane military. I'd be interested in coining this term "Score Scraping" or maybe something more clear if you can think of it. Players essentially exploit just how much military affects your power against how little cities do to declare against astronomically weaker opponents and become completely undefeatable amidst their raid. I thereby suggest a new system to COMPLIMENT (NOT replace) our current war system that limits declarations by city count, thus ensuring both nations are on a notably more level playing field. The reason this would work is because, quite frankly, your city count is 70% of the battle; more cities, more troops. By limiting players to only be able to declare within 67% or higher of their city count, we would be able to effectively shut down these Score Scraping players without affecting the game as a whole too greatly. There's still no upper limit to attacking players with MORE cities than you, though, so that's not prevented in any way. One complaint I quite genuinely predict is that this would potentially limit the war range for some players (though I doubt it would actually become an issue). Just in case that actually does become an issue rivaling my nation's habit of running out of food, I would then suggest loosening the score range of nations you can attack within your city range. I'm thinking something along the lines of a 50-60% bottom range for nation score could easily balance it all out. Any thoughts, suggestions on making this better? Do you think Score Scraping isn't all it's cracked up to be? Am I just full of s#!7 and need to delete my nation? Feel free to discuss it all below...
  7. Well instead of simply pointing out the issues, would you like to make actual suggestions?
  8. That's not something I know actually...you should ask on the pnw discord support chat.
  9. I figured since a spy revamp is coming, we could get some new spy ops to screw each oth-I mean mess with. Sabotage Warehouse: Destroys 5% of a nation's resources up to 500 (excluding uranium {200} and food {5000}.) Note that this destroys resources, it does not loot them. Sabotage Power Grid: Will destroy one random power plant improvement in a random city. 20% chance to fail even if not caught and technically successful. Sabotage Industry: Destroys a random mining improvement (such as oil wells or coal mines) in a random city. 20% chance to fail a la power grid Sabotage Production: Destroys a random production improvement (such as an oil refinery or steel mill) in a random city. Costs .2 munitions per spy and 1.5x base price. ⅓ failure rate. Sabotage Civil Services: Will destroy one random civil service improvement (A hospital or police station, or recycling plant; excludes subways) in a random city. Costs .1 Uranium per spy and triple the cash value. If caught you'll lose twice as many spies due to the radioactive material. Sabotage Business: Destroys one random Commerce improvement (including subways and stadiums) in a random city. Costs .2 munitions per spy and triple the cash value. If caught you'll lose twice as many spies due to arrests in these high-density areas. Sabotage Military Production: Will destroy one random military improvement in a random city. Costs 1 munitions per spy and 5 times the cash cost. Failure rate is more dependent on enemy infantry count (Every 3000 soldiers equates to 1%, but this caps at 30%, or 90,000 troops) and is only slightly effected by their spies (20% as much). Cannot succeed if caught. If caught, 3 times as many spies will be gunned down by guards. Cannot be done "Quick and Dirty". If anyone thinks these could use rebalancing or refinement (or thinks I'm full of crap and should delete my nation), or just thinks it's a good idea, talk to me! I'll keep this forum active as one where I'll receive notification. Cats eat brains. Vultures eat corpses. -superfalconpuch
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.