Jump to content

Spy Recruitment


Alex
 Share

Should spy recruitment be buffed?  

107 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the number of spies you can recruit per day go from 2 to 5 and to 6 for the IA project?



Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Gabranth said:

Sure, but it is still only a temp fix. Perhaps if you wanted to rework the mechanic it would be cool to have particular traits on your spies when you hire them, and you could train them with money to upgrade their traits and give them levels as well so the more they do spy operations the more effective they become. Almost like a baseball team but with spies. With this it would be somewhat balanced when defending against spy ops too, it makes it so the people who invest time and effort into their spy squad are can defend from ops and it's actually balanced.

 

2 hours ago, Sketchy said:

idk fam are the spies gonna retire on me like the baseball players do, I don't think I can go through that again

To be fair, you actually have plenty of time on your baseball player before it retires. It takes a little more than $2M to max a baseball player. That's barely 100 host games for a max stadium nation, which is perfectly doable in 50 to 95 days, and in fact doable in 20 minutes if you can find a 100 skill baseball team to spam host games. 

Though having these small buffs on your spy ring sounds like a very interesting idea, but I think to simplify it, there should be a spy ring director who applies the buff to the entire spy ring. They will automatically retire in a period of time, but can be invested upon to apply greater buffs, though they will become stronger the more successful spy ops are done. Borrowing a lot from Paradox games here.

Z98SzIG.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James II said:

You're suggesting two nukes should be able to be spied away per spy op and six nukes a day?

It's nearly impossible enough to spy away one nuke in the real world, but six a day? Perhaps you meant something else?

Maybe I had another failed idea.. Lol my main worry is spy on spy.  

1 hour ago, Sketchy said:

 

 

Its fine how it is now.

For the other stuff idk but spy on spy seems a bit twisted

  • Upvote 1

I hold the Right to my own Fate

 

yUpP2fl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe make the recruitment price rise whe you buy more than 2 at a time.  Say spies one and two are 50k each.  Spy 3 would cost 100k, 4 would cost 150k etc up to spy 5 or 6 with IA.  

This way there is still incentive to buy spies early and often, but its not game breaking if they are targeted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2017 at 8:43 PM, kosmokenny said:

As this is still an ongoing issue for Nuke Bloc, negative responses will be noted and added to the list of suspects needing to be nuked.  Kemal excepting, as he is already on the list.

The answer was both, by the way.  Hes goin down now, the rest of you will join him sooner or later.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone here is talking about nukes which is great and all, 

but I'm waiting for missiles to get a buff.

#TeamNukes

#TeamMissiles

Edited by Crossbones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2017 at 2:27 PM, James II said:

1)Easy for whom? There is a certain balance that ought to be sought.

All the power should not lie with the offender nor should it rest with the defender.

In the case of spying, it is extremely easy for the offender. In one day all spies can be wiped out, the base odds are incredibly in the favor of the attacker. Initially the defender of a spy op has some power, but very little. After the first day of assassinations, it becomes improbable for the defender to ever regain control of the spy situation for an indefeintite amount of time, that is until the attacker decides they don't want to attack anymore.

I do agree people want an easy way out, that's why you have the newbie zealots who want to keep the balance of spy ops in their favor.

If offensive spy ops are made harder, it is made harder for everyone. Your argument's logic does not follow.

People wanting balance in a system is not the same as people wanting an 'easier game.'  Those arguing against balance have an exclusive vestment in the current system. That's why the number of people for it are so small.

The position you've taken makes it easier for a select few, and a very unbalanced system that not only hurts the overall quality of the game, but your allies in WTF as well.

2)Certainly.

Although, I don't find it unreasonable for a certain displacement from real world to be at a level of absurdity. Waltzing into nuclear silos and blowing 3 nukes up every day for 40 days is beyond the bounds of plausibility.

You contradict your own argument by saying that "The position you've taken makes it easier for a select few" whilst also claiming "If offensive spy ops are made harder, it is made harder for everyone.".

Increasing recruitment rate of spies doesn't solve any of the inherent problems with the system. It also myopically focuses on single wars and instances  rather than accounting for the effect it can have on a wider scale in larger conflicts. 

Buffing Arcane, reducing offensive spy kills, and adjusting spy casualties relative to spy count (The more spies you have the less you lose) would all be better fixes to the issue than this.

All this does is reduce the overall skill level of the mechanic when its employed in larger conflicts, and adds no new strategy. This is just another change in a trend of changes and suggestions regarding the war system that ignores the macro effects in favor of single wars.

 

Also I don't appreciate you trying to infer motive or play politics in game suggestions thread (you pulled the WTF ally card, really?) My reason for being against the change is because its a bad fix. I've been pretty consistent in my opposition to "bandaid fixes" across all suggestion threads regardless of who they benefit or hurt the most. 

If you want to talk about what is bad for the game, enabling sheepy to half arse every update is probably a good place to start. Don't support bandaid fixes just because they benefit you directly (see I can make that accusation too), support changes that fix the actual root issues.

Edited by Sketchy
  • Upvote 2

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's staying at 5/6 and not 4/6 then at least give the IA 3 spy ops to make it a little more useful.

"There's nothing you can know that isn't known,
Nothing you can see that isn't shown,
There's nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be,
All you need is love,
Love is all you need."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Sketchy said:

You contradict your own argument by saying that "The position you've taken makes it easier for a select few" whilst also claiming "If offensive spy ops are made harder, it is made harder for everyone.".

  • The implication was there was no desire for a change to the spy op system. 
  • Taking that stand plays in favor of people who have direction with their spy ops only. The more reserved group, who choose not to target indiscriminately and have no way of knowing or countering any form of mass spy operation has no way to protect themselves, presenting a gross imbalance in a system that makes it easy for a very select group.
  •  
  • If offensive spy-ops were made more difficult, it would make things difficult for everyone as spy ops are not exclusive to defensive positions, and a more dynamic spy system would take the stage. There is no contradiction. There is a distinction between a balanced system and an imbalanced one. A balanced system affects everyone and everything equally, an imbalance system allows for an exploit.

Increasing recruitment rate of spies doesn't solve any of the inherent problems with the system. It also myopically focuses on single wars and instances  rather than accounting for the effect it can have on a wider scale in larger conflicts. 

Buffing Arcane, reducing offensive spy kills, and adjusting spy casualties relative to spy count (The more spies you have the less you lose) would all be better fixes to the issue than this.

All this does is reduce the overall skill level of the mechanic when its employed in larger conflicts, and adds no new strategy. This is just another change in a trend of changes and suggestions regarding the war system that ignores the macro effects in favor of single wars.

  • Orbis has demonstrated an innate desire for ezmode. It's why ya'll threw a fit over the overall cut in production. If you want to establish that the position is not good enough, and that you aren't opposed to a fix, then you should probably present it that way next time instead of leaving it out. You demonstrated no desire to change the spy system, and your tone and language showed the contrary.

 

Also I don't appreciate you trying to infer motive or play politics in game suggestions thread (you pulled the WTF ally card, really?) My reason for being against the change is because its a bad fix. I've been pretty consistent in my opposition to "bandaid fixes" across all suggestion threads regardless of who they benefit or hurt the most. 

  • Was I not clear? I thought my motive in that  inference was pretty implicit. I objected to your reasoning, and I will throw whatever piece of debris I can. That's how it works.
  • As I stated before. If you are opposed to the fix, and not the general idea of a fix, don't present yourself as having a contrary position. ESPECIALLY when you have suggestions at the ready. That's just silly.

If you want to talk about what is bad for the game, enabling sheepy to half arse every update is probably a good place to start. Don't support bandaid fixes just because they benefit you directly (see I can make that accusation too), support changes that fix the actual root issues.

  • Objecting to a system and saying/doing nothing about it until people misinterpret your position because of how unclear you are in your posts is much worse. At least we're doing something.

 

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

55 minutes ago, James II said:

As I stated before. If you are opposed to the fix, and not the general idea of a fix, don't present yourself as having a contrary position. ESPECIALLY when you have suggestions at the ready. That's just silly.

I do so because sheepy never listens to counter suggestions, especially not in threads he started looking to get a yes/no answer. I AM opposed to the update but agreeing there is a problem and providing counter suggestions usually just leads to sheepy considering my agreement as approval and ignoring the counter suggestions.

Also you didn't even respond to them so since we are playing the "read the other persons mind game" I'll assume you realized this and are willing to settle for this rather than a better update.

 

  • Upvote 1

XLL3z4T.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, as one of the few folks who helped organize spy efforts in this game, I like the original request if there's going to be a change to the mechanic (I'd rather  not change it, just FYI).

A lot of you forget that the IA's biggest benefit is the double ops, not the extra spies. (That's just icing on the cake)

So yes, I'm perfectly fine with 5 per day and 6 with IA, as long as the other perks remain untouched.  If you go with spy recruitment to 4 per day and IA to 6, that just makes IA way too good (And I'd suggest a bump in cost to purchase this in that case to balance it out).

---------------------------------

However, personally speaking, the spy system is mostly fine as it is and I'd hate to see it changed.  I'd like to see the number of spies killed reduced by 33%, but other than that, everything else is fine.

Strangely enough, I've told people how to use spy ops here, or to counter those who are spying you - several times.

 

Here's a GitGud tip:  If you know who is spying you, coordinate spy attacks on that person..  All you need to do is swap to Covert, then go have a field day.  You'll either 1) Force them to swap to Arcane (Which removes their bonus if they were previously on Covert) or 2) You eliminate the threat of their spy ops.

 

We all mostly use Discord.  It's not hard to coordinate or make lists.  Don't complain just because you're not willing to put effort into it or find someone who is willing to do it for your alliance.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Buorhann said:

Hi, as one of the few folks who helped organize spy efforts in this game, I like the original request if there's going to be a change to the mechanic (I'd rather  not change it, just FYI).

A lot of you forget that the IA's biggest benefit is the double ops, not the extra spies. (That's just icing on the cake)

So yes, I'm perfectly fine with 5 per day and 6 with IA, as long as the other perks remain untouched.  If you go with spy recruitment to 4 per day and IA to 6, that just makes IA way too good (And I'd suggest a bump in cost to purchase this in that case to balance it out).

---------------------------------

However, personally speaking, the spy system is mostly fine as it is and I'd hate to see it changed.  I'd like to see the number of spies killed reduced by 33%, but other than that, everything else is fine.

Strangely enough, I've told people how to use spy ops here, or to counter those who are spying you - several times.

 

Here's a GitGud tip:  If you know who is spying you, coordinate spy attacks on that person..  All you need to do is swap to Covert, then go have a field day.  You'll either 1) Force them to swap to Arcane (Which removes their bonus if they were previously on Covert) or 2) You eliminate the threat of their spy ops.

 

We all mostly use Discord.  It's not hard to coordinate or make lists.  Don't complain just because you're not willing to put effort into it or find someone who is willing to do it for your alliance.

 

 

Solid tips that have been said and not followed. Would have loved to have been with your street smarts. It's refreshing.

I'm also against a change, as with most changes...it will come out of no where and have a more pressing impact to the game overall that makes zero sense. The current system is fine, if people know how to use it. Which few do.

Edited by Fraggle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 and 5 seems better than 4 and 6. 5 and 6 is ridiculous. 2 and 4 with spy upkeep being put on a sliding scale to make it possible for small/damaged nations to actually contribute to the spy game without getting drowned by the expenses would be best.

Honestly, the spy system is way down there on the list of priorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, durmij said:

spy upkeep being put on a sliding scale to make it possible for small/damaged nations to actually contribute to the spy game without getting drowned by the expenses would be best.

Just out of curiosity, wasn't a sliding scale the opponent of a hard cap for spies back when people had hundreds of spies? IIRC, I liked that way better than a hard cap. 

NODOLsmall.png.a7aa9c0a05fa266425cd7e83d8ccb3dd.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, WISD0MTREE said:

Just out of curiosity, wasn't a sliding scale the opponent of a hard cap for spies back when people had hundreds of spies? IIRC, I liked that way better than a hard cap. 

Keep the cap on spy numbers but make spies cheaper overall with rising costs as the nation buys more. So 10 spies is no half the cost of 20, but more like 30% or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly, please don't let this game's mechanic be dictated by a stupid forum poll.

 

Secondly, the theme of this game always struck me as "Quick Recovery". Meaning if you lost a war, you could rebuild without having lost literal irl years of effort (tech from (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways)). This has made wars much more frequent and the game more fast paced. A good thing. Spies are one of the few categories that don't fit that theme. You can kill 10-20 spies per operation but you can only recruit 2-3 per day. I think a lesser change, but on two fronts, would bring more balance to spies: Boost recruitment from 2-3 to 3-4, and nerf spy deaths by like 10%.

 

This brings the game closer to balance in multiple ways, without bringing an axe to a surgery.

Superbia


vuSNqof.jpg


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2017 at 1:57 AM, Buorhann said:

Hi, as one of the few folks who helped organize spy efforts in this game, I like the original request if there's going to be a change to the mechanic (I'd rather  not change it, just FYI).

A lot of you forget that the IA's biggest benefit is the double ops, not the extra spies. (That's just icing on the cake)

So yes, I'm perfectly fine with 5 per day and 6 with IA, as long as the other perks remain untouched.  If you go with spy recruitment to 4 per day and IA to 6, that just makes IA way too good (And I'd suggest a bump in cost to purchase this in that case to balance it out).

---------------------------------

However, personally speaking, the spy system is mostly fine as it is and I'd hate to see it changed.  I'd like to see the number of spies killed reduced by 33%, but other than that, everything else is fine.

Strangely enough, I've told people how to use spy ops here, or to counter those who are spying you - several times.

 

Here's a GitGud tip:  If you know who is spying you, coordinate spy attacks on that person..  All you need to do is swap to Covert, then go have a field day.  You'll either 1) Force them to swap to Arcane (Which removes their bonus if they were previously on Covert) or 2) You eliminate the threat of their spy o

We all mostly use Discord.  It's not hard to coordinate or make lists.  Don't complain just because you're not willing to put effort into it or find someone who is willing to do it for your alliance.

You could just stay on Arcane the whole time as spy attacks are done more often during times of peace than random declarations of war. So no need for the other war perks.

I mean you're either using covert as a spy or you're using arcane to fend off spy attacks. So pretty easy to narrow down who might be a spy by checking every nation using covert. Factor in spy range and activity/log in times during the hour of an attack. Lastly, check who has 60 spies. Pretty much easy peasy. In fact, Nuke Bloc should have just held the nations (on during the time of the spy attacks and with 60 spies/covert/spy range) hostage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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