Jump to content

Alex, its been 9 months, I think its time to deal with reality.


Sketchy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, James II said:

Alliances are at a disadvantage if they were created after the econ changes were implemented? SO all the alliances created before that have a distinct advantage and are still benefiting from the previous econ system? 

If they didn't spend it in war, then yes they do have an advantage. They aren't still benefiting from it now though, not quite sure how anything I said suggested they are benefiting from something that no longer exists. 

 

It's hilarious to me you are so hellbent on this when you are so immensely outvoted on the matter.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alkaline said:

If they didn't spend it in war, then yes they do have an advantage. They aren't still benefiting from it now though, not quite sure how anything I said suggested they are benefiting from something that no longer exists. 

 

It's hilarious to me you are so hellbent on this when you are so immensely outvoted on the matter.

Democracy killed Socrates so arguing "out voted" is kind of silly.

So because Nuke Bloc hasn't fought in a major since January of last year we have a distinct advantage economically over the people who have created an alliance less than nine months ago? Therefore we should change the econ system?

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, even though the current system benefits my game style (I can just loot resources and sell them at inflated prices on the market), something probably needs to be done. War - raws too - resource prices are already through the roof, and I can't imagine how it would be in the event of large scale war, where they and uranium (as well as food, when nukes start to fall) for instance would get even more expensive. I can easily see steel at 7k ppu in those circumstances.

For me one of the biggest issues this system has brought is the shortage of improvement slots. Again this doesn't affect me because low infra is indifferent and actually effective to my game style, but regular players need to make several decisions and compromise certain aspects of their nation. For example nations that still want to have 100% commerce, produce and have as many military improvement slots as possible, have it particularly tough. I'd wager that many small and medium sized nations, city count wise, would struggle to start a large scale conflict with 100% commerce and full military improvement slots. Anything that gets in the way of war is bad, because war helps the game remain lively and interesting.

I personally don't mind this system since I've never been a big fan of infra, but the shortage of improvement slots does have a very negative impact, especially for players with a more orthodox game style. I understand why you wanted to implement this new system, @Alex, but like other people have pointed out, it's resulted in an overkill. I for one would like to see measures like halving the steel cost of tanks, which has always been a royal pain in the ass for people who like to be at war on a regular basis.

I think you're a good admin and have good intentions with the changes you try to implement. However, there's no shame in trying to correct something that needs fixing. Obviously that's subjective, but in this particular case I do believe a correction is in order.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, James II said:

No one has fought a major war in nine months. Everyone has had plenty of time to stock up. Like I've said, people just aren't fiscally responsible and want things handed to them. You've proved my point, thank you.

That wasn't the question, James.  He specifically asked you and Nuke Bloc.

You're right though, lots of alliances had time to stock up, but no one as much as Nuke Bloc has.  Which is why you're not even close to feeling the amount of struggle that some others do.  In fact, your Bloc has some of the biggest nations in the game, which can easily afford the slot requirements to be fine with what Sheepy changed in the economic side.

It's no wonder that the only voices against Sketchy's requirement of reverting changes, has been from two prominent Nuke Bloc leaders.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, James II said:

Democracy killed Socrates so arguing "out voted" is kind of silly.

So because Nuke Bloc hasn't fought in a major since January of last year we have a distinct advantage economically over the people who have created an alliance less than nine months ago? Therefore we should change the econ system?

It isn't because you have an advantage people want change. It isn't sustainable. Quit putting words in my mouth and learn how to make substantial posts. Two posts in a row now you've done that. I'll just agree to disagree for the sake of my sanity. 

 

Go on and be the people's champion, Socrates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alkaline said:

It isn't because you have an advantage people want change. It isn't sustainable. Quit putting words in my mouth and learn how to make substantial posts. Two posts in a row now you've done that. I'll just agree to disagree for the sake of my sanity. 

 

Go on and be the people's champion, Socrates. 

I should change my avatar and name to him. He too was disliked for questioning popular positions. Because he asked questions he was "An idiot" and an "enemy of society."

I haven't put words in your mouth. I've asked you questions. You however, have spent most of your time trying to establish that my opinion doesn't matter.

"I'm saying your opinion carries less weight" Your words.

I still fail to see why a system that makes economics more difficult is bad simply because the game is harder for everyone. 

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, James II said:

I still fail to see why a system that makes economics more difficult is bad simply because the game is harder for everyone. 

A game can only be so hard before it becomes unplayable....

Games are meant to be fun, not a chore....

Edited by Saxplayer
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Saxplayer said:

A game can only be so hard before it becomes unplayable....

Games are meant to be fun, not a chore....

So the game is unplayable?

Edit: I think that's a server issue. But Alex assures us it was resolved, again.

Edited by James II

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saxplayer said:

Is it? Or will it potentially become unplayable?

You're welcome to try and convince me. That's the whole point of this discussion thread.

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, James II said:

You're welcome to try and convince me. That's the whole point of this discussion thread.

I think other people have made better arguements than I ever will and you're just too stubborn to ever agree with them. Arguing with you is pointless, not to mention, this system benefits you, as stated previously by other people.

So why should I waste my breath trying to convince someone that will never be convinced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saxplayer said:

I think other people have made better arguements than I ever will and you're just too stubborn to ever agree with them. Arguing with you is pointless, not to mention, this system benefits you, as stated previously by other people.

So why should I waste my breath trying to convince someone that will never be convinced.

I didn't realize you were akaline.

"Most successful new AA" - Samuel Bates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think its hilarious u kids talking shit about James. U wouldn't say this shit to him irl, hes jacked, not only that but he wears the freshest clothes, eats at the chillest restaurants, and hangs with the hottest !@#$es. Yall are pathetic lol.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I have no desire to rollback any changes. Specialization is good, and I'm happy to consider ways that we can better encourage new players to make and sell resources while large nations primarily get income through commerce and buy resources. That is what the econ update was intended to promote, and I think it's working fairly well - except I think that most alliances are telling their members to build Commerce even when it may not be the most profitable option.

I am going to add a few "temporary" changes to the change when I push war changes live (as soon as all wars have ended.) I've attached a PDF writeup of one of those things related to resource production, the gist of it being that you'll get a combination bonus for having more improvements of the same type in a given city. This will promote specialization by increasing resource production for those who specialize. Of course, it may have unintended consequences or be unpopular, so by "temporary" I mean that I would like to test it for a month and unless it works really well or everyone overwhelmingly wants to keep the change, I will remove it after about a month and put things back to normal.

Here is an updated PDF after some further considerations: https://www.docdroid.net/hyQAMCD/texstudio-q10360.pdf

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 33

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Alex said:

I have no desire to rollback any changes. Specialization is good, and I'm happy to consider ways that we can better encourage new players to make and sell resources while large nations primarily get income through commerce and buy resources. That is what the econ update was intended to promote, and I think it's working fairly well - except I think that most alliances are telling their members to build Commerce even when it may not be the most profitable option.

I am going to add a few "temporary" changes to the change when I push war changes live (as soon as all wars have ended.) I've attached a PDF writeup of one of those things related to resource production, the gist of it being that you'll get a combination bonus for having more improvements of the same type in a given city. This will promote specialization by increasing resource production for those who specialize. Of course, it may have unintended consequences or be unpopular, so by "temporary" I mean that I would like to test it for a month and unless it works really well or everyone overwhelmingly wants to keep the change, I will remove it after about a month and put things back to normal.

 

 

document.pdf

Your PDF  doesnt work

Officer Nasty reporting for duty. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alex said:

I have no desire to rollback any changes. Specialization is good, and I'm happy to consider ways that we can better encourage new players to make and sell resources while large nations primarily get income through commerce and buy resources. That is what the econ update was intended to promote, and I think it's working fairly well - except I think that most alliances are telling their members to build Commerce even when it may not be the most profitable option.

I am going to add a few "temporary" changes to the change when I push war changes live (as soon as all wars have ended.) I've attached a PDF writeup of one of those things related to resource production, the gist of it being that you'll get a combination bonus for having more improvements of the same type in a given city. This will promote specialization by increasing resource production for those who specialize. Of course, it may have unintended consequences or be unpopular, so by "temporary" I mean that I would like to test it for a month and unless it works really well or everyone overwhelmingly wants to keep the change, I will remove it after about a month and put things back to normal.

 

 

 

texstudio_wz7316.pdf

Why is specialization good though? Why exactly, in your words, is specialization good for this game, I don't care about any rp or non econ reasons, I wanna know why its good for this game's economy, in your own words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
7 minutes ago, Saxplayer said:

Why is specialization good though? Why exactly, in your words, is specialization good for this game, I don't care about any rp or non econ reasons, I wanna know why its good for this game's economy, in your own words.

It's good for gameplay because it means you need to interact with other players to get all the things you need. If you can produce everything by yourself, you don't need to interact with other players. Specialization also means you have to make meaningful choices about how you want to build your nation, instead of one generic cookie-cutter build for everyone.

EDIT: As it specifically relates to the economy, more trade is better, and more fun gameplay means more people will play and the in-game economy will have more participants. More participation = better.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 2

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alex said:

It's good for gameplay because it means you need to interact with other players to get all the things you need. If you can produce everything by yourself, you don't need to interact with other players. Specialization also means you have to make meaningful choices about how you want to build your nation, instead of one generic cookie-cutter build for everyone.

So what would be the total production rate of steel if someone had the project, and 5 mills per city? Don't make me do math. You only included raw resources for examples.

Officer Nasty reporting for duty. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Just now, Arkiri Arch said:

So what would be the total production rate of steel if someone had the project, and 5 mills per city? Don't make me do math. You only included raw resources for examples.

All of the information is included in that <2 page document. The production formula is the same whether it's a raw resource or a refined resource. One of the example does take into account a national project.

Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest It

Forums Rules | Game Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Alex said:

All of the information is included in that <2 page document. The production formula is the same whether it's a raw resource or a refined resource. One of the example does take into account a national project.

Edit- Original post was wrong and redid math and found my answer.

 

Edited by Arkiri Arch

Officer Nasty reporting for duty. 

 

 

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.