Seerow

Uh yeah, about that... that isn't a bug, it's a feature.

A condensed version of the reason why SM is better than SSS: Stock Market costs 10,000,000 less than SSS. To make Social Security System better, it must earn that 10million MORE than Stock Market, within 30 days. That's right, for SSS to be better, it has to give the full bonus of SM, then 10million more on top of that. For reference, that's 333,333.33 per day roughly. The stock market already gives you a bonus of 5.99 per citizen. So this is going to depend on your citizen count and your income. If you have 80,000 citizens (roughly 7500 infra), you need to make an additional 4.16 per person profit from SSS to beat out Stock Market. So at 80,000 citizens, your total income boost from SSS needs to be $10.15. I may have done the math wrong here, but using that information, I'm getting the cutoff point being 507.70 per citizen. And that's with 80,000 citizens. The lower your population is, the higher that cutoff point gets, it goes on a sliding scale. In otherwords, unless you're buying your first wonder at 10k infra (and that makes you an idiot) SM is going to be the most efficient for you. ps to the OP, Police HQ > Barracks.

Sure you could, but saving up 100mil at 3k infra is a loooong wait.

/b/ didn't hack the game. At most there was a DDOS attack. That's not really hacking.

Alright, I mentioned this because (DAC)Syzygy reported something like a 13% upkeep reduction, so it could be a bug. He may have also run his numbers wrong but who knows how likely that is.

So, it's been brought to my attention that people with large amounts of tech are exceeding 10% infra upkeep reduction. (This value found by doing the math and actually finding out what percentage it's being reduced by the tech) It makes sense. Initially the formula [(2 * Technology Level) / Nation Strength bill.] was made on the assumption of tech being worth 20 NS, so the 10% cap was implicit, it was just spelled out for people who didn't quite understand the math behind it. Someone who's entire NS was made up of technology would have the 10% reduction. Which was in theory nice, but in practice impossible, and people would have 2-5% reductions in infra upkeep. Then, the tech NS change happened, and that value changed. The theoretical max became 40%, while the norm became closer to 10%. But the official documentation never changed, it still says today: Which makes one assume that there's a hard cap in place to prevent you from getting above that 10%. So what's all this about? Either the official documentation should be changed (to the new implicit maximum of 40%), or there should be a hard in-game cap at 10% that can't be passed regardless of tech level compared to your NS.

Citizen Income Per Day: $334.47 (A very solid economy) Course I'm currently down two important resources (Water and Sugar), don't have my border walls up, have LCs up... so my 'real' income is more like 450 a day.

So on the high side you've moved 6750 tech in the last 3-4 months. Alright, that's what I needed to know :x I'm not sure anyone's got records detailed enough to know what exactly the record would be. But I know for a fact that some alliances have moved as much in 10 days as you have in 3 months. I wouldn't see 15,000-20,000 tech in 10 days outside the realm of possibility if an alliance tried hard enough and put most resources to try to hit a record. Edit: This of course assumes you count importing tech from other alliances in this, and not just internal programs.

I dunno... a 16 person deal would be 32 slots of tech sent for a total of...1600 tech sent in one shot. That's a lot of tech, but not world record material.

Slightly off topic, but I was looking at your sig, which relates to tech deals which is topic of discussion here. "Want to participate in fast, efficient, and profitable tech deals? Get access to Atlantis' tech deal program, with over 100 successfully completed deals in the past few months. Yes, 100 deals, involving hundreds and hundreds of nations." Can you define a "few months" and what a deal is? (ie is one deal 1 tech pack being sent, or is one deal the full 4x4. So this whole 16x16 mess would be counted as a single deal)

I average a bit shy of 2mil per day.

However, someone proposed "Only the receiver needs to have this" I think THAT could potentially work. It doesn't add to inflation at all, but big nations can have it and be confident anyone with money who wants to aid them will be able to give them a significant amount, rather than the sender ALSO needing it. Doesn't add to inflation because only big nations are receiving more, makes it a bit easier to use. Though I agree with the sliding scale (+1mil/1000 infra sounded like a good benchmark) to make it worth while. That is all of course assuming we keep aid slots rather than getting rid of them entirely. </pimping again>

We currently see destroying military improvements as an alliance wide thing. What makes you think wonders would be any different? If anything it'd be even more strictly enforced due to their higher potency.

Well I'm going to argue that aid slots are really stupid. Rather than increasing the slot limit via a wonder, the more efficient thing is to just get rid of them. Also, I notice you made it so you can't destroy the manhattan project. That's a very good first step. The arguments for doing so were good (surrender forcing someone to destroy it and putting them a month behind). But realize, in a surrender, terms would likely be Destroy all military wonders, which puts almost all of the new wonders in the same situation. I'd highly recommend either making all wonders unable to be destroyed, or going with the wonder slots idea I proposed in the original wonders topic. (I'd obviously prefer the second but... >_>)

What are you talking about? Insta anarchy is FUN!

Old grudges much? Please keep such things out of this topic. 1. What new what a navy add? People always talk about it, I've yet to hear exactly what a navy would do in this game. 2. So that like all the aircraft the various troop types become irrelevant as everyone just buys max of the highest level ones? 3. I assume you mean tech effectiveness. I agree with this. 4. Always glad to contribute.

Actually a big alliance that used its member base to have a good tech program and get cheap tech for most of their members would end up a lot worse off from this update than a small alliance who didn't do tech deals and had very high relative infra. The problem here is you're confusing "Small Alliances" with "My Alliance", as Gramlins is one of the biggest tech whores in the world (though you're awesome for it!). It's worth noting that several of your members (I believe they're even leaders) have been among the largest proponents for this change. Unless you want to call your leaders stupid, sit back and consider just -maybe- this change isn't so bad for you as you think.

Nah, this was discussed in the suggestions forum. Restricting it is fine. Make it so you can only buy tech from people within a certain range of your tech level. They still buy it a bit cheaper than you do, so they can sell to you and both sides profit. But nowhere near as much as the 0 tech person selling 50 tech to the 5000 tech person.

In that case let's go for a full reset, while making tech deals more restricted

What was the point after 300 before? You're right that something needs to be done with it. But right now tech still does what it always did: artificially inflate your NS. It still does inflate your NS y'know, just not as much as it used to. Now should Tech have some other use? Yes. Does this change highlight that fact? Yep. Does that make the change responsible for tech's uselessness? Nope.