rileyaddaff
-
Posts
375 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by rileyaddaff
-
-
21 hours ago, shahenshah said:
unlike untouchable when he pushed for and started all this.
So when can i peace out? I got some tech i would like to send out, but having to have these extra soldiers to protect my shipments is a real downer and eats at my profits.
-
All in all both of these are great suggestions, I may personally disagree with it being casualties only, but I do agree that it's a great starting point for a trial run.
I would also like to see the ability of negative colored events that can be applied to colors without their senators approval. I might be on the fringe with that idea, but I like the idea of the drama it will bring.
-
I fully support this suggestion. It is something that encourages people to play without some crazy over the top reward(s) system. It gives players something to strive for even if they know that can't reach the top rewards for the round.
1) Requiring players to put in their SE info might require a lot of work on the administrative end of things. We are trying to make this as easy as possible for you(admin) to implement. So maybe have the players message you(admin) with what nation they want the prize applied to. Whichever is easier.
If I can find a list of all events that nations can receive, we can vote on which tier the players believe they belong in. Until I see the full list of events, i don't believe we need to tailor any of the events.
2) Color events is something that i believe will push more players from SE to try out TE. The pipe dream of awarding your color with that extra aid slot is just too good to pass up. Having both individual events alongside color aphere events, could be the push that both (SE & TE) needs.
This could drive alliances to bring in mass numbers to auto win the award, but without seasoned TE players, it would be hard for them to achieve it. If an alliance does manage to achieve this, then you can bet that other alliances will adjust accordingly next round.
A couple of things that weren't covered in the OP. Color events, would still need the senator's approval and only 1 applied to color at a time. Also, individuals that would receive multiple rewards through this system, would get their choice of which one they want to be implemented. All events would last for 30 days as normal.
-
The thing is, we are running out of these so called newbies..What we need is incentive to bring people from SE to TE. I've been around a long time and only played TE a few times to help with trades. This last round is the first time I've played a complete round. There is no incentive to do so from my point of view. So in my opinion, some sort of SE perk would be enough to get a handful of players to hop over. Make color sphere perks and i believe we can get even more
-
So I'm going to assume the Mongols-Sengoku(oculus) war will come to a close. Oculus did come in "defense " of Sengoku and all that jazz
-
I understood were you coming from, i just tried to amplify it 10 fold is all. To be honest, i don't think admin would want to put extra work into, so it would have to be something he already has the structure for. So we would need to break down individual events into tiers.
If we are trying to draw more people from SE into TE, then going bigger, and doing color sphere events is the way to go in my opinion. I personally think the ability to give a color a negative event would add some much needed drama to the corpse of a world called SE.
-
1 hour ago, Blackatron said:
Best way to get more people involved would be to advertise additional benefits in SE from doing well in TE; not just for a handful of people but for people in the top 40-50% in casualties or something like that (with greater rewards the higher up you are). Donations are decent bonuses but there's other stuff that could be cool, maybe if you could select an event to be applied to your SE nation or a senate proposal to be applied just to you (imagine the numbers if you had a chance to get an extra aid slot for 30 days once every 100 days!).
I like the idea of additional or even alternative bonuses. The senate proposal especially. I think that can get some activity back into the game.
Maybe have the events broken down in tiered fashion and lower the percentage down to 5-10% of whatever the flavor is for that round. It can even be the top 5 of something like casualties, most destructive wars, etc. Only 1 event can be applied per color per round.
A few questions about it though...Would that stats be the end of the round or at everyone's peak? Would the event be an extra one applied to the color, replace one, or become an option for when the next set of events come around?
This suggestion should have it's own topic in my opinion. If you write it up, I'll back it.
E - i see that there was a thread with something close to this, but on a completely different scale, crooked even. I think this idea is a more balanced approach, and shouldn't be that hard to implement. I would also say that there should be negative events as well. Maybe something like - $2 income for blue sphere and +$2 for red sphere due to some natural disaster. EMPs over a color sphere reducing tech shipments to be halved (50t).
This would also mean that the events picked would be mandatory and not up to the senators. Maybe allow it so you can send a personalized message with the event as well.
-
1 hour ago, wasso said:
We are not holding our money in our pockets, like ATeam who managed to reach peak str award with min damage lol but i doubt Iberia will win it tbh
and Our stats prove that everybody in D1 is no WC holder. We try to get everybody involved and this war is a great example to what im saying.
That's funny cause i swear your (current) #3 guy had over 287 million on hand. Yes, your people may have had assigned targets, but they were (mostly) at the bottom of their NS ranges.
I know that how things are, expecially when your the #1 AA, and everyone else let you make the first move. Some of your assigned wars are basically to pad your stats and make it look like they are engaged. So don't toot your own horn like your trying to get everyone involved.
Once again, not complaining, it is what it is, and everyone allowed D1 to do things at their leisure.
-
I was talking about D1. Al, the wolves have been smashing people, except the OP guy that declared on me <_<. AW will probably take majority of the alliance war awards. Unless D1, steps up their war game.
-
I'm not complaining war is what the game is about. I'm just hoping that a few of your top guys fight back instead of sitting there with their 200mil+ warchests
-
All i see is a bunch of cherry picking..poor show
-
7 hours ago, HiredGun said:
Ateam have some of the biggest war chest levels in the game and they're not using it while ours are. With all the WRC's in Ateam we fought we were going to get a very tough war from them. Ateam could of done a lot more in this war had they spent some of their large war chest levels instead they'll prefer to bank it for their flag runners interest, not our problem, talk to them.
I've been throwing down on the OP people that declared on me. Sadly, i wasn't able to be around when they attacked, and they put me in anarchy. So my hands have been tied the entire time.
-
5 hours ago, mythicknight said:
RAD is RAD join RAD
If thick says it's RAD it must be RAD so join RAD
-
I would volunteer to be the PoW camp, but i only accept people willing to fight in my AA.
-
2 minutes ago, Caliph said:
Somehow I don't think Oculus would mind. I mean its not like anybody can do something about it, Oculus can absorb a hit from anyone, and especially with the non Oculus alliances willing to soak up damage like MHA Gramlins ODN and Polar, to which there just isn't the NS outside of this grouping to pose a credible threat to Oculus outside of Oculus and their power base.
The only saving grace is you people might get bored at some point. But thats it, its not like anyone can do anything about it that you couldn't just easily take.
I doubt that anyone would be able to beat them even if they drop all their external treaties
-
Too bad there isn't anyone worth any time or energy left
-
Why dont you guys start declaring on AAs that have a decent top tier?
-
Why don't you guys just !@#$@#$ declare on everybody. This !@#$ is just !@#$@#$ stupid. Anyways have fun since you have treaties with anyone that can be an actual threat. I give a week or two before everyone else fights your wars instead.
-
16 minutes ago, The Warrior said:
What was being moaned about exactly? I was simply connecting the dots between Addaff's roguery and the Mongols war for US.
I was the only "rogue" from a legitimate micro AA to be sanctioned. If you want to play connect the dots, IRON's sanction on me was an attempt to provoke a war with DK by having them lift my sanction. Instead you got bones(sptr/mongols), he even went the extra mile, and sanction a pink oculus senator.
-
9 hours ago, Lestat Polaris said:
I didn't miss that, no. Look at it from my perspective though, one person ghosting an AA just to participate in a war on the other side is annoying, 10+ former members of the same AA doing it together is an issue and had to be dealt with. And while I really enjoyed fighting some of you and the great fight you put up, ultimately you lost so it was our perspective that mattered when terms were discussed.
Bottom line, the terms are what they are and they won't change (unless, you know, Berbers pulls out a rabbit out of his... hat and succeeds in his crusade), so I suggest you make the most of it.
Yup, how dare these 10+ nations from a disbanded AA join an alliance before it goes to war for an ally. Clearly they're all bandwagoning degenerates that needed to be dealt with. Clearly they should have sold out their former allies and bandwagon in on the winning side instead.
-
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 11:34 PM, white majik said:
Agree with you on the first part.
On the second I dont. You call it boring, I call it interesting. Matter of perspective and all that. I've got as many wars in the past 6 months as I have in the past 3 years. Seems pretty interesting to me.
When's the last shocking treaty to be signed that wasn't an Oc member? The way I see it is that NO ONE else is making moves. There were years for AAs to make moves and change things up but no one did.
There were many chances for splits to take place but no one put in the effort to play the game and push the cracks.
What shocking treaties are left? FAN signing with Legion? It would be a shocker, but wouldn't amount to anything. This game has always revolved around a few major AAs to get things done. What happens when all major AAs join up (oculus)? What can the planet bob to take down all the major AAs? Nothing. There is no possible way to even get something off the ground like that off the ground.
Oculus makes up at least 1/6th of all nations left in CN. Then you have to factor in all the external treaties. Which is basically any alliance that has some sort of life or a resemblance of a top tier. That leaves you with no actual competition. What it does allow to do is pick off an ally's ally and 1 or 2 alliances that have the balls to actually honor a treaty knowing they are going to get their !@#$ pushed in.
You are right that NO ONE is making moves. For some reason alliances want to hold onto their treaties forever. So there is no shake ups. There is no risk taking and that includes everyone in oculus. Oculus is every alliance (for the most part) that has a top tier. So any resemblance of risk to any of your top tiers have been taken out of the equation. A question for you. In your opinion, what alliance, that is not a direct ally of an oculus member, do you think is the biggest threat to any oculus member?
I'm sure if they was a break in oculus tomorrow that there would be activity the following day. Then again if we keep up with the current trend of things it wouldn't matter. Anyone that would have been willing to shake things up will be nothing, but tech farms at the most.
-
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Auctor said:
With increasing lack of diplomatic activity, it's not terribly surprising that alliances want to be less and less committed to their allies. Most can't even be arsed to find out what their allies might be up to and whether they genuinely want to participate or not.
Probably cause there is an 80% chance their ally is tied to oculus. Of the 20% left half is neutral, 5% is getting rolled by oculus, and the other 5% doesn't even know what an oculus is.
-
13 minutes ago, Lenny N Karl said:
We need to create "The Battle Royale War"
Problem #1 - wouldn't be able to get people to even honor it...honor is very lacking in this game as we all know.
Problem #2 - the current silly wars...
But......
TEAM 1 - NPO
TEAM 2 - IRON
Each team picks another 19 alliances (out of the top 40 ...or lower) with TEAM 2 getting the first pick. All treaties/blocs on temporary hold during war....(say a 30-60 day war?)
20 alliances versus 20 alliances until everyone on one team surrenders or time frame ends. Not sure how to score this, but I figure there are smarter people out there who can figure out the logistics.
can you draft the best?
can you draft those that won't bail on you right away?
Get to team up with someone who has always been an enemy, perhaps you will find more in common that you ever knew...
can you draft an enemy that you can trust to fight with you....oh the interesting dramas we could create.
Perhaps reignite old rivalries, spur an influx of new/former players., punch that alliance you always wanted to but couldn't
think of the possibilities.
the pixels and NS and score mean nothing if apathy and/or an overly dominant force is corroding the game!
Just an idea to shake things up for a short period of time. Then you all can go back to nitpicking, spinning and polishing turds
I would like rather see the treaty web reset. Have a month or two grace period to allow everyone to make their moves. To prevent things going back to the way they were, we could have rules and limit how many treaties AAs can have.
Some examples could be a 4-5 treaty limit per AA, limiting the size of blocs, and no blocs within another bloc, and so on.
This would cause all different kind of shake ups at the alliance level. It still won't be perfect overall cause people will try to find exploits and find a way to daisy chain the same group of alliances.
-
There is not enough nations outside of oculus' direct influence to begin to "do something about it". So oculus will continue to pick on a small group of AAs one by one until it is just them.
This would also mean that the events picked would be mandatory and not up to the senators. Maybe allow it so you can send a personalized message with the event as well.
and Our stats prove that everybody in D1 is no WC holder. We try to get everybody involved and this war is a great example to what im saying.
Anyone around from the Old Days?
in Open World RP
Posted · Edited by rileyaddaff
For some reason i can't quote. Oh well. July 06 for me, former know as dropthisacid of legalized. I remember the days when you only needed 40k NS to be in that top 5%. Chances are you did that by loading up on that infra.