WarriorConcept Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='HalpImBeingOppressed' timestamp='1315602909' post='2797556'] Hell yes. This would make it far easier to rebuild for a war, which might cause alliances to take more risks. We'd probably have to make another change to help out new nations as well, since this would make it even harder to get into the elite. How about some starting aid that's somewhat relevant? Cheaper infra for newer nations could also work. [/quote] Rebuilding infra is already much too easy thanks to already having more improvements and wonders than you otherwise would if you just got to that infra range. The only trouble in rebuilding nowadays is pretty much tech, but infra is nothing with proper warchests around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artigo Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1315550669' post='2797293'] I don't think we've thought that through. IE: Self-sustaining nuke rogues would cripple the value of sanctions. [/quote] That hardly outweighs the significance of the good it will do for this game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1315550669' post='2797293'] I don't think we've thought that through. IE: Self-sustaining nuke rogues would cripple the value of sanctions. [/quote] Nuke rogues love them or hate them are doing something in the game. If this change helps people to actually do something and create a stir then I'm all for it. Perhaps some serious nuke rogues may give us some decent entertainment between those rare moments when the treaty web untangles enough to start a global war. Roguefest 2012 ... sounds interesting... in fact I would say allowing nuke rogues to get their own Uranium may actually be GOOD for the game as it increases the chance of spontanious random actions particularly for enormously large semi dormant nations that to be honest could do with some in game excitement! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potato Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1315603088' post='2797559'] Rebuilding infra is already much too easy thanks to already having more improvements and wonders than you otherwise would if you just got to that infra range. The only trouble in rebuilding nowadays is pretty much tech, but infra is nothing with proper warchests around. [/quote] The main trouble with rebuilding is being limited to buying in batches of 10. It's incredibly tedious to click a gazillion times to rebuild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 You know, I wouldn't mind the 24 hour window being taken off nukes again >_> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='potato' timestamp='1315606741' post='2797601'] The main trouble with rebuilding is being limited to buying in batches of 10. It's incredibly tedious to click a gazillion times to rebuild. [/quote] That would be a different kind of suggestion that has been brought up countless times over years. Regarding price for rebuilding infrastructure, I don't think we need anything new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 I actually don't like the idea of being able to control who joins your alliance. Ghost busting can be a source of fun for newer players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1315608422' post='2797607'] I actually don't like the idea of being able to control who joins your alliance. Ghost busting can be a source of fun for newer players. [/quote] You arent forced to use that feature. You can leave the alliance 'open' and attract ghosts just the same as always. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Locke Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='potato' timestamp='1315606741' post='2797601'] The main trouble with rebuilding is being limited to buying in batches of 10. It's incredibly tedious to click a gazillion times to rebuild. [/quote] At least it autofills the last purchase now, it was much worse when you had to copy/paste or type it in each time. Just clicking is a godsend, comparatively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supercoolyellow Posted September 9, 2011 Report Share Posted September 9, 2011 [quote name='Sigrun Vapneir' timestamp='1315610049' post='2797620'] You arent forced to use that feature. You can leave the alliance 'open' and attract ghosts just the same as always. [/quote] Its not going to work that way if we are handicapping ourselves for fun. We could all limit oursevles to three treaties a piece and have a lot of fun, but you don't see anyone doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indian Bob Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 [quote name='King Wally' timestamp='1315605637' post='2797585'] Nuke rogues love them or hate them are doing something in the game. If this change helps people to actually do something and create a stir then I'm all for it. Perhaps some serious nuke rogues may give us some decent entertainment between those rare moments when the treaty web untangles enough to start a global war. Roguefest 2012 ... sounds interesting... in fact I would say allowing nuke rogues to get their own Uranium may actually be GOOD for the game as it increases the chance of spontanious random actions particularly for enormously large semi dormant nations that to be honest could do with some in game excitement! [/quote] Says the guy in the NPL. Of course you'd want uranium for all! LOL I do agree though that a rogue or two while not necessarily fun for the person attacked (the first cheap shot kinda sucks) but the rogue busters certainly have some fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xAurelianx Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 Alliance management should be implemented. This game is meant to be a simulation. I don't know of any real life alliances that nations can hop on board without being approved, so why should it be different here? As someone else stated, I too have played other nation simulators which all had this feature and it was never an issue. To leave it out for the sake of giving new players something to do with ghost-busting makes little sense to me. I believe new nations should be given the option to swap their native resources once, perhaps with a pop up warning strongly encouraging them to sort a trade circle before making the change and a link to the appropriate forum to get them started. I would also like to see the ability to aid tech removed from the game. From what I see, it's used as a loophole to allow larger nations, who were meant to be paying more as their nations grew, to be able to purchase it at new nation costs. Changing it now would only leave the larger players at an advantage while crippling younger nations, though, and I realize that. Perhaps a new version of the game someday, then, where all of these ideas for implementation are sorted and everyone can start anew on a level playing ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the rebel Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 [quote name='xAurelianx' timestamp='1315618050' post='2797678'] I would also like to see the ability to aid tech removed from the game. From what I see, it's used as a loophole to allow larger nations, who were meant to be paying more as their nations grew, to be able to purchase it at new nation costs. [b]Changing it now would only leave the larger players at an advantage while crippling younger nations, though, and I realize that.[/b] Perhaps a new version of the game someday, then, where all of these ideas for implementation are sorted and everyone can start anew on a level playing ground.[/quote] I disagree, if that got put in force all it would take is a couple of global wars before peoples tech started to even out with the rest or be hit down alot. Only problem with it is the small nations will be hurt on low funds as most people are selfish and wouldnt just give money away to grow the low tiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 I'm really amazed that people positively correlate dickery with stimulating activity that will keep people around here. Most of that causes people to leave, contrary to popular belief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 [quote name='IYIyTh' timestamp='1315647842' post='2797963'] I'm really amazed that people positively correlate dickery with stimulating activity that will keep people around here. Most of that causes people to leave, contrary to popular belief. [/quote] I would advise you to not cast your pearls here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Jaym Il Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 [quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1315610543' post='2797627'] Its not going to work that way if we are handicapping ourselves for fun. We could all limit oursevles to three treaties a piece and have a lot of fun, but you don't see anyone doing that. [/quote] The difference is that while it would require everyone to drop treaties for that to work, you can do the ghost thing by yourself. If you find ghosts helpful for your newbie nations, leave your AA open. If anything you'll probably get more ghosts since you'll be one of the few alliances with open admissions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jyrinx Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 With respect to the possible change of being able to choose your own resources: [quote name='admin' timestamp='1315680696' post='2798218'] I'm going to implement this change. It will work just like CN:TE, and you will be able to change resources every 30 days for free. It will be another week before I can begin coding on this. [/quote] Success Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiphosis Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 So happy about that. Our long national nightmare is finally over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banksy Posted September 10, 2011 Report Share Posted September 10, 2011 [quote name='Locke' timestamp='1315610285' post='2797624'] At least it autofills the last purchase now, it was much worse when you had to copy/paste or type it in each time. Just clicking is a godsend, comparatively. [/quote] Yeah but it's still dumb and would be easy to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeternos Astramora Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 [quote name='WarriorConcept' timestamp='1315607829' post='2797606'] That would be a different kind of suggestion that has been brought up countless times over years. Regarding price for rebuilding infrastructure, I don't think we need anything new. [/quote] It could be something as simple as, when you try to purchase 5,000 infra, you just input "5000" and it buys it all at once in price increments of 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorConcept Posted September 11, 2011 Report Share Posted September 11, 2011 [quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1315763960' post='2798769'] It could be something as simple as, when you try to purchase 5,000 infra, you just input "5000" and it buys it all at once in price increments of 10. [/quote] If only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashoka the Great Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 The idea of giving alliances some kind of control over who flies their AA seems strangely familiar: [quote name='kingzog' timestamp='1201723308' post='360278'] The problem is ghosting. It leads to wars, causes headaches for alliance leaders, and is generally a gigantic pain in the butt. The solution: Invite-only alliances. One or two people from an alliance are given the power to issue invitations to fly a particular AA. Otherwise an individual is identified as "None". I have seen this implemented in other games with much success. [b]Now, before someone jumps in with "But there are so many alliances in the game!" I propose that this be limited to sanctioned alliances only.[/b] Currently, approximately 20% of all nations belong to sanctioned alliances. I would further suggest that if/when an alliance loses its sanction that it still be possible for it to maintain its previous status as invite-only. Disbanded alliances would of course lose this option. Has this been suggested before? Probably. But I haven't seen it, so I thought I'd bring it up here. [/quote] I don't know who this 'kingzog' fellow is, but he seems quite bright. Handsome, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigbigadorlou Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 Maybe he's trying to integrate a sense of "winning" into SE nahh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 [quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1315763960' post='2798769'] It could be something as simple as, when you try to purchase 5,000 infra, you just input "5000" and it buys it all at once in price increments of 10. [/quote] Maybe you should bump the suggestion in the suggestion box related to this. It would be incredibly easy to implement and save lots of time for re-buyers after big wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IYIyTh Posted September 12, 2011 Report Share Posted September 12, 2011 [quote name='Ashoka the Great' timestamp='1315794656' post='2799013'] The idea of giving alliances some kind of control over who flies their AA seems strangely familiar: I don't know who this 'kingzog' fellow is, but he seems quite bright. Handsome, too. [/quote] No eff all of you. I don't want this tyvm and you all know why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.