Jump to content

“Foreign Aid” in TE


Recommended Posts

Okay, let me first say that I am not proposing FA as we know it in SE.

Here is what I am proposing.

Set up an Alliance wide banking capability. Nations in an Alliance can “deposit” an amount into the Alliance’s “bank”. Look at it kind of like the IMF. The deposit would come from the nation’s cash on hand.

The Alliance owner or manager could then dole out the funds to nations in the Alliance as s/he sees fit.

Of course, there would have to be limitations. Some suggestions for the limitations...

- No nation could deposit more than $x per x days (say $500,000 per 7 days)
- No nation could receive more than $x per x days (say $500,000 per 7 days)
- No nation could deposit unless they have been a member of the Alliance for say, 7 days
- No nation could receive any aid if they have not been a member for say, 10 days
- Of course, if the Alliance’s account balance is zero, no aid can be given.


Why?

Well, too often, nations that get badly beaten up tend to idle out. Another lost TE player. This may help keep more players in the game.

It could also add another layer of strategy to the game which is sorely needed.

I am not a programer type so I don’t know if this is a massive effort or not. The new alliance set up may make it easier.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what you mean but I disagree. My thought is this is tournament edition and you should fend for yourself. If you bought too much infrastructure and don't have WC and then you go to bill lock because of war then it's your own damn fault. And regarding the loss of people. Notice about 300 people are apart of the standard alliances. These people come back no matter what and this plan would effect them the most so I believe their is no reason to implement this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

This actually sounds like a good idea.... But only for small alliances. I'd hate to see this in the hands of the Romans. However I dont see why FA isnt in TE. I understand it makes things harder, but also less interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im afraid that the useof this suggestion would give a great advantage to the biggest alliances, and would kill all small ones . Which would be no fair for them . So , what i would suggest and add to that , is that this could be used only for alliances with less than 20 members lets say .
Correct me if im wrong .

Edited by wasso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would be a nice twist, the idea needs some refining though. Busy with work at the moment, will add some suggestions when I get some time.

I'll throw this out there..

Alliances can impose a percentage of tax upon nations within the alliance. So a portion of their collection automatically goes to the Alliance.

I see that benefiting alliances in respect to rogues, spy ops etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1323482109' post='2871520']
Set up an Alliance wide banking capability. Nations in an Alliance can “deposit” an amount into the Alliance’s “bank”. Look at it kind of like the IMF. The deposit would come from the nation’s cash on hand.

The Alliance owner or manager could then dole out the funds to nations in the Alliance as s/he sees fit.[/quote]

I have to say this is a very interesting idea. I would definitely support this. It changes how alliances and individuals strategize in the game, and helps to ensure that the weakest links of alliances are strengthened. It would provide incentive for members to join alliances and stay in the game.

Just a thought...what if alliances were given the option to transfer funds to one another? The alliance account would be visible only to alliance managers, but any transactions would be public for all to see. This reduces the risk that smaller alliances are disadvantaged when fighting alongside/against larger alliances.

[quote name='CEO George Harris' timestamp='1323651399' post='2874432']
I see what you mean but I disagree. My thought is this is tournament edition and you should fend for yourself.
[/quote]

I disagree. One thing that I've been saying forever is that while we call it "Tournament Edition" and give prizes to the top individuals, the game is dominated by alliances. Allowing alliances to provide additional war support would make wars better by strengthening the lower tiers and providing an avenue for quick rebuild post war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way to limit that would be you only have 1 aid slot every 10 days.
Giving or receiving.
Make you put some thought into "when" and "whom" you use the aid for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote]no no no no no. It *almost* turns TE into a game of idling bank nations.[/quote]


[quote]The way to limit that would be you only have 1 aid slot every 10 days.
Giving or receiving.
Make you put some thought into "when" and "whom" you use the aid for.[/quote]

I think that there is a misunderstanding as to what I am proposing.

In no way am I proposing any sort of EA Slots like in SE. [b]There would be no direct nation-to-nation aid.[/b] Individual nations would have the option to "deposit" a small amount of cash into the Alliance's "bank account" on an infrequent basis. Only the Alliance owner or manager could then distribute a small abount of what is on hand in the "bank account" to individual nations, again on an infrequent basis.

It shouldn't cause any nation to idle or be a bank nation because the amount is so small and the frequency that they can make a deposit is not that often.



[quote]This actually sounds like a good idea.... But only for small alliances. I'd hate to see this in the hands of the Romans. However I dont see why FA isnt in TE. I understand it makes things harder, but also less interesting.[/quote]

[quote]Im afraid that the useof this suggestion would give a great advantage to the biggest alliances, and would kill all small ones . Which would be no fair for them . So , what i would suggest and add to that , is that this could be used only for alliances with less than 20 members lets say .
Correct me if im wrong .[/quote]


Actually, it would be fair and equal to all size alliances. There would be a limitation on the amount and frequency that any given nation can deposit or receive from the Alliance Bank.

For illustration purposes, lets say that each nation can only deposit $1 each 10 days and a nation could only receive $1 each 10 days. Alliance A with 10 members would have $10 each 10 days to distribute to its 10 members. Alliance B with 50 members would have $50 each 10 days to distribute to its 50 members. Either way, no individual nation could get more than $1 each 10 days so every alliance would be on equal footing.



[quote]I'll throw this out there..

Alliances can impose a percentage of tax upon nations within the alliance. So a portion of their collection automatically goes to the Alliance.[/quote]

I am more inclined to keep it to a voluntary basis and a fixed amount instead of a percentage. A percentage would give more of an advantage to nations/Alliances that are better builders and have larger nations.



[quote]Just a thought...what if alliances were given the option to transfer funds to one another? The alliance account would be visible only to alliance managers, but any transactions would be public for all to see. This reduces the risk that smaller alliances are disadvantaged when fighting alongside/against larger alliances.[/quote]


This may be something that could be considered down the road, but I would like to see how it would work intra-alliance first. My concern about inter-alliance aid is that a larger alliance could basically fund small "training alliances" or "flag running" alliances. I think that would tarnish the overall purpose, that being to allow an alliance to help out certain nations in their alliance if and when they are in need.



[quote]I have to say this is a very interesting idea. I would definitely support this. It changes how alliances and individuals strategize in the game, and helps to ensure that the weakest links of alliances are strengthened. It would provide incentive for members to join alliances and stay in the game.
[/quote]

I agree. It would give incentive for nations to join alliances. And we all know that nations in alliances tend to idle out less often, thereby increasing the number of active TE nations.

Also, nations that can recover faster after a war will keep them interested in playing as opposed to quiting. And faster recovery may actually lead to more frequent wars. :lol1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Would there be any way to take the current suggestion and apply it to the coming round as a trial period? I am certain that kinks will need to be worked out, but I think giving nations a greater ability to fight and rebuild gives members a greater stake in fighting and will keep them around longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1347777099' post='3030703']
Would there be any way to take the current suggestion and apply it to the coming round as a trial period?
[/quote]

^ Good idea. I also think that any new ideas the developers have in mind for CN could be implemented in (a round of) TE on a trial basis first.

Edited by Dragonshy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

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.

×
×
  • Create New...