Jump to content

Round 26 Idears


Recommended Posts

THANK YOU ADMIN! Just sayin'.

 

Consolidating everything for R26 in one big fluffy thread. Please try not to nitpick on things if you can control yourself that much lol. We will get nothing done at all if there is too much sniveling about all the little things.

 

My ideas, in order:

 

1. I actually don't think we need many changes to the game as far as economics goes. People have 100-200 million warchests as it is. That's good enough. There is too much debate over what to do anyways. I say leave it as it is until more of a consensus evolves and a need becomes more obvious.

 

2. I do think the prizes as they were this round made for less action. The last month+ of the round many alliances literally did as little war as possible, they sat around and built and hugged themselves. I'd bet there were less wars overall in R25 than in previous rounds. Far far FARRR too much as far as prizes for biggest nations. Lower the rewards and spread them out more, perhaps include casualties in the NS formula. PRIZES FOR CASUALTIES. This is an absolute must!! Numbers of wars will go up fast, and they will be nuclear wars too. You could also give out prizes for most attacking/defending casualties too. This will make for more action and diversify the goals for players in TE as opposed to concentrating them just on nation building.

 

3. As far as war goes by far the area that needs the most improvement is navy. This is the easiest and most efficient way for changes to make war more fun. Navy could be really really cool - but now it's something that people can opt not to use at all, and avoid completely just by deleting land. I made a thread about this long ago here. I liked all the ideas there but let's start small.

 

If nothing else, THIS: If you have a harbor - your harbor should be able to be blockaded. Completely logical and realistic. If you get blockaded, your last trade is temporarily blocked until the war ends. If you are getting resources through your harbor, you lose access to those resources when the harbor is blockaded. This makes total sense. It will make people start to buy navy earlier as well, which alone will slow down the crazy easy growth nations can make now.

 

4. All-alliance messaging for alliance leaders. Anyone who has ever led an alliance will probably support this. Make it an option that the alliance founder can give out to alliance managers. I think this will increase the quality of alliances, alliance communication and especially alliance war capacities (among other things) by a large amount immediately.

 

5. STATS! TE is like the sports pages for CN, and we are all competition junkies. The SE Stats/Awards pages are wayyy cooler than the TE ones, and they can be cooler still. I wanna see stats on just about everything, and even all-time stats across the rounds if you can. This last alone would people less likely to hide their nations so much since they don't get accumulated stats for changing them all the time.

 

More later from me maybe but these are easy to do and would greatly improve game play if these are all that gets done.

Edited by Clash
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like clash's AA wide message button.

May I also suggest that we track AA damage, it is now tracked individually. It does open up the numbers argument again where an AA with 50 members will do more damage than an AA with 25 members but it doesn't seem too hard to actually determine ave damage as a ranking. Maybe award AA banners for their flag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Clash's ideas, I agree that we probably don't need substantial economic changes, but major (perhaps even fundamental) changes are needed generally--if nothing else to keep the game fresh.

 

Clash idea #2--I think adding prizes would be huge for attracting members and keeping members. Right now as we all know, only the top in NS are rewarded at the end of the round. An extremely small percentage of people have a reasonable chance to be in that spot. Let's open up prizes to the top 5 in total casualties, top 5 in total NS, and the top alliance (as I suggested in another post) at the end of the round. The prizes can be different for each category but it significantly opens up the game for everyone. 

 

Clash idea #3--I definitely like the idea of a blockade closing a harbor temporarily. That would definitely change how war strategy is calculated currently.

 

Clash idea #4--This is a must have. I think there is more support on this than anything else in TE. 

 

Clash idea #5--I don't play SE, so I don't know how the stats and awards page looks, but the more stats the better!

 

I do like clash's AA wide message button.

May I also suggest that we track AA damage, it is now tracked individually. It does open up the numbers argument again where an AA with 50 members will do more damage than an AA with 25 members but it doesn't seem too hard to actually determine ave damage as a ranking. Maybe award AA banners for their flag.

 

Tracking AA damage would be nice and I like the idea of AA banners for their flag--that could be the award for alliances winning at the end of the round. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#2 i am not so sure about.... We are trying to bring people in, not make them leave.
Giving prizes for casualties will most likely end up with rounds full of war. I like casualties myself, but i don't think they are worth a prize!

Top 5 NS-prizes
Most destructive war- both nations given a $25 donation
Top alliance- Prize each for the top 10 nations in that AA(members must have seniority of 30+days)

Stars for alliance leaders... All alliance leaders that have an AA with over 10 members may be given half a star for every round they commit to said alliance(voting system for each individual alliance at end of every round). It would give nations a rough idea of who they would like to work under.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always been my view that casualty prizes are a bad idea.

 

They're redundant with NS prizes - those who flagrun can easily finish with the highest casualties because infra and cash are what's needed for large numbers of casualties (this is reflected in the round-end finishings usually), and besides, casualties can be farmed just like anything else. The "wars" fought in farming them wouldn't be actual wars anyway, so that wouldn't promote fighting at all and would just result in slots getting filled. Things like tech raids would generate casualties that don't have to do with actual fighting as well.

 

An interesting idea, though, would be recording [b]damage dealt[/b] using the current tracking system. This would still be farmable, but it would be much tougher to do and legitimate fighters would have a better shot; furthermore, it's an outright more accurate measure of fighting proficiency if it can be programmed to be tracked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#2 i am not so sure about.... We are trying to bring people in, not make them leave.
Giving prizes for casualties will most likely end up with rounds full of war. I like casualties myself, but i don't think they are worth a prize!

Top 5 NS-prizes
Most destructive war- both nations given a $25 donation
Top alliance- Prize each for the top 10 nations in that AA(members must have seniority of 30+days)

Stars for alliance leaders... All alliance leaders that have an AA with over 10 members may be given half a star for every round they commit to said alliance(voting system for each individual alliance at end of every round). It would give nations a rough idea of who they would like to work under.

 

 

It's always been my view that casualty prizes are a bad idea.

 

They're redundant with NS prizes - those who flagrun can easily finish with the highest casualties because infra and cash are what's needed for large numbers of casualties (this is reflected in the round-end finishings usually), and besides, casualties can be farmed just like anything else. The "wars" fought in farming them wouldn't be actual wars anyway, so that wouldn't promote fighting at all and would just result in slots getting filled. Things like tech raids would generate casualties that don't have to do with actual fighting as well.

 

An interesting idea, though, would be recording damage dealt using the current tracking system. This would still be farmable, but it would be much tougher to do and legitimate fighters would have a better shot; furthermore, it's an outright more accurate measure of fighting proficiency if it can be programmed to be tracked.

 

Redundancy isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially when it expands the potential access nations have to being recognized for being the best at something. The more people feel like they have a stake in the game, the better things will be from top to bottom. 

 

Infra and cash aren't just needed for for a flag run--they are needed for a strong, stable nation capable of fighting high impact wars. Farming early on would be bound to occur of course, but this would be counterbalanced by nations that build to war and war often. Although there are many examples of this throughout TE, the one I can easiest point to is the past round where my guys built solely for war and we fought high impact wars over and over. You have to hit good nations that fight back in order really pack on casualties. 

 

Recording damage dealt is interesting too, but I wonder how Almighty Admin would be able to track that continuously for every nation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, your experience is one where only people who can't win the flag care about casualties and aren't seriously trying to game the casualty system to inflict losses.

There's a ton of unfortunate ways to game the casualty system.

For example, rogue strikes to prevent a leading opponent from earning casualties; three low-infra players send the target into anarchy to prevent declares, then self-ZI to prevent victorious soldier casualties, then lock the opponent into nuclear anarchy every day. How about just plain turtling to deny the casualty winner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hence why flag running needs to stay as is and new prizes, I.e. banners for the AAs page, etc, for damage inflicted, casualties, ave NS. I like hunting flag runners, I like helping friends, and I really love the shady back room dealings and besides flag runners donate.

Some play, as king suggested, for the glory of their AA why not reward that? Not a game breaking idea but rather the best of both worlds. It keeps the current flag running cash cow in game and gives die hards something to strive for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Top alliance- Prize each for the top 10 nations in that AA(members must have seniority of 30+days)

Stars for alliance leaders... All alliance leaders that have an AA with over 10 members may be given half a star for every round they commit to said alliance(voting system for each individual alliance at end of every round). It would give nations a rough idea of who they would like to work under.

Great idea, can I also add, that for the Top 10 Nations in the AA, it could be extended to any member that has been approved and has been a member for over 50-70 days.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great idea, can I also add, that for the Top 10 Nations in the AA, it could be extended to any member that has been approved and has been a member for over 50-70 days.


yeah... It would certainly increase comitment and would also create some competition within the alliance.
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.

×
×
  • Create New...