Komplex Posted August 6, 2014 Report Share Posted August 6, 2014 Tournament Edition Round 31 starts this Saturday 6/14 and it comes with a number of changes as discussed here. Nukes - The top 5% requirement has been dropped. A Manhattan Project wonder will be required by everyone to purchase nukes. Nukes cost $500,000 base and require 200 tech and 2,000 infras (these are also the same requirements to buy a MP). The nuke limit will be 10 (+5 with HNMS). Pentagon wonder allows for +1 offensive war slot. Events have been turned off. Nuclear weapons can target higher infrastructure, higher land, or higher technology damage based on player choice when launching the nuke. When you choose to target infrastructure, land, or technology you are trading more damage to your target for less damage for the other two. For instance, if you choose to target infrastructure you will do more base damage to infrastructure but less damage to land and technology. More details will be available in the information index when the round starts. The recently added war related improvements from Standard Edition have been migrated over to Tournament Edition. The airport improvement and prison improvement have also been added. Prisons have been changed to "Reduces military dependency to control population. Increases max deployment 1%, +0.20 Happiness, -0.5% Citizen Income. Limit 5." The alliance stats screen will now track alliance wide kills and losses in war. The prize structure has also been revamped. The alliance based awards will use the alliance war statistics from the screenshot above. I really enjoyed these changes. Hope it stay the same for next round! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I really enjoyed these changes. Hope it stay the same for next round! Id tweak it a bit. Â Remove the casualty award and replace with something else. If you thought I was gaming it, you havent seen anything yet! Â For the alliance awards, Top two nations with most casualties in the Alliance with etc, etc. This takes away the incentive to infra hug to beat your alliance mates out at the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 Id tweak it a bit.  Remove the casualty award and replace with something else. If you thought I was gaming it, you havent seen anything yet!  For the alliance awards, Top two nations with most casualties in the Alliance with etc, etc. This takes away the incentive to infra hug to beat your alliance mates out at the end.  Agreed.  Having cumulative alliance destruction was incredible.  I would love if we could get this for individual nations, and switch from ns in two (likely overlapping categories) to top 2 in casualties and top 2 in destruction for the qualified alliance.  Reason being that destruction will go to someone that gets the MP, wrc extra tech early and doesn't push infra, while casualties goes to the infra pusher favoring that style (which ns also gets usually). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuber Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I am fairly new to CN and this is my first round of TE so maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me the reward system is a bit flawed. As far as my understanding goes AIM of war should be to maximise damage done and MINMISE damage taken. I havent seen any war game that rewards players for getting whipped. I mean look at http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000156 ( no offense intended) He is barely fighting me at all. Just allowing me to kill his soldiers to notch up casualties. Why we reward this style of play is beyond my comprehension. Maybe any of veterans could help shed light on this. If there was a reward based on RATIO of Damage done/damage taken ( a minimum threshold specified like say 10000NS destroyed) then I think the wars would be more competitive and I think a lot more fun. Â Once again I say I am very new at this. Hopefully I am not making a fool of myself :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014  Agreed.  Having cumulative alliance destruction was incredible.  I would love if we could get this for individual nations, and switch from ns in two (likely overlapping categories) to top 2 in casualties and top 2 in destruction for the qualified alliance.  Reason being that destruction will go to someone that gets the MP, wrc extra tech early and doesn't push infra, while casualties goes to the infra pusher favoring that style (which ns also gets usually). While the awards may be overlapping. I would not favor having 4 nations awarded in 1 Alliance over 2 nations awarded from 2 Alliances.  Going MP WRC Pentagon, I would still "push infra" as hard as I can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I am fairly new to CN and this is my first round of TE so maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me the reward system is a bit flawed. As far as my understanding goes AIM of war should be to maximise damage done and MINMISE damage taken. I havent seen any war game that rewards players for getting whipped. I mean look at http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000156 ( no offense intended) He is barely fighting me at all. Just allowing me to kill his soldiers to notch up casualties. Why we reward this style of play is beyond my comprehension. Maybe any of veterans could help shed light on this. If there was a reward based on RATIO of Damage done/damage taken ( a minimum threshold specified like say 10000NS destroyed) then I think the wars would be more competitive and I think a lot more fun. Â Once again I say I am very new at this. Hopefully I am not making a fool of myself :P Â That nation will not win casualties. Â He will win the Peak Infra award, however, due to building up a very good nation, and earning the most money in the game. He has now spent all his money on infra, and is broke. Â Â In the past the only award went to the #1 nation by Total Nation Strength at the very end of the round. Admin has been changing up the awards from round to round with feedback from the TE community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 If the alliance awards are for most kills and infra destroyed then the top 2 nations in those alliances with most kills and infra destroyed should be rewarded since they contributed the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 If the alliance awards are for most kills and infra destroyed then the top 2 nations in those alliances with most kills and infra destroyed should be rewarded since they contributed the most. What about the nations who head up the blitz hitting with lower odds for their mates to follow? What about nuclear turtles? Â It isnt all black and white. There are a TON of variables. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 (edited) I am fairly new to CN and this is my first round of TE so maybe I am missing something, but it seems to me the reward system is a bit flawed. As far as my understanding goes AIM of war should be to maximise damage done and MINMISE damage taken. I havent seen any war game that rewards players for getting whipped. I mean look at http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000156 ( no offense intended) He is barely fighting me at all. Just allowing me to kill his soldiers to notch up casualties. Why we reward this style of play is beyond my comprehension. Maybe any of veterans could help shed light on this. If there was a reward based on RATIO of Damage done/damage taken ( a minimum threshold specified like say 10000NS destroyed) then I think the wars would be more competitive and I think a lot more fun.  Once again I say I am very new at this. Hopefully I am not making a fool of myself :P  Whatever awards there are, there will always be an ability to game them. We've had a most destructive war award before, and the result was friends going to war with each other and lowering defenses so their opponent could do more damage and pad their damage stats.  People have played around with a cumulative damage award going to the nation that deals the most damage throughout the round, but that could also be gamed by declaring a bunch of easy win wars i.e. raids. A way around that is instead of taking the cumulative damage dealt all round, and taking the cumulative repurchase value of the damages dealt. For instance. I'm at war with a nation with twice my infra, and the cost of his infra is much higher than mine, so essentially, 5 of his infra I destroy would be worth more than 5 infra he destroys of mine. This encourages wars against more worthy opponents rather than raids. Admin has yet to implement either ideas.  If the alliance awards are for most kills and infra destroyed then the top 2 nations in those alliances with most kills and infra destroyed should be rewarded since they contributed the most.  Not necessarily when wars are a team effort. Edited August 10, 2014 by Samwise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuber Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I understand that ANY award can be misused, and I am too new to suggest how to prevent that. I will leave that for veterans with far more knowledge than me. But what i cant understand is CN's fixation with casualties. WHY are we honoring those who are getting their soldiers killed!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I understand that ANY award can be misused, and I am too new to suggest how to prevent that. I will leave that for veterans with far more knowledge than me. But what i cant understand is CN's fixation with casualties. WHY are we honoring those who are getting their soldiers killed!! Â You got me there. I participate in the threads because everyone else values casualties so much. So... peer pressure? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 Â You got me there. I participate in the threads because everyone else values casualties so much. So... peer pressure? Someone who can add poetry, (which unfortunately is not my strong suit) would be best eqquiped to answer his question :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I understand that ANY award can be misused, and I am too new to suggest how to prevent that. I will leave that for veterans with far more knowledge than me. But what i cant understand is CN's fixation with casualties. WHY are we honoring those who are getting their soldiers killed!!  Casualties have historically existed as the only stat to represent how much fighting a nation does.  So, even when there wasn't a prize for it (almost all rounds actually), it was something people very much competed for, and have kept records on for a long while.  However, there does now exist damage for wars.  And even without a prize for that, you see people posting how they do there as a way of showing how hard of a fight and how much damage they did.  I would much rather we reward destruction, so sending cm's even when down to your last 50k is rewarded.  This round added alliance damage as something that mattered, which was a huge step in that direction.  However, it should go further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuber Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014  Casualties have historically existed as the only stat to represent how much fighting a nation does.  So, even when there wasn't a prize for it (almost all rounds actually), it was something people very much competed for, and have kept records on for a long while.  However, there does now exist damage for wars.  And even without a prize for that, you see people posting how they do there as a way of showing how hard of a fight and how much damage they did.  I would much rather we reward destruction, so sending cm's even when down to your last 50k is rewarded.  This round added alliance damage as something that mattered, which was a huge step in that direction.  However, it should go further. If we can code in casualties, i think killings can be coded in equally easily. THAT would be a much better indicator of how MUCH or rather how GOOD a person is at warring. So either damage delivered or minimum Kills scored should be the stat that is rewarded. Just because something has been done historically shouldnt mean that we continue doing it even if it defies logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 What about the nations who head up the blitz hitting with lower odds for their mates to follow? What about nuclear turtles? Â It isnt all black and white. There are a TON of variables. Its better than giving it to the top 2 with the highest NS at the end. Â Here is a War Doves flag runner http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000009 Â Hes been a member for 7 days so how does a late comer deserve a chance to beat out all the other War doves that have played all round? I figured hes the War Doves gov flag runner since its clear he hasn't just been accepted for his warring abilities but rather for his ability to take one of the top 2 NS spots if WD's take the alliance awards. Regardless, i still get to make a flag runner earn it rather than steal it. ^_^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 Its better than giving it to the top 2 with the highest NS at the end. Â Here is a War Doves flag runner http://tournament.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=1000009 Â Hes been a member for 7 days so how does a late comer deserve a chance to beat out all the other War doves that have played all round? I figured hes the War Doves gov flag runner since its clear he hasn't just been accepted for his warring abilities but rather for his ability to take one of the top 2 NS spots if WD's take the alliance awards. Regardless, i still get to make a flag runner earn it rather than steal it. ^_^ As usual Daenarys, your thought process starts sound then arrive at the wrong conclusion. You might as well accuse us of spying on Aftermath while you're at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 As usual Daenarys, your thought process starts sound then arrive at the wrong conclusion. You might as well accuse us of spying on Aftermath while you're at it. Hes sitting on 80 mill, no MP, only sends CM's, re-buys Navy daily but doesn't use any for attacks. Earlier he had every advantage over all his opponents in D1 until Marvel and then Misfits jumped on him and since then he looks like hes upset now that he has to fight nations around his own NS. I know a flag runner when i see one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 As usual Daenarys, your thought process starts sound then arrive at the wrong conclusion. You might as well accuse us of spying on Aftermath while you're at it.  Oh shush you. He is stealing a war dove flag even if it wasn't your intention. :ph34r:  That said, lets get on track for what would make great prizes...  Personally I think the worst issue with ns was it favored saving everything for 1 push at the end, so skipping fighting hard etc in favor of wc wc wc.  Casualties at least favor working along the way, although destruction I would rather see.  The one potential issue with destruction is 1 max destruction war at the end similar to when most destructive war was a thing could offset all round of hard fighting -- there were 50k destruction wars while the largest this round is just 15k.  I would suggest capping the max per war at 20k (25k ns?), and doing cumulative damage done.  When 2 of the top 4 casualties don't even have a MP, it is missing what it is meant for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daenerys Targaryen Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014  Personally I think the worst issue with ns was it favored saving everything for 1 push at the end, so skipping fighting hard etc in favor of wc wc wc.  Someone gets it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yung flow Posted August 10, 2014 Report Share Posted August 10, 2014 I think for any of the alliance awards they should only track so many nations like in the top 10 of the alliance or so. How in the heck is an alliance with 10 member suppose to do the same amount of damage as an alliance with 40+ members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 (edited)  Personally I think the worst issue with ns was it favored saving everything for 1 push at the end, so skipping fighting hard etc in favor of wc wc wc.  Casualties at least favor working along the way, although destruction I would rather see.  The one potential issue with destruction is 1 max destruction war at the end similar to when most destructive war was a thing could offset all round of hard fighting -- there were 50k destruction wars while the largest this round is just 15k.  I would suggest capping the max per war at 20k (25k ns?), and doing cumulative damage done.  When 2 of the top 4 casualties don't even have a MP, it is missing what it is meant for.  Total NS was infra hugging yeah, but at least you had to build nukes, navy, air etc and be involved in nuclear war at the end most likely.  Most infra is WC, WC, WC. And thats probably the reason you didnt get MP. Incidentally, I put my MP up as my 4th wonder on day 15. And I should be hitting 2 million casualties.  Ive shown over the last 2 rounds that you can build big WC, and also militarize, so I am all for damage being counted individually.  To your last line. That is a bit ingenuous. I could also say, that bar 2 flag runners in the top 5 for casualties, everyone has MP. Edited August 11, 2014 by StevieG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Komplex Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 Those silly flag runners :p lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hartfw Posted August 11, 2014 Report Share Posted August 11, 2014 Â Total NS was infra hugging yeah, but at least you had to build nukes, navy, air etc and be involved in nuclear war at the end most likely. Â Most infra is WC, WC, WC. And thats probably the reason you didnt get MP. Incidentally, I put my MP up as my 4th wonder on day 15. And I should be hitting 2 million casualties. Â Ive shown over the last 2 rounds that you can build big WC, and also militarize, so I am all for damage being counted individually. Â To your last line. That is a bit ingenuous. I could also say, that bar 2 flag runners in the top 5 for casualties, everyone has MP. Â I feel like you should derail more threads to talk about me personally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevieG Posted August 12, 2014 Report Share Posted August 12, 2014 Â I feel like you should derail more threads to talk about me personally. Â When 2 of the top 4 casualties don't even have a MP, it is missing what it is meant for. Â No, you brought yourself up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Widow Posted August 12, 2014 Report Share Posted August 12, 2014 Hes sitting on 80 mill, no MP, only sends CM's, re-buys Navy daily but doesn't use any for attacks. Earlier he had every advantage over all his opponents in D1 until Marvel and then Misfits jumped on him and since then he looks like hes upset now that he has to fight nations around his own NS. I know a flag runner when i see one.  Ohey, I'm famous! It was obvious that Aftermath wasn't going anywhere, and they've been friendly with War Doves so naturally I picked them. I added nearly 400,000 casualties to my count in the 7 days I was under the AA. The targets I hit were the targets I was given, and there was a total of 10 nukes between them, while I was literally unable to even buy one. Two of the nations I hit were within 2k NS of me (one was actually higher). As for my Navy, you're not the only person I was fighting, there were 4-5 others. Obviously I won't waste my Navy slots on someone with 200 more Navy strength than me.  As for "only sends CM's"  [spoiler] READ DATE TO SUBJECT VIEW   8/12/2014 12:23:26 AM jalap Battle Report   8/12/2014 12:23:17 AM jalap Battle Report   8/12/2014 12:23:08 AM jalap Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/12/2014 12:22:54 AM jalap Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/12/2014 12:22:40 AM jalap Cruise Missile Attack   8/12/2014 12:22:32 AM jalap Cruise Missile Attack   8/12/2014 12:21:46 AM jalap War Declared!   8/12/2014 12:05:58 AM Daenerys Targaryen Battle Report   8/12/2014 12:02:07 AM Daenerys Targaryen Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/12/2014 12:01:53 AM Daenerys Targaryen Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/12/2014 12:01:37 AM IzaMoss Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/12/2014 12:01:28 AM IzaMoss Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/12/2014 12:00:44 AM Daenerys Targaryen Battle Report   8/12/2014 12:00:36 AM IzaMoss Battle Report   8/12/2014 12:00:28 AM IzaMoss Battle Report   8/11/2014 1:14:28 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/11/2014 1:14:19 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/11/2014 1:13:34 AM Daenerys Targaryen Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/11/2014 1:13:18 AM Daenerys Targaryen Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/11/2014 1:12:57 AM IzaMoss Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/11/2014 1:12:46 AM IzaMoss Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/11/2014 1:12:33 AM IzaMoss Battle Report   8/11/2014 1:12:24 AM IzaMoss Battle Report   8/10/2014 3:55:52 AM IzaMoss Cruise Missile Attack   8/10/2014 3:55:45 AM IzaMoss Cruise Missile Attack   8/10/2014 3:55:36 AM Daenerys Targaryen Cruise Missile Attack   8/10/2014 3:55:27 AM Daenerys Targaryen Cruise Missile Attack   8/10/2014 3:55:01 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/10/2014 3:54:53 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/10/2014 3:54:21 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/10/2014 3:54:11 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Unescorted Bombing Attack Report   8/10/2014 2:02:04 AM Daenerys Targaryen Spy Operation Attack   8/9/2014 10:19:32 AM IzaMoss Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 10:19:19 AM IzaMoss Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 10:02:42 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/9/2014 10:02:20 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/9/2014 10:01:47 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Battle Report   8/9/2014 10:00:13 AM IzaMoss Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/9/2014 9:59:43 AM IzaMoss Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/9/2014 1:46:21 AM Papa Midnight Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 1:46:13 AM Papa Midnight Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 1:46:06 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 1:45:59 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 1:45:52 AM Daenerys Targaryen Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 1:45:43 AM Daenerys Targaryen Cruise Missile Attack   8/9/2014 1:25:23 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Battle Report   8/9/2014 1:25:14 AM Papa Midnight Battle Report   8/9/2014 1:24:53 AM Papa Midnight Battle Report   8/9/2014 1:09:54 AM Daenerys Targaryen Spy Operation Attack   8/8/2014 9:31:42 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/8/2014 9:31:17 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/8/2014 12:15:27 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Battle Report   8/8/2014 12:15:20 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Battle Report   8/8/2014 12:11:57 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/8/2014 12:11:50 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/8/2014 12:11:43 AM Papa Midnight Cruise Missile Attack   8/8/2014 12:11:31 AM Papa Midnight Cruise Missile Attack   8/8/2014 12:11:07 AM Papa Midnight Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/8/2014 12:10:52 AM Papa Midnight Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/8/2014 12:06:33 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Spy Operation Attack   8/7/2014 12:44:35 PM Papa Midnight Spy Operation Attack   8/7/2014 12:44:08 PM Papa Midnight Spy Operation Attack   8/7/2014 1:59:32 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Spy Operation Attack   8/7/2014 1:35:46 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross RE: War Declared!   8/7/2014 1:22:08 AM Papa Midnight Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/7/2014 1:21:54 AM Papa Midnight Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/7/2014 1:21:40 AM Kirito Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/7/2014 1:21:26 AM Kirito Escorted Bombing Attack Report   8/7/2014 1:21:10 AM Kirito Battle Report   8/7/2014 1:20:56 AM Kirito Battle Report   8/7/2014 1:19:41 AM Papa Midnight Cruise Missile Attack   8/7/2014 1:19:30 AM Papa Midnight Cruise Missile Attack   8/7/2014 1:19:22 AM Kirito Cruise Missile Attack   8/7/2014 1:19:15 AM Kirito Cruise Missile Attack   8/7/2014 1:19:06 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/7/2014 1:18:58 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Cruise Missile Attack   8/7/2014 1:18:41 AM Papa Midnight Naval Attack   8/7/2014 1:18:37 AM Papa Midnight Naval Attack   8/7/2014 1:18:31 AM Papa Midnight Naval Attack   8/7/2014 1:18:02 AM Gen Thunderbolt Ross Battle Report [/spoiler] 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.