New environment effect

[Thuru]

The reason you are at -12 improvements is because of the huge citizen loss due to bad environment. Plus we have to look at ALL the players not just a me, me, me game. By putting in a few improvements it will help younger nations be able to get a few more improvements faster. BW at the moment are sorta at a stand still, when i buy them my population barely moves where before it would go down by 20k. As your environment goes up your citizens go up and the border walls negate the increase population. A pure environment improvement will help increase smaller nations Citizens and happiness, and will make environment something to look at younger also. A wonder would only help those who can afford them and the bigger nations which according to DACsquiigle is a bad thing. If your going to make it easy on the big help the small out as well. Planning is important

First, there are more than enough improvements. If you are low on infra and have less improvements you must always choose to what improvement you take. If you have arround 2899 infra its high enough to get your first wonder. On that level you have also the most important improvements.

Now many people have -x improvement slots. Its much cheaper and easier buy a wonder than or break the improvements you have and buy border walls, or buy many many infra and then buy border walls. Notify that a border walls also give a -2% citizen penalty. This break issue is also if you add new envoriment improvements.

BTW, if the requirements for the last 4 wonders will be lowered to arround 4000 infra or remove that requirement completely (except for the requirements for the wonders they needed) its also fine, it also handle some problems and issue's.

Edited May 19, 2008 by Thuru

[diskord]

This is a strategy game? I always thought it was a nation/political simulator. Silly me!

Also, please explain how buying infra and stealing tech/land compulsively isn't a strategy? Just because you think of it as simple or because everyone uses it doesn't mean it's not a strategy, it means it's effective. Give it a day and the masterminds of this "idea" will have a universal formula worked out and will brush it off as a minor inconvenience, and a new "strategy" will become standardised and you will have to sit on your stool and think of some other way to force the game into your boxy notion of what is and isn't "strategy".

Come Doitz, I know it's a strategy, I was doing it loooong before anyone else was doing it (except for maybe Starfox )

And I have argued that people in large alliances such as IRON, NPO, et all will benefit most from having a braintrust that can quickly ascertain the ideal balance between infra and land, I am no fool and know that that will happen.

But now there is a money sink besides infra (land) and prevents a stagnation of growth at the top end portions of the ladder. You have been around long enough to know that CN has constantly been "adjusting" the limits on infra/land/tech. I remember when there were actual "hard caps" on infra... as in you couldn't buy any more because you reached the limit. Changes that work to remove stagnation and prolong the life of the game (as well as re-balance resources, and provide a path for quicker ascension for younger players, while slowing down [but not halting] growth of larger players) is a good thing, not a bad thing.

[Lord Sharpe]

it's the same for the top 2% of nations to catch up to the top 2% of nations? sharpe, i like you, you're a great asset to the world of CN, and thanks for maintaining the MDP web, but that statement makes no sense.

actually - i may just increase in ranking when all the top nations realize they're not having fun any more either and delete themselves. sounds like a lousy way to rise in the rankings, if you ask me.

No, it's the same with them, in terms of their income being throttled as well, even more so then yours. Makes it easier to get up there, not harder.

[BlackKnight]

Couldn't have said it better myself, Jeezy

This update benefited/ had no affect on the larger nations, while the Mid. ranged nations and smaller nations suffered the brunt of the update (Oh goody, looks like I just did Jeez )

[Esukaresu]

I must have been the only person that basically wasn't effected at all by this update. I was able to change my government from Monarchy to Democracy, gaining back the point of environment that I lost from this update. Other than that, I lost only 1750 citizens(compared to my now 126,451 citizens) and I lost about 6 cents per citizen that I collect a day. This whole change made me drop my income from 17.4 million to 17.15 million or about 250k. That's pocket change.

Yes well, most of us don't have zomgorz huge nations like yours. This update impacted the low-middle NS nations the most. It doesn't do crap to any of the top tier nations at all. Hence, why this is a suggestion made by none other than DAC.

[Syzygy]

This is a strategy game? I always thought it was a nation/political simulator. Silly me!

Also, please explain how buying infra and stealing tech/land compulsively isn't a strategy?

nobody said that. in fact, from stealing land/tech you will see BIG benefits regarding environment for your nation and with proper Borderwall/MilitaryImprovements switching (people should raze borderwalls during war anway, but I am sure your guides already explain that) will hardly notice ANY changes in their income/bill ratio. The effects are totally minor if you equal the env-penalties with borderwalls, but LAZY players who do not want to think about what they are doing and simply work all day long on a stupid "how to build a perfect nation checklist" will suffer.

So, give it some time and ALL sides, even the warring alliances will see the actual benefits. There is simply NO WAY that anyones nation was "seriously crippled" by this update. The higher your infracount is, the more pop and income you have, and the more penalties you suffer - so, nations with 14k infra lose a LOT more cash than nations with 5k or 7k infra, especially if they refuse to take action against the pollution of their nation.

This update implemented CHOICES into the game, OPTIONS where the user has to show some skill in making the correct decisions - and longterm this will reward good players because they can grow faster than the average guy now.

[myruler]

Yes well, most of us don't have zomgorz huge nations like yours. This update impacted the low-middle NS nations the most. It doesn't do crap to any of the top tier nations at all. Hence, why this is a suggestion made by none other than DAC.

I understand that you don't have as big of nations as I do, but how has it impacted low-middle NS nations the most? I think the mostly hit nations would be the ones with 25 nukes and sitting high in infra without a NEO. I am importing coal, a resource that is hurting my nation and I don't have a NEO to stop that...

[Lord Sharpe]

Yes well, most of us don't have zomgorz huge nations like yours. This update impacted the low-middle NS nations the most. It doesn't do crap to any of the top tier nations at all. Hence, why this is a suggestion made by none other than DAC.

Syzygy has made more suggestions that have hurt him then anyone. Hell, he has contributed more then most other suggesters COMBINED. So claiming some sort of alternative motive is just wrong.

[Robertraccoon]

I have to admit I am warming up to it. Looks like Tech raiding is going to get a new name, "Landraiding"

[oinkoink12]

I have to admit I am warming up to it. Looks like Tech raiding is going to get a new name, "Landraiding"

Land doesnt mean !@#$, this update would only be good if 1000 miles of land would lower your environment by something like 0.2 points.

(posted the suggestion allready, but it didnt get allowed on the forums yet)

[bill n ted]

I have to admit I am warming up to it. Looks like Tech raiding is going to get a new name, "Landraiding"

People still raid for tech?

[myruler]

People aren't realizing this slight adjustment. Syzygy suggested that population density should be a factor in this, but I am almost positive that land has no effect on the environment based on this update. Admin already stated that he didn't take Syzygy's suggestion word for word and that the equations are different. Now it is just time to figure out what the equations are.

[Alter Leader Nabla]

two last updates were horrible for my nation. This one makes up for the two previous so keep it that way. 8 trades bonus ftw

[greenansatsu]

First, there are more than enough improvements. If you are low on infra and have less improvements you must always choose to what improvement you take. If you have arround 2899 infra its high enough to get your first wonder. On that level you have also the most important improvements.

Now many people have -x improvement slots. Its much cheaper and easier buy a wonder than or break the improvements you have and buy border walls, or buy many many infra and then buy border walls. Notify that a border walls also give a -2% citizen penalty. This break issue is also if you add new envoriment improvements.

BTW, if the requirements for the last 4 wonders will be lowered to arround 4000 infra or remove that requirement completely (except for the requirements for the wonders they needed) its also fine, it also handle some problems and issue's.

I think that the game could do with 3 more improvements that touch on a part of the game that until now has been ignored. If not adding new improvements lets change some other ones to help change this. Also if you will look at my original idea I said a mix of BOTH. I am not against adding a Wonder. I think adding a 50m wonder that will increase environment +2.5 is a great idea. but I also think that adding an improvement costing 100k that increases environment .5 with a limit of 2 or 3, is not a bad idea either. Maybe making the Wonder affect GR environment as well. while the improvement doesn't. and even at 3000 infra you are still thinking to high. I am talking improvement for nations with 1000 or 2000 infra they can still buy improvements and small ones like this will help them.

[CloudGT4]

I have less than 7000 infra (what I would assume you classify as a mid range nation) and I think I actually gained money from this change. It has less to do with the amount of infra you have, and more how you have distributed your growth over land/infra/tech.

Under or even remotly around 7k infra isn't mid ranged.. The nations that took the brunt of this is anything between 1k and 5k.. maybe 6k infra nations.. Thats Midrange in my book.. However after admin fixed the bug he mistakenly put in. It seemed to ease up a bit. but 2-3k citizen loss still stunted us mid rangers.. This may work out for good somewhere.. Who knows. But this game was already slow if your not at war.. period... You need to back collect 16 or 17 days to make an infra jump.. now.. You need to back collect 17 days, save that and back collect again 17 days later.. Thus I believe ppl are mad about.. Growth for low to mid range is seriously stunted.. not only that.. we are usually the guys effected most in war.. as all you big nations.. tend to run to peace, and direct orders, or noone is big enough to touch you.. Now you just made big nations even more untouchable..

[Oktavia]

I lost -2 improvements and about 3 happiness. I'm at war so I can't test out borderwalls.

[Decedere]

Looking at from the point I am currently, being the Secretary of Defense for my alliance. I only see the negative advantages that just drastically changed for my men on the front lines. Now the other guys environment can change whether or not he gets rolled over with the drastic change in soldiers he can have. It just doesn't seem to let the game work like it should...

On a side note: I lost 4k citizens and 30 or so happiness. Not very happy :angry:

[grandsecretaryliang]

I like this change even though it hurt me a lot (lost 10% of my population). Without change the game would just get stale.

That there are so much opposition to it just show how lethargic the CN community has become. It's a game; you're supposed to do your best within its mechanics, not crying foul whenever it doesn't act in your favor.

[Willhelm]

I lost 3k citizens, thankfully I got all the improvements I wanted quick enough.

[Dinant]

Well, if this update causes the more inexperienced players to quit the game, i don't mind, i thought the game was getting a bit crowded anyway. And to all the people threatening not to donate anymore, stop trying to "buy" this game and start learning how to actually play the game.

I personally applaud this update

[mydogti]

who about a EPA national Wonder, or improvement?

[Ski11585]

Well, if this update causes the more inexperienced players to quit the game, i don't mind, i thought the game was getting a bit crowded anyway. And to all the people threatening not to donate anymore, stop trying to "buy" this game and start learning how to actually play the game.

I personally applaud this update

So let's turn out all the new players. We don't need new blood, new ideas, new alliances, or anything. Actually, let's just delete all the nations that are less than a year old. The game is too crowded, after all.

[Syzygy]

On a side note: I lost 4k citizens and 30 or so happiness. Not very happy :angry:

no, surely not. get your facts straight.

You import no Uran, you have no nukes.

The only thing I can see hurting your env is Coal/Oil import, but 1 of these is already equaled out by Water. So, the only thing that should affect you is the GRL and 1 env penalty from your trades. You want to tell me 2 env hurting your nation with -30 happiness. Tell that someone else, thats simply not true. Examples and statements like this make people believe "this update is horrible", while it is in fact not.

[King Chill I]

That's convenient considering who's on what side of the fence here.

This essentially discourages war even further. It's just further increasing the damages incurred by those who go to war AND further reducing the profitability of war. Why don't we just take the war system out altogether since turtling is emerging as the clearly favoured "choice of gameplay"?

Oh my!!! The profitability of war has been lowered?

So you mean you want to go into a fight, destroy the enemy's infra, kill his military, steal his land and tech, potentially destroy his alliance, impose your political will, ask for reparations, make a profit and do all this without the risk of incurring major damages?

Brilliant...pass me a Guinness.

Edited May 19, 2008 by Chill

[BlackKnight]

no, surely not. get your facts straight.

You import no Uran, you have no nukes.

The only thing I can see hurting your env is Coal/Oil import, but 1 of these is already equaled out by Water. So, the only thing that should affect you is the GRL and 1 env penalty from your trades. You want to tell me 2 env hurting your nation with -30 happiness. Tell that someone else, thats simply not true. Examples and statements like this make people believe "this update is horrible", while it is in fact not.

Maybe it was a typo...

But as for my other question no one seemed to know the answer:

spent a million surplus on my infra (So my invd. tax increases, as well as my pop, meaning more income), but instead of my invd. tax increasing, it decreased

Not a very large decrease, but regardless, a million into an Infrastructure only to have it decrease your indv. tax and not raise your economy by 1/20 of a dollar is heart wrenching

My invd. tax fell from 38.71 to 38.70- again, not a very large drop, but a drop regardless after spending a million into my infra

Some said it was because of land... Spent 150K onto that to drop my pop. dens. to 29.71 per mile.. Yet, still... no change in profit

Edited May 19, 2008 by BlackKnight