New environment effect

[Strykewolf]

I think I'm done tinkering now.

*Strykewolf chuckles

It was an interesting OMG moment when I logged in....but, after looking....and adjusting some things around....just means I need to pay more attention to how I improvement swap <<shrugs>>

Interesting game change.....and....well, I think it'll turn out to be a good one.

....though my nation's citizens are currently in a panic over the recent UFO abductions....in time, they shall calm down

[Ch33kY]

I just lost 6k citizens, almost 10%. So I brought some Border Walls and lost more population. This is my fault for having the Uranium trade and nukes

I don't think the Uranium trade will be too popular anymore.

[naamah]

wow, what a horrible update! Just makes it all that much harder for the small nations to ever catch up. Oh well, not like I have any say in it anyways, Ill keep playing but the days of buying donations are pretty much over.

[Ski11585]

Yes, the large nations are going to be hurt, too. I'm a fairly large nation (over 10K infra) and I've been affected. But in the long run, this doesn't really hurt me. It just means I have to take some extra time when I go into large periods of savings.

For smaller nations, the slowed growth is going to be incredibly detrimental. Again, this just makes me feel that the changes are an attempt to keep the top 10 happy by further lessening their chances of losing their top spots.

*EDIT* And because I forgot this earlier. I find it interesting that Syz is so quick to defend this to the ends of the Earth, belittling me and others for not proving their views with math. Yet, when someone proposes a change that might not be in the best interests of his nation, such as more powerful nukes, he is the first one to post a treatise on its shortcomings.

*DOUBLE EDIT* I think, over time, this change will prove worthwhile. My point is that I think this negatively affects younger nations to a higher degree.

Edited May 20, 2008 by Ski11585

[Regent of Omerta]

Looking at this it seem too early to tell whether this will be beneficial.

My main criticism is that it was done mid-game. If this had been implemented gradually and/or with fore-warning, people could have addapted (at least the "good players" would have). However, by just changing the forumula, many of those same "good players" who were doing everything right as far as maximising income is concerned are now punched in the balls and told they need to change thier nations retro-actively (obviously impossible) in order to not be penalised (for example, instead of spending the last year being an infra-whore, they would have been buying land and organising trade circles which improve environment). And at the same time, people who were playing the game "badly" (by having relatively small amounts of infra with large amounts of land. And having the poorer (at the time) resources) are suddenly flipped to being the "successful" players (income wise).

So yes, in the long run it may well turn out that the more skillfull players are able to profit. Short term, it has given a handi-cap in favour of the "lazy" or "un-economically efficient" players. And this problem is increased significantly further for those who acted during the actual update process (due to the 10x error).

I'm with you here. It seems like every time I try to adapt to the way this game is set up, I get "punched in the balls" as you put it. How about lets have a positive change for once instead of something that kicks us all in the teeth who are able to adapt and overcome. There hasn't been anything but "nation killing" updates in far too long.

At the very least, there needs to be a wonder added for us to be able to overcome this to a point that is available before you hit 13,000 Infra.

Edited May 20, 2008 by Regent of Omerta

[Franziskaner]

Speaking from the bottom of the barrel nations, I lost only 16 citizens, and that is just a normal flux for me and being so low on the totem pole NS wise.

I really like this change as it now means 1 more strategy and interest put into each nation and each decision you have to make with nation regarding trades, tech ratios, and whether or not you support the use of Nukes in game...

100% expect a great increase in the Nuke=bad population here on cybernations

edit: after buying 40 miles of land giving me a 18.05 pop density my pop rose to 40 over where I was before... seems to me that this change was made and affects our nations like RL nations would be affected.

My lush small environmentally friendly nation attracts more people, while the larger smog filled environmentally unfriendly nations attract less and even go so far as to drive some off... I vote in favor of this change.

Edited May 20, 2008 by Franziskaner

[ChairmanHal]

Remember, the game is still in Beta. I would expect a lot more tinkering before the game is reset and goes for a real run.

About the time those plans that are "on the way within Haleenstar Republic to open new rehabilitation centers across the nation and educate its citizens of the dangers of drug use" will be finished right?

Sorry, pet peeve. I chose that option when I first signed up for the game in Feb. 2007 and the rehab centers never opened.

This in fact is advertised as a beta, something that I think some people forget.

Update: net loss in daily income comes out to something close to $250,000 a day. I'll build up infra to replace the lost revenue (won't be cheap, but oh well) and with it the lost population rather than changing out improvements and building border walls. My concern is that further tinkering will make border walls much less rewarding down the line.

[Hazardousdoc]

I hope we get improvements that affect environment, and maybe a wonder to help those with nukes have less difficulty with their envo penalty. I myself suffered no loss, I have the greenest of the green for my trades. *hugs tree*

[Londo Mollari]

I do not like this update, at all.

One of the things I have been doing since I got here is making trade circles for people. I run an aqua interalliance trade cooperative called CAFE, which has over 200 registered members and more names that have been brought there by aqua alliance leaders. I and a few others have been placing people in trade circles.

http://cafe.ipbfree.com/index.php

It was awfully hard to get in a trade circle if you had [aluminum + furs], or [iron + silver] or something like that - before affluent population was updated. After it was updated, the 4BR circle became a viable option. I was able to put a lot of aqua players in trade circles who had trouble finding stable trades on their own.

This update weakens any trade circle that can't get water, or that has a resource with an environment penalty. By comparison, the vaunted 3BR - Beer, Construction, and Fast Food with Fish and ____ is made even stronger. It was the best circle before for the vast majority of people, and now it is even better. The 4BR circle, or Construction, Steel, Affluent Population, and Fine Jewelry + Wheat, has been made worse, since it has coal and suffers from a lack of water. There was a penalty before. It has grown substantially.

I happen to have an identical 12-resource profile to Syz. The difference is, his coal and oil are native. He is being differentially affected because he has 2 resources that carry huge environmental penalties, but he does not suffer from them when he collects. Nor is it a problem if he loses his trades, for he can always pay for temp trades easily or just order his alliance to temp trade with him. There is a huge conflict of interest here, because this update personally benefits him in comparison to everyone else. New nations with coal+oil will not be so fortunate, for they will be unable to pay for temp trades, and even less able to convince others to trade with them long term.

This update dramatically weakens: furs, silver, rubber, coal, oil, and uranium. They were already weak resources before, they are now all even weaker. It strengthens lead, and all of the 3 bonus resource circle resources. It damages game balance, disrupts carefully built trading arrangements, and personally benefits Syz because he doesn't take the penalty for collecting while having oil and coal, since they are native resources.

I recognize that many individuals have made efforts to improve gameplay and the CN experience. I am one of them, through CAFE. But let it not be said that Syz is a disinterested individual here! There is a clear conflict of interest, and I feel that game balance has been seriously damaged. In my mind, the way to make up for it is to give the resources that I said were weakened better bonuses, and to make sure that people take the penalty for environmentally harmful resources even if they have them native.

[Finch]

I presume improvement swapping/cycling is still viable and a way to deal with this.

You should probably check your slots available because most peoples slots are -2 to -8 so that kinda makes it hard to improvement swap.

[CloudGT4]

Okay after a little playing around, and such. I had to drop 5 total improvments (3 for slots, and 2 for the intial slots lost due to citizen count drop) to gain 2 boarder walls. This did significantly help me economically, but hurt military wise due to losing 5 barracks. I chose to drop barracks over GC's due to the fact my alliance is in war, and GC's offer better soldier eff. This in turn with dropping my soldier count to 35%. I now make a million in income after bills if my math is right.. Up from 400k. Now, the issue is this killed the war the side of the game. Unless your a nation with 100s of million or so war chest surplus. You will bill lock with a full military and defenses.

Long wars now turned into 4 or 6 day wars. I for one don't play the game for math.. thats school.. There is math in the game I of course have to know as a Minister of Finance.. but this is turning into you need to know Calculus in the 8th grade to play a game. There isn't much fun in that. I haven't even gotten to the math on the coal, oil, or nooks yet.. This I fear is a deterrent to the game. Most of us I believe are not only here for economics but also the war side of the game. So, as I go back on this being epic failure, its not as bad as once thought. However, I still stand on the argument of the larger nations getting protected in there spots on ranks and such, and the little guy having to work 2x harder for something that got handed to the upper powers. This again is on the who got hit hardest, and fairness. Simulation in my opinion is a loose term in games.. Yes, I wanna play a simulation of nation building etc.. but not a true real life sim.. where i gotta be a rocket scientist to figure out how to log in. < sarcasm but i hope you the point.

Anyways.. the point is yes its workable to overcome, and yes quiet easily if your mathamatically inclined.. but in honesty and no offense.. Many aren't that mathamatically gifted. I fear loosing many mid range nations that worked hard to get there, just to be stopped.. So not saying re-roll the update.. I am pleeing that other improvements/wonders, etc quickly be implimented or figures fixed to help overcome war deficits.

Also, How does lead become a resource of negating environmental effects? Isn't it a poisoned killer? While so called glamour goods like fur, gold, etc take a hit?

Edited May 20, 2008 by CloudGT4

[BwickFS39]

Apparently according to conspiracy theories I'm an uber secret member of the Orders so technically I should already know what it feels like.... right? I would describe the feeling as holding a sharp knife in my hand and quickly doing several strong facepalms. amirite?

The one I heard was that you are really the leader of the orders.....that they are your personal army.

[bill n ted]

I happen to have an identical 12-resource profile to Syz. The difference is, his coal and oil are native. He is being differentially affected because he has 2 resources that carry huge environmental penalties, but he does not suffer from them when he collects. Nor is it a problem if he loses his trades, for he can always pay for temp trades easily or just order his alliance to temp trade with him. There is a huge conflict of interest here, because this update personally benefits him in comparison to everyone else. New nations with coal+oil will not be so fortunate, for they will be unable to pay for temp trades, and even less able to convince others to trade with them long term.

Conversely Syz's trades have just become pretty hideous - though he doesnt suffer the penalty as they are his native resources his trade partners will - I imagine he may in the future have problems retaining stable trades due to the impact of his resources on his trade partner.

Im sorry but you seem to be in the land of fairies. There have always been bad tradesets in this game; try having lead & uranium for 18 months both were pretty bad resources until they recently got tweaked - people with pigs and gold, lead and furs etc have had pretty useless trades for a while and you dont hear them creating half as much of a fuss. You can always find trades for free; you may have to trick a few noobs or just find people who dont care, you may not necessarily get the trades you want but you can get trades.

You seem to think Syz suggested this just so that he himself could benefit; that logic is at best specious and at worst completely detached from reality.... Though that said he does have a bigger nation than me........

BURN SYZ!!

Edited May 20, 2008 by bill n ted

[myruler]

Cloud, sorry to ruin your faith in your mathematics, but you should be able to tell that almost all these formulas and things have nothing to do with calculus and are mainly simple algebra problems. As long as you have the time to work with the formulas and enough data(probably from your alliance), you should be able to figure out everything you need.

[Boondock]

Listen, I'm really tired of hearing people complain about this update, and only retorting to Syz's math with "Well you are a big nation, you must only be working with Admin for your own personal benefit"

Please, pay attention. Syz works in Gameplay Discussions and Suggestion box harder then most Mods and Admin himself to make this game better for everyone. Every update he suggests he only suggests out of cold math, something that you really can't change.

You want to complain about the fact that he is better at building and adapting then you are? Go ahead.

I lost 7 improvement slots and several mil for my sled into my 1yr. I'm not complaining because I see this as bettering the game.

[CloudGT4]

Cloud, sorry to ruin your faith in your mathematics, but you should be able to tell that almost all these formulas and things have nothing to do with calculus and are mainly simple algebra problems. As long as you have the time to work with the formulas and enough data(probably from your alliance), you should be able to figure out everything you need.

I know this, you missed the point.. To a new or semi new player.. This game is sometimes already overwhelming. I am no longer against the update itself. I am asking that other stuff be done, to benefit everyone. Not just the Top Tier. And yes some of the math is complicated. Maybe not for you or for Syzy, but not everyone again is a math genius. This is my point. There is a point of too much math in a "simulation game".

[Londo Mollari]

Conversely Syz's trades have just become pretty hideous - though he doesnt suffer the penalty as they are his native resources his trade partners will - I imagine he may in the future have problems retaining stable trades due to the impact of his resources on his trade partner.

He doesn't need stable trades... all he has to do is get a temp every 19 days. So the only thing that matters is that he and others (who are rich/well connected) with coal/oil/uranium as native resources will not take any sort of penalty when they collect.

Im sorry but you seem to be in the land of fairies. There have always been bad tradesets in this game; try having lead & uranium for 18 months both were pretty bad resources until they recently got tweaked - people with pigs and gold, lead and furs etc have had pretty useless trades for a while and you dont hear them creating half as much of a fuss. You can always find trades for free; you may have to trick a few noobs or just find people who dont care, you may not necessarily get the trades you want but you can get trades.

Yes, the resource combinations that you name are all extremely, extremely weak. You are glossing over my point, and my point is that game balance has been damaged by this update. Of the decent tradesets, the best one (3BR) has stayed the same, while all the others have gotten weaker. There is a much bigger gap now between those who can fit into a 3BR and those who cannot.

You seem to think Syz suggested this just so that he himself could benefit; that logic is at best specious and at worst completely detached from reality.... Though that said he does have a bigger nation than me........

Relative to everyone else, this update benefits Syz in a very tangible way, as I have explained. I would not claim that he did this solely to benefit himself relative to everyone else, but that effect is had. There is a conflict of interest here due to the particulars of the situation, as I have explained. Anyone who understands the CN trade system can see that in a flash. And I am sure Syz was very aware of what would happen. A game balance issue has been created that could be fixed by strengthening the weak resources, and by making people take penalties for what they have native, IMO.

BURN SYZ!!

Heh. He has certainly created a great deal more work for me, in the trading arena. I will not complain about this update, provided that there are other updates that come on its heels that resolve the game balance issues it has created. Saying "oh, some resource combinations have always been bad" does not justify making a whole bunch more of them just as bad, and giving a select set of players an even greater advantage. That is specious, good sir.

[Jordite]

Apologies for having not read the entire thread, but what I see is coal and oil taking a huge beat-down in desirability. It was hard enough to get people to take them before, but now it'll be nigh impossible to convince the informed player to take a resource with such a low return. Having said that, what is needed is not a reversal of this update, but an improvement of those resources.

[JoshuaR]

Sorry but no. The game is in beta and subject to change at any time. Most people who know me know that I tend to roll out and update and then tweak it for a bit until it is just right. I have never and will never provide roll backs because of beta testing.

I like that you've made and continue to make changes for the betterment of the game. Of course, in the future it may be prudent to give a day or two as warning so that no one gets stuck in a situation where they're waiting for a birthday and saving on 19 days or anything else. Of course the way you did it sure made it a lot of fun .

So far everyone who has complained about bill-lock has Guerrilla Camps, Labour Camps (though not as important), and no border walls.

Unless you have ZERO money, and are on day 20 inactive, you can do fine with this.

This is true. You will lose income in that you will have to buy border walls before some other income generators, but so will everyone else (growing nation).

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..

I've never back-collected for so long to make an infra jump. You might want to stop by MFO for precise calculations (though I caution that one person has reported a bug in 5k+ jumps that I keep forgetting about).

Ok after reading this long thread + several others on the subject and doing some research myself I have concluded that:

1. This update does NOT address the issue of big nations being just big and having lots of money and nothing to spend it on. This is still the same as this change has NOT affected any nation about approximately 6k infra as they all have enough improvement slots to buy 5 borderwalls which will then nullify the effect this change had on their nation.

2. This update DOES screw everybody that's between 1k & 6k infra as their income has now been drastically reduced. In most cases by 30-60% even, so it will only be harder for those nations to now even make it to the top or even close to the so wanted nuke range.

3. This effectively means this update has hugely negatively impacted 90-95% of the players in the game (those not in the top 5-10%) and just made the large nations be more powerfull then ever as their income has not been effected a whole lot. I now collect approximately $12M less in 19 days then before, so that's like nothing if you're like me and collect $220M+ every 19 days.

4. So effectively this means admin has rewarded all the large nations that account for the majority of the real $$ he gets as those nations either donate themselves or have others donate for them in return for CN dollars as it is the best way for large nations like me to grow as $20 gets me 200 infra, and I can just pay someone $12M CN dollars to do the donation for me, instead of paying $50M in CN dollars for the infra. With the reward being they're almost not impacted by this change.

So yeah.. NOT a good update as this totally screwed everybody that pays for the game. I do foresee the donations you're receiving will be significantly impacted by this change. I've already seen quite a few people stating they will not donate anymore and I can't blame them.

Just my $0.02

I will agree that this change does not address the economic inflation in the game at all. However, that shouldn't be the main concern, as that will be nigh impossible to eliminate otherwise (sans war). Instead, this change has allowed for greater complexity and entertainment out of the game. Once, environment meant nothing. Now it means something. Before, border walls were never thought of until the end. Now, you have to do more calculation.

All in all, a nice change. Thanks admin, and thanks Syzygy for suggesting the foundation of the idea. As a side note: I have been in the top 5% for quite some time, now, but only within the last week or so have I bought nuclear weapons. I saw this update... and was like... Dear Admin! as soon as I buy these suckers they bring me way down. However, just briefly looking at my nation, I see no change in income (of course I do not track my income as religiously as some of you may. I'm getting the same two digits at the beginning). Perhaps I get to look forward to an increase in income with a little tweaking... or at worst a negligible impact. I can see where some make the point that this doesn't affect the top nations one bit, as it seems to not affect me in the slightest.

However, I don't think it really hurts anyone terribly, anyway, since people will just buy border walls out of their way or reconsider nukes or resources... (Though I have not looked at this really all thatmuch and am only guesing for the moment).

[Londo Mollari]

Yes... coal, oil, rubber, furs, silver, and uranium all need to be boosted. And people need to take these environment penalties if they have coal, oil, and/or uranium native. It's almost not fair for them not to, anymore.

I think it makes sense for coal and oil to give large income bonuses, or large infra upkeep reductions. Same with rubber. - energy economy anyone? Transportation? Give coal and oil a +6 income bonus, each, in addition to what they already have. Or give them -5% infra upkeep apiece. But make them better, sure. Rubber could stand an upgrade too.

Furs and Silver can be fixed by making affluent population better. Make affluent population give +5% population and +12 income, or whatever numbers balance it out the best.

And uranium can be fixed by making nukes hurt more, and by making it a requirement to keep your nukes reliable, or to keep them at all. I have made suggestions that were well-liked to this effect in the current thread on nuclear weapons in the suggestion box.

[JoshuaR]

Yes... coal, oil, rubber, furs, silver, and uranium all need to be boosted. And people need to take these environment penalties if they have coal, oil, and/or uranium native. It's almost not fair for them not to, anymore.

I think it makes sense for coal and oil to give large income bonuses, or large infra upkeep reductions. Same with rubber. - energy economy anyone? Transportation? Give coal and oil a +6 income bonus, each, in addition to what they already have. Or give them -5% infra upkeep apiece. But make them better, sure. Rubber could stand an upgrade too.

Furs and Silver can be fixed by making affluent population better. Make affluent population give +5% population and +12 income, or whatever numbers balance it out the best.

And uranium can be fixed by making nukes hurt more, and by making it a requirement to keep your nukes reliable, or to keep them at all. I have made suggestions that were well-liked to this effect in the current thread on nuclear weapons in the suggestion box.

Oh, I'd like a bit more income out of gold, too (seeing as people sometimes drop my shiny little resource).

As for resources like oil: in real life these things will grant you massive jumps in income, yet here it is a slight +1.5happiness. (In reality happiness sorta plummets because authoritarian rulers hoard the wealth but...) Perhaps, if you hold oil natively, you can get a huge jump in income as well, to negate the pain of others dropping their trades with you (and it wouldn't affect them because those trading for oil never really get income out of it anyway).

Of course if we were to add more depth to resources like that... then all nations should be forced to trade for resources like oil because hardly any could survive without it...

[Londo Mollari]

It would be interesting if each nation had to buy and sell finite quantities of resources, instead of what we have now. Say you had such and such natural resources, and you could produce so much based on your infra.... resources like furs would be easier to produce more of per infra starting out, so having furs would be beneficial early in the game, but less so once you got on up there.. but say you also had pigs, or iron... you could devote all your infra to producing pigs, or iron. So no one would be screwed over by having a bad resource combination that didn't fit in anywhere. There would be a market where each nation would be able to buy and sell resources to others... just like in RL.

[Zangmonkey]

I suppose a large complaint of mine is that's it's really not accurate.

Having nuclear weapons, or nuclear energy does not adversely affect the environment, espescially not more than using oil, coal, rubber or automobiles.

[Heft]

I suppose a large complaint of mine is that's it's really not accurate.

Having nuclear weapons, or nuclear energy does not adversely affect the environment, espescially not more than using oil, coal, rubber or automobiles.

As a nation holding uranium as a natural resource, I entirely agree. But seriously, with all these changes very few people have any reason to trade with Uranium. I'll have to resort to temp-trading for whoever wants nukes or go back to duping noobs for cash. :/ Oil and Coal and Rubber have various redeeming features, arguably. Outside of nukes, which aren't so great anymore, Uranium doesn't have much.

But really I think the largest complaint with this change is the way in which it was done. There are many nations which were playing the best they could under the old system and are now being penalized. Nations which were in the middle of an improvement swap are now bill-locked through no fault of their own. In other words, the abruptness of the change, if not necessarily the change itself, punished those players that do manage and do strategize their nations well. And not just out of a few bucks collection, but, in some cases at least, very drastically to the point they may need foreign aid to get back up.

[twistedandy77]

Not sure if this was suggested already, but since env. is a very important part of our economy and such, why not have wonders or improvements that increases env. status, rather than having to find trades that boosts env.?

Or am I forgetting that there are already wonders/improvements that increases env.? Can't really check for myself right now. CN is down for me. >.>