New environment effect

[President Obama]

The new environment is like having actual geography. If it had been here at the start, it would have been amazing. But when you add it in at this stage, it's just a pain. I've seen a million people suggest having real geography in CN. That would be cool to have, but at this point, it would be terrible to add. This is the same, albeit on a smaller scale.

-Bama

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.

[diskord]

I initially greatly disliked the changes made to the game... but as I see arguments made I can definitely see certain benefits to the game that result from them.

:jihad:

1 down... 30,000 more to go

[Dread Pirate Bob]

As many have pointed out those of us with environment damaging resources are hurt more than others. I have had one trade dropped, further crashing my poor little economy. In trying to replace that trade I've already been told twice that the person won't accept trades for any of the environment damaging resources. I expect I am not the only one this has happened to. Guess its time to find other ways to kill off a few minutes of time every day.

[Syrik]

- change gov

- import water instead of pigs (-3.5%pop, +4.5hap, -1env penalty)

- alternative: gold = you lose 3.5%pop but gain +2hap (microchips) +3$income (gold), -1env penalty (rad cleanup), GRL reduced by 50%

magically this 29% will turn into the same 10-15% like it was for me or most others.

In addition to that the 5 borderwalls you have should completely cancel out the bad env effects AND the +2hap they provide are close to equal out the -2%pop at your level. It is hard to believe that your income has dropped by 29% at all.

I was just informed that when you switch from Anarchy to another Government, the change in Income doesn't actually happen until the Next update. I was in anarchy until just a few minutes after last update, so in 6 hours my income should be back to normal. (actually above normal because I added so much happiness).

[CloudGT4]

You also are on full war improvements. Fix that, it won't be nearly as bad.

My alliance happens to be at war atm.. so why would i hamper my war efforts by dropping those.

Lets play "spot the kids that failed math class" in this thread...

It's a fun game for us "almighty brains" sitting on top of piles of cash.

Now I just need to cackle with glee and the image is complete.

Edit to add: The issue is you keep whining about my nation this, and my nation that, instead of the overall game play of the game. Listen, I was the one who SUGGESTED the NS Tech adjustment, and yet I was probably hit harder than anyone by it. I was ranked around 50th at the time, but dropped all the way down 200th, thats 400% drop in the rankings because of a change I SUGGESTED. But it was the right change that improved the game. Likewise this change DOES effect those up at top more, but it seems to me those at the top seem more content with seeing the game improve and less concerned about OH MY BITS crying.

Look, I have worked with Syzygy on multiple different projects, and the fact that you would call in his character or motivation on the changes being ANYTHING other than game play improvement is just ludicrous.

Get over yourself, read the thread, dump some improvements, buy some border walls and get on growing your nation. You aren't hurt as bad as you think you are, you have just refused to listen to everyone giving you the answer on how to "fix" your problem, because the solution they are telling you is something other than "roll back the changes so I don't have to think."

Okay.. edited for the sheer fact i was being imature.. and wish to apologize to the CN community ahead of time.

Edited May 20, 2008 by CloudGT4

[BamaBuc]

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.

Oh sure, it's technically "Beta", but it's most definitely a full-fledged game, and has been for years. And if by "a real run" you mean trying to gain a lot of members, I disagree. This type of game only works with a certain number of people. We've had a steady amount since GW3. I think a huge influx (and I mean huge, not "big"... FARK, GOONS, and FOK invasions were "big"... I assume your "real run" plan would be much bigger) would kill CN. So no, CN is not a beta in anything but name.

-Bama

[MrCyber]

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.

If that would ever happen I predict 99% of the players will quit the game. Working on something for 2+ years for some to then have it reset to 0 would be really bad.

[Syzygy]

I was just informed that when you switch from Anarchy to another Government, the change in Income doesn't actually happen until the Next update. I was in anarchy until just a few minutes after last update, so in 6 hours my income should be back to normal. (actually above normal because I added so much happiness).

well that explains the income drop. Usually anarchy does more then -29%, but in fact your 5 borderwalls and lead import seems to greatly benefit you, so instead of suffering from the update you are one of the examples that by clever nation management you can even benefit.

thanks for proving that.

[BamaBuc]

If that would ever happen I predict 99% of the players will quit the game. Working on something for 2+ years for some to then have it reset to 0 would be really bad.

Yup. If admin ever planned to take the game out of beta and reset it, my guess is that he scrapped those plans after the "NPO/ODN/everyone else from NS" invasion. It wasn't worth losing the new growth.

-Bama

[Junkalunka]

For those at war, I am pretty certain that knocking down military improvements will vastly improve your situation. I'm on lunch break so I'll try to look at the numbers later, but looks like you can either:

a ) Demilitarize and make money again

b ) Stay militarized and lose money

c ) Negotiate peace or surrender

Wars become more costly as they should be, especially for the aggressor it seems who can normally rely on a working economy just by having more allies.

Edited May 19, 2008 by Junkalunka

[Fort Pitt]

i lost 2k!

get rid of it!

this just makes the people with the population booster trade set get MORE of an advantage

this is by far the worst (well only bad move) by CN since i have been here

Edited May 19, 2008 by Fort Pitt

[LJ Scott]

I didn't have to buy it. I wanted to see how much land had improved after reading these rumors. Conclusion? Land is still worthless. I'm posting it here so other people can learn from it.

I've done quite well with my land. Tho I do have almost a 1:1 land:infra ratio

I'm afraid this will hurt the tech dealing market. It can now become profitable to amass tech earlier.

Nah people will always sell

Also why do people even bother arguing with Syz and Diskord?

[Benjamin Smythe]

I've hardly noticed any change at all for some strange reason, even after the changes. So no worries... while I'm starting to show concern that people are willing to flame over suggestions, I hardly find that unusual...

[Syzygy]

As many have pointed out those of us with environment damaging resources are hurt more than others. I have had one trade dropped, further crashing my poor little economy. In trying to replace that trade I've already been told twice that the person won't accept trades for any of the environment damaging resources. I expect I am not the only one this has happened to. Guess its time to find other ways to kill off a few minutes of time every day.

now look at my resources...

Fact is that since Microchips and RadCleanup has become stronger, Oil has become stronger with them, equaling that out. Coal always was good, and since it is a requirement for FJ/AP and Steel+Asphalt+Cars-Route, the demand will be as high as before. Not even counted the fact that, as said 5times now, all these env-effects CAN be countered pretty easy if you just do it right (Gov, Water, Borderwalls, later NEO wonder).

[Junkalunka]

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

[Blue Lightning]

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).

[Provost Zakharov]

I've done quite well with my land. Tho I do have almost a 1:1 land:infra ratio

That is a completely meaningless statement. Quite well relative to what? Was land the best investment you could have made? Are you further now than if you spent that money on infra instead? I maintain that land in its current form is a poor investment.

[Syrik]

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

This actually increases the need for improvement swapping. There are now 4 different sets of improvements for those of us that don't have enough people to own all of the improvements at once. I'll let you figure out what they are though

[Kielmog]

Fact is now environment has too much of an impact. This is supposed to be a NATION SIMULATION game, not a fantasy game. There are countries with some of the worst environments in the world today that prosper more due to their environmental detriment. The environment should never be made a large factor in this game because it is not a large factor in real life, which is what this game is trying to simulate. If the environment did this much damage in real life, the United States, Japan, and other nations, SCREWED. I think the Netherlands would quickly find itself the hegemon if this update were applied to real life.

Yes, the environment needed fixing to have at least some impact, but, I shall make a crude visual Lower the effects on population and income for a negative environment. Let's try to keep this a REALISTIC nation simulation game. The best part, if not the central aspect about CN is the war aspect and the hegemony aspect. Making wars this costly takes the motivation out of nations to ever conflict with each other.

To summarize:

this update

__________________________________________________

what was needed

[diskord]

That is a completely meaningless statement. Quite well relative to what? Was land the best investment you could have made? Are you further now than if you spent that money on infra instead? I maintain that land in its current form is a poor investment.

I have fallen down to 7th in overall land (I'm lazy nowadays, I log in and collect), but I can assure you, I have never once purchased land... ever.

There are much more economically feasible (and a heck of a lot more fun as well) ways of acquiring land

[King Srqt]

It does effect large nations less.

As Syz has said Infra stops being lucrative at high levels and larger nations do not have much to spend money on, therefore the drop in income will effect them less even if the percentage drop is the same. So now the only thing that will be effected for large nations is there already huge surplus in cash will increase in size at a slower rate.

Smaller nations however need to continue purchasing infra in order to get to the status of "big nation" but the rate that they can do that has been significantly slowed which will allow the current large nations to maintain their edge for a longer period of time.

[LJ Scott]

That is a completely meaningless statement. Quite well relative to what? Was land the best investment you could have made? Are you further now than if you spent that money on infra instead? I maintain that land in its current form is a poor investment.

I have fallen down to 7th in overall land (I'm lazy nowadays, I log in and collect), but I can assure you, I have never once purchased land... ever.

There are much more economically feasible (and a heck of a lot more fun as well) ways of acquiring land

This. I've never purchased land. All my land has come through war and donations. By quite well I mean in comparison to what people somewhat equal to my nation seem to be reaping with this change.

[Junkalunka]

EDIT NVM

Edited May 19, 2008 by Junkalunka

[Provost Zakharov]

I have fallen down to 7th in overall land (I'm lazy nowadays, I log in and collect), but I can assure you, I have never once purchased land... ever.

There are much more economically feasible (and a heck of a lot more fun as well) ways of acquiring land

I assume you are referring to raiding.

To quote you from before:

Read the change.

Invest in land. A whole aspect of this change was to force people AWAY from the infra/infra/infra mindset. You did what every other CN player has been conditioned to do, buy more infra. In fact, if you had invested the same amount of money in to some land, your taxes would have INCREASED and you would have made money.

The only major change this update does is make people actually THINK about what they are doing when building their nation, not just pump money in to the infra beast.

So, first you give poor advice, and now you are advocating raiding. Shame on you.

[diskord]

I assume you are referring to raiding.

To quote you from before:

So, first you give poor advice, and now you are advocating raiding. Shame on you.

I have ALWAYS advocated raiding. Well, more to the point, I have always advocated warfare, whether for raiding or the sheer fun of just going to war... it's a lot more fun than most people think. There was a reason I was the #1 casualty count for over a year...

I'm not really a strict "tech/land raider", I am more of a warmonger.

The bad advise... well that was out of laziness, I didn't actually bother to look at his nation but made an assumption that he was one of those 60bajillion infra, no land infra whores. And we know what happens when you make an assumption, Diskord looks like an $@!, but since I embrace that title anyway, no harm no foul.