New environment effect

[OneBallMan]

It's not just that, but even when I do testing on the development server (there is one btw) I don't always catch all the bugs or think of how something could be different until I get feedback from the community. Most games like this are setup and run pretty much the same way. Changes are performed on the fly because in most cases they have to be.

Admin, don't listen to these guys. So what if you made a change? They are pixels.

[Robertraccoon]

Admin, don't listen to these guys. So what if you made a change? They are pixels.

I'm not a pixel *Cries*

[Aya Reiko]

This change BLOWS!

It makes maxing out your soldier count a crap shoot before the "overly strong" penalty kicks in. Here's an idea: Make the environment have no effect on population whatsoever. Make it a pure happiness effect instead.

[Robertraccoon]

This change BLOWS!

It makes maxing out your soldier count a crap shoot before the "overly strong" penalty kicks in. Here's an idea: Make the environment have no effect on population whatsoever. Make it a pure happiness effect instead.

That would be nice, The pop change is a huge hit, and will be hard to ever recover from.

[ALFERALFER]

The deployment screen needs to allow negative adjustments even if you attacked someone in the last 2 days.

At least to allow you to get into the 80/20% range when your peeps changed without you doing anything to your nation.

Here are a few examples:

You eat 6 cm's and lose 45 infra and 450 peeps when you are 80% deployed, there in no way to fix the 20% error without buying more infra.

Someone changes then ENV calculation.

You can get into this same mess by changing your gov from commie to monarchy and losing 5% and all it's peeps too.

I am also offering a lead/water trade for 3 mil 50 tech every 10 days forever if anyone is interested.

[Syzygy]

Syzygy, I'm surprised to see you disparage Border Walls as you do. They were much more than useful to any nation between certain levels of competing factors; had you not checked your math on them lately? This change has angered MANY people. I suppose I shouldn't even post this, considering unbiased mod wants to completely quash discussion on this change except between yourself and admin. That's going to prove helpful, isn't it.

- first: I do not care how many people are "angry" because of changes which are good in the long run. I never did when making suggestions and I never do. CN politics is nothing I even think about when posting there and yes, I take enough flak for it from a lot of people. Regarding this last update: Nations with 20 nukes now have a -2env penalty, now look which alliance is full of nations with 20nukes. Mine. People can argue all day long about my intentions, but in fact they know nothing and talk stuff.

- second: I have done the math several times, and for real highlevel nations Borderwalls were either counterproductive or only 1 or 2 of them had any impact at all. In ALL cases any nation has purchased them as the last improvement because in most cases they did plain suck. This is not the case right now, depending on a nations setup they might be even better than churches or intel agencies - the trick is to find out for your individual nation, right now you need some skill while before you simply followed a general guide which left always no room for mistakes. And yes, that the need of skill is something I want to see having more impact in the game I do not deny. Right now you have options influencing your env and with that your nations economy to a degree you notice - that means Gov, Wonders, Trades, Nukes.

- third: GRL had almost *no* impact before, the penalty was totally unimportant. It has now, so the deterrence of nukes has gone up, while the usage of nukes will lead to even political pressure. More politics in the game = better for everyone.

- fourth: Lead, Microchips, Rad.Cleanup were all almost useless. Not one combo with one of these was actually able to compete with the 'standard' setups: 3BG, 5BG, AP/FJ - now the 8BG or simply a Lead/Scholars combo is a nice option for Nuclear armed nations or during times the GRL is pretty high (3-4). I see only benefits for the trade market, since you have now a DEMAND for special situations, while you had "standard BEST combos" before.

[klaudiO]

This change BLOWS!

It makes maxing out your soldier count a crap shoot before the "overly strong" penalty kicks in. Here's an idea: Make the environment have no effect on population whatsoever. Make it a pure happiness effect instead.

im having that penalty =/

[Sir Wellington]

Syzygy.... while I understand the logic behind these changes, I can say I hardly agree with them.

While I do appreciate the complexity of the game and giving an advantage to the knowledgeable player, the implementation of this does not allow for a healthy transition.

Some problems I see...

The sudden implementation of this without warning completely screws things up. Imagine GOD decided he was going to change the gravitational constant of physics from 6.67e-11 to 5e-11... sure, it might eventually allow for the good changes that would come from it, but it would basically revert centuries of development. Everything that relies on that constant would be useless and would take decades of new development and end in mass chaos.

I for one would have appreciated a little warning and "hey, here is the impact"... and yes I am a numbers cruncher.

The negative impact I have seen from this is truly outstanding!

[Robertraccoon]

Capitalism, and communism now beats monarchy as the best gov choices I have found out. I guess CN is going to go from an area of Kings and Queens to Capitalism and Communism. Just like when RL became modern.

Edited May 19, 2008 by Robertraccoon

[King Srqt]

To enable those outside the top 5% to be able to buy nukes. Doesn't mean they can afford to maintain them.

So screw the people who could afford it but now cant and have already spent the 120 million that they cant get back

[DarkMistress]

Thank you so much for these changes which have made it effectively useless to grow if you're in the middle unless you have the 'right' trade set. I have never in this game had the 'right' trade set due to bad starting resources. Now, my nation is crippled moreso than before because I'm not 'big' nor am I small. You've managed to make this game even more infuriating. Congratulations.

And if you don't care that players in this game are angered over these ridiculous changes, then clearly you don't care about the game being enjoyed or even played by more than a handful of people.

So again, thank you.

[unbiased mod]

I posted this in the Suggestion box thread to, also valid here, so for the most of you lot, DON'T POST!

STILL VALID

(wow, 2 times as the last post on a page)

[Syzygy]

I for one would have appreciated a little warning and "hey, here is the impact"... and yes I am a numbers cruncher.

The negative impact I have seen from this is truly outstanding!

well I can not influence HOW the changes are implemented, only the way they go. That there was no warning and not hints what might come is neither my fault nor in my power to change.

The gameplay will adapt to the new envchanges in less than a few weeks, the trademarket may need a bit longer, but he has survived the AP/FJ changes and will probably also adapt to the Lead/RadCleanup-Boost over time. The overall pop-reduction is INTENTIONAL to slow down the growth and inflation spiral a bit. The admin WANTS it that way, because people (especially in the top ranks) make so much cash nowadays, that some of them sit on BILLIONS of cash and every wonder you implement for them to purchase only makes them MORE profitable long term.

And btw Land/PopDensity has absolutely NO impact in this update right now as far as I know.

[auto98]

- second: I have done the math several times, and for real highlevel nations Borderwalls were either counterproductive or only 1 or 2 of them had any impact at all. In ALL cases any nation has purchased them as the last improvement because in most cases they did plain suck. This is not the case right now, depending on a nations setup they might be even better than churches or intel agencies - the trick is to find out for your individual nation, right now you need some skill while before you simply followed a general guide which left always no room for mistakes. And yes, that the need of skill is something I want to see having more impact in the game I do not deny. Right now you have options influencing your env and with that your nations economy to a degree you notice - that means Gov, Wonders, Trades, Nukes.

While i did indeed buy them last, at 7k infra the ideal number for me was 4 BW's (prior to the update)

However, i like both the changes (now they have been corrected) and the original idea so i wont be too pedantic

Oh and btw - my natural trades are spices and uranium, so those of you complaining about trades should think on....

Edited May 19, 2008 by auto98

[admin]

Capitalism, and communism now beats monarchy as the best gov choices I have found out. I guess CN is going to go from an area of Kings and Queens to Capitalism and Communism. Just like when RL became modern.

Monarchy was already too strong and would have become ridiculously powerful after today's update. Look at the game demographics, almost 33% of the game is currently in Monarchy. As (DAC)Syzygy has pointed out the main purpose behind today's update is to cut back on some of the cookie cutter nation building and give people real choices to make in the game.

[Herzl]

Capitalism, and communism now beats monarchy as the best gov choices I have found out. I guess CN is going to go from an area of Kings and Queens to Capitalism and Communism. Just like when RL became modern.

Yeah, I jumped up by about 10% of my income when I switched from Monarchy to Capitalism, its a huge difference

[King Srqt]

With this I'm going to close this topic. There's another big topic on this in the Gameplay Discussions forum. If you have more input go there.

STILL VALID

(wow, 2 times as the last post on a page)

I took this to mean that discussion could take place here.

Was I wrong? (not trying to question authority but would like to know if it is ok to post here)

[Craven]

Monarchy was already too strong and would have become ridiculously powerful after today's update. Look at the game demographics, almost 33% of the game is currently in Monarchy. As (DAC)Syzygy has pointed out the main purpose behind today's update is to cut back on some of the cookie cutter nation building and give people real choices to make in the game.

Like Admin stated, this makes the game more interesting by giving us more choices. I'v switched around my government types to see the impact and differences and I dont see it as a huge deal. I dont have full trades and this update actually brought me an extra 1$.

[Istus]

The overall pop-reduction is INTENTIONAL to slow down the growth and inflation spiral a bit. The admin WANTS it that way, because people (especially in the top ranks) make so much cash nowadays, that some of them sit on BILLIONS of cash and every wonder you implement for them to purchase only makes them MORE profitable long term.

Since you seem to be "in-the-know," why is this a problem for admin? After all, they are just digital numbers, why does it matter how large they are? Isn't the point of this game to grow and be "powerful?"

PS This is less in regards to the update which I can deal with and more simply playing devils advocate.

EDIT: Spelling

Edited May 19, 2008 by Dr Hrmmm

[unbiased mod]

I took this to mean that discussion could take place here.

Was I wrong? (not trying to question authority but would like to know if it is ok to post here)

indeed, a discussion may, a flame/troll post thread not.

[Blamange]

May I ask where the Game Update log topic is, I don't go on these forums very often...

[ALFERALFER]

I found another plus for this change, Think of all the money you will save on borderwall swapping for wars and collection, You now have to buy and keep borderwalls to have maximum population which allows the purchase of maximum soldiers and tanks.

One little question on the hidden nuke silo, if it's hidden there should no people around to be affected by the radiation so the .1/.05 per nuke penalty should be lessend/removed for nukes 21 thru 25?

[Melidan]

Lost about 1 mil in collections per day, but I had 5 star enviroment... Meh, my citizens were very happy with their border walls! Ah shucks, I suppose..

So is monarchy still the best choice?

Edited May 19, 2008 by Melidan

[klaudiO]

why population is need to down whit this ?

[Syzygy]

Thank you so much for these changes which have made it effectively useless to grow if you're in the middle unless you have the 'right' trade set. I have never in this game had the 'right' trade set due to bad starting resources. Now, my nation is crippled moreso than before because I'm not 'big' nor am I small. You've managed to make this game even more infuriating. Congratulations.

whats your problem? That instead of 'everything' you have to make a decision which improvements to focus on?

Get Borderwalls and your eco will be at almost the same level like before - that you lost pop is WANTED by the admin [as he already confirmed] and EVERYONE has lost it.

Stay at your current setup and you will have military boni (Guerilla Camps, Barracks, Satellites, Missile Defenses) but economic penalties.

Hey, that even sounds logical, the environment of nations is usually not the best during war, and you are at war.

Your nation is *far far far* away from being "crippled".