Jump to content

Tournament Edition Bugs & Suggestions


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 331
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Another suggestion to try:

- Limit all alliances to a maximum of 25 nations. This will stop one alliance getting a monopoly and steam rolling everyone else. Small alliances = more mayhem. It might be a radical idea, but I think it would work quiet well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While yes, that would indeed increase mayhem, it'd be kinda annoying since, well, that's just a small number and you can't get sanctioned. Maybe, if you HAVE to have a limitation implemented, it could at least be to where people can have alliances that meet the minimum sanction requirement (I forget how many nations minimum are required for sanction and I kinda gotta rush so eh)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to see the point in sanctioning alliances in CNTE. A sanctioned alliance will only get stronger unless another sanctioned alliance plots against it. Two hundred or even a thousand small alliances of 25 nations will have much more fun just battling it out while leaving the political aspect out of it. That's all sanctioning an alliance does; increase the politics. A newbie who joins the game will more often than not join a sanctioned alliance in turn making that alliance even more powerful. CNTE does not need sanctioned alliances, far from it. We need mayhem, chaos. And to leave the CN separate from CNTE, we can't have entire alliances transferring from CN to CNTE. It will inevitable happen that friends from CN alliances will end up joining the same CNTE alliance, but we can at least limit this from happening to a certain extent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruise Missiles Cost Per Unit To Purchase: $10,000.00

10k? how is anyone supposed to goto war with 10k CM's thats like gold to a small nation, and since there is no aid available from larger nations you got to go at it on your own, even though your an alliance.

I think the price should be lowered by at least 75%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another suggestion to try:

- Limit all alliances to a maximum of 25 nations. This will stop one alliance getting a monopoly and steam rolling everyone else. Small alliances = more mayhem. It might be a radical idea, but I think it would work quiet well.

Utterly pointless. Alliances don't even require AAs to exist in-game. All this would accomplish is that not everyone in an alliance will use the same AA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defcon doesn't affect efficiency.

Yeah it does. From the about_topics page:

DEFCON 5 - Normal peacetime military readiness. (+2 happiness, +20% initial soldier cost, 76% soldier efficiency, tank, navy, aircraft strength in battle)

DEFCON 4 - Normal military readiness, increased intelligence and strengthened security measures. (+1 happiness, +10% initial soldier cost, 81% soldier efficiency, tank, navy, aircraft strength in battle)

DEFCON 3 - Increased military readiness above normal readiness. (+0 happiness, +0% initial soldier cost, 86% soldier efficiency, tank, navy, aircraft strength in battle)

DEFCON 2 - Increased military readiness, but less than maximum readiness. (-1 happiness, -10% initial soldier cost, 93% soldier efficiency, tank, navy, aircraft strength in battle)

DEFCON 1 - Maximum military readiness. (-2 happiness, -20% initial soldier cost, 100% soldier efficiency, tank, navy, aircraft strength in battle)

Edited by Janquel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another suggestion to try:

- Limit all alliances to a maximum of 25 nations. This will stop one alliance getting a monopoly and steam rolling everyone else. Small alliances = more mayhem. It might be a radical idea, but I think it would work quiet well.

Then people will make a secondary AA (example: "United White 2"). Limiting th e AA does nothing.

-Bama

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) There will be one update per day just like Cyber Nations standard. There are many reasons for a single update per day but mostly becuase multiple updates are difficult for players to keep up with.

Yes, I see what you have said.

But I still want to ballpark an idea I just had - a hard and soft update each day?

The standard update at 12am CN time, as a hard update, and a soft update at 12pm for a second day of taxes.

Gives the chance for a bit more economic growth without over-use of the war systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok hit delete button, and got this:

Your nation is too new to be deleted at this time. Please wait until after 8/5/2008 to complete the nation deletion process. After 8/5/2008 you may freely delete your nation at any time.

thats today, or do I have to wait till the 6th?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then people will make a secondary AA (example: "United White 2"). Limiting th e AA does nothing.

-Bama

True, it might make that alliance a bit more of a target though.

The update at 12am is awkward for people the other side of the atlantic. I'm sure as hell not going to get up at 5am in the mornings to do a quad attack. Perhaps the server could reset after every 20 hours instead of every 24? People world wide would get a chance to perform a quad attack instead of just people in the Americas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but: I feel like anarchy should last less time. Since the game is more or less war only. Being in anarchy severely limits your chances of being able to fight a war. Thus making it less fun to play and people being more likely to not enjoy it... If the time your nation spent in anarchy was reduced, it could make warring much more enjoyable. (Especially if we see war like we did in the current alpha, where the entire world breaks into war in the first 24 hours).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a good one,

The War-slot filling rules need to be adjusted for TE. Since in this new version, there are more wars for nations lacking in money; the game may warn a user for not attacking someone he declared on frequently.

But in reality, the user was ganged up on and had no money or soldiers to attack offensively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but I think the game would be much more awesome, if you could get nukes just by getting the infra and Tech Requirements, With Uranium of course. The game would be much funner if everyone could nab nukes instead of just the top 5 %.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...