Let's blur it up

[thedestro]

What does everyone think of making figures and other things in the game more "hidden" or not so clear?

Some ideas: Getting rid of visual spy odds, changing "Infrastructure: 10,000" to Infrastructure: "Superbly Developed".

One of the examples I liked most was removing some things from the NS equation and making them hidden. I like the idea if somebody has been building themselves up alot secretly, to be able to surprise any raiders with "hidden strength" per se. It opens up a lot of doors for defenders.

I think our game is too predictable in this respect, and we should do something about it. And not necessarily those examples, but more of the idea.

And I'd like to hear any further examples that conform to this idea.

Edited January 6, 2009 by thedestro

[thaone]

Sorry Destro I don't like it, maybe for war reasons it has some value. But I like telling newbs that they are doing something wrong, and what they can do to improve there nation

[Woodrow]

Heh. I like the game predictable.

[Arturion]

I'd like to see more hidden aspects to nations, but not neccessarily hide what's already there.

[thedestro]

One of the examples I liked most was removing some things from the NS equation and making them hidden. I like the idea if somebody has been building themselves up alot secretly, to be able to surprise any raiders with "hidden strength" per se. It opens up a lot of doors for defenders.

Indeed, trying to make NS exactly represent everything you have would be very bad for this game as it rewards people who do not prepare for wars. There should be a reward for people who save up and buy military advantages like spies and wonders. Making them all factors for NS virtually kills them and removes a lot of strategy from this game. This game needs more hidden advantages, more strategies, and more surprises, not fewer.

Came from another suggestion but it's sort of the idea I'm pushing for.

Edited January 6, 2009 by thedestro

[Arturion]

Well, for one thing, secret aid would be a fantastic addition to the game - but it would also be neat to have more hidden wonders (maybe improvements too?) that you'd be able to surprise your adversaries with. I like the idea of other people not being able to completely analyze your nation.

[thedestro]

Well, for one thing, secret aid would be a fantastic addition to the game - but it would also be neat to have more hidden wonders (maybe improvements too?) that you'd be able to surprise your adversaries with. I like the idea of other people not being able to completely analyze your nation.

Exactly, and either new hidden additions to the game can do this or the de-NS'ing and hiding of current aspects can work.

[Mirreille]

Exactly, and either new hidden additions to the game can do this or the de-NS'ing and hiding of current aspects can work.

Hmm. You would have to remove their boost to soldier effectiveness from view, but maybe make Guerilla Camps invisible? I mean who in their right mind puts a guerilla camp right out in the open where people can see it?

[HHAYD]

Hmm. You would have to remove their boost to soldier effectiveness from view, but maybe make Guerilla Camps invisible? I mean who in their right mind puts a guerilla camp right out in the open where people can see it?

Or people who says, "Hey look! We haz a guerilla camp here!"

[zzzptm]

This is an excellent suggestion. People can be audited by posting their secret infos on alliance forums. Everyone else sees a nation that may or may not be in their range, nothing more. To get actual military levels and infra, etc., should require a spy mission.

[Hob Dobson]

Well, for one thing, secret aid would be a fantastic addition to the game - but it would also be neat to have more hidden wonders (maybe improvements too?) that you'd be able to surprise your adversaries with. I like the idea of other people not being able to completely analyze your nation.

"Counterintelligence Bureau: applies random +/- n % adjustment to infrastructure, technology, soldiers, tanks, naval strength, CMs, and nukes before NS calculation and nation display. Adjustment changes once per day."

Land area, at least growth rate, would have to be exempted or that would give away the adjustment.

[Lord Xnut]

Sorry Destro I don't like it, maybe for war reasons it has some value. But I like telling newbs that they are doing something wrong, and what they can do to improve there nation

You can still help out new players, but with a system like this in place that new nation will have to give you his detailed information. To give very good advices you pretty much need all his detailed information from the extended nation view anyways.

I like this suggestion. Like it is now you can calculate most of the important factors before going to war, the only thing that can stop you from a sure win is the random chances your attack fails, but most people attacks with more than 80% victory chance anyways.

Would it be intersting to add a feature from roleplaying games; the critical hit and critical failure? That means that no matter what percent chance of victory you have you will always win 5% of all attacks and in the same way always fail 5% of all attacks nomatter the combat odds?

[Syzygy]

I have suggested that long long ago. Unfortunately the people want it boring and predictable. They want to look at other nations and alliances, knowing exactly what they have to make sure they cannot fail with their plans/attacks.

That you can exactly see the enemies strength is one of the greatest flaws of this game, because it takes away any risk.

Secret Aid is a must. Its a shame that has not been implemented a year ago.

You should need 1 Intel Agency to determine enemy soldier count (but not efficiency). Else you see only "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" military instead of a soldiercont.

You should need 2 Intel Agencies to determine enemy tank count. Else you see only "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" tank force instead of a number.

You should need 3 Intel Agencies to determine enemy airforce count. Else you can only see the status "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" airforce instead of a number.

You should need 4 Intel Agencies to determine enemy CM count. Else you can only see the status "has CMs" or "has no CMs".

You should need 5 Intel Agencies to determine enemy Navy count. Else you can only see the status "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" navy instead of a number.

Nukes are only shown with the Status "nuclear armed" or "not nuclear armed".

If you have a CIA, this is changed to "nuclear armed (1-10), heavily nuclear armed (10-15), very heavy nuclear armed (15-20).

Nukes built in Hidden Nuclear Silos are invisible except you do a Spy Op. The HNS should be hidden as well.

If you do a "Gather Intel" mission, you get the exact numbers of all military.

Satellites should increase offensive Spy strength +3% each.

Infra, Tech and Land size should stay public available.

The game would be *so* much more interesting with that.

Edited January 7, 2009 by (DAC)Syzygy

[iMatt]

sygyzy I wish all those things you mention there would be implemented, I really do - and this appeases to all of the folk who argue about it, because now they can buy intell agencies to get all those numbers they're used to seeing, and this wouldn't affect nations who already ahve intel agencies (except for the nuke part). What about the numbers in the alliance stats?

[schmutte693]

Yes. I agree. When it comes to wars and nation growth, this game is all about the math. While it is going to be virtually impossible to remove that from nation growth, it would be nice to make wars a little less certain. Syzygy's suggestions look good offhand, but I have not really thought about them. Really, anything which makes this game a bit less certain, in game, would be nice.

edit: how about also removing battle odd percents. Just give a flat "Favored" or "Underdog" rating before each attack, instead of the exact(ish) percent chance?

Edited January 7, 2009 by schmutte693

[JCFalkenberg]

I have suggested that long long ago. Unfortunately the people want it boring and predictable. They want to look at other nations and alliances, knowing exactly what they have to make sure they cannot fail with their plans/attacks.

That you can exactly see the enemies strength is one of the greatest flaws of this game, because it takes away any risk.

Secret Aid is a must. Its a shame that has not been implemented a year ago.

You should need 1 Intel Agency to determine enemy soldier count (but not efficiency). Else you see only "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" military instead of a soldiercont.

You should need 2 Intel Agencies to determine enemy tank count. Else you see only "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" tank force instead of a number.

You should need 3 Intel Agencies to determine enemy airforce count. Else you can only see the status "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" airforce instead of a number.

You should need 4 Intel Agencies to determine enemy CM count. Else you can only see the status "has CMs" or "has no CMs".

You should need 5 Intel Agencies to determine enemy Navy count. Else you can only see the status "very weak/weak/average/strong/very strong" navy instead of a number.

Nukes are only shown with the Status "nuclear armed" or "not nuclear armed".

If you have a CIA, this is changed to "nuclear armed (1-10), heavily nuclear armed (10-15), very heavy nuclear armed (15-20).

Nukes built in Hidden Nuclear Silos are invisible except you do a Spy Op. The HNS should be hidden as well.

If you do a "Gather Intel" mission, you get the exact numbers of all military.

Satellites should increase offensive Spy strength +3% each.

Infra, Tech and Land size should stay public available.

The game would be *so* much more interesting with that.

I think all of these ideas are interesting, but have a few questions:

-how would you balance secret aid? a wonder, lowered sendable amount, something else? or do you feel there should be no downside to it?

-how would nukes contribution to NS be changed? if it isn't then their numbers could probably be reverse-engineered from the NS calculations.

I have a starter suggestion, HNMS covered missiles don't count (21-25 contribute nothing to NS), and make the 3 ranges count towards NS as a whole IE for having 1-10, you get x NS for having 11-15 x^2 or x*2 or something, 16-20 x^3 or whatever. also, would there still be an alliance nuke count?

[enderland]

What does everyone think of making figures and other things in the game more "hidden" or not so clear?

Some ideas: Getting rid of visual spy odds, changing "Infrastructure: 10,000" to Infrastructure: "Superbly Developed".

One of the examples I liked most was removing some things from the NS equation and making them hidden. I like the idea if somebody has been building themselves up alot secretly, to be able to surprise any raiders with "hidden strength" per se. It opens up a lot of doors for defenders.

I think our game is too predictable in this respect, and we should do something about it. And not necessarily those examples, but more of the idea.

And I'd like to hear any further examples that conform to this idea.

I agree 100%.

It would make this game so much more interesting, and fun to play. There actually would be some element of unpredictability. It would increase the ability for ingame politics to exist.

sigh, who am I kidding...

[zzzptm]

Heck, just make all aid secret aid. One should only view how many slots are open.

Here is a list of all secret information in the game:

1. Who I am trading with - and that can be revealed in a spy op.

2. How many spies I have and/or a CIA - and that can be almost revealed just by going to the spy operations screen, without having to execute a mission.

3. My government positions

4. My messages

5. My list of saved nations

6. Things I have typed in my notepad

7. Events I'm dealing with

8. My password

Of 3-8, none of them are of any value in a battle. Well, maybe the password... but all the others are useless in war. Wars in this game are heavily slanted in favor of the attacker. Let's give something helpful to the defenders in this game!

[Syzygy]

I think all of these ideas are interesting, but have a few questions:

-how would you balance secret aid? a wonder, lowered sendable amount, something else? or do you feel there should be no downside to it?

Secret aid cost 50% penalty. Means, if you send 3M, 4.5m would be taken away from your nation. The additional cash is for the logistic, bribery and whatnot.

Also everyone should be able to RECEIVE secret aid, but only nations with CIA should be able to SEND secret aid.

Secret aid is not showing up at the aidscreen of a nation (neither sender nor receiver).

If you launch a successful spy-operation against the receiver, it will tell you how much aid was received and when (timestamp).

If you launch a successful spy-operation against the sender, it will reveal everything (how much, receiver, timestamp).

-how would nukes contribution to NS be changed? if it isn't then their numbers could probably be reverse-engineered from the NS calculations.

If just enough stuff is hidden, you fail in reverse-engineering anyway. HNS nukes should not count, obviously and the HNS wonder should be hidden as well. (btw: imho Guerilla Camps should be also hidden, because normally nobody knows where they are: THATS THE KEY OF GUERILLA WARFARE )

[jer]

Supported.

[schmutte693]

3. My government positions

You can actually get an idea of these from the nation information at the top of the page . That might only be in extended view, though.

[SynthFG]

Agree entirely that the majority of stats about a nation should be hidden with a fuzzy NS would make wars more interesting and vastly increase the importance of the gather intelligence mission

Also would make it more likely that some alliances would use spy ops in peace time to keep target lists up to date, leading to drama if they are cought

[Teh Chad]

What about making this something that's connected with your alliance affiliation? To be more clear, you would have to be on the same a/a as another nation to be able to see specific things about said nation - specific aid slot usage, military buildup, total infra, etc - and if you're not on that same a/a, then you can't see the specific data. This would add a large need to kill ghosts and spies on your A/A.

[thedestro]

What about making this something that's connected with your alliance affiliation? To be more clear, you would have to be on the same a/a as another nation to be able to see specific things about said nation - specific aid slot usage, military buildup, total infra, etc - and if you're not on that same a/a, then you can't see the specific data. This would add a large need to kill ghosts and spies on your A/A.

I think that would promote a lot of spying (I don't mean in-game spying). There's just a lot of ways around that tbh

[Qaianna]

I can understand the desire for 'fuzzy' ranges in counts, but how would you determine what's what? You'd have to figure where 'practically undefended' stops and 'mediocre' begins, for example. Same with everything else.

The idea of secret aid is interesting, although you would have to know a nation's using that aid slot for something. If only to explain why they should have one free slot but you can't send anything.

And as to letting folks who share the AA look at the detailed info ... um, not unless AA is tightened up a LOT more. There's enough ghosting without there being an actual in-game benefit.