KOwens06 Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 Ok, I am sick of having "clingers" that just give up on their nation while at war with me. It is basically because they attacked one of my nations and I defended them. Once they knew they were done they quit. I think either you could specify the type of war 3 day, 5 day, or 7 day. Or even just set it up as that once one nation offers peace, peace is given. I see problems with that because some tech raids will want to be defended. But I see that if you shorten the war length both parties will be happy and if its an alliance war. Blam the 7 day option is there. I think that would be an easy fix to all the frustration. Thanks for reading this, KO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 Agreed. Although there could be certain modifiers based on how long you set the war to be in order to make it fairer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingNeptune Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 Maybe we could have more ground attacks per day if its a shorter war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOwens06 Posted July 11, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 That really wouldn't be fair. It needs to be the same amount of attacks per day. Because Tech Raids would be enormous. The mods would work but thats not even necessary. Just the length would help in TE so that there would be more wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itsuki Koizumi Posted July 11, 2009 Report Share Posted July 11, 2009 tech raids with inactive guys is the most annoying thing ever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 tech raids with inactive guys is the most annoying thing ever I know... I support this idea of the length of a war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pax ME Posted July 13, 2009 Report Share Posted July 13, 2009 i think it would be best for a "3 Day War" and "7 Days War" (regardless, only two options that have a 'large' and 'small' incriment, preferably nothing on the extremes (1&2 and 8-10)) There should be some bonus to having a "quick skirmish" compared to a "Long, Heated War" Perhaps more recources obtainable in "Quick Battle" and discounts (which turn 'negative' at the end of the war) for "Long Wars"? (I could see examples of discounts in "Long Wars" as with what happened to the US in WW1 with the economic boom) So for "Long Battles" it might be: +x% of Soldiers +x% Ground Battle Strength -x% on Military Upkeep -x% Income On Next Collection/During War And "Short Battles": +x% Cap on Raidable Resources (IE from 5 tech per attack to 7.5, 10 tech etc) -x% Battle Strength (due to being 'uprepared') And possibly if 3 war types is best, a "Normal" War Type with nuetral benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguino Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 this would be a great idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOwens06 Posted July 14, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 I think so too. thanks for the suggestions. I just hope we can get some one to look at this because I am sick of "clingers" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko Posted July 14, 2009 Report Share Posted July 14, 2009 As soon as admin finds this, lets pray he realizes it's genius and adds it to the game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easton Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 what i could see working as well is one sided peace. If one party offers peace and the other doesnt react at all (ie no attacks etc) then peace is accepted automatically for him after 3 days. everything else is war slot filling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 It is basically because they attacked one of my nations and I defended them One of your nations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazzarin Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 90% sure he means one from his alliance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Stranger Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 90% sure he means one from his alliance You never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrniice Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 See my suggestion here which is a variation on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 i think it would be best for a "3 Day War" and "7 Days War" (regardless, only two options that have a 'large' and 'small' incriment, preferably nothing on the extremes (1&2 and 8-10))There should be some bonus to having a "quick skirmish" compared to a "Long, Heated War" Perhaps more recources obtainable in "Quick Battle" and discounts (which turn 'negative' at the end of the war) for "Long Wars"? (I could see examples of discounts in "Long Wars" as with what happened to the US in WW1 with the economic boom) So for "Long Battles" it might be: +x% of Soldiers +x% Ground Battle Strength -x% on Military Upkeep -x% Income On Next Collection/During War And "Short Battles": +x% Cap on Raidable Resources (IE from 5 tech per attack to 7.5, 10 tech etc) -x% Battle Strength (due to being 'uprepared') And possibly if 3 war types is best, a "Normal" War Type with nuetral benefits. Actually, I think the longer wars should have more benefits because, I could just do a short 3 day war then get 60 tech during that war. Then I could just re-declare because he would still be in my range Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbei Posted December 9, 2010 Report Share Posted December 9, 2010 [quote name='Believland' timestamp='1248293511' post='1711151'] Actually, I think the longer wars should have more benefits because, I could just do a short 3 day war then get 60 tech during that war. Then I could just re-declare because he would still be in my range [/quote] You could just declare a 5 or 7 day war instead of two 3 day wars. Keep It Simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMuz Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I don't think an option should be given. It's a boon for slot fillers who'll say that they want a 7 day war. Because the rounds are so short, 7 days is just way too long to switch from one war to another, especially with TE's fast pace. There's also a lot of people who don't intentionally cling; they just log out of the game after getting the crap beat out of them in a fight and don't log back in. I say we drop the war time to 5 days in a future round, then later to 3 or 4 days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tz30 Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 (edited) I really like the 3-4 day war idea. 5 right now is ok too, but 4 would be even better. But the main problem is this post I made about being able to declare on someone who is [color="#0000FF"][url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=64037&view=findpost&p=2692269"]50% below your NS[/url][/color]. Edited April 18, 2011 by Tz30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awesome Dog Posted May 2, 2011 Report Share Posted May 2, 2011 What about something like "if no aggressions are taken for 48 hours after peace is sent it auto expires?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronicPlane Posted June 9, 2011 Report Share Posted June 9, 2011 I like this idea! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.