Jump to content

Game Update


Slayer99

Defcon Level Change  

703 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 236
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This ruins the fun of alliance wars and pretty much screws anyone over who is being attacked. I mean, if you are hit by a rogue, you and your alliance buddies can't scramble to fight a full defense for five days. Thats enough time for said rogue to do massive damage.

I agree with this post and thus, I have quoted it.

This is one thing that I have failed to consider. If I am hit by a rogue, why am I penalized by only being able to fight back at maximum readiness for 3 days?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's face it....this is totally unfair to the casual players and puts them at a distinct disadvantage. People we could count on to send out aid when asked, to attack someone when asked, but were otherwise not active on a daily basis....will now be totally screwed over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not a bit realistic. To me a CN day is like a RL year. Nothing like 5 years to gear up for war. This will serve to make an already slow game even slower. :angry:

my thoughts exactly =D

like... you arent going to magically build a few highways and bridges and w/e in a day (10 infrastructure). Just like you wont magically recruit another 40000 soldiers to help with the war front in a day.

If the game was more real-time oriented then I would say its more realistic but... CN is kind of a slow game as it plays.

I voted against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's face it....this is totally unfair to the casual players and puts them at a distinct disadvantage. People we could count on to send out aid when asked, to attack someone when asked, but were otherwise not active on a daily basis....will now be totally screwed over.

Agreed. People sometimes forget about those nations who are not as active as the others, yet still collect only a few times a week to send out aid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd much prefer the original Defcon levels.

If we had to make then change, then at least drop the number of Defcon levels to 3 or allow a +/- 2 change each day as was already suggested. Or we could just leave it the way it is.

Edited by Penguin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, this is how Admin works. He makes an update, sees what kind of outrage it causes, then slowly changes it until people are only slightly pissed off rather than being outraged. Now I don't consider myself opposed to all change in the game but it seems that admin is increasingly listening to the desires and suggestions of the few nations at the top rather than the population of Planet Bob in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, no, no, no.

So let's say that I spend four days building up to DEFCON 1. First thing my enemy does is send spies in to change my DEFCON back to 5. By the time I'm back at maximum readiness, the war is almost over. This change makes spies inordinately powerful.

Also, this is a MAJOR change to game mechanics. Such a mjor change should not be, in my opinion, implemented after barely twelve hours of consideration.

This is one of the most far-reaching changes proposed yet and there is no reason that it should be implemented on such short notice.

I agree; this makes spies ridiculously powerful. I remember using spies on war opponents in the last major war--it must have been a pain in the butt to login and find that you've been attacked at DEFCON 5 in spite of your best efforts; to make it so that it takes so long to get back up to full military strength just doesn't seem fair.

I don't like this "update" at all. Not that I am against improving gameplay, but I don't think this does much good for CN.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhh the post I quoted was edited by the author. The statements below apply generally.

I would respectfully disagree that alliances retain the element of surprise with this upcoming change. A casual monitoring of an alliance's DEFCON levels can easily alert outside observers to an upcoming war by alliance "X". A proposed solution may be to make DEFCON levels private, but that only makes the organizers of war oblivious to how prepared their own alliance is, in terms of DEFCON levels. Going one step further, if one proposed that only fellow alliance members can see one's DEFCON level, this precaution is easily circumvented by ghosting an AA for a few seconds and gathering information. The ultimate solution, thus, is to create a sort of system with which alliance membership can be authorized in-game, preventing ghosting. :ph34r:

Edited by Epik High
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, this is how Admin works. He makes an update, sees what kind of outrage it causes, then slowly changes it until people are only slightly pissed off rather than being outraged. Now I don't consider myself opposed to all change in the game but it seems that admin is increasingly listening to the desires and suggestions of the few nations at the top rather than the population of Planet Bob in general.

Maybe because the outrage over the tech thing was stupid and that update didn't really change anything. This fundamentally slows the entire war system down to a point of total boredom and makes the game even more boring. The only reason I play the game now is because of the people, the game is already boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe because the outrage over the tech thing was stupid and that update didn't really change anything. This fundamentally slows the entire war system down to a point of total boredom and makes the game even more boring. The only reason I play the game now is because of the people, the game is already boring.

I was referring more to the tech requirements he put on aircraft which he then lowered by a factor of two from 1000 tech to buy level 9's to only 500 tech.

Edited by Varses
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though I already voted no... I didnt consider spies into this. It would be completely ridiculous to go from defcon 5 to 1 in 5 days, then on that 5th day your enemy just changes your defcon to 5 (or w/e it may be). In essence, that would totally dissolve the purpose of defcon levels, being that you would just run spy missions all of the time, making both parties stuck in defcon 5 (low readiness).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...