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 is #$@$@#.....

First off.. With the spy missions able to change defcons... WHAT SENSE DOSE THIS MAKE?

Secondly, IT's a horrible add to the war system, that's been changed to much already.. give the war system updates a break.... then start adding new things

Thirdly. wars last 7 days... and realistically that's crap.... perhaps instead of chaning defcons... CHANGE how long wars lasT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a game - not real life, so the admin should not implement every real life thing, because most of them quite simply do not apply to the game, and in addition, one of the reasons games like CN are fun, is because they indeed are not 100% realistic.

I think the goal should be to keep the game playable, and this change will fight against this goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very much no.

But lately I've noticed a lot of nations buying a lot of infra per day, like 30 or 40. Why don't we double infra costs after 1k barrier too? It would be excellent for the gameplay.

Edit: This is a joke. Many people didn't seemed to get it.

Edited by Marechal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But lately I've noticed a lot of nations buying a lot of infra per day, like 30 or 40. Why don't we double infra costs after 1k barrier too? It would be excellent for the gameplay.

Infra already costs a lot, this would only serve to benefit large alliances which can afford to send large amounts of aid to their nations, and ruin the game for smaller and mid-sized alliances.

Edited by Starcraftmazter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sorry this really does not make sense to me. It is not realistic at all. Defcon in the real world can change in a minute. Troops are always deployed and ready to go in the real world. Home based troops can be deployed and mobilized in 24 hours. And the fact that the defcon affects how much money a nation can make is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Infra already costs a lot, this would only serve to benefit large alliances which can afford to send large amounts of aid to their nations, and ruin the game for smaller and mid-sized alliances.

Of course I was not being serious.

It just represents another idea about the same level of this one.

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.

What he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very much no.

But lately I've noticed a lot of nations buying a lot of infra per day, like 30 or 40. Why don't we double infra costs after 1k barrier too? It would be excellent for the gameplay.

How about me Times them by 6 for over 6000 infracture? Oh wait you wouldn't like that.... Your already over 1k infra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To quote my post in the suggestion thread:

I like this idea. A few points to counter those bashing it:

- You can still initiate a surprise attack. It just is slightly less effective. Also, if it it really is a surprise attack, your enemy will also be at defcon 5 and so you will be on equal footing. You will actually likely be on slightly better footing as you will be a step ahead on getting to defcon 1.

- Alliances can have people switching in and out of higher levels to have a standing force. Should be a natural part of improvement swap cycles anyway to not collect for long periods.

- You can still fight at levels 2-5. The penalty isn't that huge. Just like you can still collect at levels 1-4, the penalty isn't that huge. I don't know how people get the idea that you can't fight at defcon 5. You just don't now because it would be stupid not to switch to 1 to attack, as it isn't a big deal to switch to 1. And its stupid to collect not in 5 now because its easy to switch into it before update and switch out afterwards. But just because its stupid not to be in 1 to attack and 5 to collect now due to the ease of it doesn't mean it won't kill people to not do it once the change happens.

- It is realistic. You can still fight a war on the fly. It just takes time to be ready to your maximum advantage.

- Changing to +/- 2 will just make levels 2 and 4 worthless. +1 is realistic. Taking 4 days isn't entirely unreasonable. Though I think 3 would be the better. That could be changed by only having 4 defcon levels instead of 5.

Edited by Azaghul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think this is a very good idea. makes the defcons between 1 and 5 useful. voted yes.

This is the equivalent of saying that all the functions of the game should be used and players should be forced to use them. I think that since you're nuclear capable, you should be forced to buy nukes, one per day, until you have the maximum. It doesn't make DEFCONs 2-4 any more useful than they are now, it simply makes them necessary.

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...