Fistandantilus Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 I think the cost of the Manhattan project ought to be reduced to about 25 mil or less, otherwise it'll just be easier to get into the top 5% rather than buy the wonder. Yes it'd make it easier for nuclear rogues to get it but it also makes the game more fun 25 mil is way to cheep, though I do support a price reduction. I think that 50 mil would be ideal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzak Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 Conventional warfare is quite silly right now since everyone will just use the big red button to destroy all defending forces and cause instant anarchy. Nukes are simply overpowered, not as silly as they originally were, but still overpowered. SDI balances the game and adds some requirements for strategy and makes having multiple nukes more useful. We used to be able to fight wars with just soldiers and there's no reason why battles shouldn't be important again. Conventional battles are lot more fun and involve more strategy than pressing the silly button once per day. We could of course agree to a compromise that would suit your need for a battle system requiring great military genius: whenever a war nation declares war on another both immediately go into nuclear anarchy and lose all of their soldiers and 150 infra and the same happens at every update until the war expires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) Conventional warfare is quite silly right now since everyone will just use the big red button to destroy all defending forces and cause instant anarchy. Nukes are simply overpowered, not as silly as they originally were, but still overpowered. SDI balances the game and adds some requirements for strategy and makes having multiple nukes more useful. We used to be able to fight wars with just soldiers and there's no reason why battles shouldn't be important again. Conventional battles are lot more fun and involve more strategy than pressing the silly button once per day. We could of course agree to a compromise that would suit your need for a battle system requiring great military genius: whenever a war nation declares war on another both immediately go into nuclear anarchy and lose all of their soldiers and 150 infra and the same happens at every update until the war expires. You obviously know nothing about nuclear war strategy. Only a fool nukes his enemy everyday. Every third day is enough to keep the enemy in nuke anarchy for maximum time while conserving your nuke stockpile for future battles. Ground battles are contrary to your belief importent in nuclear war. Through ground attacks you steal money from your enemies making it easier to bill lock them and harder for them to bill lock you. Nukes are anything but overpowered. Their main use is not the actually damage they cause, but the nuke anarchy. Also, lol @ Conventional battles are lot more fun and involve more strategy than pressing the silly button once per day. That's all we ever do, press silly buttons. Pressing a nuke button is no different then pressing a CM button. Edited November 20, 2007 by der_ko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brotherington Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 All the improvements are great as they were last night. The change to SDI is unnecessary in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carnage Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 Manhattan Project - $100,000,000 - The Manhattan Project allows nations below 5% of the top nations in the game to develop nuclear weapons. The Manhattan Project cannot be destroyed once it is created. The wonder requires 3,000 infrastructure, 300 technology, and a uranium resource. So do I still to have uranium trade to buy nukes with Manhattan Project ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygy Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 of course... what should your nukes be constructed from? wooden missles launched by a 100M Catapult? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 No, I have not been at 8k infra. I have not passed the 5k infra yet because of the reasons you mentioned. There simple is not smart to spend your money on very expensive infra which won't even increase your income very much, but it will increase your bills a lot making you more vulnerable in war (easier to bill lock).It is already very hard to destroy a very large nations, why make it even harder? So you just admitted that large nations are easier to bill lock, therefore easier to destroy...but are asking why large nations are so hard to destroy? Your argument makes no sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
der_ko Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) So you just admitted that large nations are easier to bill lock, therefore easier to destroy...but are asking why large nations are so hard to destroy?Your argument makes no sense. My argument is 5k+ infra nations are easier to bill lock then 4999.99 infra nations due to much higher bills. Don't put words in my mouth please. Edited November 20, 2007 by der_ko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 So since 5k+ nations have much higher bills (quoted from you), 5k+ nations are easier to bill lock (quoted from you). If you bill lock a nation, you can effectively destroy it by keeping it out of peacemode and grinding their infra away. Does that sound about accurate? So no, large nations are not hard to destroy. Proven by you. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 So since 5k+ nations have much higher bills (quoted from you), 5k+ nations are easier to bill lock (quoted from you). If you bill lock a nation, you can effectively destroy it by keeping it out of peacemode and grinding their infra away. Does that sound about accurate? So no, large nations are not hard to destroy. Proven by you. Thanks Wow, troll much? He is saying that due to a higher amount of bill money being required above 5k infrastructure, if a nation is caught without money to pay bills for an extended period of time, they are much easier to bill lock than a lower nation (where 3 mil would be able to cover bills for a while). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Will Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 of course... what should your nukes be constructed from? wooden missles launched by a 100M Catapult? /me snorts the soda I was drinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) Wow, troll much?He is saying that due to a higher amount of bill money being required above 5k infrastructure, if a nation is caught without money to pay bills for an extended period of time, they are much easier to bill lock than a lower nation (where 3 mil would be able to cover bills for a while). Yes, I know that is exactly what he is saying, which disproves his point about how hard 5k+ nations are so difficult to destroy. If they are so easily bill locked (which they are), then they can't be very hard to destroy. His argument against the SDI was that large nations are already SO hard to destroy, so we can't make them even harder. Edited November 20, 2007 by Guido Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygy Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) this is milkmaid math and only applies if the highlevel nation has no significant warchest or skill in war. if a 4999infra and a 9999infra nation are warring each other and both have enough cash to keep fighting for some weeks, at some point the 4999infra nation drops out of the 5% range for re-buying nukes or even below 1000infra. The only way to prevent that would be to invest 100million into a Manhatten Project. Once if it drops below 1000infra, from that point on, it has to re-buy every day infra for some millions to stay able to buy a nuke. Cash drains very quickly then, not even counted that a 4999infra nation will have no chance to win ground battles against his opponent but the 9999infra nation will win almost every battle (=2M loot). So either the smaller nation turtles from the start = accepting up to 5M + 40infra + 5 spies +10tech loss every day, while the 9999infra nation will suffer no losses from ground attacks or it tries to "fight" on the ground which will result in almost unwinnable odds. A 9999infra nation can buy around 100k soldiers, deploy 50k and wait to be nuked. Then 50k are destroyed and 50k+5k tanks come home. Fine. A 4999infra nation cannot even on max deployment (40k+4k tanks) gather enough tanks and soldiers to get good odds against 50k defending soldiers + 5k defending tanks with the infra+land+defender bonus. So on average it will feed the higher nation with 1M abandoned equipment per lost battle and only occasionally win a ground battle. Even then, it has max forces deployed, so the 9999infra nation almost have 2 default wins when attacking the 4999infra nation. See it as you wish, the smaller nation might have lower bills, but will face a lot higher losses either from defeat alerts or looting, totally equaling out the "cash burn" for both nations. Basically, if both have enough cash to pay their bills, the 4999infra nation will be ZId while the 9999infra nation is still at around 6k. It is unable to re-buy nukes or highlevel airforce or is forced to re-buy infra daily to do so... which drains the warchest even smaller. Sorry, but the idea to battle an alliance of 9k infra nations with a bunch of 5k infra nation "only because the bills are lower" is lulz, it will never work, except the 5k infra nations have 10times the warchests of the 9k infra nations. Edited November 20, 2007 by (DAC)Syzygy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 If this is a massive world war, 1 $3 million aid package would allow that 1k nation to do just fine though right? I see your point. But isn't that the way it should be? a 10k nation should be able to outlast a 5k nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 If this is a massive world war, 1 $3 million aid package would allow that 1k nation to do just fine though right? I see your point. But isn't that the way it should be? a 10k nation should be able to outlast a 5k nation. If a nation that large is that foolish, then they should have to deal with the consequences of not keeping money on hand. The only reason other nations can outlast is that others can cover for their foolishness by aiding them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannerus the great Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 first buyer of the manhatten project..lol click to see Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syzygy Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 (edited) he must have saved up a LONG LONG time for being able to afford this at his low infra amount ^^ Edited November 20, 2007 by (DAC)Syzygy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compstomper Posted November 20, 2007 Report Share Posted November 20, 2007 You have the Manhatten Project and the Hiden Nuclear Missle Silo. Have you been saving all your money for the last 100 days or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 You have the Manhatten Project and the Hiden Nuclear Missle Silo. Have you been saving all your money for the last 100 days or something? Uhh guys, that's admins nation. He can, like, edit his nation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compstomper Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 I did not even look at the nation name. Lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 lol yeah, way to go admin! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magicman657 Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 Anyone else realize it's impossible to have 2 of the new wonders when you can only buy 1 at time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starcraftmazter Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 Anyone else realize it's impossible to have 2 of the new wonders when you can only buy 1 at time? Yeh....what of that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetness land Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 I like them.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kswiss2783 Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 All of those look awesome. except oneFederal Aid Commission wont really help aid trains at all. It should only need the sender to have it. +1. I don't want to aid a new my NS, but small nations, which can't afford the FDC. 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.