People always cry. They lose war - they cry about it. They got suicided - they cry. They lost top nw slot - they cry. And they will cry in any casy, whatever you will do. But yes, keep doing useless changes, so people can cry more about changes what makes them lose, not their bad play.

In recent sets I have benefited more from restart bonuses than my enemies and I have not had to deal with suiciders, so there is no crying or bad play on my part with my proposed changes.

It was my original proposal that lead to the current restart changes but I never said for the bonus to be so high for military, buildings and tech. It was 20% in my original proposal and it is still 20% in my proposed changes.

The motivation behind my proposal is a few factors:-

- Lower base buildings for restart bonus will weaken the need for BRs in war. Couple with other simple war changes proposed directly to qzjul these changes are designed to balance war a bit more by making GSes a bit more viable than they presently are.

- With higher market goods retained and less base restart bonus it introduces more of a skill component which can be utilized during war time. i.e smart war people will use the market and stockpiling more effectively. Suiciders are also less likely to be able to make optimal use of the market.

- Another benefit of the market goods boost and nerf to base restart bonus is that if a netting tag is blindsided during stockpiling phase it has more ability to bounce back with stockpiles after a FS. Stock is often more valuable than production during war.

- In my proposal sent directly to qz I proposed returning the CS formula back to as they was 2 sets ago (or slightly less than) to boost restart growth. It would be better for a restart to have 100-150 CS more than to have a bit more buildings, which you are unlikely to have anyway as you would probably be BRed to death in war.


Basically I would like to make war less one dimensional, make suiciding slightly less viable and promote small benefits for having more skill.

Helps off set ghost acres and land trading. Get rid of those before you eliminate this.

You think that people would stop suiciding and receiving the restart bonus if people stop landtrading? That's....yeah...

That's not what he said at all.

Since warring changes don't really have anything to do with trading, he must be referring to suiciders being strengthened due to the restart changes. And he said that it helps offset ghost acres and land trading...Fix ghost/trading, and that will somehow fix suiciding? I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he said..

Unless I'm mistaken, he is saying that he believes the restart bonuses to be an appropriate counterbalance to the currently screwed-up ghost acres dynamic. He is not saying that suiciding would go away if land trading went away. He is saying that it is necessary to strengthen suiciders - or in this case, keep them strong - because land trading exists.

Personally, I think it's too much. Not just in regards to suiciders, but war as well.

How is that an appropriate counterbalance at all? It's necessary to keep suiciders strong because landtrading? Landtrading has been around for YEARS and this restart change was implemented a handful of sets ago and was intended to help alliances at war. Buffing suiciders was an unintended side effect.

But regardless, saying suiciding is a counter to trading is ridiculous. If I trade, it doesn't impact you. Maybe I get a better finish, maybe I don't, but it doesn't prevent you from playing the game the way you want to. Suiciding, however, can ruin someone else's enjoyment of the game, and that pretty much blows.

You and I are sort of on the same side when it comes to the restart changes. I don't like giving a large portion of a killed country's resources to the restart. The difference between us is that I don't believe there should be an attempt to apply changes to only those with whom I disagree. The rules should be the rules, regardless of how someone wants to play. That's why, while it isn't my ideal solution, I liked Bill's idea of lower restart bonuses for each successive restart.

I think Sov has some pretty good ideas as well.. again, not perfect in my opinion, but better than what we have right now.

Now... how does land trading impact me? In a game where everyone is competing for the number one spot, if there is a virtually *risk free* way of gaining large amounts of land, it impacts *everyone*. Land trading changes this game from competitive to cooperative. It changes the fundamental dynamics of the entire game. Suiciding can ruin someone's enjoyment of the game, you're absolutely right. And for those who enjoyed the competitive nature this game once had, ghost acres diminish their enjoyment as well.

It's still just as competitive, but in a different way. If you are not a landtrader, then yes, you have to do a lot more work and have a perfect storm of server/market conditions(as a techer) to be able to compete for the top slot. But if you are trading, then it is absolutely still competitive. The best will always rise to the top.

Well, that's where you and I simply aren't going to agree.

Take two players, equally skilled, playing the same strategy. One has access to ridiculous amounts of risk free land, the other does not. It seems very clear to me that the first player has a sizeable advantage over the second. Now, of course, the second player COULD have access to risk free land, but if he finds land trading objectionable, then he really is not free to play how he wants.... if he wants to compete.

A lot of people have said that ghost acres are essential because of the lower player base than what E2025 had. I don't buy that argument for a couple of reasons. I remember when this game had 10k+ "players", and people on the alliance server still complained about the lack of land grab targets. It is the very nature of the alliance server which makes land so hard to come by, not the number of players. And it is that competition to get to be the biggest and baddest that some of us found enjoyable. That competition is now mostly gone, and that's what I mean when I say that this server has become cooperative rather than competitive.

I also don't buy the "need for land" justification for ghost acres because... if nobody had access to ghost acres, everybody would still be competing on the same level playing field. Land levels would be lower, but the competition remains the same. The only real justification for ghost acres is to allow people to chase "all time" records. That is not a concern which I totally discount, but I do not think it is worth completely changing the basic dynamics of the server in order to achieve it.

Anyway, we've gotten way off the subject of this thread.

more buildings wouldn't hurt, if gets br'd then country is basically w/o buildings after 100+ attacks.

I do not agree with you.

Landtrading is "Competitive in a Cooperative way" while years ago, netgaining was "Competitive in a Competitive way".

Getting to top 10 has always been competitive. It's HOW YOU GET THERE that is the issue. The fundamental underlying game has changed from being competitive to being cooperative (while still competing for t10), and this is what I have an issue with.

I'm sure the counter argument is "great players adapt to changes". Sure, but that doesn't contradict the fact that the game has fundamentally changed.

A little more friendliness in this game wouldnt hurt some people Xin. Not you because you are the rare friendly netter in Laf but yah..

I think it should be balanced a bit lower but I also always felt like in the old environment that techer was too strong.

When I played a trader I was almost always competitive. I rarely did a land trade with the intention of my opponent getting out as well as me. It might not be as competitive as a WR farming techer who wants no retals but I sure as heck didn't want my opponents beating me in land. The best can still rise to the top but you are correct that the attitude, feel, and method have definitely changed.

You get 1 restart. If it gets killed, you start from scratch. That's as far as I'd support I think.

Suggestion
"War Mode" like utopia. Clan will need to declare war with another clan.
With declaring war, only country in the tag will be given restart bonuses.

I thought about that. But a few problems...

What's to stop a suicider from making a 1-man tag? You could have a minimum, but where would that be? It would be an incredibly arbitrary number. You could say that both tags need to accept the war declaration; but then some legitimate tags might not accept it so that their opponent doesn't get the restart bonus.

What happens to the tag that gets FSed? They won't have the opportunity to declare war and get the bonus. The attacking tag won't declare war until after the FS is over for that same reason.

What happens when the war is over? Is there a limit on the number of wars that can be declared in the set? What's that limit? Who decides it?

What happens if multiple tags form a coalition against a big tag or another group of tags? Do they all have to declare war against each other? Is there a maximum number of tags that one tag can be at war with?

If the clan that got FSed, as long as it accepted the war. The country died can obtain the bonus.
Unless you want to suggest that there is a limit in land gain per day? such as 20k max per day?

Well. I'm just confused about the timing. Who would accept the war? What if I restart before my clan leader accepts the war? What if the attacking team didn't actually declare war? Would the war declaration be automatic? Maybe some set of parameters? If a minimum 'x' number of hits are made against a single tag against a minimum 'y' number of countries then a state of war comes into effect automatically? That way, killing one country for overretals or suiciding etc. doesn't count as war, but 500 hits against 3 different countries might. Not sure.

Couple things, whether they can be combined or not...

1. Put in an algorithm to count up special attacks...people that are land-killed in the first couple days could start fresh and still have mostly the same turns, since people that start a couple days after the set does still have the turns accrued since the set start. Suiciders that are farmed a bunch and then eventually killed will only get the benefit of the turns people spent trying to kill it, instead of being farmed all set and coming back with close to 100% of what they had.

2. Put in a check for the previous country a player had and now they're restarting. If they were tagged, give the bonus. If not, nothing. This could of course be undermined since an untagged country can simply create their own tag, but it may deter some from getting their bonuses.

Hawkeyee made a good point. You could check the tag they're restarting from and if it's bigger than 1, then they get the bonus. If it's just 1 person in the tag, nothin. Suiciders don't usually coordinate, and if by chance they do, every alliance will be able to see a 2-3 country tag and be able to watch them for anything suspicious. It's harder to see it from a random neutral, but if you have an obscure tag showing up, you can keep tabs on them no problem.

the restart bonus rules need to cover everyone, you cant deny it from suiciders because you dont like the way they play the game...

Qz can do whatever he wants.

suicider like you makes the unappealing causing more to leave the game
It's rare to see clan doesnt CS in ee apart from removing suicider.
Plus creating a clan would need a min X member else there is no point creating a clan. So a clan with single member will be removed after X amount of time

I would love to see a "clan" server.
Where everyone would have to be in a clan.
Clans were capped at say 25 players.
And there was a set amount of lands that would have to be fought over.

you know
a war game.
not farmville.

bottom feeders make people leave to, so should we remove all bottom feeding and you can only grab above your networth?

Your arguments are invalid...

oh lcn hit rage too which caused some people to quit


Should we make it so you cant attack anyone now?

Thats the answer, we will make it so you cant attack anyone then no one will get angry and quit...

Restart with nothing

I see a very simple solution, any resources obtained in the last 24-36h does not follow with the restart. I think 24h should be enough.
This would have little or no effect to actual war countries as they rely on stocks built up during a longer period and are in turnsaving mode in general. FA would obviously have to be excluded as its seen as legit for restarts at war. This would also kinda nerf the production advantage of a FS as any country killed from the agressor would lose his production during the FS. Restart rules remain as they are now based on # of defends, maybe a slight buff to CS:es.

The reason suiciders come back as strong or stronger every time is because they can go on a grabbing spree before they are killed. If this option was removed for them they'd quickly grow weak. Any tag should be able to kill a suicider within 24h. It also means suiciding suddenly requires you do to some actual work trying to survive the first 24h.

This will not prevent your "pro" suicider as he/she has the intent to do harm and plans it out, but it will stop the random "griefer" who just decides fluff it my country sucks I'm gonna make someone else feel as bad as me.

lol this whole debate is fluffing retarded, why dont netters just play sim???

Bottomfeeders dont hit anyone who is in an alliance. This is an alliance game. The game directs people to play the solo servers first anyways so anyone playing alliance as an untagged more than likely knows what will happen. It is not comparable to say it is the same as someone who is a griefer or plays to piss people off.

so then why not make it so you cant be untag, you have to join an established alliance??? To create an alliance you must inform the moderators and be accepted, because otherwise whats to stop an untag just being a solo tag.



It is an alliance game afterall...

How about you restart with nothing but you get an increased turn rate for the first say 250 turns

Ooh, I like those two ideas :)

I do believe that the goal of a war is to kill remove enemy and if you kill a country it should stay dead.You may always make a new server, let's call it "zombies strike again" with your current ideas for the restart. However if you really really want alliance server a "she deserves a second chance" one why don't you just make the restarts kick off with a percentage of their clans average nw and land? That way everyone happy, an LCN restart would be at 2100 acres (randomly built) and 1.4mNW in random military units and tech and readily able to kick some punch in a war while a solo suicider would be out of humanitarian range at his first reincarnation.

CAN'T WE ALL JUST EXPLODE EACH OTHER?

Oh wow, that sounds really good. Would put greater emphasis on building better countries and teamwork, and would reduce the impact of the bonus on suiciders, while still allowing people to get back into the fight right away.

+1

I also think that rebalancing some of the other war aspects of the game (making EMs more worthwhile, for example) may help by giving the affected alliances the ability to further liquidate the suicider's units and perhaps other resources, which would limit his restart strength.

here's the thing: having gathered statistics and information over many years and resets I can tell you this: most dedicated alliance members will restart once during a war (about 90%). Prior to the restart changes, for twice it dropped to 25% or less. After that the floor's the limit so to speak. People using news feeds plus a script to get land grab targets also is a very big negative on the game and participation (two stepping). As does people randomly suiciding on high ranked netters who get mad and rage quit for the set.

All those issues need to be addressed together, not just one.
Part of what is going on is that some players have found another way to get back at larger clans in retaliation to them taking actions that aren't liked. It could very well be balanced too far but no way should the game let you do whatever you want consequence free and with impunity regardless of if you are netting, beating the fluff out of a tag, or whatever else it is you are doing. It's not good to have game mechanics that let you build invulnerable or untouchable countries because then you are wrecking the competitive aspect of a multiplayer game. Those people that like to play it via spreadsheet optimization in a sim-city like way are so entitled to do so, but there should be no expectation that this strategy should be protected by game mechanics. Similarly tags that war endlessly should not be protected either, regardless of size, strength or influence.

++martian

the above is not an argument for or against changing/balancing the restart changes btw. I just think that it should be kept in mind when giving input (there are some really good suggestions in this thread btw).

b

tella you were not refering to my alliance idea were you lol? I said it tongue firmly in cheek :P

Nice idea. +1.

5 suciders who tag up and stock could ruin any alliance in the game. Lame

yea, rep casher spent 2b on bushels 18 hrs ago and logged off and then alliance that player is gets fs'd 6 hrs later and that rep casher is amongst those who die in fs or just some untagged players decide to kill that country so 2b cash lost and also bought bushels lost.

They wouldnt be suiciders then, they would be a small alliance with a death wish...

How about letting us do non-harmful spy-ops on countries still in protection?

"I see a very simple solution, any resources obtained in the last 24-36h does not follow with the restart. I think 24h should be enough."
I have to be honest and say that I really like this suggestion. or maybe any resources obtained through offensive actions (so external FA could be kept).

Not thought through 100% though:P

"How about letting us do non-harmful spy-ops on countries still in protection?"
also good.

"Originally posted by Requiem:
5 suciders who tag up and stock could ruin any alliance in the game. Lame"

What is to stop an existing tag from doing that now? Isn't that what a war is about? I mean there is nothing stopping a warring tag from ruining the reset of a netting alliance anyway:P