Game News

War booster - Giving 20gcs to the attacker may encourage players to attack weaker players for a quick 20gcs. Attack a few visa noobs a month and its easy money.
Transfer of pop once a war starts- Maybe this should apply to the aggressor only... Its they who choose to take the risk of war.

I personally have had pop removed as I was taking a War Index to zero. To attack a 60 mil pop country and end up with only thirty after winning is well . . .devastating and BS. And no I didn't nuke the country in question.

Highly populated countries should not be undefended .

I agree with Vali. What's to keep them from declaring 6 months later? All this does is milk GC from a player so they have to buy more from W3C. I don't see how this wouldn't be abused.

You could just choose to put up a defense and fight. Killing pop goes both ways. You kill mine, obviously I should come back and kill yours. Its like cause and effect. Anyone killing my pop or "attempting" to milk my GC, should have an effect on me.

1. Build a defense in highly populated countries I own
2. Learn how to fight and get some revenge.


It adds realism and gives some "thing" to do other than play endless eco game.

Blackout Times were abused AND useless from the outset. One sets times for a blackout, then declares, comon gimme a break.

Players all to often get caught up focusing entirely on ECO game only to build a decent country and get caught with no defense. Most Vets will answer this comon question: Newb1 "So how Do I learn how to fight?

Vet1 "Build your economy first LoL, until you do that you shouldn't even think about an army."


any question

I have to agree that this (war stop booster) would just turn into one country demanding tribute from another. it actually incourages behaviors i thought the gm discouraged. it would have to be cheaper though to just buy WP.

Also is this just going to stop one war dec?
What if there are multiple countries declared on the weaker one?
Say i have four slave all dec'ed on, do i have to pay 30GC each?

I just think the means to avoid war are already in place.

I question how else to answer that question, in my experience many people get frustrated after getting in debt from failed attempts to figure out how to win a war, only then will they ask about warring. So then all i can really say is well you're in alot of debt why not work on that first.

and yeah the stop war booster is a bad idea

I agree that it WOULD add a degree of realism to the game.

But, like others are saying, wouldn't this be counter to what the GMs are trying to do on LU? Or are they just trying to find a way to get their cut?

I completely agree that players need to have defenses. And I'm already on the record for agreeing with raiding/wars.

And the advice is to build an economy to support the defense, not to ignore it.

"And the advice is to build an economy to support the defense, not to ignore it."

exactly. build up a strong eco in your untouchable main then worry about armies. nobody is forced to obtain slave countries

This is my email to W3C about this idea

Hello,

This is a horrible idea, there are already players out there that do not care one way or another how much damage they do to themselves as long as they can trash someone else.

There would be nothing stopping them from declaring war, fighting to the point they where going to lose and then using this booster. Not only is it possible they have done major damage to whoever they are fighting but 20 gc's is not going to replace assets most probably lost.

Additionally this would leave them with thier country still in place ready to build up and continue again.

I'm sorry but most of those people complaining about losing countries in war where the one's that provoked the war in the first place.

On the one hand you keep installing minimums for defense which indicate you want people to protect thier countries and on the otherhand

I was starting to wonder how the Gamemaster inferred this from what I said, specially when I ended with two possible broad solutions. This is far simpler than one of them and more traditional than the other. Nothing similar to what I had in mind, though.

In essence, this is quite good. Doesn't make war inevitable and it makes a more-than-anything symbolical cost to avoid it aware. Two things I was aiming for.

However, the cost to avoid it is in-game, it is technical, not social. Even so, it buys time for the player to get ready for war and/or gather support - social activity. I can see this becoming a vehicle for extortion too, but extortion is a matter of the administrative forum and in a game such as this, when it grows enough and well, I expect it to be somewhat self-cleaned.

I don't have much against it. I see it has being rather amusing actually. Still not opening hand from Imperialism though.

Yah well I'm going to start calling you "zoltar".

Wait until someone comes around and involves you in a war costing you millions in pop, trillions in hardware and opts to end it right before you punch the WI to zero.

I think the idea sucks both in theroy and practice.

And yes once war is declared I don't think either side should be able to move population in, out or place offers for sale.

Even though I'm more likely to move pop IN to keep the WI up some.

For somepeople it may be worth the GC's just to mess with them. You attack a country/fed you know you have no chance against, do some damage then buy out and go back into WP. Not smart but its there and 20GC can repair a lot sure but you don't get your time back and you don't get the satisfaction of the fight to the finish. You don't want to war then only have yopur main on anyworld other than FB. problem solved. no need for this at all.

Ah, I thought about that when I saw it this morning, but I forgot it in the meantime. This "booster" shouldn't be applicable when the WI is lower than 30. 30 because... Something about civil targets.

Don't mind being called "Zoltar". To kill then revive is currently on my book. And anything that is added can be removed. It's all a matter of time and circumstances. When this becomes unnecessary or something better shows up, I expect this to be gone.

From what I'm reading, players are posting from the perspective they already know the game. This booster is not aimed at those player. It's for new ones. They have the GCs because of the Game Levels.

If anything I'd say this "booster" shouldn't be available when the WI is lower than 80.

If you are really that timid you want to pay someone to leave you alone fine, do it before the war starts.

As for me I'll make any payments I have toward the prevention of war through the purchase of weapons and ammo.

War comes along fight, if you did it right you can come out on top and if you don't want to fight boost your WP.

All the tools are already there, and if you are boosting WP at least you get value for the full 30 gc's.

A country without forts, has less than 80 WI.
WI counting solely on civil targets is 45.
30 for the new player to realize he's going to lose.

From a gain and loss view, to the attacker, this booster can be quite ridiculous, hence I find it amusing.

Between limiting to new players (conditions to be defined) and not being implementing at all... I'll just go with the first for now. The difficulty comes in limiting it to the appropriate people, and that's why it is presented as a booster usable for all.


In the possibility this is introduced, it would be best for the thread to define as to who gets to use it, instead of being applicable to all. I largely prefer Imperialism, so... I'm not going to wonder much about the criteria.

"30 for the new player to realize he's going to lose"

THAT is exactly my point, if they didn't want to fight they should make those arrangements BEFORE the tide goes against them.

And if they are out of WP they should realize they are at risk of a fight.

I can just see this turning into both an extortion ring and a case where every player that comes down the pike tries to hump your leg until they get a few kicks in the crotch.

Then of course they'll all want to quit. Don't force ME to live next to someone with aggressive tendencies, I have every right to be able to take thier country and throw them out of my area.

Letting them fight until they see they are losing and letting them go is simply NOT anything I would like to see introduced into this game.

If you don't want to fight either go to the shallow end of the pool such as LU, WG or GR and sit there in a secured mode countr

I think this stop war booster is a horrible idea, but if WC3 is determined to intall it, I believe the stop war option should only be available before war actually starts.

And it should involve every country in the empire of the person that chooses to use it. All of them otherwise people will simply take out those they are losing with, or know they can't win and use them for fed defense.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Good lord, even a moron knows not to pull out a wad of cash big enough to choke a mule at some convience store a neighborhood like this.<!-/Quote-!>

Good point.

The proposed booster.


Horrible idea.

Simple answer...

Bring back peaceful mode.

Player who wish to play a sandbox version are able to do so with ease. Everyone else is subject to the laws of the neighborhood.

[IMAGE] You have 1535 new messages.

Yah right, like I would actually read them

It's bad enough waiting for the page to load so I can delete .... hope nobody wanted anything important.

I have to agree with the majority of posts here. I don't like the idea of the booster.

We already have WP and Secured mode, which I believe is more than enough already.

Simcountry is a game that lets players participate in both war and/or econ,it becomes flawed when you take away the war aspect.
It is then just an econ game.

If you do not wish to war, put up wp or build a defence to hopefully deter.

The majority of new players that start and then leave, is imo down to them not wishing to pay gc's each mth for their empires.Very rarely to do with war.

Usually them that leave through war didnt know when to keep their mouths shut.

Horrible idea is my vote.

"The majority of new players that start and then leave, is imo down to them not wishing to pay gc's each mth for their empires.Very rarely to do with war"

BS, you are alright, on the other hand this feature will make the game unrealistic.