Chat transcript and summary, 15/08/10

1. Development

The next months will be dedicated to improve and correct current features.
A new world with free membership will be launched on October.
Starting next year, game missions will be added.


2. War protection

[16:09] [@Jozi] we think that war should be risky for both sides. if you want to start a war, you should be able to conquer but also sustain damage.
[16:09] [@Jozi] hence the idea of partial war protection when you go to war.
[16:10] [@Jozi] you need to have at least half of your population in countries that are unprotected.
[16:12] [~Laguna] [CC] This is an idea or a definite action W3C will take Jozi?
[16:13] [+Vicious] Thanks. That's very fair. That works.
[16:13] [@Jozi] This is considered a small, very easily implemented feature. we want to do it quickly.

<

[15:54] * Laguna changes topic to 'Private Message Laguna to voice questions and opinions.'
[15:55] * Laguna sets mode: +m
[15:55] [~Laguna] Hello, Jozi.
[15:56] [@Jozi] hi laguna. Its been a long time
[15:56] [~Laguna] Indeed. It has been eight months since the last chat session.
[15:56] [@Jozi] we should do this more often.
[15:56] [@Jozi] I am available, just let me know and I will participate.
[15:57] [~Laguna] I'll see when we can schedule another for next month.
[15:58] [~Laguna] Can you tell us what was that W3C did since the beginning of the year, how that development will continue, what aims are set for the remainder of the year?
[15:58] [@Jozi] ok. Sept. 19 and 26 are OK with me.
[15:59] [~Laguna] Better make it the 19th.

Thanks for posting for those of of us who were not available!

wow

"[16:47] [@Jozi] we can take some time and discuss on the forum but everyone should realize that too much war protection is diminishing the war game. "

I WAS THERE!

[17:11] [Barrenregions] bye

Sorry I missed it, but the vacation was awesome! Overall the chat sounds pretty good, the war protection comments, especially the one Orbiter noted are very promising.

Vicious - Still don't understand how guerrilla/terrorist warfare is not equivalent to sneak attacks. Also, guerrillas and terrorists DO risk something, their lives...in SC under the current rules, they risk nothing. Their life might not have value to the person being attacked, but it is invaluable to them, irreplaceable, certainly much more value than an SC players war protected countries.

Since Barney has asked that no one comment on his thread until Jozi has a chance to read, I'll respond here and say again that I support it as do many of my mates. More warning and time to prepare is quite reasonable, however I'd again like to see it as optional. For example, I get a notice of 'Intent to Declare War' from someone, I can then choose to immediately d

Yup it was a cool chat. Dident have any ideas tho.

Readers digest...

Any update on the price of war protection?

Non-Starter, Meastro.

"The next months will be dedicated to improve and correct current features."

Thank you. :')

I agree with Whiteboy's idea to allow the defender to opt to start the war early. In additon, I think the following changes should be made to war:

1. make it a 48 hour pre-attack window.

2. As mentioned above, allow the defender to start the attack immediatly.

3. Also, allow the defender to declare with any country of his own against the country attacking him, and to start that war whenever. This way, if you attack one country in an empire, and of the other countries can fight back too. I forces the attacker to attack with multiple counties of his own or to also put up a good defense.

4. Give different worlds slightly different rules. For examle, set 1 world as a safer world where 3 countries are like secure mains; set another with 2, another with 1, keep FB with 0.

5. Change the alliance system slightly. Although the fed system works fine for inividual players and for small federations, for large fede

Still like the war % index idea. (1)From attacker point of view you cannot attack an opponant under (.75 x his power). This allows players to move up the ladder without being eaten by players 10 times their size. A top player can attack a noob if he uses a country closer to the size of the noob country. The same index might apply to empires or FEDs. 6 top players with 12 massive war slaves cannot jump a fed with 2 weak slaves with 40M population each. Less players would quit SIM & less players would require WP. (2) From newer player perspective - you cannot attack a country or empire greater than 50% your power. Hence a terrorist with C3 cannot declare on a huge war giant. Problem solved. Only question is - is war index the right index to use? - HORDO

In (1) above - you take your war index times .75. Anything under that threshold U cannot attack. Econ players may benefit as well.

There is no right index to use. That's part of what makes this game unique from all the boring and predictable games that do use that easily gamed 0.75/0.5 rule.

Which would you use Defensive Index? That's 2x DF, 1x OF, and 1x SF divided by 4?

DF? Easily gamed with MIBs. OF? Easily gamed again.

SF for the calculation would be suicide.

Really, if I wanted to play one of the games that used that boring rule, I could go play Archmage or something and get raped periodically as I clawed my way up to a #1 position.

Most new players quit because this game is "hard". Not because of any threats. The "information" is overwhelming. The configuration possibilities are complex in comparison to any other online browser game I can think of.

And finally, this game is slow. That's part of it's appeal, at least for me.