 |
|
|
|
Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 01:18 pm  Defence Index levels to replace war levels? Part 1 It is true that the current war levels to stop the stronger players attacking the weaker players on this game has certainly worked, as there is no denial in that. Up to a point where PvP wars are rare now. Maybe it's because everyone's all happy getting on with each other but the forums are telling me differently, of which there is certain players threatening to declare war on one another as you have probularly seen. I've also noticed that these certain players that threaten to declare war on them are usually those who are near war level 3 or those that are in secured mode or some other form of war protection. Well the truth is... as well as myself, we are all too afraid to fight. As they all know that many of them have a military arsenal that is probularly well over a 100 times more powerful than theirs. So how can anybody ever see PvP wars thrive again when odds like this are overwhelmingly appalling? Well I was thinking I may have found a way forward to make warring much more fairer is by implementing a system where the only way to declare war is through the overall defence index of that players country or empire, to match that of the other players country or empire he wants to attack. A defence index level system could look like this From 0-20 You will be protected from war, it would be like a form of automatic war protection for your countries. Although if you were defeated in war for example, and were driven down to this index level after the war with a large empire, it means you will be safe from war at this level but also means your countries could well suffer from rebellions and riots due to the lack of military presence across your empire. 21-40 This is where your first taste of PvP war experience will come so be prepared. The wars at this level will most likely be small and petty empires. Countries or federations at this overall defence index level may declare wars on each other. They may also declare war on any players or federations who have an overall defence index higher than their own at any defence index level. 41-60 This is where you will most likely meet the experienced and more organized players. The players at this level could well be strong individual empires or federations. Countries or federations at this overall defence index level may declare wars on each other. They may also declare war on any players or federations who have an overall defence index higher than their own at any defence index level. 61-80 Countries or federations at this overall defence index level may declare wars on each other. They may also declare war on any players or federations who have an overall defence index higher than their own at any defence index level. 81-100 Countries or federations at this overall defence index level may declare wars on each other. They may also declare war on any players or federations who have an overall defence index higher than their own at any defence index level and so forth. Well the numbers what I quoted here does not exactly have to be the same but just an example of what it could be like.
| |
| Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 01:20 pm Defence Index levels to replace war levels? Part 2 SINGLE COUNTRIES If you are a single country in this game, the advantages and disadvantages you will have in this system would be such as Having the same amount of military spending limits as the enemy at the start of the war, whether you are going up against 2 or even 25 countries, you would have the same amount of all of them combined. Or simply to stay out of the war since the secured mode for your main country will still be in force no matter how high your defence index is. WAR DECLARATIONS Once you start a war you cannot call in anybody or a neutral player for help or join a federation until the war is over as this would be seen too much of an advantage for the player or vice versa. As for federations, that would be a combined total of all the countries and empires overall defence index levels. Which means even a single country can declare war on a federation as long as the defence index levels are about the same or visa versa. But the war levels would remain in the game only for C3 reference. Also with this system there will not be any third party countries suddenly joining in on either side during the course of a war as this will suddenly militarily boost one of the sides. A fair fight would mean the military spending limits at the start and during the course of war would have to be the same for both sides. For example in a 4 vs. 1 fight, that single player would have just as much military spending limit as those 4 combined. This spending limit for the single player would only be active through the course of war, not after the war is over. If you are a single country and have grown into a large empire with a number of countries, they should all be treated how the way you can share military resources in times of war at 100% in a federation without creating a federation. Since if a country in your empire ever got attacked they should all automatically be at war together. So basically your empire can act like a federation without creating a federation. Federations should only be created if you want to work with or help a few friends or allies to dominate the world. It is true that the biggest players would lose out a lot with this idea of mine as it will stop them from attacking the smaller/weaker players, although they can keep their huge military arsenal if they wish and wait until other players can match their arsenal at whatever defence index level they are at. Another alternative for them is to bring their huge military arsenal down by selling many of their weapons and ammo to reduce their defence index to a level that they desire to be in, in order to wage war with those players. This is where your war experience will be vital rather than using brute strength to defeat your enemies. OTHER ALTERATIONS I believe removing the 25 countries federation limit altogether would be a good idea in order to create big gigantic federations on my defence index levels as say a huge fed with a defence index of 10,000. They will not be able to do anything about other federations who are growing but are nowhere near that index level so eventually this would create a power struggle when they get very near that index level. Also if that huge fed sent a player by telling him to leave the fed to attack this growing fed, he would not have their military support to assist him and would have to fight them on his own, which will come down to war experience to win this battle.
| |
| Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 01:25 pm Defence Index levels to replace war levels? Part 3 QUESTIONS Will the smaller/weaker players be guaranteed war protection under this 0-20 defence index level? Yes, the overall defence index levels could be the new solution as they could stay in the 0-20 zone until they feel they can go up to the next level . The index levels of mine would give the new players the opportunity to gradually build up on their military over time much more successfully without the fear of being attacked by the large militarized players. What happens if you are at 0-20 defence index level with a very large empire? Even if you have a large empire at that level you will be protected from war, but there would some kind of a limit imposed to the number of countries you are allowed to have. For example if the limit was up to 5 countries at that level and have an empire of about 6 to 10 countries or even more for example. Rebellions and riots would occur all over your empire due to the lack of military presence (defence index level) which would effectively be made very difficult to keep that many countries at that level since it acts as war protection for them and simply because you're trying to cheat your way up by having a lot of countries where other players can't attack you. As a small and low defence index player will I be able to attack players who are much stronger than me and beyond my defence index level? Yes, there is no limit for the weaker players, even for those from the 0-20 defence index level, who have a much lower defence index to attack others who have a very high defence index if they think they can stand a good chance against them, this is where your experience will be vital to bringing down a potential world power. How is the Overall defence index measured in the federations? The overall defence index of a federation is measured by the combined total of all the players defence indexes who are part of that federation, which in turn could potentially make it into a very powerful and leading military power on any planet. I am a relatively new player and can not seem to get very far expanding on my military and my empire because of experienced players wiping my slave countries out, is there a way I can prevent this? Unfortunately there is not, but this is where you need to gain some considerable war experience before moving out of the 0-20 defence index level. However if you joined a powerful federation with a very high defence index while yours could be in the safe 0-20 index, you will be exposing yourself to attacks just like your other federation members so be aware. So the only way to prevent this, is by leaving that federation so your countries can be safe again from any attacks. What happens to my defence index level if I joined a federation? Your defence index will be combined with the other players defence indexes to create the Overall federation defence index level which works in the same way as individual players index levels. Finally in all, I believe this whole idea could be replace the war levels or maybe integrated into the war levels.
| |
| Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 02:09 pm Basically, I dont think you understand how easily the war or defensive index can be manipulated.
| |
| Wednesday, February 13, 2013 - 06:15 pm If you mean if you wanted to fight someone who is much weaker than you, then sell a lot of your weapons and ammo to match his index. This is the only way to make fighting more fair and give the inexperienced a good fighting chance. Or if you meant transporting weapons from other worlds through the middle of a war, that might not be possible. When I mean by an Overall defence index for players, thats including all the weapons and ammo you have in your enterprises and countries on the other worlds too.
| |
| Wednesday, March 13, 2013 - 02:17 pm Like I just proved this with my war with Serpent today, he overwhelmingly outnumbered me by well over 100 to 1 like I predicted when the war started and he did'nt even give me a chance to fire even a single shot, is this what you call FAIR? because let me tell you, I don't think so! and if this is how the way PvP war is going to work on this game, it will NEVER thrive as I don't think i'll even bother with it anymore and just stick to C3 raiding only. I am not AGAINST the idea of other players having huge armies, never have been. But with my idea on this page of an 'Overall defence index' of the players account, it will give everybody a much more equal chance at the start of the war, but once you've declared it, buy as many weapons and ammo as you want and build a bigger army than him during that period and throughout the course of war and not have it ALL in order to win. I believe the GMs are missing out a lot on some of these ideas of mine as the new players who come to play this game would want to wage war on a FAIR scale. For when they realize they are choked up by the war level restrictions at the start of their game and the huge empires who can attack them once they reach at a playable PvP war level, they will leave as they will see the unfairness of this game. Maybe this idea is impossible to implement, but I do know another online game where this similar idea of mine EXISTS.
| |
| Wednesday, March 13, 2013 - 02:48 pm A little complicated wouldn't you say? Hopefully the GMs will disregard this suggestion. There is no such thing as a "fair" war in SC or real life. In both the best and often biggest win. End of story. And to use your war as an example is a poor one because you could have avoided a beatdown by a larger and more accomplished opponent but you instigated it. You were not the victim of a bully empire - you were the bully. You would not have needed any military or defence index if you would simply have treated Serpent and other nations in a respectful manner. Even after he graciously offered you a way out you chose to go to war and he made you pay the price. That is how it works in the big boy world. Instead of worrying about how to meddle with the defence index perhaps you should learn a little diplomacy and respect for others. And another piece of advice - forget the nluo - and stop drinking their kool-aid. They left you twisting in the wind cheered on by a guy in a bad hat yelling exterminate and a little blue monkey begging others to help you because he wouldn't. And no one helped you. Learn from your mistake, make peace with your neighbors, join a respectable Fed and forget world domination with the nluo.
| |
| Wednesday, March 13, 2013 - 03:54 pm I realized that and i've told them so! Well obviously theres no such thing as "fair" in SC or in real life, and obviously you have got no idea what a bully is and you were probularly was'nt here when the war levels did'nt exist as litually the bigger players were knocking the beginner players out all the time for no reason at all, so you can say whatever you want about me being "disrespectful" and a "bully" as I see them for not having any respect for others at all for doing that, not me. Just remember this is a GAME, and a simulator too, but when it comes to war though, the rules should be EQUAL. Just like sports games are, for example..... football matches, and if you're a football fan, how would you like it if the opposition outnumbered your team 10 to 1 from the start? you would probularly call for a big change of the rules in the game. Just remember this is a GAME like any other and will not forget and give up of what i've wrote on this page. Well if theres going to be hardly no wars on this game anymore where they can't be fought fairly, I might as well not renew my membership anymore and be on a social networking site talking to my mates instead.
| |
| Wednesday, March 13, 2013 - 08:31 pm how about you grow up, stop crying, rebuild, and reconquest...
| |
| Wednesday, March 13, 2013 - 10:50 pm James, your military is by no means your biggest defense or attack. Your diplomacy is. Learn this lesson well. In the past I have witness MASSIVE armies, big enough to make the largest seen today look like Switzerlands, been destroyed for pissing off the wrong people, and I have seen very weak players hold their own because they had the community support. Talk softly and carry a big stick.
| |
| Thursday, March 14, 2013 - 02:27 am I agree Crafty, diplomacy wins wars, not armed forces. Many examples: Hitler-> talked his way into a massing large acres of land without firing a shot. America vs Soviet Russia (Cold War)-> disablement of large numbers of silos and nukes. And other situations in history. So o/ to Crafty quoting Teddy Roosevelt. (I believe I'm right)
| |
Thursday, March 14, 2013 - 05:25 am
LOL, I like Edgar, he is funny! James the issue here is not as simple my military being bigger than yours. Remember you had a 66M pop country defending against 3-10M pop countries. Your country suffered about 1.4M deaths in that war and my country lost about 3-4K. The difference is that you do not know how to use the military you have. You speak of a football game and being outnumbered 10:1. With a country the size of yours, you could have out gunned me EASY. But, you did not know how. Even if our countries were of equal size, unless you know how to use what you have it would be like the NY Giants playing the local elementary school team (or the Washington Redskins)! Your first mistake was joining the wrong group of people that want to dominate the planet. The second is that you provoked this by attempting to pass sanctions and bans on myself and others and continuing with aggressive speech. Your third mistake was not taking my simple and easy request from you and your fedmates. Whats worse, is the lil blue monkey is still spewing lies and idiocracy! James you are not a noob, you have been around long enough to learn more than the basics of the game. Please, do not quit because you lost. Find a good fed and join and learn and become the great player that you can. It takes time and effort as you well know, but 'If winning was easy, Losers would do it'!
| |
| Thursday, March 14, 2013 - 01:26 pm Dillonmittan i'm not crying over this at all, and those who tell others to grow up are usually those who ar'nt grown up themselves and think themselves as somebody when really they are not, and don't worry I will rebuild up and makeup of what i've lost. Anymore cheek like that telling me to grow up, I will find and destroy your country if you're on LU. Crafty I never said mine was the biggest army, far from it, and very true in what you say there. Switzerland's army in real life is MUCH LARGER than you think, it's a hidden army you could say, every citizen there has to go through periodic service for about 5 years (I think) as soon as they leave school. Then after that they leave the service, but if they ever went to war, every citizen there would be called up since they are basically trained for war which would total to probularly about 6 to 8 million, they may only be paramilitary trained though but they've always been very territorial in defence throughout history. Serpent I do know how to use my military, the difference between me and you is that you could muster them into position MUCH faster than me since you had all the weapons and ammo READY, I was going to get much more defence wings into position but the 2 day delay did'nt give me enough time, it's not about the size of your pop at all as that does'nt matter, it's about the size of your military. "Even if our countries were of equal size, unless you know how to use what you have it would be like the NY Giants playing the local elementary school team (or the Washington Redskins)!" What you quoted here is exactly how I would like war to be played from the start, of equal military, just like I said on my ideas above, it would be down to the quality of the weapons and ammo, and experience skill of the player that will matter as I would be happy with this kind of gameplay. But I know it would take a lot of realism out of the game though if my ideas were enforced, such as the overly powerful attacking the weak. For example in real life, the US attacking Iraq back in 2003.
| |
Saturday, March 16, 2013 - 11:24 am
Is this something new, implement by NLUO ? Last time i checked Zurich was in CH and i was not 5 years in army, and as i know SW have only pro army but not much around 100 000 person. (we probably dont have enough gold to buy pro soldiers.) also saying something stupid like this "every citizen there has to go through periodic service for about 5 years" you compare us with some dictatorship country i think that even them don't send people in military service for 5 years. Please don't post things that you do not know.
| |
| Saturday, March 16, 2013 - 02:04 pm Just when I thought I was sticking up for people like you, but I NEVER said it was like a dictatorship but I do know there is some form of compulsory service there for most of the Swiss born, i've realized some of the things i've put here is not true as I deeply apologize for that, i'm actually glad they take great pride in their military. So go and read it on wikipedia about Switzerlands military if you don't believe me, here is the link to it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland#Military Why the hell would I make such comments if conscription was'nt true? the page is either out of date or you're lying.
| |
| Saturday, March 16, 2013 - 03:52 pm Even on that page you have this The reform "Army XXI" was adopted by popular vote in 2003, it replaced the previous model "Army 95", reducing the effectives from 400,000 to about 200,000. Of those, 120,000 are active in periodic Army training and 80,000 are non-training reserves. Also i think 2005 or 2007 this numbers were reduced even more. So what did you look was probably from WW1 and WW2 and in WW everyone who could hold rifle was in army. With 18 year anyone could join army just like in any other country, but it is not true that people must go in army after school.
| |
| Sunday, March 17, 2013 - 09:49 pm Isn't it true though that every Swiss person holds a side arm with X amount of ammo, just in case. And the ammo is checked periodically to make sure there isn't mis-use?
| |
| Monday, March 18, 2013 - 05:47 pm no not side arms i have 10 nukes in basement :D since we have to clear bunkers for banks and their servers, my friend have tanks :D No serious i am older than 26.  i was not in army and i never have any real weapons and most of my friend didn't have them insted of weapons we get franc's that you and your gov put in our banks :D i only have airsoft M-4 http://www.popularairsoft.com/files/images/GP735-1L.jpg i pay it 500$ but i don't play it much (no one want to play with me they are afraid that i will use my nukes from basement if i get pissed)
| |
Tuesday, March 19, 2013 - 08:18 pm From "AN ARMED SOCIETY" by Stephen P. Holbrook. Barefoots world.
| |
| Tuesday, March 19, 2013 - 10:38 pm LOL i first time see this Switzerland have army, Airforce and Land "Units" Also next year (1914-2014) Airforce will celebrate 100 years. But it is not true that all male citizens have weapons or that gov give them lol. As i know each year you can sign for military career and i think they recruit 10-20K recruits per year. Weapons are illegal you cannot go to store and buy weapons only police,security, or military may have weapons and only on duty.
| |
| Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 02:00 am um how would this play into federations working togethor to fight enemies..... i know my federation of small coutnries could work together and take down a large empire.... would we be able to though with what your suggesting...... also how is a normal sized country 20-30 million supposed to obtain over a 20 index and if we were under would this still cause riots even though we would have a substantial military proportional to the size of our population...... seems abit complicated but anything to bring back PvP warring.... i say we just ditch war levels and leave it at secured mode and let free players take more slaves it would be a more FUN game with war and diplomacy and intrigue..... the GM is spending lots of time it seems "Improving" the war game but there still isnt much of a war game due to war levels..... maybe they will see this logical error and after they are done with there "improvements" they will dispense with war levels
| |
| Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 07:26 pm It sounds like it seriously needs updating Darcus, I suppose wikipedia is only as good as someone wrote it on there. Jark a lot of this I suggested has been dropped now, the size of the population does'nt matter. However my federations idea could still be partially enforced, for example if you are below the 20 defence index level, the riots idea it would work something like this.... (SMALL EMPIRES) From 1 to 5 countries- Defence Index 0-20. No riots, which would also act like my new (Peaceful Mode) idea. From 1 to 5 countries- Defence Index 20+ (War Mode). No riots, can be attacked by other players. (LARGE EMPIRES) From 6+ countries- Defence Index 0-20. Riots, also the more countries you have, the more riots that will occur more frequently because of the lack of military presence across your empire. because your defence index is below 20 (Peaceful Mode) you will not be attacked by other players. From 6+ countries- Defence Index 20+ (War Mode). No riots will occur since you have a sufficient amount of military across your empire. Can be attacked by other players. ----------------------------------------- It does'nt have to be a 0-20 defence index you know, as I think I have well over estimated that number as that is a substantial amount of military like you say, maybe 0-10 or something or even below that could work.
|
