WAR LEVELS... REBOOTED

Gothamloki ... well said. Especially since I am a moderately experienced (as far as war goes) player who may be looking for adventure (hint #2: against poorly defended war level 3 countries on KB?).

LOL Green, you are giving away your best advantage... SURPRISE!

I say those who want too keep the war level system raid em with ur ceos

Number of countries in each world:

KB: 3,061
FB: 6,159
WG: 6,376
GR: 4,804
LU: 3,467

There is enough gravy in this turkey for everyone.

Want to be a war player? Get to war level 3

Want to be an econ player? Stay under the radar at war level 0,1 or 2.

Perhaps there should be more war levels under level 3. Give new players the time and training to graduate to war level 3.

All worlds should be a war world at level 3 or 4.

scrap war lvls...want to avoid a war and play econ?...go back to paying for WP and use the gc's u make mountains of.

Worst idea the gm's have introduced is taking away the ability to war, after all, war was and should be a apart of the game as was advertized.

There are over 10,000 available c3's on the five worlds.

Lock and load cowboys!

and where in those c'3 do u find your PvP battles?

War levels don't prevent anybody from fighting wars. All you have to do is get to war level 3 and fight against the other players who enjoy wars.

If the pro-war players would have just fought each other to begin with, war levels would have never happened. But, pro-war players prefer to fight their wars against the other poor bastards who may or may not be prepared/skilled/interested. Note that I've done this too so I'm not accusing anybody.

It's just that wars in SC only appeal to a minority of players. The rest prefer to not be bothered with it. History has shown this to be true. Example: White Giant war last year.

I'm against removing war level 0 because I see no point in encouraging parts of the game that are not well-liked.

thats why we had WP or secured........it was ur war lvl 0

You know. It sounds more and more like players with high war indexes are upset because they cant run rampant against less experienced players that aren't interested or prepared for war. What's preventing level 4+ players from going to war with each other again? War protection that can be turned off?

So between FB, plenty of high level empires buying temp protection they could turn off, and single country secure mode that could also be turned off; There're STILL not enough presidents to fight with?

Maybe the problem isn't the war leveling, but a population of players not interested in having experienced players ruining their gameplay by having to respond to unprovoked attacks.

Well said Kit,
Accounts are now free, so is war protection. True there is no game level 0, but there is a game level. Calling it 0 or 1 makes no differance. WP or secured still works for players at any war level.
FB is still unique with it's lower military costs. Stagnence is 100% player, adapt or be bored. War level 0 should only be an issue for an over populated world, wich isn't an issue for SC. Training thru war vs. a friendly Fed is far from realistic.
War level 0 does not affect your ability to wage 'fair' war as much as advanced restrictions do.

"War level 0 should only be an issue for an over populated world, wich isn't an issue for SC." Synicus

I agree.

Wonders why I, who has never really warred and only played econ, am in favor of removing the ridiculous war levels?

Oh oh....here's a thought:

I've paid WP for years. GMs.....I DEMAND A REFUND!!!!!!! Why should a player of today get it free, when I paid for YEARS!!! How bout dem apples!!! :-P


And,,,,Kitsune.... YOU are????? I don't recall your name as one of the SC great warlords. Where u come from???? lol

All of this talk, and the answer is really simple. This game has become and economic sim. This game is no longer about war, war really does not have ANYTHING to do with this game. 'Eco' players cried about getting 'beat up' or 'gang-banged' by vets so things were changed in their favor.

But, what if I wanted to complain and say it is to difficult to maintain a huge military and make my country profitable? Will things be changed in my favor? My point is this... If this is a empire building sim then it needs to include war. War is a part of any empire. Is there any real empire or world power that was strong economically but that did not also have strong military?

I mean if 'Econ' players want protection, then pay for it, shouldn't be able to 'have your cake and eat it to.'

Simply put this game is not as advertised, or what it used to be. Thats why many players that enjoy the war aspect

I been playin this game for some ten years and bit by bit this game has declined making war harder and harder and most players have left.When i first started u used too be albe to fire 100k aamb at once now there isnt much left in the tank concerning the war department too be enthusiatic about comptemplating winding up.

What I find amazing is GMs have not spoken on this issue. I would like to hear their thoughts. I feel like we yap yap yap, but are not being heard.

GMs, with all due respect, I would like to hear from you. Are you going to change it back or will it stay as is?

Thank you.

War levels have killed this game. As Serpent said, it is not as advertised anymore.

Federations are also dead now. They are now used to discuss economic trading. They USED to be used for that and much more...federational defensive tactics and offensive strategy.

A strong federation used to be all the war protection you needed...and GASP...if that wasn't enough for you...buy war protection, which is still cheaper than setting up a proper defense.

Now, we have all these new players, who have never experienced what it was like before war levels, hiding behind the war levels, and yet still running their traps about how great the war levels are. The players who aren't eligible for war should not even have the war threads of the forum as an option to comment on.

I thought that was what the economic mode of SC was supposed to be for. Where you can choose if you want to have war as part of your gameplay. With that optio

Lol,
EC, you sound like a republican. The player bids drive down the cost of gold coins, it's called greed.

when a new player shows up... and wants to war a c3? what happens? they're told to sell their weapons and focus on econ. what happens next?

when a new player figures out that they'll have to spend 6 months building up to a decent level, then they'll be labeled as a sim-hitler or sim-stalin, after 6 months of work... what happens next?

sim country has many avenues toward success. their are some very influential players, that are terrible at both econ and war, but still rather powerful when it comes to effecting the game.

sim country allows for military, econ, and political success. and frankly, the 3 of them need to balance each other.

when you have entire federations adding members, based on mutual protection, but utterly fail. we add another level of protection. making the war game unpractical.

the problem, is that the player base, as a unit, chases off any one that wants to war. labe

23,867 = Total # of countries in simcountry
13,195 = Total # of countries human controlled
10,672 = Total # of countries simcountry controlled (c3)

55.29% human player
44.71% C3's

keep war levels, but make them count only for c3 wars. I getting an harder and harder AI to fight would be nice in the future. Maybe some offensive play on the higher levels?
1-5 the AI fights like to day.
5-10 AI react to offensive land divisions within their borders.
10-15 they actively attack you air-force / missile concentrations
16. they use nukes!!

PVP should still not be free for all on all worlds
FB = free for all
other: main = protected + 6 months grace period.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

EC:
I guess enough eco geeks crying to the GM's about the unfairness of war was all it took to ruin SC<!-/Quote-!>

That's interesting, because I remember ...

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

whiteboy:
You know what I think would go a VERY long way to creating balance in the war game? Not changing defensive weapons to be stronger than they already are, but instead, creating levels of c3's

War<!-/Quote-!>

and also ...

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

whiteboy:
Seems very cool, pretty much exactly what my idea was ...

W3C - War Missions and war le

Very true Jo.

The warmongers brought us war levels. Only later did many econ geeks embraced it.

Is 'Warmoners' a negative term?

If so, then I say we embrace a new term.... 'Ecomonger'!

With the whole war protection thing, why are people suddenly complaining about it? Look here for instance from the polls:

'Price for Ware protection is too high. Especially for growing nations that need time to develop an army. Would be nice if a country could defend against the giants & would probably keep more new player playing if they could afford WP. If 10 countries are committed to destroy your empire - 5 or 10 GC should buy a full real world month. Owners wont lose because a player will still donate to build army.'

23 gamers voted for the proposal.
8 gamers voted against the proposal.

To me, it seems that people are just not interested in wars. That or they're afraid of it.

Honestly, unless your slave country is ultra wealthy, or you have people who hate your guts, no one is going to invade a slave country with all sorts of dramas. Trying to get the economy in a conquered C3 back to normal is