War

I would have thought that after nine years, the failure of this model had become evident. One does have to wonder what exactly any of you are thinking.

1.
c. Ok.

2.
b. If you can make it happen, Boss.

4. No.

5. You need to clarify if and when you mean countries or players.

6. I would call it a day after six hours.

7. More automatic stuff? What is wrong with you! I've been here since the automaton craze, and I hardly know what is going on with my country.
Just let me save some unit blueprints that I create on the game, so I can build them faster according to my specification, instead of the game's default.

8. Yes, no, maybe... If the soldiers are coming from my country's LLWs forget it.

9. Empires with war protection on at least one country - secure mode isn't war protection -, cannot declare war on another player. Once he declares war on a player country, no

Actually, Laguna and Tom. Maybe, just maybe what can happen here, is that another Version of SimCountry can be created, from scratch.

Reason Being, while the changes and suggestions Laguna just made a few posts ago make complete sense, I think people realize what they have paid for. Altering that too much would probably cause many people and players who love the game as is to want to quit or feel like they paid for something that game will become while wanting what it is currently.

I feel I have an ultimate solution that will allow what Tom is doing now to proceed, while providing an alternative.

Conquest World Servers.
At First, I thought that a completely new game would suffice as a valid alternative. But in afterthought, I realized this would constitute too much of a demand on the GMs, developers, and split the player base leading to further abandonment of other worlds.

The general Idea or Concept is to give Aggr

1. reducing deactivations... mixed feelings, see my comment to lg on #10...
but the concept is interesting. wasn't their talk of a market, where you could buy the right age mlm, it'd be something like mercenaries? right? that would also follow, that people could SELL them, i kinda like that. a person who is poorly prepared, and is trying to compensate for lack of skill with money... well why not make it cost them?

2. i oppose the start now button. when a player decs, both players know in advance when the shooting starts. rather, give the defender expanded sneak attack options. meaning they still get the first shot, with out going into full war mode.

5. thanks for giving some ground on this. i still don't like c e and g... they will make things 2 herky jerky.

6. i favor a time limit, if some one is defending, they shouldn't have to fight of the same guy for a week? the suggestion of 48 hours soun

wendy's idea is really good, it really is.

especially the black out part. you set your black outs, and end up near people that you don't have to wait 16 hours to fight!!! thats excellent!!!

giving every one the same basic start, and giving a gc award at the end of the month to the most successful players... i really can't find a real problem with it

it wont end wars in other worlds. as the build up process in permanent worlds would be much higher, so big country battles would happen more on other worlds... but offering a monthly, month long tournament for bragging rights and coins...with a relatively cheap buy in...excellent!!

My 2 cents,

The game needs whats missing or broken to be fixed, not the addition of more things.

More units etc are just going to add to the list of "not working correctly"

There is a back catologue of things waiting to be implemented that have already been accepted/promised.

Going back just 2 yrs ago, this game was far more enjoyable with less.

Fix what needs fixing first.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

if their is no point to gaining an advantage, their is no point to putting out any effort!!! i do not feel that currently an aggressor can gain an unfair advantage, when many players have had real life YEARS to prepare a defense... seriously think about that LG, if you've had a country for a RL year... should it be prepared? if it isn't who's fault is that? not mine for being prepared when i attack it...<!-/Quote-!>

And the United States had 225 years to get prepared to have two of their towers blow by a couple of planes, along with the Pentagon. Obviously, it is entirely their fault.

Players have years to prepare for an attack... May the players who have been buying weapons and ammo for every game month with all their countries for the past couple of years please raise their hands? Are these the same players whose first thought when logging in their countries is

Interesting


no win. I'd rather be left with not fighting at all.

"And the United States had 225 years to get prepared to have two of their towers blow by a couple of planes, along with the Pentagon. Obviously, it is entirely their fault. " -lg

that one is out of line

wow, seriously? you can't compare an act of terrorism, done more in the realm of espionage (which is a feature we don't have in SC,) to an act of war. further, this act of terrorism lead to 2 wars, lasting a decade, the level of retribution has been long and far reaching

but this is a game.

as is stands, right now, a country can avoid any war damage, with WP... in real life, that just isn't possible.

but if you want to use a real life example of lack or preparation, and an ACT OF WAR, look at pearl harbor. the lack of expecting an attack, meant many people died, and full scale war ensued... and through AGGRESSIVE means, the attacker was eventually destroyed, and it included the

That is the SC equivalent of coming out of the blue and smack a player with a war dec and what follows.

If I had said the Chinese had 4 000 years to avoid the genocide during the Second World War, would you call it out of line? You would probably leave it at odd. I work with what I have.
The point is time matters not when others are entertained with something else. And they mostly are.

If players don't want to fight back, who are you to force? If they don't, they don't. They were minding their own business, jogging along, paying their membership. It is in the interest of the game to keep it as such. They are the proof that war is not necessary. Most wars players fight are a great deal of smoke and mirrors.

Many things are called a game by some. Simcountry is... well, the moment you pay for membership, it's a hobby. For those that have gardening as a hobby, if I showed and trampled your favorite rose bush, would

"no win. I'd rather be left with not fighting at all." -wendy

thats what him and others are going for, no win, no fighting... customizes the game to fit their playing style. they can effect politics, and not risk loosing.

if a player wants to play a no risk game. the documentation clear states they can, with their secured mode country, and wp...

the documentation also clearly states, that if you want to expand past one country, you must defend it. why is this a problem?

don't remove every advantage a player can gain... just to make if fair for those that don't put out as much effort. add some equalization, sure. but not so much that you remove the value of effort, and preparation. other wise, if you want to play a no effort game... face book has tons of no effort games, with no risk, and you can socialize all you want. for free

personally, i enjoy challenging games. i like winning