W3C - Game News October 7,2020

We are very interested in your experience and comments.
If you have specific knowledge on units that are useful, or not, weapons that you think are obsolete etc. please let us know.

If you put it here, others will be able to participate and learn.

We have detailed logs of wars.
blow by blow, missile by missile.
all wars are logged. These logs are sometime many many megabytes long.

we know how to find the relevant info.

I hope others will participate.
most current participants in the discussion are players with large armies.

we fight wars all the time.
we can setup wars against C3s in all levels and see what happens if we make a change. we see the exact numbers, misses, hits etc. in that log.

We have no intention of making the defense impossible to break but it should be possible for players to create a defense that is nearly unbreakable.
not easy or cheap, but very strong.
<

Andy I just want to say that C3 wars are not a good example of how defense operates because they are not in a federation. They do not benefit from the federation air response.

Also, I just sold 360 trillion worth of weapons from my CEO. Doing my part. I noticed they were all bought up almost immediately. GM buyback?

very much agreed on land forces diversification. they could be more expensive to buy and more resiliant against long range attacks. artillery must be strong against batteries.

great news!

It would also be a good idea to simplify the amount of unit types that are available for creation. I think there should just be one type of land unit that can accommodate any combination of offensive/defensive land weapons, and one type of air unit that can hold any of the offensive air units. There is really no use for some of the current unit templates, especially the small sized ones, and it will only serve to confuse players.

yes, unless this would be based on weapons diversity/purpose/resiliance. currently it has no logic how different units are supposed to be used.

I wish I had seen the fire sale on weapons. I didn't get to buy any! I am not selling weapons until I have a better understanding of what constitutes "too large" for an army. I have a set defense that I build for my countries and I purchase the weapons needed to fill that defense. I don't think it is unreasonable to have this number of weapons for each country that I might defend. Again, these are numbers that I have selected. I f I put 500 int wings, 500 heli wings, and 300 stealth wings in each country, is that too much? Not enough? If I maintain enough weapons to have a small garrison in every my capital and every city/county (50ish) plus enough for a tiny garrison in all my forts (150), is that too much? Not enough?
What about offense? I buy enough weapons that I could defeat a country defended like I defend. Then I consider how many countries I might need to attack in a full scale war and I build to that. So yea I h

In my main, I am at negative 104B for the country and total defense costs of 211B. I noticed I had auto activate on for the country's defense weapons so I do have some weapons active now. I will deploy the garrisons and air wings now to see the final cost.

500/500/300 is a lot. If you can support that, more power to you. I don't see anyone currently with 100 of each wing type active on FB (at least in the last couple days, not sure if it changed today). Not saying they can't, just no one currently is.

There is a decent amount of pvp war on FB at the moment. It's a good time to look at what other players have up.

Also, I'd like to echo again what John said about federation air defense. I shot at air d today, and I actually think the losses are good/appropriate if there is just one wing responding (which is what I was dealing with).

If there is a federated response though it becomes a very different story.

I ended up going with 250 int, 200 heli, and 50 stealth. We will see what the final costs are after it all deploys. I wouldn't expect to see anyone maintaining an active defense like this because of cost, which is my point. If someone were to dec on me and I deployed this defense, even for a few RL days, the cost to me would be huge. I expect to lose close to a T a month. It may be less though because it does seem the efforts to reduce costs have made a noticeable difference. I would be shocked if it was less than 500B per month and still think it may climb to a T.

I wasn't going to beat on a dead horse but here we go.

I see this move as a blatently obvious attack on Jon Galt and myself. I find it objectionable, petty, and poorly conceived.

I am not getting rid of my weapons Andy. I have nothing else to spend cash on, I can no longer exchange my trillions of sim dollars into gold.

There is zero legitimate reason to stop CEO storage.

I am at WL 11, who am I going to bother?

The game is for all intents and purposes dead to me. I weathered the destruction of the economy, the endless worker shortages, economic roller coasters, war levels, the impossibility of selling countries, and I am not sure yet if this is the final straw or not.

Selling weapons was visible on the market.
You see some utilization percentages shooting up.

there were shortages of many weapon types and some disappeared.
these will probably come back again.

we were not buying or selling any weapons, or any other products.
we never do unless there is a danger for the market.
Players always kept saying it but it was always baseless.

Some product shortages can crash the entire market because they are used in the production of many other products.
The system has some intervention rules that are never changing price directions.
The system never buys anything. Oversupply can not topple the market.

the lower pricing for many types of war materials is probably starting to kick in.
more will follow.

Reducing the types of units is not really important.
Nobody is forcing anyone to purchase all these types and indeed, when we diversify some weapons, the v

I thought I would have an update on the cost but the garrisons are not deploying. They are partially deployed (about half maybe). I have 150 small supply units and 100 large supply units. About half are idle. I have tons of military supplies, military services, gasoline, and trucks. My total defense cost is holding steady at 222B. It does seem there have been reductions in active defense costs because I would expect this to be higher already. It jumped to 265B for a couple of months but lowered back down for some reason. When it is all done, I will check my logs to see how much ammo was used up in this process too.

The cost of the defense was reduced in two ways:

1. The cost of ammunition is reduced. This will have effect when you purchase new ammo. The cost of using ammo in maintenance is based on what you paid for it on average. As you purchase new ammo, the average cost price will decline.
Numbers used remain the same.

2. The price of defensive weapon maintenance units is reduced.
you use the same number.
also here, the decline depends on the average price paid for these products.

We are reducing the cost for a very long time.
There were several large reductions in the past weeks.
in total more than 30%.

The older declines probably kicked in. The recent ones will do so in the coming days or weeks, depending on the numbers you had available.