Here we are again where players have all the answers, not surprising to see Scarlet thinks he actually has one of the best. Stating the obvious is obviously easy. With that said, a utopian solution is by no means easy to achieve.
How many times in the last few years have we been at this very point? All the effort, even if the devs mean well has actually pleased the game? Yet we stand on the edge of another unplanned change. The sad thing is that even with the best proposals possible, at best what can be expected is to please a simple few and piss off the rest who are ill-affected by the change. So why not force it down our throats? That is the final solution.
But forget all that, think of just a few days ago. Not a single player was on this forum asking for any change other than removing all war levels entirely. That was the only request made by many players, old, new, big and small. A majority consensus.
But what has lead to thi
Crafty had a good idea so I agreed with him.
What's your problem, seriously?
My guess, irritable bowel syndrome. lol
i'm with the idea 2, but not based on c3 wars, but pvp, the more pvp you do, the more it proves your aggression, and should push you up.
shrug
You know what my problem is. Too many crybabies, and you cradle them.
It is with the idea that players individually or as a group think we can change the game to fit/match/correct/improve any and every situation.
I think everyone should have the right to state an opinion or a suggestion. If people feel like they wanna "cry" so to speak about something they feel passionate about, they have the given right to do so, as a player within this game. Too bad, Wendy, there are OTHER players. Game doesn't revolve around just you.
I do, however, know that the GMs appreciate commentary and suggestions, and I'm sure constant gripes and moans are frustrating because I think they really do try hard to make the game an enjoyable and fair playing environment for everyone.
I did not read all the previous in details.
too busy in these last days of the year and most of us are on some free days.
I agree that there is a problem with war level in different worlds.
If you are a great war player and reached a very high war level in one of the worlds, doesn't it mean you are also a great war player on the other worlds?
maybe we should move the entire account to the max war level that was reached in any of the empires.
That sounds fair.
Personally, I'd still like to see it paired with the system moving up players who win many wars - whether it be done through C3 wars or PvP wars - and hope you take a look at the C3 bounties compared to cost of conquest. But same war level across the account makes good sense nonetheless.
Maybe you should Andy, I'll start Preparing right away. You could remove war levels too and please 95% of the game as well. You could do anything or nothing at all. And please move me to War level 0 when you change anything. It is a humble request.
Just to clarify,
there are never any resets of war levels as there are no resets of players war experiences.
war levels are here to stay as they function.
some tuning might take place, like account wide war levels and possible a little more flexibility in fighting between players with different war levels, especially in the higher levels or increase in the war level after winning a certain number of wars, like with war levels 1 and 2.
Any such possible change will be announce ahead of time on the forum and game news.
There will be some other additions and changes to the war game.
Mobile units are close to be released. two land types will be released first. to be followed by others fairly quickly and later by intelligence units.
A very significant change will involve the support of land units in the fighting for a target, allowing military units that are within range, to support the defense (garrison&
S
SuperSoldierRCP
All worlds
If i may Andy
A few updates that would be welcome to the war levels.
-Winning a PvP war should count as moving up the war levels. Taking 5nations from a player shows skill to a degree and a player shouldnt be allow to sit in the lower levels.
-I should be allow to fight anyone "UNDER THE CONDITION" that i signed a war dec. Signing a war dec pledges forces to your allies in times of war(it used to mean and auto dec of the attacking nation). This should still be the case. The only time you should see a war level 11 fighting a 3 or even a 4 (outside of FB) would be if they signed a war dec and are defending there ally. Otherwise the normal 2 above or below the war level should stay in place.
- Also please increase the cash in C3 warring... Bring it back to the old levels, as it stands the income gainned is really pretty sad
i would not like to see us set to our maximum war levels im 11 on FB and 0 on KB i dont want to be bumbed up to 11 on a world i havent fought a war on nor built a military on.besides there is no money to be made warring c3s at war level 11 i have to fight at 3 or 6 just to try and make a dollar, please consider another option.
<!-Quote-!>Quote:at best what can be expected is to please a simple few and piss off the rest who are ill-affected by the change.<!-/Quote-!>
Not true, complete fabrication in fact. Read "expected to please most of the players, who enjoy a good game, and piss off the one or two players who like to take endless C3s to attack people.
<!-Quote-!>Quote:But forget all that, think of just a few days ago. Not a single player was on this forum asking for any change other than removing all war levels entirely. That was the only request made by many players, old, new, big and small. A majority consensus.
<!-/Quote-!>
Not true, complete fabrication in fact. I would point out most every single post has advocated war levels remaining and, as a whole, the player base seems to accept the GMs decision that they are here to stay and they provide a stable p
Yeah Crafty no need for me to care about it anymore. It is just easier that way.
There are two different issues here:
1. Should you move up the war levels if you win several wars against a C3 of the same war level.
currently you can keep doing so and never move up.
2. should the entire account move to the highest war level of any of the empires.
1 We think that raiding C3 countries is fine but as you become more experienced, you should move up the levels.
Then raid higher level C3s.
War is becoming cheaper. The cost of ammunition is declining (following the exchange rate) and the amount of money you receive has remained unchanged for a very long time, meaning that you can purchase many more weapons for this same amount.
2. also looks reasonable. some will not like it but:
- They have secured mode for the main country.
- They can use temporary war protection or just build a strong defense.
With the new feature that will allow mil. units to participate more in
Well...personally I would not enjoy having my entire account move up to my higheat war level game wide because on GR I play at WL1 and am strictly economy driven. Ha! thank gawd a couple of my countries make money. I wouldn't want to lose them or lose their profitability because of arming them.
But for the best for the game all round, I am going to sit on the fence over the whole account being the same WL, and hope some reasonable unselfish points are made.
Seriously, I cannot wait. Initially I thought it would bother me too Crafty. But hey, it is fair. Cheers to the future.
1. I dont agree with moving up war lvls after winning several wars with c3s. This should always remain an option. I'm all for rules in game but SC shouldn't dictate every little aspect. If so, we will only log in to see how our countries are progressing with very little input from the player.
2. Each world is basically its own game within the big game. Keep it that way. If your entire account moves up to the highest level from one world, you might as well amalgamate all worlds into one big one. Military being cheaper and having more defense to participate is not a strong enough reason to move an entire account up to one level.
Yes a strong player can wipe out a weaker player(but thats how the world works, the strong will survive.)As long as this game is around there will always be an issue with stronger players defeating weaker players. And by stronger doesn't mean who has the most weapons.
I'm pretty much in favor of 1 and 2 for the reason that I see these as turning war levels from a means for experienced players to protect assets to a temporary protection that is slowly phased out the more you play the wargame.
Regarding 1, the current systems voluntary choice in war levels makes it so that players can self-select their competition range and works to keep players separate. By switching to a system that always pushes people it, it is my hope/opinion that more and more players will wind up being in the same competition range reducing the game-enforced partitions created by the existing war level structure.
Regarding 2, the stated purpose is to protect inexperienced players. It is not to allow players a safe econ base on one world that earns money to allow you to purchase weapons and fund campaigns on another world. This is what is being done by experienced players. The whole game has already been unified into a single &#
K
King Hezekiah II
All worlds
This needs to go in the suggestion section.
Scarlet has good points. If we were forced up the levels, then the war experienced players would find themselves in much the same position that they were before the war levels that most moaned about.
While at the same time, newer or non aggressive players would remain without the threat from 'bullying' players. Is this not the ideal position that was wanted with the introduction of war levels?
Lol King!
So when can we expect this provision to take hold Andy?