W3C - Game News Feb. 6

1. Quality of Supplies in the Country

The quality of products the country is purchasing has and increased influence on the welfare of the country and in turn, an increased influence on the welfare in corporations and their production level.

Higher quality supplies in the country will increase the cost for government but a higher production levels in corporations will increase their profitability and income for the country.

The higher ordering quality will also improve the average level of requested quality in the market and bring it closer to the quality of products that are produced in corporations. We intend to continue and increase the influence of quality on the welfare even more in the future.

All such changes are slight and they effect of the corporations will take time before it can be noticed.

2. Trading menu and Pages

The trading menu is improved and some of the underlying detail pages are impr

An error in the computation of corporate assets caused this drop.

We will fix it ASAP in the coming hour or so.

I am sorry for this problem.
nothing is lost. There is no damage to any country.

Andy why cant the blackout messages show the entire blackout period? That way I'd know exactly when to log in and attack.

The way it's showing now is hour by hour. Meaning I have to log in each hour to see if I can atttack.

It would be so much easier if knew when I could login and fight.

I dont think the attacker should be given any information about the defenders blackout times, just the statement that the country is in blackout, to prevent confusion.

Andy

How much of a boost does higher Q consumer goods give?
I tried it awhile back and only got a few points when buying 200Q, if I plan to self contact the Q boost would have to be somewhat large. Can you give expect numbers 300Q average equals 30% increase? what kind of benefits are we getting?

I nearly had a war go inactive on me Crafty because of blackouts been active when I was online.

Wouldn't take long to figure out anyway so dont see why they shouldn't just tell you.

Would save the confusion of wether the war would go inactive or not.

I support public blackout information!

The boost of quality in countries has a very small influence on the welfare index.
It is now increased a bit and will increase more but it will be a small percentage.

The cost increase to the country is not very significant while a small percentage boost in production is running in large numbers.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

I support public blackout information! <!-/Quote-!>

I have to agree. As I have been in several wars where the feature is being used in a manner inconsistent with the reason it was implemented.


During several wars with Jackseptic, his blackout period seems to span an hour at a time over several hours. Meaning one hour on, and hour off, an hour on, an hour off and so on. The feature is being used in this instance to gain an element of surprise when naturally an attacker would assume the start of a blackout period means the player won't be available to fight for several hours. This feature is not being used to avoid being conquered while being genuinely unable to login and fight, but to gain some advantage becuase the opponent has absolutely no idea when these periods will be set. Not to mention the feature is not universal for every country, it can be randomly se

"This feature is not being used to avoid being conquered while being genuinely unable to login and fight, but to gain some advantage" -Wendy

sounds allot like how you use war protection, and c3 warfare.

"If the feature is intended to avoid war when a president cannot log in, allowing the person to setup the blackout period on and off and off and on, defeats the purpose and the feature is being exploited." Wendy

also sounds like a wendy tactic.

you'd think that you'd applaud such behavior in others, that you yourself are a shining example of.

Ok, then lets have w3c drop war protection and blackout and see who lasts.

That conversation has been had already and is in large part to blame for c3/war levels. The war levels served to make c3 warfare more complicated. It has been for the most part successful too. I am not as enthusiastic when I have to go about doing things the way I do, but you can't stop a determined opponent committed to action whatever the cost in time or resources.

But yeah, if you wanna drop war protection/war levels and blackouts, I'm down to wipe you out the moment they do. Trust me, unless you are swiping that plastic you can't keep up with me, this is fact.

Any day they are ready I am too. Let's stay on topic here and not derail the truth for some worn out argument that has been had numerous times.

Oh, and my bad. I apologize Josias. Let me take two steps back. On the surface it appeared to me you wanted to criticize my observation but given what you just said evidences the fact that the blackout period abuse should be addressed like the numerous measures implemented to counter c3 warfare addressed those concerns after numerous lengthy conversations.

Thank you for agreeing. Two different types of perceived or implied abuse. The issue here is that one has been addressed several different times in many different ways while the other still persists.

I need to read slower next time Josias and I apologize again.

i don't think the C3 thing has been properly addressed.

the W3C has clearly stated, that if you fight a war. If the defense fights hard, you should not be able to "just walk away,"

how ever, the use of C3s, only, does not allow some one to do enough damage to cause you to go away. and allows you to harass better players, for weeks on end. claiming victory, not by superior game play, but by just forcing the other guy to yield, or spend countless hours fending of an inferior force

mixed feels about the black out issue, i get the point, but i'm not sure why one thing must be stopped, but another thing not. Especially, when the one getting the pass, has been a blatant feature abuse for years. the other, not so much

but for all your talk, and bravado. its you who could come up the war level latter, and fight me.

Say what you will, but it is you, who is avoiding me. Its really easy to talk tu

~War protection cannot be toggled on or off for 24 hours.

Note: EVERY veteran good at war, even the legendary war players used war protection all the time in the very same manner I have used war protection. You just mention my name, because I brought the efficiency of my tactics to an unprecedented level. I get it, but keep it real.

~War levels and increasing difficulty when moving up the war levels dramatically reduces the effectiveness of c3 warfare. Therefore, most of you moved up the war levels. I choose not to play that game. As long as you are not a threat to me and the other way the same, war is avoided altogether.

~The range of nuclear weapons, especially strategic bombs, have been reduced, because I bombed the crap out of Budman using a plan to keep his land weapons out of range, making it nearly impossible to paint my country.

Note: The very same tactic used against me while facing several opponents at o

which is another point that was brought up a while back.

based on what you said, wendy.

"I'm down to wipe you out"

"Trust me, unless you are swiping that plastic you can't keep up with me, this is fact. "

"Any day they are ready I am too."

it would sound that you are my better. If thats the case, why are you still low war level? The last thing W3C wants, (accourding to andy,) is an experienced war player at a low level. So why are you still at a low war level, bragging about how great you are?

probably, because your use of C3 only wars. which of course, would mean hours of me popping forts. while you just take more C3's

every one HAS, how many ONLY?

only you

and as you just said, you can't fight me at the higher levels. you are weak. a one trick horse.

you obviously can't actually fight any one who should be your own skill level, because you'd loose.

you rely entirely on cheap tactics to brag about your own prowess.

If that's the case, why are you still low war level?

As I said, I choose not to play the war level game. If you don't want to face c3 warfare, you moving up war levels solved that problem. YOU moved, I was always readily available. You had a problem with how I operated, and you got your fix.

As far as being in a position to face more war and pooping forts, you could always choose not to piss people off, or be an antagonist and find yourself in that situation, like you have done in the past, and continue to do on this thread. You bait, then complain when I come calling.

I'm not bragging about my greatness, this status was mentioned by Andy himself in a thread on a similar subject. I know my capabilities, in making money in the game and putting it to good use. Knowing where I stand is far from bragging.

You only know how to amass countries with large amounts of weapons and ammo, declare war in a pack on unsu

All this tomfoolery is exquisite I admit. but I am not here to knock the chip off anyone's shoulder in this thread. I mentioned an issue and would like to know the gamemaster's position on how this is being used.

I'll requote myself and ignore Josias here. I don't want this to get lost in his valiant attempt to bait and hook. I'm not a fish, it's that simple. You can have the rest of the thread to throw whatever mud you like, but it is pointless here.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

I have to agree. As I have been in several wars where the feature is being used in a manner inconsistent with the reason it was implemented.


During several wars with Jackseptic, his blackout period seems to span an hour at a time over several hours. Meaning one hour on, and hour off, an hour on, an hour off and so on. The feature is being used in this instance to gain an element of surprise when natu

"You only know how to amass countries with large amounts of weapons and ammo," wendy

isn't that part of the point. its not entirely about assets. but building countries and defending them is a cornerstone of the game.

when you build something you care about. you don't want to loose it. so you defend it. and might be willing to step down before you loose it.

that creates politics. with a balance of power, and conflict. it creates political maneuvering, to gain allies, and tactical advantages. as players must weigh their goals, against the risk

the use of C3 warfare, does not encourage that. their is no risk. it does not offer interactive politics, because you do not need allies, and never risk anything.

it makes this a one person game.

Perhaps you didn't get the point of my last post. But go ahead, have at it.

I dont agree that black out periods are for extended periods of not be able to log in. Some people may have other schedules that require different blackout periods. You cant assume all have the same sort of day as yourselves.

Cease suggesting ways to make the game easier. What do you want, SC for dummies?

Wendy, you know damn well that your methods of fighting, (from what I have observed, not experienced I might add), are designed to use harassment to get your own way.

Josias, why do you bother argue with Wendy about this? You have avoided her with WLs. Dont use that as a safety net to get away with critisising her.

well, my suggestion about C3 warring would be

a GC charge, based on the pop of the attacking country.

If a player uses a country under 30M, to dec a country 30M or over, their'd be an additional GC charge. for the dec. it the attacker wins, nothing special happens, if the defender wins, he/she gets half the gc

for instance.

if some one was to use a 20m country to dec a 70M. The 20M being 10 under 30M, would cost the attacker 60GC to make the attack. if the 70M wins, he gets 30GC. less than a C3 raid, but atleast the attacker isn't "just walking away,"

perhaps a certain amount of free dec's could be asigned to each player account. for instance, you could use 5 undeveloped countries per real month, to dec on others. but after that, you have to start paying GC.

it would allow the tactic, but still limit it. And provide a way to slow down weeks of endless fighting against un

Yeah, that would be a cool way of gifting coins.

Abuse? Much?

their are better ways to gift gc, shoot, we used to be able to just give GC away. And we didn't loose it because they didn't want us to give each other gold.

"Wendy, you know damn well that your methods of fighting, (from what I have observed, not experienced I might add), are designed to use harassment to get your own way. " Crafty

and thats my point crafty, she is out to harass players.

you have to ask, how many people would sign up for a game. if they knew that after a few months of building up, if they try to do anything, they are going to have a person attack them endlessly, until they quit or run away?

i'd bet most people would keep looking.

I am sure you are right in your own way Josias, and I understand where you are coming from.

But I must add that, in 4 years of playing here and Wendy being around too, I have so far managed to maintain diplomacy with her. Is it because she fears me? I very much doubt that. Is it because I talk, am civil and reason with her? ah, maybe we are onto something there...