Nation-Wars

I know that the changes we suggested won't take place anytime soon as coding is hard work and Mr. P will have a lot to do.

The bulk of the job is for the community.

Here's the nation list.

Nation A - Maggio, what name do you want?
1. Maggio
2.
3.
4.
5.

Nation B
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Nation C
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Independent States (Those who do not want to join the experiment)

NOTE: I'll keep editing this as this thread progresses.

For those who want to join, reply to this thread and say what nation you want to be in.
For those who want to be nation leaders show your desire to be so in your response.

Next set starts in a few days guys. Have a nice day.

Until we can get to this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zardozr

The answer seems obvious to me, we need to change how rounds are won. Make it so it is nations that win instead of individual players! Also, change it so that instead of a set ending date a nation has to reach a certain power and then stay above that power for a set amount of time in order to win.

If we did these two very minor changes it would force people to work together and it would force action into the game once nations started getting close to the power goal. (and action is always a good.thing)

---

I will gladly sign up for this list thing and I also propose that all the 'gentlemens agreements' simply be abolished from this point forward.

i know im going to have a nation next set

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zardozr

Until we can get to this



I will gladly sign up for this list thing and I also propose that all the 'gentlemens agreements' simply be abolished from this point forward.

---

What nation you want to join? We'll make the nations by ourselves.

People are already working together, zardozr. You might not have seen that in this round in eleet, but that's because most of us have been playing for so long and don't need to talk things through so much.

We had guys who were going to the top - originally margus and zaxz, but zaxz waited for too long and missed the train :P. Then we had 2 helpers, me and mauno. We were just doing our turns, reselling some of our stuff - generally helping to boost the tech and nation army. You were kind of a black horse, judging from earlier sets you knew what to do, so i figured you could get a top quality finish anyway. Yes, it would have helped more, if I would have co-ordinated tax drops with you better, so you could have maximized your efforts even more, but hey, we can try better next time.

RO had a good army/tech, but this time margus just outnetted him, but that was THANKS to the fact that eleet had decent army and tech. None of that and he wouldn't have won.

So, my point: I don't understand what we are trying to fix here???????

In order to win sets you must have a good nation. When I am helping in a set, and a state from my nation ends up winning I feel good. Usually having a top state helps to get other states to the top as well. As the top state constantly farms the lower states.

What good is this nation a/b/c thing is going to do? You have to realize that when I say "working together" it can't mean that all players from a nation will win. There are netters/helpers and usually there are just expanders. While netting takes the most time, the helpers need to be online a lot as well, so they can resell fastest/do spy ops for states/etc.

So my proposition is to create long lasting nations that will stand for years ( :D ). Then most players can try to win, as netters usually don't have time nor will to play for top spot each set.

This was actually only my second full round but being in eleet was a real pleasure, especially since I was given the overview privilege because I was able to look at all your states and see what you were doing. It was obvious that different people were playing specific strategies to help out the nation and I learned a bit just by watching. One of my personal problems is that I have trouble spending all my turns, I know I lost a LOT of turns because I got to 300/100 plenty of times. (I have a hard time balancing out what to sell and when to sell it)

What is trying to be done here is to focus more on changing the game so that nations win sets as opposed to individual players winning sets. Everyone is a nation, everyone working towards getting their own nation to the top and fighting the other nations to do it.

I have no idea what is done here.

What needs to be done is give players a reason to stay and play. Right now there's a handful that know the game and are comfortable playing as is. There really should be some reward for 1st,2nd,and 3rd place for nations and states. Right now it's first or last and who really wants too waste time going through the motions for nothing except for a few diehards? It's probably intimidating for a new player to get pummbled off the bat by big nations not knowing what too do. Some players are so greedy for land and the no. 1 spot that they forget about expanding the community. And it really starts with the forums,a few of us try to get threads going for participation but too no avail.

all good thoughts, this thread may be too premature so dont get too upset if it doesnt go down as planned. its a good start, but these dogs are slow to learn new tricks.

i think ACE has it right, whats the point? a little money or wager may get things rolling, but we will need cashflow for prizes.

I think even in game prizes for winning would be a cool idea, like if your nation wins then everyone is guaranteed to get a random lvl 12 unit in the next round.