Nation Wars Redemption V2.0

[blaa]

Here's my view on why the winner is clear after only few days.
First the default expanding was like 30 to like 15 on average. Then it got raised to 45 to 30 on average. At first the winning 'jump' came like on the 6th or 7th day, in the recent sets on 3rd or 4th day. Is there a correlation?

I believe there is (was). Netters (those who actively waited for expanders) can get land much more easily, can get tech and army much more easily (even the less active players help the NA/tech a lot more), because while getting land was made easier, getting tech and na wasn't made any more difficult. So if you have full tech and you can get a lot of land, then of course, you jump as fast as possible. There were states with 20k land on day 4 or day 5. Of course they will break away.

Meanwhile, stockers or alternative strategies were offered no relief. Only the netters (jumpers). If you stock in the bottom, you still need a lot land, even though you have no army upkeep, the topstates will be uncatchable if they have so much land. But if you are a stocking state with a lot of land, you will lose a lot of land...

I hope the old game remains somewhere (different server, chaos rules maybe?). Reduce expanding, tweak the GB formula, I think I remember that in the old GB formula you didn't get shitload of land just because you had little land and enemy had a lot of land, like you do now.

I won't judge on the new game, it seems kinda random to me, but let's see what comes out of it.

[MAGGIO]

i would like to see a player gain something from each different type of attack whether that be land, units, or buildings.

it will take a few sets to settle in. next set will be a blood bath, so the real test will be in JAN.

[Top12Gun]

exapanding will be an issue. Especially early on expanding will net you ~150-200 land in 5 turns while a GA if the formula is anyway similar to BR/AR will get you ~25 land in the same 5 turns. yes you could declare war out of the starting blocks, but even at ~25 land in 2 turns expanding will be more powerfull.
Even at 2k land, a BR style GA attack will only get you 28 land on avarage per 5 turns. the point where GA approach the gains of exploring = 9k land (9k * 1.4% = ~ 126 land per 5 turns)

there are a number of options to change this :

1) increase GA gains
2) lower turns for GA
3) lower land on expanding
4) make GA gains / Expanding gains dependant on either own size or time in set
5) put a max expansion cap in place for the server (will hurt late starters)
6) put a max expansion cap in place per state
7) start with a lot more land

I support this option.

Scav is right....the whole element of being a skilled land grabber which differentiates the winners from the rest is gone. No one wins with 3 days into set. Thats what too early to jump. If someone wins after 3 days its simply because no one else is bothering. Person whos #1 on day 3 is the person who will be giving the skilled netter his 3-4k land grab when he jumps....

This. Not to mention the fact that when you remove both the GB formula and any benefits of grabbing over expanding, you remove a lot of what sets people like Kris apart from people like me. And that's a bad thing. Too much of a level playing field with little skill based opportunity for the better players to place better will be a detriment to the game, not an upgrade.

Here's my view on why the winner is clear after only few days.
First the default expanding was like 30 to like 15 on average. Then it got raised to 45 to 30 on average. At first the winning 'jump' came like on the 6th or 7th day, in the recent sets on 3rd or 4th day. Is there a correlation?

I believe there is (was). Netters (those who actively waited for expanders) can get land much more easily, can get tech and army much more easily (even the less active players help the NA/tech a lot more), because while getting land was made easier, getting tech and na wasn't made any more difficult. So if you have full tech and you can get a lot of land, then of course, you jump as fast as possible. There were states with 20k land on day 4 or day 5. Of course they will break away.

Meanwhile, stockers or alternative strategies were offered no relief. Only the netters (jumpers). If you stock in the bottom, you still need a lot land, even though you have no army upkeep, the topstates will be uncatchable if they have so much land. But if you are a stocking state with a lot of land, you will lose a lot of land...

I hope the old game remains somewhere (different server, chaos rules maybe?). Reduce expanding, tweak the GB formula, I think I remember that in the old GB formula you didn't get shitload of land just because you had little land and enemy had a lot of land, like you do now.

I won't judge on the new game, it seems kinda random to me, but let's see what comes out of it.

blaa is right in almost every way..........

[SkyCat]

well i havent played like forever, but let i guess last year basically every set has been winning indy? maybe there would be needed some stronger indy nerf to make sure they can get so much power in start of set when there its almost impossible to chalenge them as farmer cant sell food, casher issues i that in order to get cash fast you need to cash or you lost every turn to indy player a lot from your production - or if you cash-cash indys simply got so much more land that they own you with it.... science maybe - but its too much a wildcard anyway

[Mr President]

Lol you haven't even tried it yet and you're saying it won't work. First - this is just as starting point. Of course we will have to adjust and change things as we move forward. Some are complaining about just expanding all set, well what do you think happens now? I could count the amount of grabs I have made the last 5 sets on one hand and I know many others could too. The average time people spend on here is 4 minutes. I would love to increase it and have tried many times but after a while you either continue to fight a losing battle or you make some changes. Its time for a change.

The only people who complain about making the playing field even are the few who have mastered the game and take first each set they play. I totally agree that the ones who spend the time should reap the rewards however 1% does this. So do we continue the same path for the 1% or change things up so the other 99% has some chances as well?

I have received several messages saying how they were leaving the game but they saw this new change and are very excited to play again.

I really have no idea if this will work out or not but I do know that I personally was getting very bored with the game. If I was getting bored I can't imagine what others were feeling. Really what do we have to lose? People might leave and not play? Newsflash, it happened long before this change and without this change I highly doubt the game would have made it another year.

Lets give this a shot. Change it when we need too and see what happens. I can always put the old game back up anytime. But the game is not growing. No growth, no game!

You all get 200 more active members and i'll host any version you want.

[kitoy]

seems interesting, so i'll give it a shot.. though i hate learning new things, that's why i didn't bother playing another game..

and MrP, if possible, this:

I hope the old game remains somewhere (different server, chaos rules maybe?). Reduce expanding, tweak the GB formula, I think I remember that in the old GB formula you didn't get shitload of land just because you had little land and enemy had a lot of land, like you do now.

[MAGGIO]

LOL @ Mr. P, 200 active

Now this game is more about activity rather than LG calculations

[SkyCat]

expanding need a lot of activty?

things about this game that make it both so intresting and make getting new players hand and play it well when you dont waste much time is that this is quite complex, simple but same time complex...

however making it next dump click-click-click browser based game would be :S

however who im to talk anyway, havent played like forever and probably will not after that set as what i read says that its not game i loved anymore then

[Mr President]

Exactly my point. You haven't played in forever but the game is suppose to stay the same in hopes you one day come back? Who knows maybe by the time you come back the old version will be back.. Or maybe there would be a new version that has thousands of members. Or maybe just nothing at all.

[MAGGIO]

however who im to talk anyway, havent played like forever and probably will not after that set as what i read says that its not game i loved anymore then

this fool just intelled me this morning