Search Results

Quote from BMfox: “ Quote from MZM7: “Is it even good gameplay for a former ally to suddenly switch sides without having to be cleverly persuaded or forced by enemy players? I'm talking of course about a coalition mate (perhaps even a fellow alliance member) goes inactive, and the AI proceeds by declaring war on their former ally. Sure, much of the responsibility falls on the guy who went inactive, but the person receiving negative consequences for the inactivity is the one who's still active, a…

Quote from BMfox: “If you aren't able to handle the downgraded Elite AI then maybe it's time to make a switch towards SimCIty If you as a country go rogue on invading all countries by surprise attack and without using all diplomatic channels the remaining world countries would form an alliance against you. I'd say that the mechanics as they are, are pretty realistic. ” I'm not entirely sure if this is meant to be a response to my points or not, but I'll continue as if it is, since it seems to be…

Quote from Tribunate: “Abusing the term literally. I haven't done a poll but my understanding is that most players play video games to relax... not to be stressed out. I don't know where the disconnect is here? ” Mhm.. yes we all know most games are played with the goal of relaxation, but most games don't continue while you're asleep. Some players shrug this aspect off, but the doesn't mean that the same can be expected of all players, since being asleep does make you vulnerable, unlike most oth…

I will not repeat myself. I've made my points, so I will only respond when my points are actually addressed.

Quote from Tribunate: “To be blunt, this seems like a personal issue when it comes to your well-being. I've been playing for years and don't feel overwhelmed or "tired of mind" when playing. This game helps me relax and enjoy some alone time from the world. If you are at a point of a game exhausting you, perhaps take a break? Every now and then I'll take some time off all my technology. It's very healthy for you! Go workout, fishing, hiking or whatever. This is just a game! ” No worries, you're …

If you can pull it off, taking over a player's land (especially earlier than everyone else due to morale) is far more lucrative, so I usually go with that if possible. Higher skilled players are usually better as allies, or at least non-aggressors if possible. If they don't respond to diplomatic messages, they immediately go from priority ally to priority target.

Quote from Larry is god lol lol: “dude I’m sorry your not making any sense that would not be possible to make a game we’re most people would be asleep. ” You're literally asking for the point we keep making! YES. It would be possible to make a game where most people would happen to be asleep, since people would join if their time-zone allowed them to sleep during the night bonus for a particular match. How many times must we repeat ourselves? I'm not saying 100% of the players would be same time…

Quote from Tre: “Quote from MZM7: “In my current Clash of Nations match as Finland, I first declared war on Sweden and took his land. Then did the same for Estonia, Latvia, and Germany within the next few days. Then, Romania attacked me, so I took his land. Then Turkey attacked me, so I took his land as well. Now, Ukraine the AI has declared war on me, after I fought one war at a time, with the most recent two being the result of players attacking me first. The main problem isn't just that it do…

Quote from Tribunate: “Sleeping is part of being at war man. There is no way your suggestion would make much sense since 100% defense bonus while people are sleeping (and assuming your troops would be "sleeping" ) is not fair at all. Plus, since this game has players from all over the world, there would be some many various times to attack someone. Sleeping and night time is just part of the game. Be smart about your unit positioning before you get off for the night! ” Just because sleeping is p…

Quote from CharlesPotatoXII: “Coalitions: Germany and Italy/me, Ukraine, and a maybe afk Britain ” Very unclear whether or not you mean the coalitions are: Germany, Italy, Caucasus vs Ukraine, Britain Or if you mean: Germany, Italy vs Caucasus, Ukraine, Britain I actually interpreted it the second way, since you used "and" in between Germany and Italy, whereas if there was another nation in their coalition there would be a comma there, with the "and" coming after Italy. Also the slash indicates …

The issue with the AI is not only that it's unrealistic for random countries to declare war on superpowers because they're 'unpopular.' Just from a gameplay standpoint, having to deal with something that is actually pretty hard to predict and avoid, alongside the stress of dealing with both allies and enemies is extremely off-putting. In my current Clash of Nations match as Finland, I first declared war on Sweden and took his land. Then did the same for Estonia, Latvia, and Germany within the ne…

Province VP's makes some sense from the standpoint of perhaps resource production. In real life of course it isn't really cities that make all the food for instance (although perhaps they process and distribute it), so I understand that idea. However, VP's being in cities makes sense from a gameplay standpoint, and gameplay is by far more important. It keeps objectives simple and straight forward. Plus, you still have to take rural provinces to get to cities at times, so that still gives them si…

Let's begin by remembering that criticizing the current state of gold isn't the same as rejecting its existence as part of the game. Here are some aspects of the current situation that can be seen as problems, along with potential solutions for each problem. Problem: Gold use is essentially concealed from other players, up until they're being overrun by planet-sized armies. See, a big part of strategy games is reflecting on what happened, and trying to figure out what allowed you to win, but mor…

Quote from Spite_Is_Right: “I'm willing to give the concept a fair hearing. You wrote that whole post arguing I should add something, but offered nothing yourself. ” In the post before (the one you literally quoted), I mentioned getting rid of the new terrain type and possibly giving plains some of the properties VC mentioned like the 30 min disembark for marines. That's building on the concept, even if I didn't add a fancy new unit or something. C'mon, don't play this game with me. Quote from S…

I know he suggested a new terrain type.. I mentioned it.. but that's not all he suggested. Sure, like I said we might be able to throw out the new terrain and just apply its attributes to plains, but that doesn't mean we throw out his whole suggestion.. I won't deny anybody's background in knowledge regarding development costs and times, and those things being factors in feature decisions is quite obvious. but my point still stands; I said what I said about assumptions because although making ev…

I'm not sure if there's already a thread on this topic or something, but when I searched for this I only found the terms 'classic' and '1.5' in posts, rather than subjects for threads. So I'm curious to know which of the two versions you guys prefer. I personally prefer 1.5 by far, as I actually enjoy just about every mechanic they've changed or introduced. Production of units is much cleaner and quicker, and they fit their specialized roles much better. I like what they did with airstrips and l…

I think marines make sense if implemented correctly. I presume they'd be quite expensive with few levels like Commandos, and their main purpose is the disembark times. Who said every province that borders water has to be coastal? Adding some coastal terrain can be done only to certain provinces, with some areas having way more or less provinces with such terrain based on the location's real life geography. This way normal provinces still have the 4 hour disembark. Perhaps there doesn't need to b…

Heavily depends on Doctrine, Economy, and Enemies, listed from most to least important in my book. I had a hard time choosing between the two because those factors are so variable, especially Enemies. If my enemy has plenty of motorized infantry themselves for example, then perhaps mechanized is the better pick for me since its light armor gives it an advantage in 1v1 against motorized. Ultimately it's 50/50 for me.

Quote from Stumpy Pete: “Sure there are. But the classic "canvas" view had an almost old-fashioned feel, making it seem like you were really sitting around a table with your old high-school friends, playing a board game like Axis & Allies. You felt like you're with friends and there's a camaraderie that the WebGL version just doesn't seem to foster....too much like other Mobile games. But we — the long-term players — didn't start on Mobile, and most of us still don't play on Mobile. Sure, we'll …

At what popularity does the AI attack you? For example my popularity with Norway is 14%. Also, are countries that began as AI more likely to attack you than countries whos players went inactive?