Your hard to please.

If Pang runs the autobots, I shall be the leader of the decepticons

i agree with this... and let me tell you all it's a fluff of a set when someone - me glances at PG - decides us to be pacted to the deep end of our butholes... i hate it, nothing to grab sucks, that is 1 of the main reasons i took part in landtrading a few sets back, cos when you got nothing to grab and don't have the time to camp it sucks ass :(

The problem is pretty simple. Greed.

You all want grabbing and land to be easier, but if any one of you got grabbed, you would go crying. God forbid you spied on the country that grabbed you and found he had grown in NW to try and protect his land from being grabbed back. That would start a war.

Every alliance policies and player attitudes have restricted everyone. It shouldn't be up to qz to build in land farms for everyone, there is hundreds of thousands of acres to grab in the server.

People and alliances just need to change their attitudes and it might get somewhere.

cry? had a good laugh with a friend over the results :)

play primary ya noobs.

bonus post

How stupid are you? You are not asking QZ to fix this? You cannot be this dumb. Have you read this thread at all? In particular, all what you typed in this thread? If that isn't asking, can you give me a million dollars?

Edited for Waster,

Crest can't read,

lol..even after all this time.. this is still a debate?

we could fix .... just let us all run 16 country's

Alliance turns in to FFA and its fixxed

Perhaps you should tell that to Laf leaders then dude. The one set we tried trading there people got active. Now they wont even hear of others doing it.

lol you need to learn to read dude.

Isn't this how Argentina solved their economy . . . wait, never mind.

Yeah, the idiot creates a thread asking the admins to solve the "land problem" in his head with bots, but no, he isn't really asking them to do anything and by bots, he actually means politics. Farking moron.

I made a thread asking the mods to add some variety and to fix the issue with the complete lack of land available to bottom feeders... which (I know this will shock you) will give the game more variety for more than the 5 people who do all the camping now.

Now.. those solutions if you used your tiny brain to think about them would have nothing to do with landtrading, ghost acres, or any political issue. Those changes would affect BOTTOM FEEDING which provides V-A-R-I-E-T-Y.

The quote that you so anxiously replied to was this

"Oh and I have run trader countries so I am obviously not scared to be retalled. Sof in particular is trying to make this part harder but you may notice that I did not ask for QZ to fix this since it is purely a political issue. "

I am NOT asking QZ to address the issues with land trading in this post. I am asking him to give people more options so bottomfeeding could be done. Now. Do I need to explain that to you again or are you going to continue acting like an ass?

Oh, ok, I got you now. The lack of land on this server is caused only because there aren't enough countries on the server, there aren't enough untagged in the servers, not because of the policies all the alliances have. OK, gotcha. If you are not afraid of getting retalled, and obviously you like to grab, why don't you just go ahead and hit? Last time I checked there are like 500 active countries on the server. Go on, hit, get retalled, so what? You aren't afraid of getting retalled, right?

My opinion? Quit the server, come play Primary, let me see your top 10.

All of you opposed to having bots(npcs) are fools. No great game goes without them.

This idea is great and should be implemented.

Have there been serious talks about taking this game to fb and other platforms? The costs involved? Taking in investors and giving a royalty?

Yes, we had a working fb thing in our dev area before they changed their API a couple years ago; but we decided upon reflecting on Mars's experience that the new-user-experience needed to be fixed before we go on facebook, as it seems to be a one-chance sort of thing -- we can't go on fb, get 5k people who join & promptly quit, and *then* fix the user experience and expect any of them to come back...

EE is great if you played this sort of game (or E2025/Utopia even) in the past, it's a little tricky to get into though without a mentor at this point though... We'd like to improve that before moving onto FB

as for money/investment, throw some our way and we'll see ;) this is a hobby for pang & I so it takes more time than if we were blizzard...

I am doing exactly that, however, it would be nice to have the other option since I have no as of yet found one willing participant in my trading so I always have to initiate 1-2 and wait on retals which means I dont gain overly much. I'd still enjoy not having to gain the same way each set though.

QZ might I suggest that you guys get a patron thing going asap? Pang and I have spoken about this and it seems like you guys might consider it. If you were getting paid some stuff for some minor benefits like no need to click bonuses or somesuch then you might feel more motivated to spend more time with us :P

I don't need to talk to LaF leaders about antthing. I don't like netting, I don't like land trading. And I like playing in LaF. No talking needed.


I am just explaining why the game land is broken, new players struggle and everyone when they don't have trading partners or a whole tag they can farm complains about a lack of land. It's simple. It's regressive policies.

I am not sure why people don't allow land grabbing. But limit it to x number of attacks between alliances per 24 hours. no player can be hit more than once in 48 hours by the same alliance. And have your policies for breaking those rules.

At the moment the zero tolerance to grabbing really is stifling the game.

As I said, I like to war so it's no issue for me.

It would also need more than one alliance to change their political out look :)

I have been screwed by too many people when it comes to money. I wouldn't be throwing it, but I would seriously consider giving money if I was to receive a royalty. As I'm sure some others would as well.
It's awesome you guys just do it in your spare time, but if you entertained the idea and saw what you could bring in, maybe it could be worth your time.

I still love the bots idea. Having bots that actually outnumber the players, actually attack, do spy ops, stock, etc. Even bots that ally together and form an alliance. I'm sure that's extremely complicated to code, but the general idea is great and baby steps should be made.

How much money would it take to get stuff like this rolling.

pay me and I'll run a few hundered countries for all of you :)

Yup.

heh my friend if other alliances want to land trade they sure can

LaF does not care, when we did it for a single reset, we showed how broken it was and got it changed... the current Don we have says no to land trading so that is that. We havn't warred anyone when they landtraded

You are a leader of one of the most respected alliances playing, you should be implementing it!!

I'd also argue any grab followed by a retal, if done properly, results in land trading because of ghost acres. It's the lazy or stupid people that lose out in a situation like that.

I've termed it "forced" trade.

You guys would probably kill them :P You kill them every 2nd set anyways

Very interesting topic, and even though I was years removed from the game, I gots some opinions on a lot of what was said here, specifically for the alliance server.

1. Get rid of this extra land (ghost land or whatever it's called) f1uff. I am sure there were good reasons for it, but I see it as quite pointless. Land should come from exploring alone. Land trading nettting to more land than we started with just makes no sense to me whatsoever, and kills off a lot of the "realism" of the game. If anything, land should disappear due to war, with radiation and destruction, etc. I am guessing the extra land was to make alliances grabbing alliances happen more often, but the side effects are dumb.

2. Put more land in the game by either making exploring more lucrative, or by incorporating exploration tech. An all explore farmer should be a pacifist route that someone invests in.

3. Grabbing is pretty lucrative, keep it that way with a slight increase to gains to counter the fake bonus land removal.

4. Facebook yes. But since this is a pretty simple HTML game, then why not a google app as well. I play from my phone as much as I do from a computer. An app would make it oh so much easier. As far as app creation goes, an html port is one of the simplest. Find out the cost estimate, and then put together a kickstarter (kickstarter.com) to get some quick funding to do it.

5. Join the AVC. The problem with this game is too many vegemite loving hippies and not enough vegemite hating lords. You already hate the stuff, so make it official by joining the AVC

6. For the players sick of alliances not allowing grabs - deal with it. Seriously. It is the alliance server. Nothing has changed here in 15 years, and there are other server options. Of course none of them have the fun, fear, and activity of the alliance server, so you have to play here. Join an alliance, or go rogue - I have had fun doing both. But expecting all the alliance leaders to get in a room and decide to not have retal rules and DNH's is ridiculous. First thing I would do after that meeting is call up MD make sure sure that the new "No DNH" agreement didnt apply to us *wink* wink*

7. Help out the little guys by making sure all attack rules (networth and GDI) are top down only. The only limitation a little guy should have on their ability to attack a big guy is the power of their weapons and their own skill. Does it already work this way? Actually I don't even know anymore.

8. Bot countries...they would be farmed to nothing so quick that exploring would be a better option than attacking them.

9. See #1. Land trading is stupid

10. LaF is ranked too high

11. LCN

Bu

Jer Bu, bot countries would vastly outnumber players. There is no way they would all be farmed. They aren't just some fat countries with no defense. There would be different types of bots.

Think of land as 'xp'. There aren't a lot of games out there where you gain xp solely through playing by yourself or vs other players. It's through tasks, killing mobs, etc. Land needs to be the same way. I agree about your point on ghost acres. Exploring and attacking should be the only routes, except that bots should also be exploring and attacking.

WHAT JER BU SAID!

BILL

I don't think land is comparable to XP, Networth is comparable to XP. Land is just another factor in it, like military, etc.

Land should be a huge factor in calculating XP, maybe more so than it is today.

To me, bots just address the symptom of the real problem which is lack of players. The time spent coding bots could be better used in expanding the reach of the game through mobile, facebook, etc.
You dont want the game becoming 2000 fake countries and a hundred real ones because no additional effort was made to bring in new players.

Now that being said, there are some cool things you could do with bot AI that could be fun. But this is a player vs. player game, and I just don't see bots fitting in. Bots would shift things more to a single player model.

politics not players is the bigger problem. Lets say the alliance server added 1000 players. Most will join alliances and a handful will stay untagged. DO YOU REALLY THINK ALL 1000 WILL STAY UNTAGGED FOR YOUR LANDFARMS? Now because everyone is pacted out this leaves an even higher ratio of tagged vs. untagged to farm and camping for dr's will be even worse.

pussies let down your pacts and really play the game.

I ran a single tag last set in ffa ...went untagged and had a blast at all the targets and had fun with stupid people grabbing me who got spanked on the retal.

TELL YOUR LEADERS TO OPEN UP !!!

I ALSO AGREE 100% WITH JER BU. BOTS AND GHOST ACRES CREATE A SITUATION WHERE THIS IS NO LONGER A "PVP" TYPE GAME. THERE ARE ENOUGH SINGLE PLAYER GAMES ON FACEBOOK WITH WEEKLY HIGH SCORES AGAINST YOUR FRIENDS LIST... I'D LIKE TO NOT SEE THIS GAME TURNED INTO ANOTHER OF THOSE.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE IS A "LAND PROBLEM". THERE IS A LACK OF UNTAGGED COUNTRIES, BUT THIS IS *NOT* A PROBLEM. IF THERE IS A LACK OF LAND TARGETS, THAT LACK IS PRESENT ACROSS THE BOARD, FOR EVERY ALLIANCE. THE FIELD IS LEVEL FOR EVERYONE, AND SOME ARE BETTER THAN OTHERS AT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE SCARCE RESOURCES AVAILABLE.

FOR AS LONG AS I CAN REMEMBER, PEOPLE HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW HARD IT IS TO GET LAND ON THE ALLIANCE SERVER. IN FACT, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, GHOST ACRES FIRST MADE THEIR APPEARANCE (IN MUCH MORE SANE AMOUNTS) WHEN WE HAD SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 10K COUNTRIES ON THE SERVER. THERE'S A VERY GOOD REASON LAND IS HARD TO COME BY: THIS SERVER IS DESIGNED TO ALLOW PLAYERS TO BAND TOGETHER TO PROTECT THEIR LAND, SO OF COURSE IT IS HARDER TO FIND TARGETS.

A SHORTAGE OF PLAYERS ON THE OTHER HAND, DOES POSE MORE PROBLEMS. AS PLAYER NUMBERS DROP, EVENTUALLY YOU REACH A POINT WHERE THE PUBLIC MARKETS NO LONGER FUNCTION PROPERLY. WHEN THIS HAPPENS, THE NUMBER OF VIABLE STRATEGIES IS REDUCED AND THE GAME IS LESSENED, LEADING TO MORE ACCELERATED PLAYER LOSS.

THE GAME IS FINE. FOCUS ON KEEPING NEW PLAYERS COMING TO TRY IT OUT. MOST WILL QUIT, A FEW WILL STAY. IF YOU MANAGE TO GET ENOUGH PEOPLE TRYING THE GAME OUT, THOSE WHO STAY WILL OUTNUMBER THOSE OLD VETS WHO ONE BY ONE DROP OUT.

HA!

SAM
CHAMPION OF THE EUGLAF DIVISION,
THE MIGHTY CLAN [DANGER]!

There will be a number of bots one can add that will balance the game. As turns are limited each country can only do a specific number of attacks a day.
- 78 turns a day, so max about 33 attacks a day with minimal readiness losses and rebuilding for readiness. Let's say you would do 6 hits on a country before the returns turn too bad (assuming there is pleny o' land). This would mean per landgrabbing country you'd need 5 bot countries. Probably 3 or 4 bot countries would be enough to sustain everyone and have the balance.
- the better players would hit the better bot countries
- the mediocre players take left overs
- the sucky players get the scraps from that
- the losers play all explore countries.

But with 4 bot countries per country (so a max of about 2000 bot countries with the current player base, probably even less), you would give everyone something to do with their turns. They can grab, they can grow. And some players would still choose to hit the real players cos getting 4K on a grab is better then 100 acres from a bot country.

The reason we want land is because it gives something better to do with our turns the cashing or exploring for 6 acres a pop. Because no matter what grabbing takes a little skill (not much but still). Better players will avoid the bot countries with warfare tech, etc.

Seriously landtrading is not that much fun either, but bottomfeeding right now is not either (camp galore). People want something to do with their turns once exploring becomes boring (after like 8K its boring and useless)

That's pretty much the policy we have gone by. We are currently at war with 1 of the 2 alliances that doesn't agree to our policies, and the other is on Ceasefire.

so I guess we live in scarcity
oh well

If that is true, you should get some of your close allies to agree with you, and start working those policies out together.

Once others see it as the way forward, they will comply.

Loc, would a bot country be able to retal? Make aggressive ops or other harmful attacks?

I think of xp as land. You use xp to raise stats, levels, etc. NW is levels. military is stats. I have a level 1 character with 100 nw i go around grabbing fluff for 10 xp to gain 1000 xp which i spend to raise my strength, dex, con, or military which also allows me to raise my level.

Since this is the alliance server, you're right, you shouldn't have a lot of bots running around as untags, but the cool things you can do with the AI should be to have bots link up into smaller or larger alliances. Or have players who pay money run a certain number of AI bots(the bots run themselves but they get to have the bots landgrab a specific alliance x % of their turns, or do kill runs, etc.) in an alliance... or something along that line.

you're supposed to add cool stuff to a game(like donate $1 and instead of 20 bonus acres a day you get 100 for the rest of the reset) so people spend money on it. when you spend money you spend time and it becomes more and more about winning and beating others. if you can get people to spend money on a game, you will get people to stick around and learn it more.

If 10 ppl put 10k and got a 5% royalty would that get the ball rolling?

Do we have ten people willing to invest that much? Is that enough to motivate the ones doing the work?

I will pay you $5 to remove offensive allies from solo servers

That would be a must. You need personalities for a bot.
- passive
- normal (retals with ab or gs or missile depending on how often and how much you hit)
- Aggressive (retals you at every chance)
- Sleeper (appears to be a passive country, but after x hits he activates and suicides on a country that grabbed him in the last 3 days)
- cheaters (bot that actually controls 3 countries, will suicide on ya a la sleeper style)

Stuff like that, there must be risk involved in the grabbing, simulated real life noobs trying to make it.

Plus I think they should create spam tags up to 80 countries. If you grab a 'leader' bot country he can mobilize up to 5 countries in a soft suicide run

If bots were done I think it would be very important to not overdo it. Start low I'd say. Right now there are 126 total, including people in protection. I'd use that as a starting point and go from there. It would obviously be kind of pointless to put too many bots in or it is essentially the same as gifting people land which takes away any purpose of grabbing really... allthough I still do believe that if we just handed everyone 50k acres the best would rise to the top

and limits hits done by 1 country to 1 bot inside 24 hrs, otherwise some could put bots in deep dr so others wouldn't benefit that much.