Jan 15th 2014, 15:14:33
[quote poster=SAM_DANGER]
It is common knowledge that the restart changes were based off my suggestion, however in my submission to admins I never said that restarts should come back with 70% (or more) of what they had, but rather 20-30% of what they had plus 70% or more of what they had on the market. I believe preserving stock on the market does add a new element of strategy to warring. 70% of everything however is excessive and is easily exploitable. As most suiciders would not get the opportunity to stockpile in such a manner I believe my initial proposal was far more viable than what we have been presented with this set.
I THINK YOU'RE WRONG ON THE MARKET PART OF THIS ONE, SOV. DURING OUR WAR WITH LAF IN OUR INAUGURAL RESET, BILL AND I WERE RELEGATED TO FARM STATUS AS WE WERE NO LONGER VIEWED AS A THREAT. BECAUSE OF THAT, I WAS ABLE TO EASILY STOCKPILE FOOD ON THE MARKET, SELL IT JUST AFTER THE PEAK, AND USE THAT TO STEAL BILLIONS IN CASH AND FOOD FROM LAF PLAYERS. LAF WAS ABLE TO COUNTER THIS - AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN - BY SIMPLY KILLING MY COUNTRY AND ELMINATING THOSE ASSETS. IF I'D BEEN ABLE TO PROTECT ALL OF THAT ON THE MARKET AGAIN, I COULD HAVE EASILY REPEATED MY ACTIONS AT LEAST ONCE, IF NOT MORE TIMES. 70% IS JUST FAR TOO MUCH OF ANYTHING TO BE RETURNED TO THE DECEASED COUNTRY.
I FOR ONE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS IDEA GO AWAY OR AT LEAST BE DRASTICALLY REDUCED - EVEN THOUGH IT HAS HELPED US IN OUR WAR AGAINST TPA. IF IT IS GOING TO BE KEPT THOUGH, MAYBE THE LOST ASSETS, RATHER THAN BEING JUST VAPORIZED, SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE COUNTRY WHICH DID THE KILLING.
PERSONALLY, I LIKED THE RAMPING UP WHICH WAS PUT IN PLACE A FEW RESETS AGO. I KNOW IT RESULTED IN LONG KILL RUNS, BUT IT PROPERLY REWARDED PLAYERS FOR KEEPING REASONABLE AMOUNTS OF DEFENSE ON HAND. IF THE RAMPING UP CONCEPT WAS STILL IN PLACE, EN4CER COULD HAVE DRAMATICALLY REDUCED THE DAMAGE TO HIS COUNTRY JUST BY UPPING HIS MILITARY LEVELS SOME, WITHOUT HAVING TO KEEP THOSE LEVELS SO HIGH AS TO CRIPPLE HIS COUNTRY ECONOMICALLY.
I THINK I'M DONE WITH THIS POST NOW.. SORRY TO BE SO BRIEF AND UNDETAILED, BUT I JUST DON'T HAVE TIME FOR A LOT OF TYPING THIS EVENING. :)
HA!
SAM
HOMICIDER,
THE MIGHTY CLAN [DANGER]!
[/quote]
My original proposal also had it that restarts would keep the same name as the original country so that suiciders could not hide, in which case an Alliance can deal with it's stock.
You also forget that if your country only comes back with 30% of what it had plus 70% of stock it would still have far less resources to begin with and thus would need to spend stock to continue it's crusade.
The intention of my change was to make dying less painful, add a new element of smart strategy to the game and give blindsided netters a better chance to bounce back after eating a FS.
Originally posted by Sov:
It is common knowledge that the restart changes were based off my suggestion, however in my submission to admins I never said that restarts should come back with 70% (or more) of what they had, but rather 20-30% of what they had plus 70% or more of what they had on the market. I believe preserving stock on the market does add a new element of strategy to warring. 70% of everything however is excessive and is easily exploitable. As most suiciders would not get the opportunity to stockpile in such a manner I believe my initial proposal was far more viable than what we have been presented with this set.
I THINK YOU'RE WRONG ON THE MARKET PART OF THIS ONE, SOV. DURING OUR WAR WITH LAF IN OUR INAUGURAL RESET, BILL AND I WERE RELEGATED TO FARM STATUS AS WE WERE NO LONGER VIEWED AS A THREAT. BECAUSE OF THAT, I WAS ABLE TO EASILY STOCKPILE FOOD ON THE MARKET, SELL IT JUST AFTER THE PEAK, AND USE THAT TO STEAL BILLIONS IN CASH AND FOOD FROM LAF PLAYERS. LAF WAS ABLE TO COUNTER THIS - AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN - BY SIMPLY KILLING MY COUNTRY AND ELMINATING THOSE ASSETS. IF I'D BEEN ABLE TO PROTECT ALL OF THAT ON THE MARKET AGAIN, I COULD HAVE EASILY REPEATED MY ACTIONS AT LEAST ONCE, IF NOT MORE TIMES. 70% IS JUST FAR TOO MUCH OF ANYTHING TO BE RETURNED TO THE DECEASED COUNTRY.
I FOR ONE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS IDEA GO AWAY OR AT LEAST BE DRASTICALLY REDUCED - EVEN THOUGH IT HAS HELPED US IN OUR WAR AGAINST TPA. IF IT IS GOING TO BE KEPT THOUGH, MAYBE THE LOST ASSETS, RATHER THAN BEING JUST VAPORIZED, SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE COUNTRY WHICH DID THE KILLING.
PERSONALLY, I LIKED THE RAMPING UP WHICH WAS PUT IN PLACE A FEW RESETS AGO. I KNOW IT RESULTED IN LONG KILL RUNS, BUT IT PROPERLY REWARDED PLAYERS FOR KEEPING REASONABLE AMOUNTS OF DEFENSE ON HAND. IF THE RAMPING UP CONCEPT WAS STILL IN PLACE, EN4CER COULD HAVE DRAMATICALLY REDUCED THE DAMAGE TO HIS COUNTRY JUST BY UPPING HIS MILITARY LEVELS SOME, WITHOUT HAVING TO KEEP THOSE LEVELS SO HIGH AS TO CRIPPLE HIS COUNTRY ECONOMICALLY.
I THINK I'M DONE WITH THIS POST NOW.. SORRY TO BE SO BRIEF AND UNDETAILED, BUT I JUST DON'T HAVE TIME FOR A LOT OF TYPING THIS EVENING. :)
HA!
SAM
HOMICIDER,
THE MIGHTY CLAN [DANGER]!
[/quote]
My original proposal also had it that restarts would keep the same name as the original country so that suiciders could not hide, in which case an Alliance can deal with it's stock.
You also forget that if your country only comes back with 30% of what it had plus 70% of stock it would still have far less resources to begin with and thus would need to spend stock to continue it's crusade.
The intention of my change was to make dying less painful, add a new element of smart strategy to the game and give blindsided netters a better chance to bounce back after eating a FS.