I kicked the box! Even found a spare monitor to plug in -- it took 20+ mins to decide to acknowledge my reboot command

Agreed! you can pm me in discord, I'm trying to get people to discuss what that would look like.

I like the idea of pacts, it's just slightly complicated

Bots will stay

100% i agree random behaviour bots would be a good thing

Max FA is 10% of their stuff; 10x max FA, is "all their stuff".

Hi All,

TLDR: Clearly the majority opinion, from both people in favour and against the feature in general, is to disable Clan GDI, at least until it can be tested and bug-fixed a bit more. I will thus do that, for next reset.


Thanks for feedback on the previous post, especially people like Tertius and Auk for engaging on the complexities. I'd also like to thank the people who answered #4 and gave some suggestions, like "make a classic 1A server", and "make the bots retal".


-----


The problem, as many have pointed out, is the general asymmetry of warfare / netting in the game. Clan GDI was the most obvious, and frankly simplest - idea I had, to formalize the warring system, and at least provide a way out of war.

Clearly, however, there have been some edge cases and loopholes; and given this is a game, everybody minimax'd to those...



So, I'll disable Clan GDI on alliance until I can more easily debug (by getting the IRC server going - hopefully over xmas!!) and getting y'all to test it a wee bit more on alphaffa. However, part of the "fix it" involves the edge cases:

Step 0: Turn off Clan GDI on Alliance for next set.
Step 1: Fix IRC server.
Step 2: Deploy series of changes to Clan GDI on Alphaffa, and have you guys test it.
Step 3: Put it back on Alliance.



So the general purposes of Clan GDI are:

0) Make it so "being at war" is formalized.
1) Prevent solo/small griefers from disrupting other alliances, by making it so there is a relative size required to "be at war"
2) Make it so there is a way to make "wars end", so you don't have a war at week 1, and have the rest of a two-month reset to endlessly die or give up...
2a) ... so that you can surrender, in some way that lets you continue playing the game in some more-meaningful way than described above;
2b) ... or so that you can win, in some way that feels like winning.
3) Nerf the FS, because it is overwhelmingly powerful, and arguably reduces the long-term enjoyment of the war.


Thus my solution was Clan GDI as described:

a) Have to be >=5 members to declare war on clans >= 5 members.
b) You can surrender by giving up money/goods (at any time)
c) You can send a peace offer (that doesn't require giving up money/goods) but that must be accepted (at any time)
d) The "war" does not go "active" until after a certain period of time (24h I believe currently)




Then, the most obvious way the system can be gamed:

i) Clans break into groups < 5 members upon being declared or tag-hop to a new tag within every 24 hours of being declared upon

... and one outcome that I consider to be semi-desirable, as a compromise between viewpoints:

ii) Surrendering before war begins


To solve i), my thought is to make it so countries can't de-tag during the "war is declared, but inactive" period. Seems simple enough? Maybe too simple?

Also, make it so that clans < 5 members can declare on clans < 5 members; seems like it would be a game of chase then, but no problem.



As for ii); I would like people's opinion on this. Part of my thought is that surrendering and giving up a good chunk of money & goods, while not having absorbed an FS, is a "Fair" out for clans that don't want to war.

What do you think?


Am I missing anything else?


Thanks,

qz

----

as a PS: I really like the "make bots retal" bit, but it's harder than you would think. It's still my plan, but I'm not sure when I'll get to it.

I think i fixed this!

oh, NB: I bugfixed a couple things today, RE: 5 char limit, and war actually starting.

Hey All; I've been a bit busy of late with house projects and haven't checked in. I've been aware of the sentiment of some on Clan GDI, but I thought I'd check in and get a feel for what the community would like, and post my thoughts.

I will say, it's hard for me to digest posts scattered across the forums & discord, so that's another reason I'm making this thread. That said, Clan GDI...


----------------------


So, firstly: I think the pre-ClanGDI "forever status quo" was broken, especially from a player retention pov. You get in a war in week 2, and then spend the next month and a half restarting and being killed. I have been there, it is never fun. And secondly, the FS is just so *unbelievably* OP, that unless there's a major discrepancy, you're likely to prevail.

Secondly, the "griefing" aspect: Apparently this has been slightly reduced already, but I do recall a time where one person with a grudge can really just wreck dozens of players resets. That asymmetry is just a fundamental flaw/result of the gameplay and the fact that the game has resets.



My thought with ClanGDI was to address both of these:
1) Make it so there was a formalized process to war that dulls the FS, and that has a method to actually END the war at some point
2) Make it so a clan requires a minimum number of players in order to engage in attacking a Clan, if they didn't want that sort of engagement

The one caveat that ended up in there was that there is a way to avoid being FS'd at all by surrendering in there.


Now, I'm ALSO aware that it hasn't been as debugged as it could be -- and that is partially due to lack of time, partially due to the IRC server being broken (where the game error logs go to).



So the way I see it, I have 4 main options currently for Clan GDI:


1) Bugfix as is.
2) Disable ClanGDI until it can be bug-fixed and tweak on alphaffa, and the IRC server fixed.
3) Change the Surrender-Before-FS option, so that there's a minimum of X time (24h, 48h, 72h?) that the war will actually exist before surrender is available as an option.
4) Some other change-in-place based on your feedback.


Thus, with all of the above in mind, what are the popular thoughts? Personally I lean towards 1 or 3, but I'm open to input.

yes... but i hadn't merged some of the GUI stuff...

It's technically listed in GDI i believe....

This was after discussion with a couple people, admittedly it was 1a focused though. Partially I'm thinking about bots as well, and changes I'd like to make there. I forget sometimes that Primary doesn't have bots. DM me on google chat or discord and we can chat about ideas and solutions :-D

The former, shooting commences upon Clan B's acceptance

1) yes
2) uh, no, if it's not in Clan GDI it becomes active right away

It's in the Clans page

Yea, this is much more complicated. We've got a TON of the groundwork in now though, which is helpful. Just even having the concept of "official" clan wars is huge.

I'd also like to note that there is currently NO NEWS associated with these events. That's something I'll rectify sometime in the next while. It's not a game balance thing so I'll just put it in randomly when i get around to it.

Yea so this is one of those corner cases I'm not sure on. I like this "you gotta be 5 members to be clanGDI" suggestion though. That seems reasonable tbh.

It's based on max 50% of FA capped to relative TNW currently

Yea so this is one of those corner cases I'm not sure on. I like this "you gotta be 5 members to be clanGDI" suggestion though. That seems reasonable tbh.

I hope so. There might be some weird cases and loopholes, but we'll work through those.

Then eventually you'd be > 5x their TNW

Yea, the bot code

We've had difficulty onboarding people partially because the codebase is complicated. Right now the process is, make a significant number of improvements and modernizations to the NPC codebase, and then I'll notice & bring you into the fold. (it is open source after all!)

This would demonstrate:
a) competency in PHP
b) understanding of the underlying stuff
c) some commitment to long-term dev

Added mechanism; defending clan would get the reserve if the attacker surrendered, yes.

Honestly I don't read much, I haven't seen any of these requests; also I wasn't reallly involved with the design of Team, so I've been hesitant to mess with it. I've only ever played alliance myself. Wouldn't be opposed to that though.

Hi All,

Thanks to many suggestions and a large amount of feedback, there'll be a new changeset for the first time in a while.

Firstly, a couple of things pointed out for the general base game that lead to undesirable play styles, that will apply to all servers, and then a change for Clan GDI, which only currently applies to Alliance.

1) Military Expenses Multiplier change:
This was a change that probably will allow me to change the bots for the better, and change some dynamics in general. The military expenses multiplier will be changed from:

(1+NW/(200,000,000)) → 36/(24+ln(NW+100,000))

This will result in effectively decreasing the cost per unit as NW goes up, call it due to scales of efficiency.

2) CS Destruction will be reduced, because they make wars on big land reset-wrecking.

a) AB CS destruction will decrease from 0.2389% to 0.1000%
b) BR CS destruction will decrease from 0.04% to 0.01%
c) CM CS destruction will decrease from 0.0022% to 0.0011%

NB-1: Those have many other multipliers attached to them
NB-2: This seems like this is a common theme, as the line for CS in BR's currently looks like this: 'perc_lost' => ($this->changeset >= 22 ? 0.004 : ($this->changeset >= 16 ? 0.04 : ($this->changeset >= 12 ? 0.11945 : 0.2389))),


3) Clan GDI this one is more complicated.

The initial alpha version of Clan GDI was effectively an all-or-nothing free opt-out of war. This is not *entirely* what I wanted, but was a first step given the feedback I was getting.

Thus some changes:

- Clans will have a "Defence Account", denominated in $
- Countries in Clan GDI will pay 1% of "GDP" (NW + Expenses), to this account each turn
- When Ranks are calculated, total Server Growth Rate (SGR) is calculated based on Server TNW growth (say 0.05%); the Defence Account will be multiplied by this growth rate (as in it was being invested)

- Clans >= 5 members can Declare War on other Clans that are >= 5 members (whether or not either are in Clan GDI)
-> the "Defending Clan" will have 48 hours to Accept War or Surrender (after which it is auto-Accepted)
--> If they Accept:
---- The Defence Account is given to each country in the Defending Clan
--> If they Surrender:
---- The Defence Account is zeroed, and given instead to the Attacking Clan
---- 50% of max FA amounts (including on-market goods) are transferred from each Surrendering-Clan country, pooled, and split amongst the Surrendered-To-Clan countries
-> If war is proceeding, either clan may surrender at any time, triggering the payout.
-> If war is proceeding, either clan may make an offer of peace at any time, which may be accepted at any time by the other clan
-> Clans may not declare war on a clan they have previously declared war upon. (Or that >= 20% of their members have been at war with via Clan Wars to avoid weird re-tag loopholes)
-> Clans may Declare Victory once their TNW exceeds 5x their opponents, ending the war without settlement

As always let me know your thoughts.

The Clan GDI changes are highly experimental stil (I'm still working on things technically), but hopefully this will address various parties concerns.

Thanks,

qzjul

Well perhaps I'll add a declare war between clans mechanism then; a good chunk of the point, afterall, was the untag suiciders issue.

Hi All,

Just a quick heads up, I won't be changing anything currently; life's been busy and I haven't been able to digest the changes thus far.

I have a few specific changes wrt ClanGDI in mind currently for the reset that will be starting in October, and I'd like to field some thoughts.

1) If a clan wants to leave clan GDI, it will take 48 hours from clicking the button, and a message to *all* clans would go out that that is happening.

2) Something restricting countries from leaving clans in Clan GDI. Unsure what restrictions.

3) Make a bunch of the bots (33%?) tag up, so there's an advantage to not hitting.

I would also like to make some sort of formalized declaration of war possible, with a accept/decline or something with criteria but I have no idea what that would look like. In an ideal world we'd build some sort of pact-like system, but I think that's beyond the scope of this project.

I'd also like to hear from people as to how things went. I know there was much emotions on both sides, but I kindof wanted to see how things played out.

I would like to point out that part of the point of the entire idea is to provide a relative sanctuary for people who really have no interest in war. I would like there to be some sort of cost for using the system, but many of the ideas seemed a bit heavy handed or artificial.


One idea from... Marble? was to change the expenses formula. That might be in the mix for next reset, to kindof change the overall dynamic of huge countries.

Ty,

qz

it might have been allowed because of the spyop stuff earlier; harmful ops count as attacks

I'm working on it by i can't get my password to reset

Yes, mods have access to all the dev stuff, that said, there hasn't exactly been much discussion; the last two hotfixes, incidentally, were relatively little code, and what code there was most was Dev'd by pang like 4 years ago; when complaints were raised recently, I basically said, "well, we can try the clan GDI mechanic, because it's been idling there for years, untested". And so i merged it in.

My thought was (and still is!) that it's a mechanic that was envisioned to solve an ongoing vocal issue; and while it certainly may not be perfect, I get more data on how it's imperfect by implementing it than by people sitting and discussing it off and on for 4 years. Where's the harm in trying it eh?

What's the declare war bug?

To be clear: I've generally tried to do things that are balanced (often to LaF's chagrin), but griefing and long standing war grudges have been issues for a long time. I think trying this is worth a shot. It effectively isolates a clan from everybody else.

I *will* try to make some bots tag up, which will make it so there are effectively penalties for being in ClanGDI.

Hi All,

I've added spyops into the ClanGDI mechanic; hostile ops are treated exactly as if they were attacks. I was hoping to do this later, because adjusting the display stuff is slightly annoying. Consequently you'll just see an error code rather than an english sentence when you run afoul of the restrictions.

It would seem like this somehow offended both sides of the arguments in this channel, so, here it is!

Thanks,

qz

PS Let me know if there are cases i missed.

I mean, I would say it's a country game...

I don't think I've ever muzzled anyone.

Ehh the numbers were always kindof an off the top of my head sorta thing. I've always wanted to make it more like 20k bots per server, but I'm not sure my comp would like that. That said, I want to make 'em do more....

At first glance this seems fair, but I realllly don't remember the math on all those things.

This is the sentiment I'm mostly hoping for. Try it!! If it's bad, I can change it. Honestly part of the biggest problem with developing for this game is that no matter what we do, or don't, we get like INFINITE flak for it. Hence why we've been doing nothing. I feel like it's worth giving this a shot for a couple resets, see how things shake out. Maybe there needs to be a cost, maybe we remove it. Maybe we make players in Clan GDI have 100x as many earthquakes, i dunno =/

fix how?

Maybe like, give it a chance for a couple of sets and see what happens eh? We can always adjust things. Better to try something new every now and again than to stagnate.

Hm I have some stats, but the number of complaints i've gotten has increased.

Part of my thinking is, the options are basically:
a) do nothing
b) do something

At this point, it's difficult to dedicate time to outrageously complicated mechanisms; so I'm working with what I've got.

Part of the goal is to not shed more users, of course.


I kindof figure that changing things up a tiiiny bit every half decade isn't that crazy. We can always adjust things if it doesn't all work out. A lot of players don't have the time to attend war chats, and drop out when that becomes necessary. This provides somewhat more choice in that regards.

I'm actually somewhat motivated to do this, so we'll see

Very good question! It will be so that if you've been attacked, you will not need to declare war to hit back within 72 hours of the last hit by that country. I think that makes most sense.

Currently "has attacked clan recently" is 72 hours; and "has attacked by country" is all reset (well, 1 year technically, but only alphaffa is that long)

Yes, but I think the unknowns are easier to solve with it live than with it in a concept stage, at this point. See what it does for a few resets, adjust accordingly.

I swear I fixed that. Maybe there's just one more spot...