Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Removing Restrictions to Land War.
#162901 - 12/20/11 08:16 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
A serious problem today in neveron is the very limited number of attack-able lw targets due to the many restrictions I will go into with this post. The end result of these restrictions is that established empires are very hard to kill, newer empires and players are very easy to kill, and a very large number of empires are untouchable, or at least, pragmatically so. It is critical that we remedy these issues and open up neveron war to make war more enjoyable, faster paced, and less siege based. The restrictions and solutions will be discussed below:
1. Cored empires.
Cored empires are empires with either one large city with all their infra and bv or a number of large cities in a block of cities. Cores empires are extremely powerful for defense. Attacking a core is highly unpractical at best and against a well defended core you will face a long boring grinding war that goes no where.
Solution: Cores are far to strong, and they need to be broken apart. I suggest we separate cored cities up in some manner that has them much more spread out, no more of then unbreakable core block nonsense.
2. Tent Cities.
Tent city empires are another huge problem. Although tent city empires are not unkillable, or pragmatically unkillable, they are designed with one intention, to be utterly boring and completely worthless to attack because it costs more to take the infra than it does to burn and bv is extremely hard to find.
Solution: SM has already proposed it. Link an empire to one location where the great majority of their infra would lay, with the option of taking outposts for an increased cost. This effectively kills tent city empires and I put my full support behind it, baring some terrible execution.
3. Walling.
Walling is a problem in neveron where one empire borders another empires cities to create either a bottleneck or to make them HD only. Walling can be applies in many ways, such as around tent cities, around cores, or just regular cities. The only purpose of walling an empire is to make attack impossible or impractical, and serves to make many empires effectively not a target on neveron.
Solution: SM has already proposed it here as well. Auto claim Soi. It will open up war possibilities never before dreamed.
4. Single city empires. Though there is definitely some advantages to single city empires, this feature was created to put cored empires at a disadvantage, and has failed at this goal. For example, you can have a single city with all your bv defending it and still have hundreds of 1pop tent cities. What single city empires do is allow large numbers of empires to be entirely unattackable. This is used grow an empire without threat until they are completely setup, and allows walling empires to be unattackable. This limits war opportunities greatly for no good reason.
Solution: Either remove single city empires from the game or increase the penalties of having one. Since it was supposed to punish cored empires, make it be a bad thing instead of a good thing with some sort of penalty.
Additional Solutions Needed:
In neveron today, we have two options, to raid or to dow. In the real world, there are many types of conflicts that do not involve a war, such as skirmishes, border disputes, assassinations, etc. In neveron there used to be the same sort of thing. You used to be able to to fight an empire without a dow for a cost per zone. You could do things like spaghetti a enemy empire, dividing up its land to screw up its land transit, to attempt to trap and kill enemy mech forces, to take potential DZs, capturing small amounts of infra you intend to keep rather than gaining funds from it like a raid, to trade land in agreements, and the list goes on and on. There is no draw back to restoring this specific option. This opens up so many new attack opportunities and minor conflicts that raids and dows do not address. In response to criticism from SM and from neveron players, this concept is to be applied to in this manner: empires of equal level can fight in any manner they wish, smaller empires can attack bigger empires without a dow, giving the bigger empire the ability to dow but otherwise, bigger empires cannot attack smaller empires. I repeat, big empires could not, for example, drop on a smaller empires mech force, which removes the criticized part of this system and removes any need to charge big empires money for attacking smaller empires because they can't.
The rules for dows should be that an empire can dow an equal sized empire or any empire at a higher level than it. This change is very important for opening up war because it allows, for example, a group of level 8s to take on a lvl 11 if there are limits on the lvl 8s this group can fight, or simply if that is the enemy they wish to attack. This opens up so many options for the game without effecting balanace. Suddenly in an 11 on 11 war, one side can swing the war into their favor by bringing their only other big empire into the fight, a lvl 7 lw empire. This change too would only go up. I have completely removed the concept of a bigger empire being able to dow a smaller empire, unless attacked first. This opens options, and does no harm to the game.
Finally, my last proposal is to change the way infra works on neveron. Currently, you have lots of 1k cities, and big cities in general. People know the more big cities the better. What these big cities encourages is slow, drawn out, boring wars where the defender has a huge number of units they overwhelm any attack until it is slowly grinded down. I have had battles day 12 hours where I was only killing hunters and strikers, even though they were poorly skilled. If we spread empires out into many cities, we force the defender to spread out their defenses and remove or at least limit these super defenses that are all over the planet. For example, you have a lvl 7 with a 15k, 5k, 3k, 3k, 12k, 17k, and 30k cities for a total of 86k pop. What otherwise could be up to 100k bv in one zone is now spread across 6 zones, making each individual city beatable in a reasonable amount of time. You no longer have sieges as much as you have battles. 25 towers of various size from 25cf to 100cf and two batts of strikers vs a batt of 12 med mechs, 12 heavy mechs, and 12 snipers is not a siege, it is an actual battle where each side have to actually fight.
I am not sure how to go about spreading out cities, I am very open to peoples ideas on this, but the idea of doing it I feel is sound. It significantly increases the enjoyment of battles, and makes wars end much faster because of less time spent sieging super defenses.
All of these solutions would do so much to make war more fun, and more plentiful. I am curious about what people have to say on these ideas and I accept any feedback you can give me.
Edited by Maghetti123 (12/20/11 10:22 AM)
|
Vindication
Corporal
Reged: 01/22/07
Posts: 53
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Maghetti123]
#162909 - 12/20/11 09:39 PM (65.87.44.157)
|
|
|
point taken on what restricts LW on Neveron but lets also talk about what got Neveron to where it is today. And that would be donations from these cored empires in the past. Just because a player has grown beyond the need to donate to this game doesnt mean they should be penalised for thier successes in todays enviroment seeing that it was more hostile in the past when any lvl empire could attack another. Also diplomacy has gone right out the window with the whole 1 side must be the victor crap. This was inacted by the former admins in an attempt to make larger non-donating empires donate again to maintain thier empires from FFWARS. Greed has ever been the downfall of any game site and the examples from the past just on Neveron should be a clue as to what will happen if players are forced to behave in a particular manner. Furthermore the whole lvl 8 empire example being made to spread its defenders out just so an attacker can have a even chance.wtf is this A player spends real cash setting up thier empire to give some other player the oppurtunity to take what they have built because its been spread out cause coring is bad in some players eyes. Talk about killing the donation base from lower lvl empires."look I am lvl 7-8 now and I have to have my defenders spread out so lvl 7-8 empires can come kill my stuff I think Ill donate again....NOT" since when is war suppose to be fast and easy?if you dont have the time to war then dont start one! simple solution.
--------------------
Old age and Treachery
will overcome Youth
and skill
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Vindication]
#162910 - 12/20/11 10:39 PM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Lets take this one point at a time
1. The cored empires being separated is not really a punishment in my eyes. I love donators and have donated plenty in the past, but cored empires are simply imbalanced straight up. I have spent a great deal of time defending cores and attacking cores and they make empires defensively unbreakable in a lot of situations, allowing them to be offensive without fear of counter attacks.
2. I agree with the one side must win thing being crap. My idea to allow attacks to happen without dow goes to this point, and I also support adding in a end war button. I in no way want people at each others throats with no way out.
3. Spreading defenders. The point of this idea is not to make defending empires die easier as much as it is supposed to make the battles more fun. Remember, I support things like CFs, raids, attacks without dows, and speedbumps making a return, and even a return to the old restriction system, which would mean much less over all damage done to an attacked empire. If an attack is made on one of these smaller cities, and a empire losses it and some tanks and towers, yeah that sucks, but it isn't like losing a cored zone, which is so critical.
4. Wars take time no matter what, but we can agree for the sake of enjoyment and neveron being a good game throwing waves of hunters into a zone with 216 units, sitting on the edge with snipers, and so on for 12 hours to kill 40k bv in light tanks is much less fun for all sides involved than a battle between a smaller number of better skilled defending units and your standard offensive units. War isn't just supposed to take a long time, which is fine, it is supposed to be fun too. I think you are coming from the viewpoint of someone who has been attacked, because you said "fast and easy" when the last thing I want is for a war to be "easy" or fast really, just more enjoyable. It should be battles that are fought, not sieges that are conducted.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Maghetti123]
#162911 - 12/20/11 10:58 PM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
I want to add something that was pointed out to me in a conversation I just had. If you make these sorts of changes it actually greatly benefits weaker empires against stronger empires. For example: you have a DP whored up level 8 with either a unwalled core, or better yet, spread out infra over say 6 cities. If this empire has a huge mech army, and they attack some weaker empire, what is stopping the weaker empire from counter attacking and taking down cities because the do whore empire would have less SP for defense. The more balanced empire would have means of defeating a super strong empire they do not have right now. Right now that DP whore empire has both a massive killer do mech army AND a practically unbreakable defense because all their defense is focused to a point like a sword.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Maghetti123]
#162917 - 12/21/11 02:27 AM (222.153.236.231)
|
|
|
Cores without walls are fine.
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: buc]
#162919 - 12/21/11 02:44 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Cores without walls are better, and actually attackable, but still imbalanced and IMO should be broken up. It isn't going to break the game to keep them, it would make it more fun and more fair.
|
Protege
Corporal
Reged: 04/19/06
Posts: 71
Loc: Bakore Village
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Maghetti123]
#162922 - 12/21/11 04:49 AM (65.87.44.157)
|
|
|
Drop the number of defenders allowed per zone, or increase the number of attacking units allowed. Allow 108 units to attack, or restrict defending units in zones to 108. Core problem solved.
--------------------
I've stopped being nice? When the hell did I ever START being nice?
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Protege]
#162923 - 12/21/11 04:52 AM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
There is a time and a place for larger number of defenders, being able to attack with 108 units is an interesting idea I would consider but takes a lot more pilots, and the first answer applies to the third thing as well.
|
Gunner
Sergeant Major
Reged: 07/11/04
Posts: 365
Loc: Hurricane Capital of the World
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Maghetti123]
#162946 - 12/21/11 02:14 PM (173.65.23.244)
|
|
|
So because some players were smart and came up with a good idea, and then spent hundreds if not thousands of $ on that idea, we should go ahead and negate that? I'm sorry that not everyone can have them, but that's not my fault or problem. Cores are attackable, you just have to put some effort into it. You say you don't want to fight for hours or days on end, then don't make the mistake of coming for a level 12 or 13. We have lots of units because we're really big empires and we should be allowed to defend ourselves accordingly. Of course it should take a while to defeat us. Of course we should have the advantage as the defender, we're on our home turf. We produce mechs and assault tanks, of course we're going to be hard to beat. You think anyone is going to put huge amounts of money into this game if you make it super easy to be beaten just because some guy doesnt want to put any effort in? I took a single 2500+ buildable from Zap that involved me fighting at my computer for over 40 hours, then handing it off to someone else so I could go to work. That prize was worth it to me, I made the choice to sit there, no one forced me. The same goes for my core, I didn't start it, I took it in war, then I expanded it with donations. You want a quick easy war, go back to nooblet island and pick on all the other veterans there who pretend to be new.
--------------------
It's a bird...It's a plane...Goddamit! It's another NUKE!
|
DeathStar
Corporal
Reged: 02/05/11
Posts: 59
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Gunner]
#162948 - 12/21/11 02:30 PM (74.196.239.46)
|
|
|
Cores are not the problem. ITs Gauntlet Zones and Unattackable walls that are the problem with cored empires.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: DeathStar]
#162950 - 12/21/11 03:01 PM (222.153.236.231)
|
|
|
Cores are not a problem, walls are 
Like gunner has said, people have spent LOTS of RL$ getting their emps setup as they want. Nev has enough controls and limits, we don't need more.
|
cbtgod
Lieutenant Colonel
Reged: 12/14/05
Posts: 1813
Loc: IN A BOX UNDER A HOUSE
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: buc]
#162957 - 12/21/11 08:32 PM (173.168.109.218)
|
|
|
i agree dont like to war high lvl empires go play mechcommander? all i hear is how to bend over high lvl empires defenses? why is this some kind of crusade to make it easier to war high lvl empires? cores are not an issue lazy players are. all i hear time, and time again in these forums is how to strip down the ability to defend our empires and make this a mech on mech game. CBT table top if you play it correct, is not just a mech on mech game.
ive heard nothing to help a defender empire? and we do have players that errrr work for a living? so they make the best defenses they can. i dont see cores as the lord vader of neveron. as gunner has pointed out large empires would have cores, and large amounts of units to defend it self. and i agree it can be boring to war a high lvl empire, and even to the point of mundane. but why would attacking, just be in the attackers favor? l8rs DABOSS 
--------------------
yes its a toad, if you didnt know that you dont know anything about cbt
|
Maghetti123
Sergeant Major
Reged: 05/01/04
Posts: 203
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: cbtgod]
#162958 - 12/21/11 09:09 PM (184.1.118.183)
|
|
|
Gunner I am sorry you wasted you time with that response but you have misunderstood me quite a bit. I love high level war. Far more then any other style of war. I have no interest in an easy war. I too have cores. 7th NC and 1st nc have its own core, as well as several other NC empires. This has nothing to do with me wanting to make war easier, it is about making it fun and more fair. I don't even object to long wars. I have spent 12 hours a day fighting wars for weeks at a time. The issue I have with cores is they do two things:
1. They give a give advantage to dp whore empires and lw empires in general. If a empire has piled all sorts of money into mechs, snipers, or both the quality of their defenses in theory should be lacking. In reality, if they have a core they can skimp on defenses because reallocation of defenses and focusing on defenses is very easy. They can afford to be both offensive and feel safe at home.
2. Cores lead to sieges and not battles. The difference between the two is fairly vague with some cross over but the idea is that sieges is where a strong position is slowly being grinded away at with waves of attacks where battles are more two sides fighting it out for a more limited active period, such as something like 15 idf towers, 12 assault mechs, 36 hunters vs an offensive battalion of med, heavy, and assault mechs. In this scenario the battle will result in a lot of potential kills on both sides, but definitely not easy for anyone.
I will add that cores are not THE problem, there are a lot of problems of this nature, that is why I created the thread, but cores definitely make the problem worse.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: Maghetti123]
#162959 - 12/21/11 10:28 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
One problem i got with cores is the newer people cannt build them like they were in the old days. You have to find an area with good terrain and get lucky as hell to have more then a few buildables in the general area. You cannt just make zones buildable anymore.
I do agree that having a core makes it easier to concentrate defenses and allows more bv to be committed to attack. High level empires should take days to take a single city unless there is a huge mismatch of forces, ie someone has nothing but 216 8/8 jeeps in a zone, and someone hds a full bat of energy based asssaults into the zone. Ai is the problem with most defenses.
Daboss. It seems alot of people want to strip the defenders so their chances of taking a zone without a loss is extremely high.
As was said before, if you dont have time to run a high level empires, you shouldnt build one.
Most of these problems come from the best lw empires tend to be set up with the 'nasty' setups, and to survive you need to do the same. Tents discourage all the the rich from hitting an empire. Most people are looking for the quick kill.
Cf's to avoid empire destruction in a quick battle, but people dont want the chance of someone getting on and really fighting back.
Single cities is discussed in other threads..
Only problem i got with the really big cities, is you cannt build them like that anymore. Split all the bigger then 1k zones back down to 1k and move the excess into another zone.
And the point of people spending lots of money to build certain types of empires. That option isnt availible anymore. Hate to say it, but open that back up and people might donate again.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: ghostrider]
#162985 - 12/22/11 04:56 PM (222.153.236.231)
|
|
|
Big cities and cores... why dont we just make it like unit skills and multis. Yes we DPed for them, but yes, they reduce over time. Lets just make all zones over the natural max (810) reduce over time. That way SM gets more DP for keeping zones big.
The reality is, Randy or WWS (I forget which) moved alot of zones around to create cores when (I believe) he introduced SOI. He did it for any emp that needed it at the time, which is why there are big cores. No you cant build one now, but you can take one. There are also so few zones over 1009 buildables, that it actually doesn't matter.
Unless you're one of those complaining people who wants everything to be fair and even for everyone, regardless of how long they have played, or how much time and money they put into the game.
|
ghostrider
Lieutenant
Reged: 03/26/10
Posts: 522
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: buc]
#162997 - 12/22/11 10:44 PM (70.173.25.223)
|
|
|
How much longer will the long time players be playing if new people dont stick around to start donating? Really. Unless you have alot of spare money laying around, why would anyone want to donate to a game that is all but locked up by a few people?
Room to build? not likely. Someone with a neg gunned force will destroy what little you build unless you have someone else that will counter it. That means you are either in the large alliance or you are cannon fodder. This is not good for someone that just drops in to try out the game.
Same goes for trying to fight someone. I just buy a brand new light mech, only to have someones upgraded to hell neg 4 gun mech come in and wipe it out with one shot at a range i couldnt even detect it at. Do I wanna stay? Hell no.
Its this sort of impression that drives and keeps people from playing long term. Yes, long time players donate. It is easier for them to just buy dp with nevcash then to actually donate real money.
Why isnt there an option for people to move their cities together to help with soi now?
Now as for the original post. The one city empires should NOT be allowed to send money out of the empires. They should not retain zones outside of their soi for more then a few real days, unless it is a mine.
Another way to limit tent empires is to make it so any city under a certain cf/pop for the level contributes NOTHING to that empire. No sp, no money, no research, NOTHING. If nothing else, it should cost them for having to send supplies to every one of them. This does nothing to counter the fact that most lw empires will continue to survive because they are funded by larger empires. Granted, if no sp is generated, they will NOT be able to dow anyone.
|
buc
Captain
Reged: 08/12/05
Posts: 710
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: ghostrider]
#163004 - 12/23/11 01:11 AM (222.153.236.231)
|
|
|
IMO your idea about limiting tent empires is flawed. How you might ask? It's restrictive, overly so IMO. Tents are an issue, but there are far better ways of dealing with it than that.
Not that it really matters though, but free HDs and re-introduce war costs would fix it instantly
|
DeathStar
Corporal
Reged: 02/05/11
Posts: 59
|
Re: Removing Restrictions to Land War.
[Re: buc]
#163025 - 12/23/11 11:21 AM (74.196.239.46)
|
|
|
Also not listing every damn city on the empire intel page helps. When i can see where all your infra is with a few clicks, I usually know if you are viable/cost effective target.
Will it end tents? no
Will it help empires survive in general? Yes.
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
