Author Topic: Map War 2 - G7 (Read 1413366 times)

Bla · « **Reply #4230 on:** April 04, 2012, 09:42:45 AM »

Okism.

Bla · « **Reply #4231 on:** April 04, 2012, 09:43:15 AM »

And the world graph (blue = tech, green = production, red = resources).

vh · « **Reply #4232 on:** April 04, 2012, 09:55:43 AM »

kolbla, me and you are taking over the stacked production area chart

vh · « **Reply #4233 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:03:41 AM »

so now that there's no war going on, i think we should address the issue of using revolution as an attack. You shouldn't be able to attack, and then give all your zones to another member so you can travel forwards with impunity to invade the enemy vital regions. I think this amounts to sort of an exploit, it wasn't (i think) intended to work like this. Maybe add a rule that prevents this.

Bla · « **Reply #4234 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:07:12 AM »

Quote from: mudkipz on April 04, 2012, 10:03:41 AM

so now that there's no war going on, i think we should address the issue of using revolution as an attack. You shouldn't be able to attack, and then give all your zones to another member so you can travel forwards with impunity to invade the enemy vital regions. I think this amounts to sort of an exploit, it wasn't (i think) intended to work like this. Maybe add a rule that prevents this.

Sorry, but I don't see your point.

vh · « **Reply #4235 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:08:38 AM »

well, i think it's unfair for a nation to attack and then give another member all it's resources so it can't be attacked (for fear that it'll revolt).

Bla · « **Reply #4236 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:09:39 AM »

Which does "it" refer to? Can you give an example?

vh · « **Reply #4237 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:10:33 AM »

fiah was attacking me with income from trades, then giving all but 1 of it's zones to you. the rules allowed him to move forward, but if i attacked, he would revolution.

Bla · « **Reply #4238 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:12:26 AM »

It is a problem which should be fixed if we can come up with a better system.

But I will not make such a big change before game 5 is over.

vh · « **Reply #4239 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:15:09 AM »

I think it's pretty important. What happens when another war breaks out? It'd be very unfair if one side was able to use it and another wasn't. Also, is there a problem with changing it right now?

Bla · « **Reply #4240 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:25:37 AM »

I don't see how it'd be that unfair, you could blockade the enemy and reduce their income to essentially their tech. Also it seems realistic to simulate that you don't suddenly crush an enemy completely, but that there can be a resistance war going on in the area if the crushed government still has large support in the population, for example.

It is always a problem to change rules in the middle of a game because it can ruin peoples' strategies or flip the power balance. If they've based their turns on something it's not that nice to have it suddenly taken away.

Darvince · « **Reply #4241 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:28:18 AM »

kol, matty is world powering

vh · « **Reply #4242 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:34:59 AM »

Quote from: Bla on April 04, 2012, 10:25:37 AM

I don't see how it'd be that unfair, you could blockade the enemy and reduce their income to essentially their tech. Also it seems realistic to simulate that you don't suddenly crush an enemy completely, but that there can be a resistance war going on in the area if the crushed government still has large support in the population, for example.

It is always a problem to change rules in the middle of a game because it can ruin peoples' strategies or flip the power balance. If they've based their turns on something it's not that nice to have it suddenly taken away.

it's pretty impossible to blockade because i'd be surrounded on both sides between both persons and they could easily breakthrough and prevent me from doing it again for another 2 turns or so. If you're going for realism, i don't think it's realistic to have a country that doesn't care about being destroyed because it can simply 'respawn' into an even larger one.

You can't really plan your turns so that this strategy works best. It's simple really, give all your regions to an ally and attack!

Bla · « **Reply #4243 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:37:21 AM »

If you give all of your zones to an ally, you can only revolt against the ally and you can't attack anyone when you have any zones either. :|

Anyway, just come up with a better system, this discussion is a waste of time otherwise.

vh · « **Reply #4244 on:** April 04, 2012, 10:58:23 AM »

Ok how about we say something like this:

don't attack the enemy and give zones to an ally in a way that allows you to move forwards, but causes the enemy not to be able stop you (not because of resources), short of destroying your nation and allowing you to revolt.

Bla · « **Reply #4245 on:** April 04, 2012, 11:00:54 AM »

How do you objectively determine that?

And why can't you just defeat them, let them revolt and defeat them again? Revolution isn't there for you not to defeat someone, it's there to give that player a second chance...

vh · « **Reply #4246 on:** April 04, 2012, 11:12:22 AM »

objectively determine that? i think it'd be pretty clear if that was happening. Maybe you could illustrate with a simple, small map how it wouldn't be clear. The definition is quite clear cut imo.

While i have enough resources to defeat them as they are, I wouldn't have enough resources to defeat them if they revolted against me.

A small nation is able to attack a larger one with impunity because if the larger one defeats the smaller one, it'll get attacked by that smaller nation respawning as a larger one.

Bla · « **Reply #4247 on:** April 04, 2012, 11:25:02 AM »

Quote from: mudkipz on April 04, 2012, 11:12:22 AM

While i have enough resources to defeat them as they are, I wouldn't have enough resources to defeat them if they revolted against me.

If you don't think you can, then don't attack, or ally them or something else. It's that simple. If everyone turned on me and revolted I couldn't win either. It's like saying that if someone with 2000 production attacked you, you couldn't win, and then wanting the rules to be changed so you could.
As it is now it seems like people choose not to eliminate other nations because of the revolution option instead of eliminating them and actually giving them a chance to revolt, which was what the feature was intended for. I do want to change this so it becomes better or maybe remove it later, but not this game. I also want to give people a chance to jump back in if they were eliminated, and removing that option this game would be unfair.

Quote

don't attack the enemy and give zones to an ally in a way that allows you to move forwards, but causes the enemy not to be able stop you (not because of resources), short of destroying your nation and allowing you to revolt.

Try to rewrite the last part about "short of" so that it is easier to understand, or give an example where you show the objective criteria which makes the example break the rules you defined.
If you mean that you're afraid of revolution and therefore choose not to eliminate them, then that is your your own choice.

vh · « **Reply #4248 on:** April 04, 2012, 11:51:30 AM »

I thought you were for changing the problem and not debating over whether it was a good idea or not. What if the enemy is attacking? Should he be able to gain more of my zones by taking advantage of the revolution mechanic?

and how about this then

Don't attack enemy zones and then give zones to an ally in a way that you are able to move forward and not be able to be attacked without allowing you to cause a revolution.

Bla · « **Reply #4249 on:** April 04, 2012, 12:41:51 PM »

Quote from: mudkipz on April 04, 2012, 11:51:30 AM

I thought you were for changing the problem and not debating over whether it was a good idea or not.

I'm all for both, but I didn't see any reason to discuss whether it was a problem or not when we didn't have any alternatives to compare the problem to.

Quote from: mudkipz on April 04, 2012, 11:51:30 AM

What if the enemy is attacking? Should he be able to gain more of my zones by taking advantage of the revolution mechanic?

Your revolution mechanic still assumes that you don't fully conquer the enemy. You should fully conquer the enemy or find more allies so the revolution mechanic can be used once the way it's meant to be. If you overpower all other players enough and outsmart them strategically, you'll still be fine.
You can pick either depending on what you think is least of a problem to your nation, but I don't think revolutions are overpowered. The one who revolts would hardly win the game if there isn't a revolutionary change in the rest of the game. The one who is revolted against loses 10-20% of its zones from its border rounded down, in your case that'd be 5-11 which is hardly more than the small nations have currently. I do think revolutions could be improved, maybe with having to start in previously owned territory if you're eliminated, or with a time limit on (like must wait 5 turns since conquest and max 10 turns), or something else which would make people actually eliminate other nations again.
But again, I don't think revolutions are that overpowered, if they are at all. They might tip a war, but then you need to become stronger, just like if it were the pure production which tipped the war, or the trade between nations compared to you being alone which tipped the war.

Quote from: mudkipz on April 04, 2012, 11:51:30 AM

Don't attack enemy zones and then give zones to an ally in a way that you are able to move forward and not be able to be attacked without allowing you to cause a revolution.

I think this exception is too specific. Maybe something like "you cannot transfer zones which one of your attacks depended on the same turn" or something like that. Because that also does look a bit stupid on the map indeed.

vh · « **Reply #4250 on:** April 04, 2012, 02:30:37 PM »

"Your revolution mechanic still assumes that you don't fully conquer the enemy. You should fully conquer the enemy or find more allies so the revolution mechanic can be used once the way it's meant to be. If you overpower all other players enough and outsmart them strategically, you'll still be fine."

I think it'd be pretty difficult to overpower or outsmart the enemy when they're able to take so much land. If it was a 3-3 war like it was last time, i had around 48 zones. Each one of you could've claimed probably around 7 or so (i took lots of fiah's and deoxy's land). Thats 21 land, or half of me. I think it is a big difference. So you need a lot more production, maybe 1.5 times, than the other side, to have a chance of winning. I'm fine with that, however, this can also be used on the attacking side and make it hard to defend which i think is unfair.

'I think this exception is too specific. Maybe something like "you cannot transfer zones which one of your attacks depended on the same turn" or something like that. Because that also does look a bit stupid on the map indeed.'

That sounds like a good idea too and makes sense..... what do you think about implementing it.

Bla · « **Reply #4251 on:** April 04, 2012, 02:47:58 PM »

I'll make a poll and say we'll need at least 75% of the active nations to accept. (So Fiah, Naru, I and you can vote).

I vote yes.

vh · « **Reply #4252 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:11:07 PM »

I don't think it needs to be voted on. Do we vote on whether or not exploits are allowed on Blacraft? It's not supposed to happen imo. But whatever, we can discuss that if the vote doesn't pass

voting yes.

vh · « **Reply #4253 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:11:37 PM »

oh , a question. What if some nations abstain and we get 2/3 votes.

Bla · « **Reply #4254 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:13:21 PM »

I don't consider it an explort.

And 2/3 is less than 75% but we'll try to make everyone vote.

Naru523 · « **Reply #4255 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:18:07 PM »

Darvince · « **Reply #4256 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:24:11 PM »

vh · « **Reply #4257 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:27:38 PM »

you're not an active playur so yu kant voates

*poos you*

FiahOwl · « **Reply #4258 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:32:28 PM »

This message is only viewable with Universe Sandbox Galaxy Edition. Access it and much more with promo-code '65251'.

vh · « **Reply #4259 on:** April 04, 2012, 03:37:13 PM »

it's already won basically. me bla and naru voted yes which is 3/4. but i guess it's good to have a 4th input

Poll

How would you like future videos to be? (Please don't put more than one vote at each number)

Author Topic: Map War 2 - G7 (Read 1413366 times)