| Andy | Thursday, January 10, 2013 - 02:55 pm 
The following update will introduce several additions and changes:
1. Mobile Attack unit will be added
2. All mobile units can be moved to a space station and can be transported to another country you own or to the space market. They can be traded and used in war by the new owner. Units must be complete to be transported or sold.
Mobile air force units will become available later.
Work is in progress on the mobile intelligence units.
Expected war change: (Jan. 22)
To win a war, nearly all fortifications must be destroyed. The maximal number of remaining fortifications is 2.
War Change expected within several weeks:
When you attack a target, all military units that are within range of the attacking force will participate in the defense.
Defensive land forces will defend against attacking military units and anti aircraft missiles will be used against airplanes, helicopters, drones etc.
Missile interceptors will be used against any incoming missiles.
This feature was announced before and it is announced again now, ahead of time.
Placing your military units that have a defensive function, close to many essential targets in your country will make it harder to destroy these targets. |
| Crafty | Thursday, January 10, 2013 - 04:39 pm
"All mobile units can be moved to a space station and can be transported to another country..."
Do you mean station or did you mean center, the ones we have in countries?
You realise that having to rent/buy a dock on a space station will prevent most all players using these new units right? It's just too expensive, as the current small volume of space trading illustrates. Actually I think it's a great shame that your team spent all that time and effort to develop the space program and never followed it through to make it an accessible functioning addition. But that's another subject. |
| Andy | Thursday, January 10, 2013 - 05:56 pm
The shuttles can transport these units to where shuttles can go.
both a space station or a space center in another country you own.
to change ownership they will have to be traded.
shuttles will in the future be able to land in remote bases. |
| SweetPea | Thursday, January 10, 2013 - 06:21 pm
Will you guys be addressing the issue of target stacking on maps previous to wars being executed? As far as the shared defense will be concerned.
To sum it up, a player can stack all strategic targets including most or all of the forts onto a single space on the map and then stack an endless number of missile defense units on top of them as well. It may even go as far as placing the military base they will be deployed from right on top of the stack as well.
I hope the answer is yes, but if it is not a problem I'd like to know officially. |
| PhilinCt | Thursday, January 10, 2013 - 07:02 pm
Andy the changes you expect to make in several weeks.. Do they refer to C3's or just for player vs player? I guess my concern is cost of attacking a C3 with the new rule set is going to go up considerably? |
| SweetPea | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 07:38 am
Most updates do help players. A small minority annoy or seem like they are anti-player. Lighten up Super. The were clear they want to curb c3 raiding for assets. Calm down. |
| Crafty | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 05:13 pm
Sense, not sence super.
Is it really the main reason for moving up the war levels?
I dont remember a time when the GM took player opinion into more, or less, consideration. |
| Andy | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 06:42 pm
Until three weeks ago, you had to destroy nearly all the fortifications. The change in counting damage points (several weeks ago), changed this but destroying them is a prime war target. always has been.
the better defense will include all countries although C3s do not have many units and thus will not benefit much from the change.
at very high levels, it might become relevant.
The cost of ammunition is now less than 50% of what it was several months ago while the loot you receive when conquering a C3 country did not decline at all.
the cost of war keeps declining. The number of weapons in mil. units declined and will decline more. the use of ammunition will decline and the price of ammunition (base price) keeps going down.
The purchasing power of 1T has now increased tremendously.
Also, as we explained, the use of mobile units will reduce the need for so many units and will help in reducing the cost of war even further.
Quality becomes even more important.
The pace of upgrading will double in one of the coming updates and the upgrading products will also become cheaper. (already happened in the past months and will continue).
The positioning of object on the maps is an old problem and we plan to solve it by requiring a minimum distance between them.
we think that this will cause targets to be distributed to larger areas and density will decrease. Protecting them to the extreme with army units will become more difficult.
However, countries with a very large number of units will have a better defense, they might even decide to drop the war protection.
Once countries have more possibilities to build a very strong defense, we might rethink both the rules of the war protection and the possibility of partial victories with some ares being conquered (with economic advantages for the winner), without taking the entire country. |
| Gaz | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 09:14 pm
Im a little concerned were this is heading.
My guess is these new mobile units will take over from normal weapons. Considering the costs involved (GC) im not too happy if that's the case.
Andy, 1T doesn't buy alot when your purchasing at 350Q
I'd like to see WP gone, the other part though about partial victories is a bad idea. I hope it goes no further.
Why would I war for "economic's". By that I presume you mean cash? Pop and weapons are what im after. |
| Josias | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 09:36 pm
the partial victory thing is offered as a type of secured mode. allow players to build a country, and loose a war, but not the country. and still giving the winner something of substance. i've got mixed feelings about it.
until they bring in natural resources, that part wont be very good.
but the 98 fort thing, i was thinking that was an extra layer of protection for the new mobile units coming out. their is probably more than 1 guy, that has been stocking up professionals for a couple years, with upgrades, and such. then we get mobile units, and all of a sudden, their are thousands of them swarming previously highly defended countries. i was thinking the 98 fort thing was just to make sure players don't get over run by the newness of mobile unit.
i sincerely hope that they gradually back off that one, like over 6 months? shrug. and i certainly hope that they don't apply it to C3s. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 10:07 pm
Andy
Can i please ask "WHY" you removed my post, i made a few hours ago? |
| Jackseptic | Friday, January 11, 2013 - 10:57 pm
really he removed your post ..thats not right |
| Gaz | Saturday, January 12, 2013 - 10:30 am
When it comes down to it, this is simply a way for the GM'S to force us to open our wallets. That's how I feel about these new units.
I wish they'd spend time fixing exisiting problems, Instead of creating new ones.
A partial takeover would be such a fundamental change to the game. No matter how they sweetin the deal. I dont think I could take it. |
| SweetPea | Saturday, January 12, 2013 - 11:35 am
Quote:The positioning of object on the maps is an old problem and we plan to solve it by requiring a minimum distance between them.
we think that this will cause targets to be distributed to larger areas and density will decrease. Protecting them to the extreme with army units will become more difficult.
However, countries with a very large number of units will have a better defense, they might even decide to drop the war protection.
Sounds good Andy. |
| Crafty | Saturday, January 12, 2013 - 11:42 am
Haha, sounds good to me too. I have countries that cant fit all units and targets in anyway. How they gonna enforce a minimum distance beats me. |
| Laguna | Saturday, January 12, 2013 - 11:50 am
Plenty of room in the sea. |
| SweetPea | Saturday, January 12, 2013 - 11:53 am
A few lines of code should do it. An auto repaint of all maps game wide that adhere to the rule one day. Along with adding the minimum distance to map adjusting by players , giving an error message or prompt that an object is or isn't obeying the rule.
1/2/3/4/5KM minimums all seem reasonable.
Wonders which distance they'll eventually choose. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Sunday, January 13, 2013 - 05:46 am
still waiting for a response on my post....
and in terms of weapons a few changes are welcome def a few increases in units would be welcome, most ranges are reasonable as is, air being the expetion.
I'd love to see some weapons do more damage, it takes 5 anti air batteries and 30missiles to shoot down 1 helicopter a tweak there would be welcome, or as it stands it takes a 1600unit of tanks/artillery 2attacks to blow up a capital or a foritifation, increase damage would be very welcome |
| SimcountryCEO | Wednesday, January 16, 2013 - 06:08 pm
From a9fc8yt3kd1:
So, at what ranges will the weapons in land-based defense units defend attacked targets? Will the ranges be the same as the maximum ranges as listed in the game documentation? |
| Lorelei | Wednesday, January 16, 2013 - 08:27 pm
Hiya Andrew,
The Wicked Lady came to visit!!!! You have been remiss and are not in chat! Tsk tsk
Dun make me file a complaint with the GameMaster. Oh wait! That's YOU! :P |
| James the Fair | Wednesday, January 16, 2013 - 10:18 pm
'Once countries have more possibilities to build a very strong defense, we might rethink both the rules of the war protection and the possibility of partial victories with some areas being conquered (with economic advantages for the winner), without taking the entire country.' Andy
I'm very interested about this partial victories idea, especially if the loser does'nt lose his country altogether through it, tell us more about it. |
| Andy | Thursday, January 17, 2013 - 11:28 am
The war game will evolve and there are several features that will make it possible for players to setup a fierce defense for their countries that will keeps attackers away more effectively.
if so, we could add incentives to those who remove their security blanket. Maybe even pushing some more to reduce the use of the feature.
It will also help if during a bad war, you do not lose the entire country but rather can keep part of it and fight to recover some areas another day.
Just a thought and we will have to move cautiously, introduce these features one for one and see how it evolves.
for now, mobile units are a major change.
Mobile units will be offered on the space market.
It creates the possibility to upgrade your army very quickly by purchasing these units when you need them, for example, when you are under attack.
Adding 10 units at quality 600 and getting them quickly into action where needed can influence the war.
landing them in remote bases, will also add a new dimension to the war. |
| Stephen Ryan | Thursday, January 17, 2013 - 01:56 pm
Further watering down of the war engine where it costs extravagant coin for warfare to the stage over some ten years where it of no point. |
| PhilinCt | Friday, January 18, 2013 - 02:31 pm
If you won't lose all of your country why not make it when you attack a C3 or player for that matter you gain that country (or part of country) as part of your main country? Gaining population and corporations, This would require rewriting borders on a regular basis though. This might offset some of the increasing cost of farming due to the increased defensive power of C3's? |
