| Andy | Wednesday, May 1, 2013 - 03:04 pm 
- Maps are improved. The large maps are now also used for more war functions.
- Moving units on the maps is now consistent, in war time and in peace time.
- Many maximum quantities for products stored in countries have been raised.
- Spending is tuned down a bit to partially compensate for the declining cost of products.
- More price declines, mainly for weapons and ammunition, make the war process cheaper.
- The mobile Units document is completed and improved. It includes all operational Units.
- More systems (worlds) have been upgraded. A large additional upgrade is expected within several days.
- The score of award winners now declines more than before, to allow more players win awards. Please read the documentation.
- Some of the documentation is improved, more will be available in two weeks.
- The White Giant world will start running 6 game months per day. The change will take place within several days.
- Chat names are now identical to the player name in the game. Some players appeared on the chat with different names, confusing others. The naming is now consistent. |
| Borg Queen | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 12:36 am
Ok, as Empires and CEOs still are equally penalized for the awards I hereby declare that I dont want to get the No 1 CEO Award when I should win it. |
| Jark Valiga | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 02:14 am
thanks Andy |
| Yosuf | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 02:39 am
sorry but why i can't buy Coins? i can only buy game money |
| dboyd3702 | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 03:15 am
Why go to 6 months per Day, I originally signed on to WG because it had the slowest rate. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 07:59 am
Andy
Just wondering becuase im a econ player, How is the GM going about reducing war costs?
Are you lowing the amount of goods to make the weapons?
Lowing the base cost itself?
Increasing production which decreases the cost?
Im just wondering as i make and trade weapons as a source of income and these changes make a difference, im just asking so i know but i can give accurate info to others when asked |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 08:14 am
Sorry for the double post
Also
Ive talked with several people well professionals soldiers are attractive and seem to powerful the price tag for many has been quite an issue. 7GC is a heavy tag for 3K officers or 10K soldiers.
If i wanted to make my nuclear forces professionals
i would need 40K soldiers and 8K officers meaning id need to spend 49GC to just have 50K troops.
Keep in mind also that 12USD only gets us 90GC, Professionals are a VERY good idea im not disputing that fact, but as stated the price tag is HUGE not to mention they can be killed. Is there a possiablily of the GM lowering these rates to something like maybe 5GC per 10K soldiers/3K officers? |
| Andy | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 12:07 pm
The reduction of the cost of weapons, ammunition and in fact all other products is taking place in small steps that are achieved by the restructuring of corporations.
as raw materials become cheaper, the price of the end product can be reduced too.
same with the reduction of other costs in the corporation that make it possible to reduce the end product price.
also, in some cases, the corporation can increase production while reducing the price per product.
We are quite happy to see that the price of weapons and ammunition is now a fraction of what it used to be.
As to making the nuclear forces use professionals:
it seems like a bad idea.
they use very large numbers of soldiers and officers.
on the other hand, mobile units use small numbers.
if you think this too is expensive, don't use mobile units and you do not need professionals. |
| SuperSoldierRCP | Thursday, May 2, 2013 - 09:07 pm
Andy
I think you mis-understood my point i was using nuclear forces as a point of reference.
I personally will use mobile units and professionals im just saying the overall cost is high.
12USD = 90GC
90GC = 50K soldiers/ 15K officers
This would supply alittle under 30 mobile inter wings.
30Wings when compared to ANY PvP war is considered VERY small 30wings offer very little extra protection.
My point was there high price tag makes using them to help allies more costly then me just using depots and such. For the USD paid you get little soldiers back(again they can be killed so it makes one hesitant).
Also with the cost of ammo being reduced will we see reduction in the use of ammo used in battle per turn? Some weapons still use large amounts of ammo which does keep the cost of war high in general
1 Interceptor wing
130 Inters * 224M per inter = 29.1B
9750 missiles needed * 6.62M per missile = 64.5B
1300 missiles per attack * 6.62M per missile = 8.6B
As you can see a standard unit of interceptors @ 100Q costs 93.6B PER UNIT. It costs Players 1Trillion to make just 10interecptor units(this also vaildates my point of professionals adding an even LARGER cost)
I love the cost of ammo is going down but at the same time it takes 9B just to fire 1defensive attack. Can the GM look into maybe reducing the amoutn of ammo used in attacks and increasing weapons strengths which would also help in dropping these costs?
Or can you also increase production?
A single inter missile corp only makes 1100 missiles per year meaning i need 10 corps to make alittle over 1 corp of missile per year. Doubling production would help in self suffiency or players and allow you to just ammo costs in help.
Just saying |
| Jackseptic | Friday, May 3, 2013 - 10:23 am
very good points you make super and i agree 100%. |
| darcus | Friday, May 3, 2013 - 12:53 pm
Yea it would be a good thing to increase ammo production,
Some units use more ammo than corporation could produce in one month that is not realistic much
At least increase production on defensive weapons,
Also most of weapons corps produce with lost and we all know that producing weapons and ammo is one of most profitable industries on planet called Earth. |
| Andy | Friday, May 3, 2013 - 02:23 pm
Weapons and ammunition corporations are designed to produce the highest profits.
The reason they make losses is the overproduction in the worlds that causes the product price to decline to the lowest level possible. Some of them close and eventually, the market stabilizes.
Increasing production will make this worse and all of them might close.
once the market recovers and the products are bought in larger numbers, their profiability will return and it might make sense to increase production or just let the market do its work and more such corporations will be created to increase production.
For now, we will continue to gradually reduce the price in the same way it was done before, while keeping the model capable of making a profit when the oversupply disappears. |
| Rich Coyle | Friday, May 3, 2013 - 08:23 pm
When is the Space Wars update coming? |
| Andy | Sunday, May 5, 2013 - 12:05 pm
Last time it was mentioned, it was hated before it was even known what will be in there.
It is on our plan.
There are some other features that will be developed before. |
| Jark Valiga | Monday, May 6, 2013 - 03:08 am
will free players be able to engage in the space game |
| Albert | Monday, May 6, 2013 - 07:09 am
Hello Andy: Can you help me with map control? I want to move some capital cities in front of the beach, with view to all those golden tanned chicks...well, the question is how can I drag a city to another position.
Best regards and thanks in advance.  |
| Smiley | Monday, May 6, 2013 - 07:51 pm
This is a small problem for me also i liked the fact i could,
move units,at any spot i choose but since that tweak was added,
i can't seem to move capitol or cities anymore. |
| Andy | Monday, May 6, 2013 - 08:50 pm
We received several complaints about it.
an engineer is looking into it right now.
objects should be moveable at all time except for during war.
units should be movable always, with arrows showing where they go.
we intend to change unit movements by making the step smaller but their numbers larger.
(same speed in smaller, frequent steps). |
| Andy | Monday, May 6, 2013 - 08:52 pm
You will need shuttles and space crafts that are traded in space.
We expect full members to be the target users. |
| LilTit | Tuesday, May 7, 2013 - 05:03 am
Dear Andrew,
I thought you had fixed chat to where players could only enter with their game names. I saw a player in chat tonight with a very different name than their game name. You sure you fixed this???? |
| Andy | Wednesday, May 8, 2013 - 10:32 am
I thought we did.
any example of this taking place will be appreciated. |
