The Aries Simcountry Priority Wishlist - 3/1/2016

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Removing the ability to create an interstellar empire removes a primary motivation in Simcountry.<!-/Quote-!>

That statement is a joke right? Poor question. It is. Can I lol now?

The primary motivation in SimCountry(Not AstroEmpires) is to build a country with an economy that can sustain a military.

Players struggle with building the right corps, and taking their first c3 and even believe it or not, pvp warfare on a single planet. Interstellar Empire?! *Spits Coffee* Monkeys and Chimps galaxy wide and even in alternative universes are jumping up and down and rattling their cages with laughter.

It is NOT the view of my eyes. It is more than my view. Nobody suggested taking the feature away. There was only a suggestion, to make some realistic or reasonable limit. Balance doesn't need to be reached in my eyes. This absurdity is obvious to more than just I. Whiteboy states the same. The original objector near the top of the thread also stated the issue with mega accounts from his perspective as well. As in the perspective of everyone you hope joins simcountry to grow this game.

You are very hypocritical in assuming you are the only one qualified to make observations leading to suggestions that actually make sense for this game. Every single one of your suggestion threads takes your view and your problems. All while disregarding all feedback that is a contrarian view of your opinions. There is no compromise, no reason-ability, no discussion. There is simply Aries. The way Aries sees it. The way Aries understands, or doesn't apparently. The sims revolve around Aries and his singular wisdom that only he can see and interpret.

Unless you are the GM in disguise, "Never going to happen." Is a strong statement to make. Even if you are just guessing. You aren't trying to tell us all something are you. Didn't think so. Pipe down and have a conversation. Quit 'yer condescending tone.

If you were right in identifying a problem where players lack the ability or desire to expand their accounts to multiple worlds, then you have identified a bigger problem the any type of balancing you are attempting. The goal of the GM is to make premium accounts attractive. Limiting game enjoyment to what a free account can very adequately fill would be counter-productive.

However, I think you are simply wrong on the facts. Most new players who stick around graduate to premium and empires on multiple worlds. Why don't you poll the players who have any interest in your "council" or whatever you are calling it on FB. I would bet most players who have been around for some months, have such an Interstellar empire. Graduating players to have interest in Interstellar empires and hopefully to some type of social game/politics are the keys to keeping such players.

If you are going to continue flaming the topic, I am going to disregard you as a common troll. You are drowning out an otherwise productive conversation based on observations and practical suggestions.

No player here has suggested limiting game enjoyment of premium accounts to the level of a free account. Misrepresenting anything any player has said in this thread as such is irresponsible and plain silly. I won't stand for it.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

However, I think you are simply wrong<!-/Quote-!>

A wise man once told me, "Thinking comes from not knowing." He was right.

I think you are wrong
I would bet

Pure speculation. Less hysteria more logic.

Is that your way of not addressing my points? golly gee, you be so smart.

You clearly stated you believe players struggle with basic achievements. If that is so, wouldn't that be something to fix?

You also clearly stated a low bar of motivation, to have a single country that can support a military. If this was the case, something also to fix. We want people to succeed here and graduate to premium and multiple worlds.

It is clear to see what you said about these things and, if true, these would be real issues to address. No?

And, I completed a quick poll of your new council on FB. Of players around more than 5 months, 100% of them have Interstellar Empires. Maybe your points just aint so?

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

You clearly stated you believe players struggle with basic achievements. If that is so, wouldn't that be something to fix?<!-/Quote-!>

While true, as stated, that discussion deserves another thread and diminishes what should be being discussed here.

I.E. Topic: How can we improve players' understanding of basic functions and operations in Simcountry.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

You also clearly stated a low bar of motivation, to have a single country that can support a military. If this was the case, something also to fix. We want people to succeed here and graduate to premium and multiple worlds.<!-/Quote-!>

While true, as stated, that discussion deserves another thread and diminishes what should be being discussed here.

I.E. Topic: How can we improve....

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

It is clear to see what you said about these things and, if true, these would be real issues to address. No?<!-/Quote-!>

While true, as stated, that discussion deserves another thread and diminishes what should be being discussed here.


I.E. Topic: How can we improve....

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

And, I completed a quick poll of your new council on FB. Of players around more than 5 months, 100% of them have Interstellar Empires. Maybe your points just aint so?<!-/Quote-!>

Most players have countries, most are in shambles.
Most players have corps, most are not run optimally.
Most players have a military, most have no idea what to do with them and bankrupt their countries trying to figure it out.

So... maybe my points are so, and you're just being salty?

And stop with the interstellar talk. AstroEmpires is suffering the same issue Simcountry is. Dedicated player interest plagued by general inactivity... So please... You cannot realistically expect to revive one far more superior game with that of a failing alternative with the interstellar thingy as its core idea. Space trade and transport is good for sim, but like war levels, needs to evolve to more realistic. yet competitive state.

Not a single player in this thread has ever in any post advocated for the removal of the space aspect of the game.

Again, get out of your own narrow view and get into the frame of mind a new join or existing member dreaming of one day competing in the game thinks. Although it won't line up with your objectives, that is the player base sim needs to add. New Players.

How are you so against helicopter money in c3s yet so for the egregiously unrealistic transfer of tonnage via space in just real life minutes?

That's the real point at hand. Talk about it. And take your time with it Aries. Currently on display is the weakest you I never dreamed of. If you don't challenge me intellectually with real responses and leave yourself open to emotional outbursts, it isn't really a good look. They expect it of me, but you. You're Aries.

What the heck is helicopter money? Can you explain it to myself and the masses? Not sure I can be against it without a firm understanding of what it is that you are advocating. What exactly is it do you want that you describe as "helicopter money"?

Just to clarify, I mean in terms of how Simcountry works.

marshalney joined the room.

aries: anyone here know what "helicopter money" is?

fattymcbutterpants: lmao

marshalney left the room.

fattymcbutterpants: It is the term used to describe Ben Bernanke's program of printing money in the united states.
fattymcbutterpants: Do you even economics?

aries: wendy is talking about it. i think she is talking about a return of "follow cimple guide for mega-bucks"?
aries: *simple
aries: well, i meant in terms of Simcountry

fattymcbutterpants: <--- Wendy bruh, and no its really the Fed's program. Yes it is a reference to your objection to raiding c3s for 5T

The GM moved to limit benefits from what the GM called, "fake wars". It has been that way for two years. Reasoning and discussions on this can be found at these places.

https://www.simcountry.com/discus/messages/1/24185.html?1413592528

https://www.simcountry.com/discus/messages/1/24292.html?1414263979

The GM was right and this will not be changed back. deal with it

As I said much earlier, many of the suggestions you made are spot on. The trouble I have is that some of them have ' remove war protection" or "no war protection if they do x". I think that leads to a lof of sacrificial lambs being led to the slaughter.

The PvP Tutuorial is an excellent suggestion. I think I chimed in on that as well. A tutorial for all aspects of the game would be a nice change, leading the player through all apsects of game play, teaching them how to do things. The doc's are some intense and often frustrating reading. How many of us have read the entire thing one or more times? Much less have it memorized?

On the boosting idea: going to say 2 things, 1 of them tongue in cheeck. Yes, I think it should depend on who attacks whom. I think the reasons people are hiding at lower war levels is comprised of a number of factors. Knowing that they are open prey to a lot of big sharks is one.

Now for the tongue in cheek: It is a massively multiple player game. Those big guys should get into a fed to have the smaller guys protect them. Makes just about as much sense from an asthetic view point, doesn't it? Encourages just as much political and federation stuff. (take it as it's meant, light heartedly.)

War levels against sim countries are not a sufficient preparation to paricipte in pvp. The college etc are all excellent ideas, from the knowledge and skill viewpoint. It's not going to help with logistics or preparedenss. Again, not a big fan of endless c3 raiding. That doesn't teach anything either, and leads to a grind like in Evony or similar games. It's also not a true indicator of power level, like your power rankings are. And that's what PvP should be balanced around. One of the things that rankles some players (conjecture here) is that when the endless raiding hit the wall, there was no reduction of any kind on the side of the players who had already benefited from it. All players from that point on were put behind the curve. I argued for a devaluation of the currency, but to no avail. Again, going with a power ranking determination for PvP will help. It might not at the top end, though it would in time. If we want to see more PvP, we should want to see more of it at all levels.


Moving on to the space stuff. When the space program was introduced, I think it left a lot of things out of the equation that should have been factored in. The transferring of military goods is only one aspect of that. yes, there should be some kind of limit. Whether that is similar to the spending limits, or whether the time to move between worlds should be a lot longer as Wendy mentioned are both good starting points for a debate. Despite this being a space game now...it's not Star Trek. We have space shuttles on our Earth. They are a lot smaller. (lessening the amount per trip.) And interplanetary travel takes a lot longer. (increasing the time.) The tech may just be a discoonect. But I'm not seeing laser weapons, or planet buster weapons etc. The technology is most things seems to be about Earth current, maybe slightly ahead. Ye Gods and little fishes, we still have coal fired electrical plants.

There are other factors that should have been taken into account. There was a mention of extending the empire limits. With quick travel between the worlds, I'm wondering why Empires are limited to one world, and not across them. Most products can be shipped across. The same with contracts. Would be nice to set up space based contracts - especially for those products that can only be produced on a single world. It would also be nice to set up something similar to the counter attacks of stealth bombers and conventional missiles with shuttling of units or supplies in war time. In short, the space program should have been more though out, and have better integration into the entire game.

Going to say one more thing, and please don't take it as a sign of disrespect. Your comment about reading a guide, and using it to grind endlessly. You've done that also, a little bit. :p Your air war guide for c3 warring is great. But it's cookie cutter. There's not a lot of explanation of why you do a,b,c. Like the combat process in explaining why to attack defenses before the target.


And please all. There is no reason for any personal rancor to enter into the debate. Ideas are a free exchange, and should be hotly debated if needed. It detracts from the debate.

Cordially yours,
MNey

Agreed Marshal.

Adding to the c3 thing...

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

The GM was right and this will not be changed back. deal with it<!-/Quote-!>

I have not asked for it to be restored. However I did ask you

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

How are you so against helicopter money in c3s yet so for the egregiously unrealistic transfer of tonnage via space in just real life minutes?<!-/Quote-!>

Aries' response did not address the question at all. Now further, I have not advocated for the ability to be removed.

Simply limited to some reasonable quantity for weapons and ammunition. Planet specific product transfers are an obvious need. The feature needs to be refined.

I yield to alternative views if anyone would add.

Weapon and ammo transfers are already slow to move through space. The current cap is that no more than some 200 shuttles can slowly move objects through space at one time. Based on the current market, any player who can grab the third prize rankings awards can afford such a fleet and match any player in interstellar transfer speed. In that way, the current game is very level on access to space.

As to how quickly 200 shuttles can actually move things, I posted some stats before on this. Yes, "mobile" units are much easier deploy-able through space.

---Takes 50 Shuttle Trips----
50 Mobile Air Defense Units
(20,000 Anti Aircraft Missile Batteries)
(600,000 Anti Aircraft Missiles)
------------------------------

----Takes 128 Shuttle Trips-------
20,000 Anti Aircraft Missile Batteries
600,000 Anti Aircraft Missiles
-----------------------------------

----Takes 50 Shuttle Trips----
50 Mobile Missile Defense Units
(4,000 Anti Aircraft Missile Batteries)
(6,000 Missile Interceptor Batteries)
(10,000 Defensive Missile Batteries)
(120,000 Anti Aircraft Missiles)
(180,000 Missile Interceptors)
(300,000 Defensive Missiles)
---------------------------------


-----Takes 128 Shuttle Trips--------
4,000 Anti Aircraft Missile Batteries
6,000 Missile Interceptor Batteries
10,000 Defensive Missile Batteries
120,000 Anti Aircraft Missiles
180,000 Missile Interceptors
300,000 Defensive Missiles
------------------------------------

----Takes 50 Shuttle Trips--------
50 Mobile Attack Wings
(12,000 Fighter Planes)
(900,000 Fighter Missiles)
----------------------------------

----Takes 408 Shuttle Trips-------
12,000 Fighter Planes
900,000 Fighter Missiles
----------------------------------

Is that a low bar can be met for any player to easily afford the necessary shuttles and considerable time/effort/expense is needed to move non-mobile units not enough?

Marshal: I have considerable PvP experience. Don't discount what "smaller" guys can do. Regardless of one's size, attacks and other strategic movement doesn't happen by itself. I rarely go to war without ready allies. I have been both the "smaller" guy and the one with more assets, and never have I felt that I could not contribute or that it would be wise to turn down anyone with skill, regardless of assets.

I am very proud of what new players can do who can take advantage of whatever guidance I can give them. Check out the post of "The Battle of Camp Foxtrot" that can be found here:

https://www.simcountry.com/discus/messages/3711/25234.html?1447529218

Zentrino and Zen started the game and were newbs in August 2015. In November 2015, they went to war, with some assistance from me, against a player I would rank as the 3rd most powerful player at that time in the game. Zen and Zentrino had the active war decs against Blackeyes, I was not declared on and did not declare war myself. By Wendy's accounts of newer players, Zen and Zentrino should have been crushed under Blackeyes' boot. This did not happen and, believe me, Zentrino and Zen carried most of the load. Don't underestimate what newer players who gain the necessary skill can achieve.

As to the suggestions, you mentioned that war college would help with skill and knowledge but not help with "logistics" and "preparedness". If you mean assets, I do recommend in war college that rewards be granted for each level of completion. My recommendation is a total of $35 Trillion, with the idea that additional rewards are available in the next step, Battlegrounds. I don't see you comment on the level of awards I suggested that I indeed have right there in my suggestion write-ups.

On the c3 guide, I tried to keep it simple and many players have found it invaluable. It basically contains all the information I used to type of manually in chat off the top of my head to help new players. I choose to leave out "why" in the guide to let the new players learn a bit on their own. Ideally, they follow the guide closely and get some very successful raids under their belt and then they are free to experiment and, perhaps, learn more of the why on their own. Additional info in that write-up could have caused too much confusion and been more intimidating to a new player. That was my calculation.

Okay clearly we are trolling now...

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

By Wendy's accounts of newer players, Zen and Zentrino should have been crushed under Blackeyes' boot.<!-/Quote-!>

Umm what? Who said this? Try not to drown out conversation with baseless drivel. Let's try not to drown out the real problem here.

You again and constantly will champion any cause that strengthens your position, or your player class position. Your comments and hardline reasoning is hypocritical at best, engineered by design at worst. We are more than aware by now it is the latter. It doesn't matter how many times anyone says anything. Myself and anyone else saying anything but what you want to hear is going to pointed in the direction of the driest novels on the web. Aries "Guide to the Galaxy"

You continue attempting to drown out everyone and anyone with nonsense. You feel this... You think that... By xxxx's account... all nonsense.

What is so bad about limits on unrealistic space transfers? If new players should not be underestimated, why should you do so bad without this option? Not the ability, but the ability to do it limitless?

Why do you think players can only do well if they follow your guides? Is everyone too stupid to comprehend the game without your omniscient consent? If only you follow my guide to this... my guide to that. Granted, in the volume, Simcountry for dummies, your guides will serve an ignorant player-base well. But you even talk to Sam Houston and say, "Did you follow my guide to path of an economist?" If you did you would not be complaining about anything. In my head I'm like is this guy really serious? Sam Houston, needs a guide to making money in Simcountry. Wow. How dare he or anyone profit without it! The really saddening part is yes, by now it is clear you really are serious.

Why do you think you have the only omniscient view of Simcountry, it's problems in total? You already admitted you have tried everything in your power, including your ego-stroking guides that nobody can play without, to spark interest in the war game. Including your sponsoring of x.y, and z challenges. Those threads are about as dry as your inbox. Nobody has interest. You assume everyone is here for your entertainment, but you can't see that. You cannot deal with people in that way, it is a shame you don't instinctively understand that.

Every single response you have posted here in this thread to anyone has been if you read my "guide to the earth"... if you only read my "guide to the moon" and so on. Players have to read these guides as a requisite to think independently and come to rational conclusions? You need to think more. Really.

Perhaps you are the most recent smart-guy in the game. But your biggest deficiency is the adoption of a pansophical self view so severe that you cannot comprehend anything but yourself. Perhaps this is why with 'your suggestions' this game is in the diminished state it is in, presently. Despite your best efforts. Congrats. Give yourself a big pat on the back. Write another guide on "how to suggest a game into ruin."

For the record. What Wendy actually said was limitless transfers of weapons and ammo via space is an unrealistic problem and advantage for already advantage laden mega accounts. Limits should be imposed to achieve a balance. This will allow newer players finding themselves growing on a planet to not be surprised by some player who can cart over 10 times the amount of military assets he currently possesses in just minutes. Just sayin.

It won't be a problem until 90 days from now I am snapping up players hugging Aries too tightly with this feature. Then, mysteriously, you all will come out in droves and scream abuse...

The feature needs to be tweaked. That is what I said.

Guides are good. Wendy has always been better.

I will say a couple of things about space movement of weapons.
First, it takes longer than a few minutes, even on the same world. When I was last attacked back in May, I mobilized my defensive weapons from the enterprise to the attacked country. It was about 300T worth of defense and I started it within an hour of the dec coming in. The mobilization of everything took about 4 real life days, longer than the waiting period for war to begin. I learned from that event that ammo takes a very long time to move, especially huge numbers. I no longer store ammo in the enterprise but in the countries themselves.

Second, I have an empire of FB and LU. My FB empire is one of war and I have a very large military presence. My LU empire is one of peace and has only minimal military assets. I mostly maintain an offensive army for C3 raiding on LU. I certainly don't think it would be fair to block my defense on FB from coming to LU if I were attacked. I also don't think I should be able to drop in 500T in defensive weapons at the drop of a hat. Of course, again moving all the ammo would take a very long time. My mobile units could be moved much more quickly and I have a large contingent of those. I am not sure if the current speed is right or not. I definitely don't think it should be limited by spending limits. That would be unworkable and would make it unusable. I could probably get behind the idea that only mobile units could be moved during wartime. It would change how I play on LU of course, but that's okay. The game changes and we adapt. I would not want that restriction during non-war times. I make purchases on LU when prices are low and would want to move those to FB if I felt the need. I see no reason to stop me from doing that normally.

Finally, I have commented before the war college idea and like it. Zen and I have considered doing something like this with our fed just to learn ourselves about different pvp tactics. I would like my fedmates to be know these things as well. I believe the game is enhanced when more people know about war and pvp wars.

Wendy: You were the one spitting up her coffee at the idea of a new player striving to achieve something in the game. You pictured them as struggling with econ, let alone being prepared to make interstellar empires and being prepared to fight a top player. I gave an example of two players that managed to survive and win a war a few months after starting their accounts. Yes, I think in the context of what you wrote earlier, you might have been in another state of shock.

Which of my suggestions strengthens my position and how does it do so? My suggestions are clear at the top of this thread and nothing you have typed would give me a hint that you ready any of them.

On space, you started with "Without imposing limits and being too intrusive, why not just limit space transfers to empire to empire on the same world?". Really? Without bring too intrusive? Now, you say tweaks. Well, how? I actually posted real data on the current limits of space transfers. I have actually tested them? Have you?

Beyond that, you go on to be pretty ridiculous. My guides are an option for any player and if they don't need them that is fine. In a situation where I am told something is difficult or impossible, of course I am going to mention if I have a relevant guide. Johanas saying that there is no free way to grow an empire is demonstrably false. You can approach it by saying the game has somehow wronged him and needs changes but I see others that are new players in this environment and they do just fine or even great.

Finally, who do you think you are appealing to? You have never been a team player that I know of. You pretend you have some type of support. You don't.

So far, I am not impressed by your return. Your council on FB seems to include one player other than yourself. You whine about a game change the GM made. You want to remove space because you are insecure in your skills. Finally, you try to attack the one player that most other players in the last two years would agree has worked to help them and improve the game.

Currently, you are on a path to whine, whine, and whine a little more and then flicker out of the game again. There is a real question whether you can hang around and compete in the current game. If you folly out, at least it will prove to some of the recent players that they have what it takes and these legends of Wendy stories are a real bore. Talk yourself up but lets soon see that if you are any more than talk and whine.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

I am not impressed by your return.<!-/Quote-!>

mmmm so? Yu liek pie?

Zentrino: Careful about considering a limitation of moving weapons and ammo tied to "wartime". Remember that the attacker has the advantage of the where and whens and much of the conditions of the coming war. The attacker will certainly have their forces ready. A wartime limitation could seriously hinder the ability of a defender to defend them-self.

As you said, the picture Wendy paints of the speed of current space transfers as being piles of forces at a drop of the hat is simply false. It is difficult to be taken seriously from the get-go in that condition.

Thanks for your comments on the War College! I find many players support it, just not many are fans in posting to this forum.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

I find many players support it, just not many are fans in posting to this forum.<!-/Quote-!>

Kind of odd being as though this would be the perfect place to support it. Where dey at doe?

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

the picture Wendy paints of the speed of current space transfers as being piles of forces at a drop of the hat is simply false.<!-/Quote-!>

Lies... Okay I admit. It isn't a picture it is reality. And in this reality transfer occurs slightly longer than it takes to drop the hat. Satisfied?

Maybe defensive weapons should move faster via shuttle than offensive weapons?
In full disclosure, I have far more defensive weapons than offensive so this helps me.

lol.

You are in luck. It already works that way. Defensive items do move faster than offensive. I have posted actual data on this thread on this, twice.

The point is it all happens too fast. The military aspect really hampers interpersonal relationships. If one can simply transport the majority of their military assets to another planet so instantly, there is no need to engage in the politics of said world. Success on a single world is too easily transferable as it is. I can have another player set up a country or more and super-power military strength can be projected anywhere instantaneously. All without player 2 actually putting in time and work to earn that prestige on the world organically. A glaring example is given above. In other examples where friends sell each other countries to support their empires or federations in a time of war, it is true this is the way it happened in the past, but the assets did not just appear, they were cultivated and purchased, in-world. The mere possibility that so much can be transferred with such a degree of limitlessness is an imbalance itself the needs to be addressed. This is also the line of reasoning used when ending c3 raiding. The money should not appear so effortlessly. What else do we imagine the money from raiding was being spent on, trains? No it was weapons and ammo. In a sense we have traded apples for apples, better still oranges in the example cited.

If you could simply move the majority of your military instantly/instantaneously (other any other word you want to use that seems you can move stuff at the drop of a hat), there would be a problem. However, it simply doesn't work that way. I just can't take you seriously while you seriously mischaracterize speed of space transfers. Why don't you try it and come back with some actual test data? I bet you don't because you aren't serious about this.

This has no relation to the "follow simple guide for megabux" that c3 raiding used to be. Moved assets are still earned by the player and are not gained by fake wars against the computer. This means that players actually did put "time and work" into earning their assets and, if you buy what Johanas is selling, it must have been pretty darn impressive that they did so.

It actually does work that way. Quit pretending to be the only who has done it. I moved over 200K interceptors and Helos with nearly 10M of each ammo very quickly. As in nearly instantaneously, not in the blink of an eye, but near to that. It's not that hard to do with a fleet of 400+ shuttles and something like 200 of them performing each operation.

Since you know so much, post your time frame for movement of that much hardware and ammo, and explain why it should be possible. I'll wait.