Poll Started (War Level Choice)

I appreciate the ongoing dialogue here, and think some changes you're making will indeed help the war game improve, which is my primary goal with the positions I take in this discussion.

Respectfully though, you didn't answer my question. Why would you limit players being able to stay at lower war levels? Players need practice, want to be able to test tactics and weapons out, and want flexibility. Everyone in this thread who has talked about this concept agrees that they'd prefer the OPTION to stay at lower levels, and these are some of the players who've actually gone through war levels and won wars.

I understand you believe players are incentivized to go to higher war levels, but if they were, more would. Despite these incentives, you have just three players on your busiest planet (WG) who've ever progressed beyond war level 3. Three.

On Fearless Blue, your war world, you start at war level 3 (at least you used to - I'm seeing new players starting at war level 0 which is strange). Only 4 players have moved up more than 2 levels there.

Your system isn't working as you intend. Fighting against computer countries that simply have more weapons at higher levels isn't good training and it isn't particularly fun for many players. It can be quite tedious. Fighting higher level c3s requires understanding and using THE EXACT SAME concepts to win. You just have to click a whole bunch more and have to acquire more weapons and ammunition to win. Let players decide if this is what they want, or if they want to fight for other reasons.

Additionally, players do not always fight wars against the computer "for a challenge." As I've outlined several times, sometimes players just want to move around. Sometimes players want to help fix worker issues. Let players play the game - don't limit them arbitrarily. If you have a reason for limiting this aspect of the game besides the fact you think players want a "challenge" when fighting the computer, I'm all ears. It seems like you're trying to replace pvp wars with wars against the computer? I'm not sure that's what your player base is after - at least in its current form.

Again, if your level system was something players thought worked well, you'd have more than THREE players on your busiest planet progressing despite these lucrative rewards you're offering for doing so. Players will almost always try to do what's best for them, their account, and their fun. The way c3 wars are fought doesn't seem to align with many players having fun or growing in the current system.

I again recommend having the ability to fight one war per week at a lower war level (Gaz's proposal wanted more ability to choose to fight at war level 3). See what happens. See what players choose to do.

Also:

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Then there is the "need" for a flexible empire, so you can conquer a country far away, release it later and do it again.
This enables you to fight a real war at a large distance with a C3 country you conquered as a base.
This is fine too.<!-/Quote-!>

This is not a flexible system. If you achieve high war levels, you no longer can easily achieve this. It becomes extremely expensive and time consuming. This exact reason is why players are asking about having the option to fight lower level c3s. You're highlighting what we're asking for here, though it seems you're misunderstanding how flexible your system is.

What I said is that you will be able to increase the size of your empire to 5 countries, fighting on at level 3.

Once you have five, you can reduce the empire to 4 and fight again at wl3.

this is giving you the option of fighting at war level 3 for ever and the flexibility of where you want to have your country.

If you want to have 10 countries in the empire, it has a higher complexity level, you can do the same, have country 6-10 while fighting at wl 4.
then continue at war level 4, while reducing the empire size to 9 and having the flexibility to conquer countries for strategic reasons.

I said in a previous post that I do not see the need for trivial wars for experienced players.

why would you E.O, fight trivial wars at WL3. you are more than experienced enough to fight them at WL4, or 5 or higher.

Building a very large empire by fighting many wars at WL3 does not sound logical to us here.

A large empire makes sense because of, for example: natural resources.
These resources can be found in very large numbers in many countries and their increasing profitability makes them attractive.

They are not for free.
It is either a war, which is probably quite trivial in the lower levels or 30 Gold coins. (no disaster).

and then, the war level C3 wars to grow to 10 countries is 5.
might be too low but this is where we will start.

And then,
I do not think an inexperienced player can win a C3 war at war level 10.
an experienced player can but it will not be trivial.
War experience certainly helps, and the player will win 130 gold coins on FB.

You can use them to get 4 more countries at 30 gold coins each.

one war at WL 10 and you get yourself 5 countries.

We will implement the possibility to run C3 wars at WL3 while the empire has less than 5 countries.

We agreed is it not for resources.
These will be wiped out, weapons, units etc.
The reason is the strategic flexibility for players to get countries far away, fight a war there, remove the country and fight another war at the same level in another far away place.

Please respond. I hope also less experienced players respond and I hope for new ideas and points of view.

I didn't read the above. My attention span is small. But what purpose is war levels when there are no wars? Seems like they were implemented way back when people were complaining about all of the wars that were going on back in the day. They wanted to play a "peaceful game" and these war levels were the implementation to satisfy them (though, I maintain that war protection was perfectly fine for that). But there doesn't seem to be conflicts anymore. Why maintain something stupid like war levels? Just because they've been around? Get rid of a feature that is dumb. New players should be enabled and encouraged to go C3 raiding for the experience and some small $. And if people don't want to war (what war?), WP is available.

BC - because I can't change my name for a week...

Edit: I read a little more of the above... a little. I guess I'm unqualified to have an opinion at this point until I play the game. I remember war levels when they were implemented and hated it. But that was 10 years ago. Maybe things have changed. I remember the GC rewards were not worth the costs at the time, but maybe things are better now....

I've hesitated to respond here because it doesn't seem like you understand my point about how going up in war levels makes it more difficult for you to fight other players. I guess no one fights much anyways these days, but there are a number of reasons for that. I'll try again to comment on some war level challenges (from my point of view). War levels are less of an issue on FB, but most of your players aren't there, so I'll leave that topic alone for now. This will be a long response - so I thank you for the audience in advance.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

What I said is that you will be able to increase the size of your empire to 5 countries, fighting on at level 3.

Once you have five, you can reduce the empire to 4 and fight again at wl3.

this is giving you the option of fighting at war level 3 for ever and the flexibility of where you want to have your country.

If you want to have 10 countries in the empire, it has a higher complexity level, you can do the same, have country 6-10 while fighting at wl 4.
then continue at war level 4, while reducing the empire size to 9 and having the flexibility to conquer countries for strategic reasons.<!-/Quote-!>

I'll start by commenting on your idea. This proposal you made would be an improvement on the current system. 100%. Right now, the system is very unforgiving in terms of you wanting to move around at all, practice at all, test tactics, and so forth. Right now, if you win once, the next time you fight IS ALWAYS harder, is always more clicks, and is always more expensive. The tactics to win remain exactly the same. The next level is just... longer and costlier? Do you think that is the fun all players want? Just asking. This system doesn't exactly motivate players to build empires - and players who do build empires are ones who are more likely to stick around in my opinion, so making that easier would be a good thing. Ideally, you could even have War Level 5 up to 15 countries, War Level 6 up to 20 as well. Make it a little easier for players to PLAY the game in the way they see fit. One question - if a player achieves war level 10, would they have the OPTION to fight at war level 3 if they only have 3 countries? If so, then your proposal is a very good idea.

Next, I'll talk about how the current system limits mobility. I have a scenario for you. If war breaks out on planets besides FB, what happens if the guy who's attacking your federation is on the other side of the planet from where you are? The system currently used REQUIRES me to do one of three things. I could have a navy to go shoot with (navies are expensive and generally are not a great option for this), fight and win a war against the computer, permanently raising my war level (in order to fight a player), or that I need to pay you 3 dollars for another country to get range on them? This tilts the field for players toward having to buy another country - and one they'll just throw away in a couple weeks. However, if I'm at war level 3, I can much MUCH much MUCH more easily take a couple of c3s to get near this attacker or near my ally to help. What if I make it to war level 10 in this scenario? It's so much more costly in game cash and in real life time for me to move across the world to get nearby this theoretical player than it would be if I was war level 3. What this means is that I probably won't. I won't waste time and resources fighting a war level 11 c3, I won't spend time in the game dealing with this issue to help my ally. I've already paid for gold coins to just to have registration in the game - I am very unlikely to instead spend gold coins on a throw away country. This is why I will never go up in war level on FB unless I truly need to help a country survive urgently. Because I'll be war level 3, I'll be able to get there as quickly and cheaply as possible to defend my or my allies' assets that we've spent so much time building.

Additionally, the way the current system plays out is quite monetized. If you go up to higher war levels, it becomes more and more expensive to fight against c3s. Many/most players are not particularly good at making money, so it could take them weeks to make enough cash to take on the next level, even at low levels. This is especially true of the new players who the game needs to retain. Who waits around for weeks to be able to continue to play a game? Do you expect players to spend a lot of gold coins on game cash? Buying a premium membership only covers gold coins for REGISTRATION for one year. If you buy a game on steam, you can play that game forever. Players shouldn't HAVE to spend gold coins on cash, spend gold coins to expand, and so forth. It's a deterrent for players - and makes it an easier decision for some to leave or to not go premium. You say it's "no disaster" to spend 30 gold coins on a new country. That's the equivalent of one month of playing the game for an empire or an enterprise. That is absolutely a disaster. There's no comparison for some players. You'd rather have registration than a 14 mil pop country. The option to buy countries and cash is great, but making it THE way to expand is bad. What yearly budget do you think the majority of players have for simcountry?

I also do not find fighting against c3s to be that interesting or enjoyable once you've done it once or twice. They're static and just take a bunch of clicking and usage of ammo and weapons to defeat. They absolutely have their place in the game, and giving rewards to players for going up in war level is a good thing. The fact that this is the only system right now though is not good. It just makes it more difficult for players to expand, to keep playing the game, and seems like an arbitrary limitation. Your game needs more engagement, not more hurdles and more $ costs.

In the past, players took c3s for reasons other than expansion, and this helped them have fun. These other reasons (raiding for workers, raiding for small amounts of cash, jumping around to set up countries near allies without paying real life cash for a tiny, new country, etc.) were what many players did in the game. This is what they had fun doing, helped them improve, and why they continued to play. Players should get rewarded for playing your game. Hard work = game cash, assets, larger empires etc. You wonder why there are so few mentors left? Why are there so few players making guides? Which players do you think it was that used to populate your game chat? Well the game has much less for experienced players to do anymore besides sit on their countries and collect cash. What can you even spend the cash on? You're talking about removing weapons from CEOs, placing arbitrary limits on corporations in CEOs, so again, what to spend cash on? What is there to do in the game?

This post is not meant to say I dislike your game. I spent time writing this because I want to help. I'm just trying to point you in the direction I think can help your game by illustrating hurdles and asking questions of you.

I think our proposal will offer a solution.

One point is a bit strange.

I was made to believe that conquering C3 countries is not for resources but for more flexibility.
I had my doubts but players said repeatedly that it is not for resources.

I think that our proposal will bring a lot of flexibility and allow you conquer countries, quite easily, far away and then switch to other locations etc.

Sometimes it sounds like:

Don't bother to agree with me, I already changed my mind.

I refer again to the war competition world where at the end, two players registered.

I understand your confusion - I made a long post talking about many things, and probably not very clearly.

Personally, it's the flexibility issues that I'd like see changed most about c3 wars right now. The original poll was started for this reason, and is why I started talking about this topic. I was trying to make a case for why the poll was a good idea. Your proposal seems like it will probably help with this. I like your idea, and beyond flexibility, I think it will improve the way war levels function in general. I'm excited to see this change implemented if and when you do.

My additional comments about other players in the past were meant to just illustrate other general frustrations and drawbacks that occur with war levels (not just war level 3, for example), as they reduce the number of things players could do in the game and reduce player engagement. I think war levels reduced the willingness of some players to practice and play the game as much. This is just general commentary. You have made comments about thinking more guides and more activity in game chat would be good, and this is what the rest of my post is about.

Once you've built up your countries, now what? Warfare isn't common at all between players. Federations don't really do much right now except in the rare moments of tension. The fact that you can't really benefit too much from fighting computer countries just makes the game a bit more stale, and gives people less options for activity when they log in. If there's not much to do, people won't play as much, won't post as much, and won't be as active. If your proposal is used to make updates, perhaps players will have more interest in fighting more regularly and play a little more. There might be some benefit (even if not cash) from regularly fighting against c3s. The key for increased engagement though is players need to be able to benefit (repeatedly) somehow without TOO much cost, otherwise they won't fight much. Why fight much and invest time if there is no benefit? I've talked to a player who has won multiple first place prizes on a now inactive account, and once they made war level 6, it was just too costly and long for them to continue advancing from their view, despite gold coin benefit. At that point, they were done forever with fighting.

Many of the players who actively raided c3s in the past acquired great skill and understanding of how to build countries, in how to maximize gains from warfare, to become more efficient at fighting, and so on, because they had a reason to practice repeatedly (profits). Many of these players were very active on the forums and in chat. They played the game a lot because they had something to do when they logged in, and because of this, they were active in the community. Finding a way to help engage players in ways where they can practice skills (and benefit somehow from doing so) will help grow your community.

I have thoughts about the war competition, but that'd just go off topic. Thanks for your audience.

Andy, - war competition world could be a success it just requires different configuration. If you are interested in this I could dedicate some time and write you an email with concept.

Thanks mndz.

we are not going in that direction any time soon.

@andy
We should also have the option to send loans directly to countries and enterprises
With a maximum or default interest rate

Are we even allowed to be presidents
It is like we’re restricted from a lot of things

The loans were discussed in a different part of the forum.

If you hate limitations, please explain which ones and we will try to help.

the loans do not represent any limitation.
there are many ways to do loans.
we prefer the market.

Everyone can always get a loan with a reasonable interest rate.

we had time at the start period, where you could set the interest rate.
so the second account got loans from the first account for 100% interest per real day and after the second account bankrupted, it was discarded and a new account appeared and did the same.

we could spend two months of development time to do it again and this time do it right, and we will end up at the same place we are now.