VOTE: Remove/change the War Level System (Kebir Blue)

Yup, chat is dead. I agree with you CC.


But I will say that many players will run off their mouths in chat and never understand the gravity of what they are getting into.

I was no exception, I messed with arguably the best ever to play the war game and it was a hard and grueling road to travel, I never experienced a measure of personal success until i refrained from fighting. This is a hard thing to grasp.

One positive part of the war levels is that players can take time to get the economic game and store some assets or build a base to undertake a few real wars. Months of ammo purchases and storage are lost in minutes in real wars and thus are not really productive in a any real way, unless we are raiding, period.

I agree with CC and AC (can I call you that?). There needs to be more social interaction between players.
The reason is simple: People like to know that there are other people who are playing who will actually be there to help them. Same as when someone calls an insurance call centre: you don't want to talk to a voice recording, you want to talk to a real person who can symphathise and understand. As soon as W3C understands this, they will see more players sticking around because players feel like they are part of a group or a community of people who share common goals.
If you are to get anything out of this thread, get that^.
Cheers,
T

Gotta say folks - i was going to pay for the game this week. Would have probably spent a couple of hundred quid to set myself up. However, with the crap thats going on here with econ players appearing to rule the roost, forget it.

W3C - may i remind you that back in '08, I was spending that each month as i know others were.

Look where your bread is buttered.....

I agree with Tom. My countries make enough $$ that I can afford to aid new players with a Trillion here & there, but dont see that option. Would be fun to have a mentor program - also love to learn more about the game.

Agreed! Emily. This would be a great option. Although, now that I think about it... Couldn't we just use Asset Packages to gift game money and gold coins directly to other players without any strings attatched?

Yes thank you for saving me the post Gothamloki

I wasn't really saying we need to give them money (although development aid could be a new feature of the game) but rather by Vets giving newbies tips and chatting them through stuff (on chat, for example).
Maybe a possible criteria for reaching Game Level 3 would be joining a fed?
It would go along way in helping player retention rates.

when it comes to PVP I say 1 2 3 4 what are we fighting don't no don't give a damn back to Vietnam

DO NOT TOUCH THE FEDS.

That will be WORST then the war levels. How about econ players can send contracts till level 5?

Feds are still somewhat beneficial even to the lower levels who are serious and looking to learn. I teach players who are level 1-2 that have REAL intent on becoming 3. The suggestion on making feds a level 3 is BS if anything a level 0-2 Shouldn't be ALLOWED to start there own fed but have the option to join if they are invited. The Fed chairmen should be ATLEAST level 3.(If there is non the fed closes and is disbanded)

"Emily Foncque"
Go to the chat. For everyone who says we need a mentorship program. You just need to go to the chat to teach news. I help lead a fed that teaches news all aspects of them game. I have personally helped more new players then you have prob talk to in your entire SC career. Every vet can say ive been doing it. A mentor ship would require that the GM pick the most exp people to teach otherwise you have people who don't know crap about war trying to give warring advice. The best way to fix most player via player is to add a new chat. I know people hate it but the chat needs to be open all the time it should be linked to SC(close the game you log off) Something like that.

One thing the GM might want to look into. Cruise missiles/nukes/space weapons should be a war level 3 or higher (country made item) That might give war players something to do.

@Supersoldier,
Maybe doing a Facebook sort of thing where the chat box is always in the bottom right-hand corner.
Cheers,
your Innovative pal,
T

Forcing people into chat is not practical. It would give an automatic indicator of when a player is on/offline. Not the greatest idea when it comes to fighting a war! Besides, there are times when I just don't want to be in chat.

Remove the war levels, it will force feds to have more interaction with each other and make it more critical for new players to join them.

I personally found this quote quite funny and yet particularly insulting:

"One thing the GM might want to look into. Cruise missiles/nukes/space weapons should be a war level 3 or higher (country made item) THAT MIGHT GIVE THE WAR PLAYERS SOMETHING TO DO."

Yeah....making and selling weapons will completely distract us from the fact that you can't use them anyway....maybe if I just close my eyes and pretend I hear an explosion or smell napalm....uh....sure

Over 100 comments in this thread and yet nothing from the GM's??? This issue isn't going away. Might as well deal with it. The war levels either need removed or seriously modified.

Hey EC,

Did you know that "Andy" is the GM? Seven down from the top. Tom is basking in the sun in Barcelona or there abouts.

Cheers,

Maestro

I was talking to some players earlier today and we had a GREAT talk about the war engine. One of those talks that everyone was nice and willing to listen, no fighting or debates. You know a moment where everyone came together and had nothing but the interest of the game @ heart. To be honest it was rather touching but to the real matter. During the talk we made ideas and came up with suggestion that might fix war issues or at least get this ball rolling.

War levels would remain in place, Expect Fearless blue president warring starts @ war level 1
As stated before once they get to war level 1 the GM gives them 30days of war protection. This would give them enough time to find a fed and start buying weapons.

During our talk we also agreed that on Fearless Blue if a nation started with
-20M population
-10T cash.
-100 fortifications instead of the normal 20
-30 interceptors wings and 10 helicopter wings already pre-made( at 200Q ) that might would massively help news with building a def.

Warring would still be an option econ players would have no worries as it wouldn't force them to join and they could go about playing econ. They can continue to buy nations and never be involved in the war game so they need not worry.

Also before anyone joining Fearless blue there would be rules.
-You must be a premium member.(this so they can get weapons is space/trade in space/and so theirs no unfair advantage over free vs paying players)

-----and-----

-A warning tab stating to all before they join Fearless blue. It would state "Fearless Blue is the war world. Once becoming a war level 1 you will receive 30days of provided War Protection after this 30days you will be able to be attacked by other Presidents. It is HIGHLY suggested that during this 30days you seek membership in a federation as well as work on both economic and military aspects.
Before they continue and get there country make them check a box showing they agree.(so there's no complaining and it shows they understand the rules)

Our reasoning behind all the added bonuses to the nations are simple.
-The 20M population would be huge. That gives players (econ/war) alike a chance to start with somewhat high pop levels allowing many State/CEO corps to be present. If the player was to be lucky enough to have 25CEO corps in their starting nation that would be 50B + profit a month almost guaranteeing a positive income to start. This would also mean a lot of workers all the way around allowing them to start building there military/index's quickly.
-10T cash is a very good suggestion. If the GM made it so that very nation on FB had to have minimum 10T in cash in order to receive game cash that would help this more. This would mean econ players would have an instant 10T to loan or invest in there nations index's. As for war players this would allow them to buy large amount of weapons from the get go. Even though its not much at least the 10T, plus 20M pop, and lets say a nation making 50B a month might be enough to get some new players warring over it.
-100 Fortification does nothing but saves them cash and might discourage those looking for an easy kill. 100forts, plus lets say 20states, 20cities. Thats around 2T in just ammo to blow them up. You still need to strip there 40free air def wings they get. Those wings could easily kill 3K bombers plus if they have fed air that's almost 6K. Making it a total of around 3T worth of JUST bombers, If they at 250Q you've lost money. A player would spend more then 15T to make 10T or less making it unprofitable again helping to derail easy new kills plus keep in mind they would have a fed making it entirely un-worthwhile.

Anyways sorry for the long post everyone but we had such a great chat and such positive discussion that i had to share. Hopefully we can all continue on the amazing brainstorming that we just finished in the chat and bring it here to this forum. To everyone who participated in chat you where wonderful.

There is no need to lower the war levels on any world. Every veteran knows it's easy to get to war level 3. (Wendy, Keto, Whiteboy, ...)

What's needed is an update to federation rules and use of war peace. Yes war peace. When player wars return to the game, war peace use needs to be addressed. This was a huge part of the war level discussion.

Levels 1 and 2 allow new players/econ players to dabble in war a little and take a few countries and still stay under the war radar. Some of these players will graduate and join the war player group while others will choose to stay under the radar at war level 2.

Perhaps if all worlds were saturated with players I would bend on this opinion, but this is not the case. There are thousands of available free countries on every world.

Again, there's enough gravy in this turkey for all of us.

Cheers,

Maestro

Meastro i respect your opinion as it your own. But feds don't needs more rules in fact they need more ways to support each other and less rules. As it is if a level 5 and 7 are in a fed and lets say a level 4or3 attack the level 5, the level 7 cant respond because their "to high". If North Korea attacked Japan the US wouldn't go "Well I'm a level 7 guess i cant help" They already to hard to use. Be nice if they had more ways to support beside fed air they should allow all defensive weapons to be shared. If i'm bordering my allies nation. I should not only provide air support but if i drop 30def missile division in his nation then all should support when they are attacked. War peace fix might be a nice idea. Instead of dropping a peace treaty on 2 nations it should be an empire ban. That might work so i will take that suggestion.

--------------------------------------------------

Also i talked with Wendy last night and she also made a suggestion. If those rules where added and (even though no one wants to hear it) but if there was a blanket wipe of all war levels dropping everyone to level 0 as well with a GM message to every empire main on FB that would help the process then everyone who jumps to level 1 right after would show there intent on warring. This might spur some pots and get the balls arolling

Simple rule for federations (proposal)

Join a federation and you are automatically at the war level on any world. You want to be in a federation, understand that you are part of a team. A team that's committed to protecting each other.

Example: If a war level 2 player joins a federation, that players countries auto advance to level 3. You are now a war player. End of story.

War level 3 should be the war level on all worlds.


Cheers,

Maestro

That's a really stupid idea. I'm sorry but the issue with that is so many NEWS make feds you know how many feds there are that having nothing but 0-2 levels in them? The largest noob fed (no offense to anyone in the fed is the Contunnium on LU) I have friends in that fed but only 2-3 out of the 30people in the fed are actually war level 3. Forcing people to jump up levels just by joinning a fed isn't fair. War levels "reflect" skill if a new wants a fed and jumps in and goes from 1-3 just by signing that's not fair to them in the least. Because the haven't learned anything new.

Meastro why do you even bother ruining a nice topic? Can we get off your suggestions that are make the game more complicated and please make REAL suggestions.

I was not around before war llevels came in but from what i've read it was fun back then when politics had to be addressed, that said I am also glad that I was protected when I first started!

I like the ideas regarding FB startup a couple of posts up, if implemented they may even tempt me to find a country there in the future. By then I would hope that I will have had enough experience and wealth to survive a new player surely has no chance there.

I do believe that a higher level president should be able to assist a low level president in times of war (if in the same fed of course) and as I understand it this is not possible in the current system. A couple of suggestions that may work - or not.
1) Countries allowed to LOAN military assets to low level players - a limited number with some sort of method of reparation to whoever loads out the troops.
2) A kind of United Nations "peacekeeping" force for each Fed. All members MUST allocate a set % of their military assets to the force, the higher the level of the president the larger the commitment. Some sort of option to "invite" peacekeepers into attacked county.

As i said earlier these ideas may not work, but feel free to comment

Complicated?

The federation idea is simple. Join a federation and you are a war player.

"The largest noob fed (no offense to anyone in the fed is the Contunnium on LU) I have friends in that fed but only 2-3 out of the 30people in the fed are actually war level 3. Forcing people to jump up levels just by joinning a fed isn't fair."SuperSoldierRCP

Let me understand correctly. This federation is 90% econ player?

Cheers,

Maestro

The issue is not that everyone joining a federation needs to be prepared for war, as that will kill federations further - no new players will join until they are ready, and how do you get them ready? By mentoring them. And the best way to mentor them? Have them join a federation with a whole bunch of supportive friends ...

The issue is that federations can no longer support their fedmates, except through shared air defences. It was difficult enough before war levels for more experienced feds to protect their newer players. But now it's nigh-on impossible!

The balance is settling at WL 3 for a reason. That is the WL that most people are signing up to, therefore, that is the level at which most people can / will war. Above level 3 there are few players to war against. Below level 3 you can't war.

Easier to reduce your potential opponents? Yes.

Promoting the war game? No.

Hugs and respect

Jo

100% agree with Jo

I like the idea of FB being all-out war for WL 1 and up. I hope the GM's will consider this as a good option for war players.

Current Statistics - War Levels of the top 100 players on FB.

In the Top 100 by game rank

War Level 7: 9 players
War Level 6: 2 players
War Level 5: 1 player
War Level 4: 4 players
War Level 3: 6 players
War Level 2: 8 players
War Level 1: 19 players
War Level 0: 51 players

Interesting statistic

22% of players at PVP war level (3,4,5,6,7)
78% of players below PVP war level (0,1,2)