Soft war planet

Please, make one of LU, GR, or KB, a softwar planet

by that, i mean disable "take over country," on all PVP wars

make one planet, safe-ish place to get your feet wet in the PVP game

That's pretty much any planet but Fearless Blue.

Below WL 3, you can't be attacked, period, by anybody.

After WL 3, you're presumed to be experienced enough to either defend yourself if attacked, or know enough that you can rebuild/restart somewhere else, even if you lose.

It's not a bad system. There's also not many people going around intentionally picking fights.

@Banedon - He's saying he wants a planet where there is player vs. player wars without conquest. Personally, I'd like different war "win conditions" available, such as enforce war reparations etc. instead of it being "conquest or nothing." I think Josias' idea is good and a good place to start discussion.

War is mostly dead. It's not that few people pick fights. It's there's few people to pick fights with. Virtually no one will risk war because it's expensive (and they're broke), they don't know how (because they're too scared to learn), or they simple don't need to care.

As a result, the entire culture of multiplayer, needing alliances, and utilizing the core concept the game was originally built around has faded. Banedon - you play on KB yeah? There've been two ever total countries conquered in player wars on the planet among current players? Most likely both were raiding inactive players? It's just not part of the game on KB. By comparison, last weekend alone 5 countries changed hands on White Giant. It generates a lot of activity and politics, and many find this more interesting than single player.

I think the idea behind war level 3 was to give protection to new players, not to protect all players forever. There's not an easy way around that though. I mean, achieving war level 3 is doable for *everyone*. It's not some sort of skill barrier.

Even TA is a planet where the point is acquiring a resource to make better weapons.

Anyways. Just my 2 cents.

Well, perhaps I spoke too soon.

Someone I've never heard of before, and never spoken to until today, has decided they're going to attempt to take North Etar away from me on Kebir Blue.

This will be interesting, and educational.

Hopefully since you're war level 3, you're experienced enough to defend yourself.

Is it Greg?

Hopefully since you're war level 3, you're experienced enough to defend yourself.

Is it Greg?

Yes, it's Greg.

I have a plan, but since I've never fought a PvP war, I have no idea if it'll work out the way I intended.

I may get my butt completely kicked, or not. But worse case I move along to greener pastures elsewhere on Kebir Blue, or maybe try another world entirely.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

I may get my butt completely kicked, or not. But worse case I move along to greener pastures elsewhere on Kebir Blue, or maybe try another world entirely. -Banedon<!-/Quote-!>

The problem, is that is your attitude, and I like it. But that sort of attitude is more of a minority, than the standard sim culture.

WLs were created to prevent players from building up, just to get knocked down by someone. Then quitting.

The particular event, itself, involved the fall of allot of people that spent years playing the power game, w/o the basic skills of defeating a C3. And when they lost their countries, they cried. Then we got war level.

It's a mixed bag, with no right answer. It's not right to force players into playing a war game. But it's also not right to play the power game, w/o any risk. And w/o the risk, there is little need for a sim-community.

My suggestion was actually LGs suggestion back when we got WLs. If you build up and play the power game. Then you lose a war, and lose years' worth of work, its legit disheartening. If you take away the biggest bite, so that it just bruises your pride, I believe folks would be more willing to get their feet wet, and end up better prepared to rebuild if they loose a country on a harsher world.

Any update, Banedon? Haven't heard how this played out.

Decided to read all the posts in Suggestions and Problem in the past two years, to search for a post, and here I find Josias' suggestion and think to myself "He gets it."

Reading all the way down, I'm glad you were listening and took it to heart. Yes, losing the fruit of your labour is a blow too hard to stomach for the vast majority of people. Even Banedon in this thread who spoke as if he could deal with loss, did not. The fact of the matter is that he left shortly after losing his wars. One example among thousands.

The all or nothing nature of War has always been Simcountry's source of its maladies. Its definitive character is too heavy a setback to allow a player to develop opportunistic attacks, discourages involvement and robs you of a means to strike back. We must admit it is SC's greatest failure, because its success works against itself.

To note, I haven't given up on this. And I do see this particular change as being easy to implement by itself, and order of magnitudes better than present. At the same time, I'm also aware this also means the game requires more ways for players compete, channel and resolve conflict. That must not be an impediment to take the first step.

Could not have said it better. Agreed.