| Monday, December 15, 2003 - 02:39 pm |
Well, Matt and Matty, you guys had me on the ropes for a bit. I am buying arms - that's what these big economies are good at - and I'm growing again. Most of my economies are holding up OK under the strain and the rest are fixable.
I have learned some important lessons, both about the game in general and about how to fight, but I know as well as you that no congratulations are in order. Had I the intent and time to attend to the military part of the game during the 6 months since I left the US, I would have been far better prepared. But I had neither the desire nor the time and I know that this inattention caused me to look to the Monkeys like a big, fat target (which I was).
Now what do we do? Some Monkeys continue to poke at my defenses. Others declare war to keep their options open, but make no attacks other than those needed to keep the wars going (they seem to take special pleasure in targetting my fruit juice corps - it must be a "Monkey Thing"). Still others are completely quiet.
I'm willing to keep fighting if that's what we are going to do. What I hope to avoid is the Monkeys keeping all of my countries at war indefinitely. That is a legitimate strategy - but it's wearying and more damaging to me personally than it is to my countries, so I hope that is not the path to be taken.
I know that the Monkeys are a collection of unique (!!!) individuals. But if you guys and gals can come to some common policy on the continuation of the war, I'd appreciate it and I pledge to cooperate in efforts to improve the game whether we fight or not. If the Monkeys don't want to act uniformly in this, that's OK and I'll play it by ear until the situation is better resolved.
| Monday, December 15, 2003 - 03:03 pm |
**note: if you are jozi, dont bother reading this. No principle discussion contained**
"on the ropes" is nice way fo saying that we coudl have conquered your empire for a decent window of time, if we had not lost the will to make an effort . I am not altogether displaeased with the lack of conquest, although the circumstances were a bit, hmmn, ugly. Still, commenting on the specifics of that conflict or ex-conflict in this thread makes it feel like clutter to me.
I expect to formally offer you peace soon,treaties and all. Everyone is doublescheckingthings for themselves. I expect common policy is forthcoming, as the chaos of changes and such dies down.
Obviously any such offer would not be permanent.
just as obviosuly, you could have armed yourself much more thoroughly. Maybe the point would have been more clear then.
Very much appreciate your candor, thoughts, and goals.
Im sick of talking on boards and in-game enough so that ill wait to talk to you until I can find you on a messenger or in IRC, with the exception of sending any formal offer.
| Monday, December 15, 2003 - 04:58 pm |
well im too tha point of giving up on this crap , . i mean why bother if ya cant win a war anymore might aswell take all our weapons off of us and make us all single counties gee how many players is simcountry gunna get then?
| Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 12:19 am |
We had an initial set up of the "peaceful countries" and we should move to the next stage.
Initially, we wanted to create the escape for people who never wanted war and found themselves involved in a huge one.
We will publish this later this week on the site and every new user will have a clear message on his home page telling him to convert to "peace only" if he wants to avoid war.
If this is working, and all current users had their opportunity to convert, we can stop the conversions. We can stop them during war only or stop them period.
An existing user can convert now. A new user can convert while he is protected from war.
If they don't, that can be seen as a definitive choice with no way back, just like the peace choice.
Is that reasonable?
| Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 12:26 am |
Peaceful countries were not created to force more seperate accounts. The possibility to play without war may attract more players. We hope that it will happen.
Having two countries, one peaceful the other playing the war game does not create advantages. The peaceful country will not be able to purchase weapons or transfer them. As a seperate account, it costs double and brings little. It cannot be compared with a conquered country.
| Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 01:26 am |
Ah. Interesting ideas, Jozi.
So, according to your plan an initial period will be allowed for existing users to convert to "peaceful" status. You haven't decided whether to continue to allow such conversions of existing countries if they are at war. I can see arguments on both sides of that - the complaints of players who waste a war effort only to see an enemy escape have validity. On the other hand, war declarations are easy to make and may prevent a player from making the important choice you are now offering. And for new players, they have until the end of the 100-month grace period to make the choice but after they go out from protection (whether by passing the 100-month mark or by making a declaration of war of their own, then the choice becomes closed to them and they cannot become "peaceful."
Sounds like a good plan to me, though I will not use it myself and I still have issues with the 100-month period.
| Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 01:52 am |
I too have issues with the 100-month period. After the initial grace period to let current countries at war go into "peaceful" status new players should be able to convert into "peaceful" status at any time as long as they are not at war.
| Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 04:42 am |
I can see an advantage having one war country and one peaceful ie the peaceful countries could build war corps and trade them to tha war countries. therfor i think if they want one of each then start another account still the same problem though gee i talked myself out of that one :P
| Tuesday, December 16, 2003 - 05:01 am |
It wouldn't be much more of an advantage than having a ceo account and doing the same thing. Possibly not even quite as good because you can't infuse cash into them and they tend to flounder eventually. Which means you couldn't even stockpile. Which would be the only real advantage, because a stockpile in a national corp would be safe, until it closed and all those weapons went *poof*.