IJ Update Feedback

[inanimatej]

So, it's been about 24 hours, time to start feeding back on the update.

I noticed that my score didn't take as large of a hit as I was expecting given the changes. If the White horseman wasn't broken, I'd have 5 vassals instead of 3 still, which would put me in the high 90s for score, still around where I was prior to the changes. The only real impact comes down to PM, which isn't terribly crippling to me as I haven't needed as much to trade.

The black market is still painfully effective for me. Given how easy it is to maintain a high GM through this strategy, and how valuable food appears to be to Ramul, it's not uncommon for me to be able to simply Ramul for 30+ coal, or enough Glass for outposts to being re-vassalizing people I lose over the course of 24-48 hours. Tweaking the value of Food on the Black Market, or perhaps imposing some kind of GM penalty for vassals maintained (since you're parceling out your land to all those pesky fiefdoms...) could curb this somewhat.

[Rasteroid]

Ultimately, I have no problem with your strategy (given your stated means and ends) continuing to be effective.

I'm more interested in tweaking the rules so that the victims of your approach do not feel too hard done by. Keep in mind, with reduced pollution this week, things got a lot easier for everybody.

[inanimatej]

That's why the vassal trades concern me so much. Psiweapon's real complaint was that I can pull out so much coal that he barely has enough to fire one volley, and left him basically crippled to respond in any kind, or even just ignore me and remained vassalized if score isn't his primary concern.

Without regular tithing, and no penalty aside from score for people, there really isn't a downside to vassalage /except/ for the vassal trade. I can only conquer you once until you bribe out or beat me in combat in return, so one warlord isn't an issue, it's if two warlords start fighting over one vassal constantly that this might become a serious issue.

I think after a world reset, we should get another volunteer to warmonger along with me, and see how detrimental the warfare is on the economic-minded players. If two warlords fighting over all the vassals leads to a desolate pile of rubble and munitions stockpiles amongst them, there might need to be some overhauls made there.

[Rasteroid]

I have a potential solution which I am keeping on the back burner but I'm not convinced I need to bring it out yet. If you are doing enough regular mining, your coal should be safe until you come collect it.

Maybe I should just give you another account and see how multiing impacts play.

[inanimatej]

Maybe. There are some thoughts here. Let's see if I can temper this a little bit right now, the rain is hampering my styles.

[inanimatej]

So, some further feedback. The munitions clause for tiebreaking seems a little overpowered at the moment. This is due to the fact that if you miss entirely, but use URO, you're able to win the battle and vassalize someone. This, combined with me having the URO miner vassalized currently, could lead to me being able to cow the entire game's population with relative ease again, especially given the fact my land is the equivalent of a smoking crater and hardly gets hit.

My suggestion: require a hit registered by combat (not necessarily a building lost) to trigger the munitions clause. URO shells flying overhead not nearly as intimidating as URO shell landing in open field.

[Rasteroid]

I hear what you are saying, but again: I don't think losing combat is that crippling. It seems bad for coal miners right now, but I think that's for two reasons:

1. A relatively low coal miner percentage (PhoenixRaven may fix that).
2. People not yet noticing that having less cannons is probably better overall (firepower wise).

I think if you have the URO and use it, you deserve to win. I'll collect a little more experience data before I tweak it again.

[inanimatej]

I guess this might be a different argument if we had control over defensive firepower. Right now, it will auto fire EUR/URO on the defensive, making it impossible to beat someone carrying EUR and an Academy, which feels wrong, unless you also have EUR and an Academy. Given that firepower SHOULD be a decision of the players (and has been voiced as such previously), I think that change needs to happen to get some different data on it.

Also, you're right in that losing combat isn't terribly crippling, but it's the fact that when you're out of coal, you're fucked up shit creek. Several people can then begin fighting over you without any repercussions, and if shells actually start landing, you can end up a smoking heap of scrap.

[Rasteroid]

You will only lose the EUR battle if no buildings are hit. Ultimately, players are intended to gravitate towards a fairly high building percentage.. which I see several players doing (not you obviously). The most fun/meaningful battles should be those between players with fully stocked cities.

You will never end up a smoking pile of scrap because the more buildings you lose, the harder it is to hit your remaining buildings, and the greater the investment that has to be made (in OPs at least).

I think anyone who leaves the game in a state with 2-3 cannons, and 9-15 coal, is not a very appealing target. They should be able to tide over until they get back to play again.

[inanimatej]

I can see your point, though I suppose it depends. Right now we don't have the second person fighting over vassals to the same extent that I am personifying currently. Furthermore, from my standpoint right now, that person is a target because they contribute to my score and PM directly, which is my MO for this session of testing. If you have two people like me warring over the same person, over a long enough timeframe, it's possible (but as you say increasingly unlikely) that they can end up a smoking hole in the ground.

[Rasteroid]

I'm still not convinced that your approach is actually getting you any "further" in the "game" than your so-called "victims".

It's one thing to have warlike neighbors, but presumably they are also warring on each other. If, say, half the map is working in total unison to fuck over like one player, it may well be possible to spoil their day. I'm not sure yet. Personally I would find that highly amusing, and just another road to having fun.

I fully expect, nay, hope that people will play the game like you are. You're just another random negative event for your neighbors, open to mitigation by various avenues. Once I've gotten a few techs that I like under my belt, I'll join you and we'll see if we can stop people from enjoying the game.

Maybe I shouldn't have pal'd you, it's all peaches and cream over in.. Axarquia? [sic]

[inanimatej]

Further kind of depends on how you approach it. You know that in previous incarnations, I tended to throw building to the wind because of how easily you could lose everything, and how it was really fucking cool to sit as Master of BM with all kinds of ridiculous score. The difference is, in old BM, it required a Red, and a LOT of rapid-fire clicking to get the land exchanges and full scraps going to get everyone vassalized and laid waste. Here, I can vassalize everyone and maintain it relatively easily, but I can't go on a land-wasting rampage. I like score, I like standings. I get bored of building mindlessly to a DDD and resetting the world, but it does give you cool titles, it just takes for fucking ever, and I have a real need of near-immediate gratification.

[Rasteroid]

well I'm sure a large chunk of the player base will too, so I am grateful for your presence.

Those cannons aren't just for show. Top players will be getting knocked around more (in theory) when the rest of the world exists (see global warfare), so enjoy your cheap laurels for now.

[inanimatej]

Once the ICBMs come out to play, things change dramatically, I agree. I could still probably get by with only teching to the Factory and churning them out to become the North Korea of Battle Mines. Which I tried to do, until SOMEONE decided to hit my Academy.