Walking_Death
Harvester
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 212
A solo is solo, not a 3 man alliance.
even alliances can't tell when it's a friendly spy or hax most of the time
A solo is solo, not a 3 man alliance.
A solo is solo, not a 3 man alliance.
even alliances can't tell when it's a friendly spy or hax most of the time
I always thought the fun and challenging part was attacking and defending successfully. Not hacking and spying every tick.This suggestion deals with making the wrong components of the game easier. This is a war game after all and it is "intended" to challenge you. Where does the fun go if you make everything easy and within arms reach?
I think some short-cuts are nice such as harv calculators and irc bots, but altering tactical play upsets the balance and takes away from the experience.
I always thought the fun and challenging part was attacking and defending successfully. Not hacking and spying every tick.This suggestion deals with making the wrong components of the game easier. This is a war game after all and it is "intended" to challenge you. Where does the fun go if you make everything easy and within arms reach?
I think some short-cuts are nice such as harv calculators and irc bots, but altering tactical play upsets the balance and takes away from the experience.
I have to spy my NAP every tick.
Now what is tactical about that?
I enjoy nothing about the 'experience' of constantly flying over my partner.
In conclusion i do not support being able to see you NAPs troops. I also do not support being informed on incoming to your NAPs inc. However, i would not be against some sort of secondary notice of inc at say, Att 3, allowing you to send blockers. Its not much, but its something
There are advantages to being solo that HEAVILY outweigh the advantage of being in an alliance. AR for instance? Alliances don't get garanteed defense when the incoming exceeds a certain point. In an alliance, you can have 20 people on 1 tick that had to come with a +2 modifyer to attack you.. Solo? 1 person is likely to trigger, and throw in a pnap, and your very difficult to land on at all. If your inconvenienced by "spying and hacking" every tick, get over it. You have the government to keep your arse alive, and if someone does manage to get into that perfect little gap between AR and your ability to defend, and your pnap forgets to spy, and you get zeroed and lose some land. You have several days of high AR to get back up there.
In short, Alliances do have a lot of advantages, 19 other people to look after you, see your incoming, politics to chat in, ect..
But a group of active solos can dominate, just like an active alliance. (I believe last round showed this quite well, even if they did trigger on each other to do it)
Thats the point i was trying to make. Gov is not supposed to save your ass every time.You are supposed to be zeroed a couple of times a round. Government defence is not meant to protect you 24/7 for the whole round. There are times when you're pretty much going to have to die, either deliberately to increase your AR, or by accident when you're offline.
To have solos notified when their partner gets Incoming is abhorrent to me; especially "just for last tick" How annoying would it be to have plotted the death of a solo for however long it's taken, and then only to have yourself blocked by some assbandit with 50m SDs and 10m Stuns simply because they automatically got notified about their incoming. As Hobbezak has said; Communication is the key. Solos just have to be more up on their game, if they want to be as competitive as alliances. That's the simple truth.
You are supposed to be zeroed a couple of times a round. Government defence is not meant to protect you 24/7 for the whole round. There are times when you're pretty much going to have to die, either deliberately to increase your AR, or by accident when you're offline.
To have solos notified when their partner gets Incoming is abhorrent to me; especially "just for last tick" How annoying would it be to have plotted the death of a solo for however long it's taken, and then only to have yourself blocked by some assbandit with 50m SDs and 10m Stuns simply because they automatically got notified about their incoming. As Hobbezak has said; Communication is the key. Solos just have to be more up on their game, if they want to be as competitive as alliances. That's the simple truth.
Walking_Death said:Small solos, even the ones with partners, could use any help that they could get in a game where they can barely hit anyone
You are supposed to be zeroed a couple of times a round. Government defence is not meant to protect you 24/7 for the whole round. There are times when you're pretty much going to have to die, either deliberately to increase your AR, or by accident when you're offline.
To have solos notified when their partner gets Incoming is abhorrent to me; especially "just for last tick" How annoying would it be to have plotted the death of a solo for however long it's taken, and then only to have yourself blocked by some assbandit with 50m SDs and 10m Stuns simply because they automatically got notified about their incoming. As Hobbezak has said; Communication is the key. Solos just have to be more up on their game, if they want to be as competitive as alliances. That's the simple truth.
first off, very clever. Assbandit. By the way, blockers don't prevent death. They prevent land loss.
And heres an update of ideas. I know all of you have already expressed extreme disapproval to most of these, but if one doesn't make it... accuracy by volume, as they call it . This is mostly just to recap. And to know exactly what we're talking/flinging
feces about.
- An "Incoming" board for solos. How far it can see is questionable. Perhaps, they could put funds in to bring it from Att. for 3 to ETA 2.
- "Friendly" hax/spy (for alliances as well!) are automatically identified (i.e. it'll be just like regular in your feed as if you detected them)
- An ability to see stealth units if you hax your friend (for alliances as well) [this is downgraded from the automatically see your allies stuff idea].
In defense of these, you shouldn't ever HAVE to be 0ed in my opinion. And correct me if I am mistaken, but didn't they bring in preventive measures about AR mod abuse?
Last round was a fluke because no alliances were really stable throughout. Finale, ReQUITal, and those are just the 2 I was in that managed to flop. There was all sorts of shuffling, Brucifying of alliances, etc. No one was there to continuously rape the solos, except each other in a controlled manner, until finally the solos rose up, mostly because of manipulation of the system, and the disorientation of the alliances to form AR Mod. Thats the real reason that solos are so "strong" in your eyes. Just because solos have the government to stop people from continuously using their ass as a ... well, ass that you rape continuously, doesn't mean that they're all THAT strong. Small solos, even the ones with partners, could use any help that they could get in a game where they can barely hit anyone. Everyone is either in an alliance or has been recently raped by an alliance, making finding a target incredibly hard. Just my PoV.
Hugo, give up, seriously. I don't understand what the **** you're trying to convey.
Solo != 3 man alliances.
Solo == solo. End of story. pnaps are just a bonus.
If you want the advantages that alliance players get, join an alliance.
No. This combined with tactically high AR would make it pretty much impossible to land on solo pnaps who had a spread of timezone activity. You'd just have someone sitting there with an auto-refresh plugin and sending defence whenever an attack appeared.- An "Incoming" board for solos. How far it can see is questionable. Perhaps, they could put funds in to bring it from Att. for 3 to ETA 2.
Being hacked or spied doesn't automatically mean you're going to get attacked. It's just an indication. Knowing whether it's friendly or not would tell you very little.- "Friendly" hax/spy (for alliances as well!) are automatically identified (i.e. it'll be just like regular in your feed as if you detected them)
...this is a ridiculous suggestion. Do you want to remove *any* of the skill it takes to play the game, as well as any need to communicate? Allies currently have to keep updated troop counts in politics/titles to reflect stealth - a well-organised solo team could have a forum, Google Wave, IRC topic, Skype/MSN group chat or anything else they liked to allow them to keep accurate troop counts. Making this process entirely automated just removes yet another element of skill from the game.- An ability to see stealth units if you hax your friend (for alliances as well) [this is downgraded from the automatically see your allies stuff idea].
You can get zeroed in an alliance, either if you're offline and get no defence or you forget to send out when online - I don't see why it should be any different for solos other than the fact that if someone sends stupid amounts of troops at you, the government will try and stop them. If someone jumps through all the necessary hoops to calculate your AR mod properly, to realise when you're offline and to capitalise on this, they deserve to zero you and get some land for their trouble. This is a war game.In defense of these, you shouldn't ever HAVE to be 0ed in my opinion. And correct me if I am mistaken, but didn't they bring in preventive measures about AR mod abuse?
Can we at least have something that says when our Pnaps are online or does that take all the work out of everything as well?