New System

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Hmm,

      I wonder if a queue could be established for certain higher ranks and people who want countries.

      Or, even further
      1. They pick three in an order of preference.
      2. Everyone's preferences get randomly placed by the game.
      Secondly,

      Can we please have unranked maps where people can practice. Reduce the gold award.
      • But, limit the top ranks to lower ranks.
      • 4x smaller maps, quicker games. Get them hooked.

    • Job_ee wrote:

      And letting new players get big countries doesn't hurt the experience of other players? Again, let's be realistic. South/North Korea and countries like Austria, who are in the middle of Europe is a suicide mission and it is a Miracle to make it past day 20 if you're a country like Mali or Angola who are a) surrounded by half a dozen nations within a quick striking range and their coasts leave them very vulnerable.

      You are simply wrong. There's is nothing bad about Austria, it have advantages. Land-locked so you cannot hit it with navy, so it doesn't need to spend resources to research and build ports and navy to by safe from water. Playing Austria in a coalition makes no problem for it, other countries have same amount of cities. It's super easy to defend it from air or missles as it has so small territory, comparing to Brazil, China, US or Russia. It has advantages.

      About Korea's I also agree they need buff and get 5 cities each, or maybe even South Korea 6 as it's quite developed and rich country. But it's another topic.

      I know some players who do like to take both Koreas as a challenge to win world maps and they actually do it, without golding. So it's an option for really brave guys.

      Job_ee wrote:

      Constantly reloading the server for 2 straight hours just to get a good nation just because 3-7 games that are 61-63/64 players because no one wants the countries listed above sucks the joy out of the game. Please be realistic. I don't want to spam reload to get the country of my choice for 2+ hours and neither do you.

      You problem is that You are not open for other option. You are maybe afraid or unable to play with other countries. Probably cause of lack of skill in game. Otherwise You would find a game with friends easily, joining any not apo, which appears and is not 3/4 full, to make you guy choose countries near each other.

      You want perfect conditions, but life is not like this.
      Perfect general wins in any conditions he meet, not to find perfect ones cause you want it. Maybe other players want same countries cause they are powerful and easy to play.

      Maybe others watch same youtubers and they follow same advices to take some countries?

      Go and get some games with random take of country and learn to play this game more by this, instead of ghost-joining many games.

      It's good there is limit so you cannot ghost-join more games.

      The game is not bad in this case. Your will just to join perfect conditions is bad in this case.

    • Job_ee wrote:

      What really hurts the experience of the game for other players is when a level 5 player gets the US, level 2 player gets Russia, and a level 9 player gets China, etc, etc then goes inactive after day 10, so now there's a huge power-surge that will require extra planning for players that were expecting a fight from said countries, leaving experienced players to get moderate counties (a tier C or B class country) at best. If we can't spam end games to get good nations, then there should be a minimum rank required to get a S tier country.


      No, You are wrong.

      That does not hurt the game.

      This is the game.

      Every map is different, different scenarios happens and a good player need to change strategy many times during game to win and adapt to changing conditions.

      This is the game that some countries collapse, get inactive. Incactive Russia is common actually as it's really hard country to play with even for experienced player if he play solo.

      You dont like that your "expecting" plan didnt go as You wanted?

      This is all this game is about.

      Re-arranging, planning, changing strategies, so it's not boring like always going from A to B with same strategy.

      You dont understand this game.

      Of course that experience players could and should get moderate countries, cause if they get best ones, there is not much to play about, as they dominate the map soon and it's simply boring.

      How newcomers would be able to fight getting worse choices?

      Instead of trying to get best country, change your attitude to get best skills in playing game to with maps with any moderate country, even if you dont have a team joining with you to hold your back.

    • Job_ee wrote:

      Lastly, how about Israel, "When I think of a dominating country, look no farther than it. It has no political or religious enemies in the area and none of that goes into effect in the game. Egypt and Syria are my BFF's forever! I'll totally make it past day 5! (again, said no one ever)." There's a reason why no one wants these counties and there's a reason why people pick them so new games will be made. Please be realistic. People don't skip games because it's fun. They do it to get to games that are fun.


      I played I guess 2 or 3 maps where Israel is playable, possible to take by player and actually in one of them Israel was among winners with his coalition, so you are simply wrong.

      You can take easily smaller countries and playing the game well diplomatically, having allies near to hold your back.

      Religion and real life have nothing to do with it, as there is no mechanic in game, making neighbour bots fight it more than anywhere else on the map and real players make choices for their own. Each country have own characteristics, ups and downs.

      I like to take hard countries and play game nicely with them. I did so with Bolivia, Afghanistan or Papua.

      It's not that noone wants to play with them. I like to take such and dont be seen as the threat for others and then surprise them badly. I like challenges.

      Your attitude is lame, You want to win with better conditions than others have. It's lame.

    • Kalrakh wrote:

      On a map with everybody active, Austria would need to find allies very quickly, it has many neighbours to get run over bye.

      In Europe is one of the worst, even more because it is quite small compared to its neighbours: Germany, Italy and Poland
      I find smaller nations to be more advantageous ... it's much easier to consolidate units ... in the early game especially...
      I think Austria isn't as vulnerable as it first appears... there is so much mountainous terrain that any invasion is significantly slowed... allowing time to group stacks.
      With artillery you get more benefit from the terrain as a stat bonus and can hit the enemy more often as they are moving so slowly.
      With helicopters, too, it's not so hard to crush an invasion that is so slow.

      Any of Austria's neighbors have neighbors of their own and would have to commit a large force to have much success in Austria... which of course leaves them vulnerable and with a slow return home.
      If your neighbors ally against you... well that's another story... If Germany and Italy ally you better hope to join them... If Germany, France, and Poland ally you better hope they want to take Spain and Sweden. ...more than one front could be too much....but usually its not seen so much as a prize worth taking as it is really slow and the neighbors have lower fruit to pick and bigger threats to guard against... Honestly, its easier to take Germany as Austria than it is to take Austria as Germany...If you can join with Germany or take a few of her home cities early...she is the most important either as enemy or an ally.

      I think the key with Austria is to expand quickly. It really shines in the early game. If you can succeed early, the Balkans are the most city dense region on the map and you don't have to go far for them...

    • Job_ee wrote:

      And letting new players get big countries doesn't hurt the experience of other players? Again, let's be realistic. South/North Korea and countries like Austria, who are in the middle of Europe is a suicide mission and it is a Miracle to make it past day 20 if you're a country like Mali or Angola who are a) surrounded by half a dozen nations within a quick striking range and their coasts leave them very vulnerable. Constantly reloading the server for 2 straight hours just to get a good nation just because 3-7 games that are 61-63/64 players because no one wants the countries listed above sucks the joy out of the game. Please be realistic. I don't want to spam reload to get the country of my choice for 2+ hours and neither do you.

      If anything, I'm making it funner for some nations that have one less obstacle to go over. So they can fight nations that are more well defensible and letting players the chance to have more resources.

      What really hurts the experience of the game for other players is when a level 5 player gets the US, level 2 player gets Russia, and a level 9 player gets China, etc, etc then goes inactive after day 10, so now there's a huge power-surge that will require extra planning for players that were expecting a fight from said countries, leaving experienced players to get moderate counties (a tier C or B class country) at best. If we can't spam end games to get good nations, then there should be a minimum rank required to get a S tier country. Again as I mentioned popular CON youtubers have also recommended end game spamming to get a decent nation.
      I'd rather have the US, Russia or China be inactive than 80% of players to go inactive on day 3 just to spawn more maps. 30 inactive countries are worse than 3. If you're surrounded by other countries, use diplomacy and ally with your neighbours so that you won't get taken out immediately. If there isn't a good nation in the map, simply don't join it, inactive countries suck more joy out of the game than waiting for a new empty map to respawn.

      Just because a bunch of youtubers suggest that you spam join games to spawn new ones doesn't mean that you should do it. It just creates more inactive nations and fewer people having fun playing. TBH, the fun part of the game is going to war, it's not fun to fight an AI nation but it's fun to have the satisfaction of winning against another human player who gave you a good fun fight.

      PS US China and Russia are all horrendously big and too difficult to defend. Lots of infrastructure is needed to get your troops from one side of the country to other, and it'll take 3 days for a unit to traverse it.

    • Smallsword wrote:

      Would having the USA, Russia, and China all be off the selection list fix this problem?
      Frankly, I don't much like playing them and I don't much like spending 5 days for 5VP in Russia.

      If those countries COULD'NT be picked... would the maps be more active?
      No? People would still bitch about not being able to pick the countries they want
      I am The Baseline for opinions

    • Maybe the USA/Russia/Brazil (others maybe, too) could be coalition picks... like 3 players that are all within the same country each with 4-5 different cities in distinct regions... each player gets the VPs they gain but the country coalition gets the whole territory... Russia and the US could easily be 5 members with 4-5 cities... Brazil and China maybe 3 players each... just a thought

    • Smallsword wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      Smallsword wrote:

      Whoa, I didn't even see you mentioned Austria...
      That's my favorite nation to play.
      I've played it twice and won both times.... once as a solo and the other with a coalition.

      It sounds like Australia might be a good pick for you... if you're looking for time to build an economy... you just have to build a defense navy ASAP and then you get the luxury of peace and time.
      My bet is you had a coalition of 5 high ranking players and your allies probably included Germany, France, Italy, Poland, or the Ukraine, and/or you had to gold to live. Am I off?
      (Hey, finally figured out this "quote" feature everyone uses!)

      No gold... well, I accidentally decreased the morale of a random inconsequential province (I was pissed about that) .

      I'm trying to remember my coalitions make up... but it wasn't a geographical thing.... I blitzed my neighbors early... I had all of Europe in both.... In one, I desperately needed an ally with a navy and the USA was the only available player with ships not already in a coalition. In the other one I annexed Italian cities to build a navy...
      I wish the archive feature really saved the games so I could review it.

      Austria is fun to play because it is right in the thick of things... the Balkans are the most city dense region of the game... it's also very mountainous which is great for artillery.... It's small but slow to invade without airmobile... and it's not like all of Europe decides to attack Austria, they're too busy fighting every other country that has easier terrain... if you invade Austria and you don't finish her quickly it's a quagmire.
      That's great for you and happy it worked out for you, but I don't have that type of time. Seeing that you have to be constantly active in order to win wars, and the fact that you're fighting a lot of them is going to take a lot of time out of my day. It makes it very hard for people with jobs to play and go to work and be successful at both.

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Opulon wrote:

      . . . continue to lobby and spread how general the dissatisfaction with the current situation is. . . .
      Does bitching and moaning in this forum count (get noticed), or is there another/better method to use?

      Seroslav wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      And letting new players get big countries doesn't hurt the experience of other players? Again, let's be realistic. South/North Korea and countries like Austria, who are in the middle of Europe is a suicide mission and it is a Miracle to make it past day 20 if you're a country like Mali or Angola who are a) surrounded by half a dozen nations within a quick striking range and their coasts leave them very vulnerable.
      You are simply wrong. There's is nothing bad about Austria, it have advantages. Land-locked so you cannot hit it with navy, so it doesn't need to spend resources to research and build ports and navy to by safe from water. Playing Austria in a coalition makes no problem for it, other countries have same amount of cities. It's super easy to defend it from air or missles as it has so small territory, comparing to Brazil, China, US or Russia. It has advantages.

      About Korea's I also agree they need buff and get 5 cities each, or maybe even South Korea 6 as it's quite developed and rich country. But it's another topic.

      I know some players who do like to take both Koreas as a challenge to win world maps and they actually do it, without golding. So it's an option for really brave guys.

      Job_ee wrote:

      Constantly reloading the server for 2 straight hours just to get a good nation just because 3-7 games that are 61-63/64 players because no one wants the countries listed above sucks the joy out of the game. Please be realistic. I don't want to spam reload to get the country of my choice for 2+ hours and neither do you.
      You problem is that You are not open for other option. You are maybe afraid or unable to play with other countries. Probably cause of lack of skill in game. Otherwise You would find a game with friends easily, joining any not apo, which appears and is not 3/4 full, to make you guy choose countries near each other.

      You want perfect conditions, but life is not like this.
      Perfect general wins in any conditions he meet, not to find perfect ones cause you want it. Maybe other players want same countries cause they are powerful and easy to play.

      Maybe others watch same youtubers and they follow same advices to take some countries?

      Go and get some games with random take of country and learn to play this game more by this, instead of ghost-joining many games.

      It's good there is limit so you cannot ghost-join more games.

      The game is not bad in this case. Your will just to join perfect conditions is bad in this case.
      That is also the problem. It's landlocked meaning it can't get outside of Europe, meaning per say a united NA and SA, who are heavily armed with navy and using ballistic missile subs could slowly, but gradually destroy him economically, draining his ability to fight. I've fought Bolivia and had similar results. Surround him with navy and nuke him into submission. If you want to win, you have to have some sort of navy, or allies with navy. And it's easier to get through THAADs and SAMs than you think. A level 4 ICMB has a splash range of 75. Just hit the province next to the THAAD and then nuke the city itself. That is how I defeated a late game (50+ days) Bolivia. Austria would be even worse, due to it's close proximity. One max ICBM and it's over, not to mention the mayhem stealth bombers can cause.

      Appreciate your insults (not really) to my intelligence. Maybe we could go at it sometime with you as Austria and me as something like the UK, capable of making a strong navy. It's already hard enough to fight golders, backstabbers, and incompetent players, I don't want resources to be another one. If you want to pick nations with only 4 (maybe 5) homeland cities, go for it. I prefer to live and have fun playing, instead of focusing half the game making a good economy to begin with. Not picking bad countries isn't a lack of strategy, but it is strategic for wanting to pick a country that you know will succeed (not just the US obs. but ones that you're comfortable with).

      I have seen and am a big fan of Melliodas and the B-2 and have been watching them for at least the past year, the B-2 probably longer. I'm not a noob. I've played this for at least 3 years.

      Why fix something that isn't broken?

    • Teburu wrote:

      Smallsword wrote:

      Would having the USA, Russia, and China all be off the selection list fix this problem?
      Frankly, I don't much like playing them and I don't much like spending 5 days for 5VP in Russia.

      If those countries COULD'NT be picked... would the maps be more active?
      No? People would still bitch about not being able to pick the countries they want
      Yes, if I'm going to invest 2 weeks to 3 months of my time in a single game, I should have the right to at least pick the continent that I want. Let's see you get North Korea, surrounded by active and experienced players and hope to win. There would be *at least* 3 players who would want you dead on day one.

    • ahuman wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      And letting new players get big countries doesn't hurt the experience of other players? Again, let's be realistic. South/North Korea and countries like Austria, who are in the middle of Europe is a suicide mission and it is a Miracle to make it past day 20 if you're a country like Mali or Angola who are a) surrounded by half a dozen nations within a quick striking range and their coasts leave them very vulnerable. Constantly reloading the server for 2 straight hours just to get a good nation just because 3-7 games that are 61-63/64 players because no one wants the countries listed above sucks the joy out of the game. Please be realistic. I don't want to spam reload to get the country of my choice for 2+ hours and neither do you.

      If anything, I'm making it funner for some nations that have one less obstacle to go over. So they can fight nations that are more well defensible and letting players the chance to have more resources.

      What really hurts the experience of the game for other players is when a level 5 player gets the US, level 2 player gets Russia, and a level 9 player gets China, etc, etc then goes inactive after day 10, so now there's a huge power-surge that will require extra planning for players that were expecting a fight from said countries, leaving experienced players to get moderate counties (a tier C or B class country) at best. If we can't spam end games to get good nations, then there should be a minimum rank required to get a S tier country. Again as I mentioned popular CON youtubers have also recommended end game spamming to get a decent nation.
      I'd rather have the US, Russia or China be inactive than 80% of players to go inactive on day 3 just to spawn more maps. 30 inactive countries are worse than 3. If you're surrounded by other countries, use diplomacy and ally with your neighbours so that you won't get taken out immediately. If there isn't a good nation in the map, simply don't join it, inactive countries suck more joy out of the game than waiting for a new empty map to respawn.
      Just because a bunch of youtubers suggest that you spam join games to spawn new ones doesn't mean that you should do it. It just creates more inactive nations and fewer people having fun playing. TBH, the fun part of the game is going to war, it's not fun to fight an AI nation but it's fun to have the satisfaction of winning against another human player who gave you a good fun fight.

      PS US China and Russia are all horrendously big and too difficult to defend. Lots of infrastructure is needed to get your troops from one side of the country to other, and it'll take 3 days for a unit to traverse it.
      The problem is we have both. You have a bunch of new players get the seats on world current world powers, so experienced players go looking for other games, and then those new players go inactive, leaving a game with inactive world powers and 80% of the game goes inactive. Let players with at least a rank of 20 (maybe even 30) get the world powers, so they stay active, and newer players get regular countries, and if they go active, at least the experienced players are still active and there's not nearly as much of a power gap.

    • Opulon wrote:

      Kalrakh wrote:

      So, when will we finally get play grounds for veteran players? @Opulon
      In the purest Star Citizen Style, a Road Map will be published mid 2022 to explain what couldn't be done in 2021.

      Joke apart, don't know. But i do encourage to continue to lobby and spread how general the dissatisfaction with the current situation is. Remain cordial, courteous, as always, but don't deny that it breaks the nuts of everyone that is actively playing the game, and that includes customers.
      @Opulon I adressed several thoughts on this in in the forum. Any other smart idea to get heard?
      @Dorado If you Close the Forum and move everything to Discord you will lose my Feedback for sure.