Game-play how to questions

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

    • Game-play how to questions

      Hi all,

      OK, I'm new here to the Conflict of Nations game community and game-concept

      however, I'm a self-declared hardcore gamer, as such I don't think I'm new to this kind of a game geopolitical warlike conquering game, I have some extensive experience this type of games in the gender, like, but not limited to one of the best of all times Supreme Ruler 2020 and its variations

      so, with some background in this area, I need some guidance here, as such I have some questions:

      1. Healing units
      - do the units heal themselves, automatically, in time, by just sitting peacefully, not engaging in fights?? if yes, at what rate per hr. or per day
      - I am aware they will eventually heal in a field or city hospital, I'm asking if they heal without a hospital, over time just by sitting in a city or province, the concept being will take the supplies needed to heal from the city or province is stationed in

      2. War - annex - peace

      a. at war, after conquering a city

      - if I annex the city, then later make peace with the country I'm at war, I assume the city remains to my country, since I just annexed

      - what happens if I don't annex the city/cities and then I make peace? will the cities go back to the original owner??

      - how about the occupied provinces? what happens if I make peace will those go back also to the original owner??

      b. conquering 100% a country, then making peace

      - what if I conquer 100% a country, its all cities and provinces, then I agree with the leader of the defeated country to make peace, with the intention to give the country back to its initial leader - aka liberate a country by force, but then give it back to its people, aka creating a protectorate...

      - if I make peace with the now conquered and defeated country leader, and withdraw my own troops from that country, can I give it back, hand it back to its rightful owner??

      c. Victory Points
      - assuming this is possible, to give back a conquered country to its rightful owner, by mutual agreement, will I keep my victory points for the efforts to defeat and ultimately conquer that country?

      this is it for now, in a nutshell, I'm a bit confused in this area and I don't know how it works

      **********

      for those of you reading this and maybe not fully understanding why would someone want to do that, and maybe for the game developers looking to improve the game, the reasons why would someone would do that are many, and I'll just name a few

      - to create a protectorate - why do that?? to make and keep a friend, than to make a new lifetime enemy

      - to save, literally save and liberate a country from aggressive invasion, of a third-party and in the end, give the country back to its rightful owners
      yes, some could say, "but wait, that's what coalitions are for"

      OK, sure, but coalitions have a major flaw - in my opinion - a limited number of ONLY three (3) players/countries, as such it's useless when a coalition is full and still wants to help another country against an invader

      then, there are other reasons too, the victim country that's under aggressive invasion, may have a leader-player weak at heart, giving up fast under pressure, or unable to react fast, or unable to communicate in English (or whatever the language they use in one game) for diplomacy agreements, or the leader may have computer problems, or abruptly no internet connection, so it becomes suddenly inactive, abandons the game due to circumstances, etc. etc. etc. - but his friends would still like to save his country, for later on when he may come back

      I could go on and on, but either way, those are valid reasons why I would conquer a country, by force if need be, only to keep it away from aggressive invaders, so I can ultimately liberate the county and give it back to its rightful owner, when that player is once again available

      this is after all politics, diplomacy and some effects of a war and warfare business... sometimes is plain and simple, sometimes is deep, intricate, subtle, even dirty business, this war business of ours around here... in real life too, just many don't realize it...
    • Sandblast wrote:

      1. Healing units
      - do the units heal themselves, automatically, in time, by just sitting peacefully, not engaging in fights?? if yes, at what rate per hr. or per day
      - I am aware they will eventually heal in a field or city hospital, I'm asking if they heal without a hospital, over time just by sitting in a city or province, the concept being will take the supplies needed to heal from the city or province is stationed in
      wiki.conflictnations.com/Combat#Unit_Healing

      Sandblast wrote:

      2. War - annex - peace

      a. at war, after conquering a city

      - if I annex the city, then later make peace with the country I'm at war, I assume the city remains to my country, since I just annexed

      - what happens if I don't annex the city/cities and then I make peace? will the cities go back to the original owner??

      - how about the occupied provinces? what happens if I make peace will those go back also to the original owner??

      b. conquering 100% a country, then making peace

      - what if I conquer 100% a country, its all cities and provinces, then I agree with the leader of the defeated country to make peace, with the intention to give the country back to its initial leader - aka liberate a country by force, but then give it back to its people, aka creating a protectorate...

      - if I make peace with the now conquered and defeated country leader, and withdraw my own troops from that country, can I give it back, hand it back to its rightful owner??
      if you conquer something then it's yours; if he conquers it back then it's his
      there is no giving back of country other than him conquering


      Sandblast wrote:

      c. Victory Points
      - assuming this is possible, to give back a conquered country to its rightful owner, by mutual agreement, will I keep my victory points for the efforts to defeat and ultimately conquer that country?
      no; having cities/provinces gives victory points; loosing them looses the attributed VP


      Sandblast wrote:

      OK, sure, but coalitions have a major flaw - in my opinion - a limited number of ONLY three (3) players/countries, as such it's useless when a coalition is full and still wants to help another country against an invader
      coalition sizes vary from maptype to maptype; either 3 or 5
      Flashpoint Europe is already pretty small, so overall less space for ppl

      Sandblast wrote:

      - to create a protectorate - why do that?? to make and keep a friend, than to make a new lifetime enemy

      - to save, literally save and liberate a country from aggressive invasion, of a third-party and in the end, give the country back to its rightful owners
      focus is more on warfare than diplomacy :D
      and since ppl rarely communicate i wouldn't expect too much in regards of diplomacy

      if you wanna roleplay/have a ton of diplomacy there are roleplay rounds... somewhere ... i think ^^
      Help what do i put here
    • thanks Teburu for your fast response

      OK, so checking the wiki-link you sent me, unless I am wrong, and please correct me if I am wrong, the units will NOT heal without a hospital in the city or province those units are parked?

      I don't see anywhere in the wiki specified the units will heal with no hospital around...

      what I see it's even more confusing to me, at least, like:

      The base healing for cities is +1HP per day per unit and increased according to the level of the Military Hospital in that city:
      • A level 1 Military Hospital heals at a rate of +1HP per day

      so, does that mean 0 HP for no hospital, and 1 HP per day, with a Lvl.1 hospital?

      or it means 1 HP default, with no hospital and 1+1=2 HP with a Lvl. 1 hospital

      I even see
      The base healing for provinces is +0HP per day and increased according to the level of the Field Hospital in that province:
      • A level 1 Field Hospital heals at a rate of +1HP per day

      which clearly implies, 0 healing with no hospital

      so, the simple question is a yes or no question, do we get any healing for units with no hospital??
    • as a side note, I personally don't care nor look for RP - role-play - diplomacy for post-by-post RP

      I'm more interested about in-game diplomacy, creating alliances, to help and support each other, protect each other at military level, trade with each other at preferential prices, and ultimately to join forces against a common rival or enemy, a common target... that's the diplomacy I was talking about...

      if there is not much in-game diplomacy and players don't really communicate with each other - as I've clearly noticed - then in my humble opinion, it's sad, and there are clear reasons for that, like, but not limited to:

      those are concept features

      - not many tools in place to enhance or even encourage diplomacy efforts - a coalition with just 3-5 countries, is almost useless

      - a round based game, where, we the players, we lose all the assets we build up - or pay for with real money - at the end of the game, so why bother make friends, to maintain friendships, and alliances with that, or keep long lasting feuds active, if the game will end and we all lose everything

      and I could go on and on, but I'm sure you guys got the idea...

      I'd strongly suggest to the game developers to make a version that's sandbox, endless, with no resets and no "Game Over" - in my humble opinion, this game is great, has great potential, with a major and very significant flaw, it's round-based, will periodically end and we all lose our assets

      make a sandbox, endless game and this is how you'll retain players, this is how you'll attract new players, this is how those with disposable income will continue to pay over and over again for premium memberships and in-game assets, this is how players will bring their friends in and will stay, not abandon the game... and more, I could keep going, but I'l stop...

      me, I'm new around here, just passing by and testing the game concept, but me, personally, I already know I won't stick around for too long, consequently I won't spend too much money on this game, simply because it's a round-based game and I'll lose everything at the end...

      in my case at least, I choose to play and also pay monthly-yearly fees on games that are open-world, sandbox, with no end, where I clearly know I won't lose my work and my assess for years and years to come... example, I'm in Eve-online since 2006 and I still have my assets to this day, I don't mind to spend real money there, knowing I won't lose my assets due to a "Game-Over" concept...

      at and for the game developers more...

      please make a open-end sandbox style game, and I for one I'll stay and pay premium membership fees and I'll bring my friends too...

      keep it round-based, and I for one, I won't stick around much...

      don't take it as a complaint or critique, not at all, far from it, please take it as constructive feedback to improve... at least, I'm taking the time to write down my suggestions and even express my concerns... others, just leave the game, without giving you a reason...

      make some servers sandbox style, endless, open-world, and people will stay... more people, players and paying users, will come and stay... not many will leave in those conditions...

      yes, I know, this needs more resources, financial and human to handle all that, more expensive servers, colo and/or cloud hosting, bandwidth, databases, techs to maintain, coders to maintain and all that... and more, much more... (overhead, marketing, QA, HR & payroll, etc.etc.etc.)

      we know that, but this is how the business goes, it's the nature of the beast...
    • Teburu wrote:

      if you conquer something then it's yours; if he conquers it back then it's his
      there is no giving back of country other than him conquering
      with the exception of conquering enemy cities/prov that were once your coalition partners. example if teburu and i are teammates... if he loses half the country and cities. then i come to rescue ;) the cities dont go to me they revert back to your coalition partner .
    • Teburu wrote:

      focus is more on warfare than diplomacy
      and since ppl rarely communicate i wouldn't expect too much in regards of diplomacy

      if you wanna roleplay/have a ton of diplomacy there are roleplay rounds... somewhere ... i think
      but dont ignore diplomacy.... sometimes striking up a friendly conversation early on with some random country pays off in long run. can use them as pawns. Many players like to feel wanted. so even a quick "hey that was an impressive victory over Y; We are way far away now but maybe down the road we could help each other". Even if you need a ROW base to sneak attack an enemy that happens to be a neighbor of his down the road ??
    • Teburu wrote:

      cities have a healing value of 1 per day; provinces 0 per day
      hospitals add +1 per level to that

      also keep in mind that coastal waters can also heal troops tho thats a bit more risky :D
      OK,

      so, that's a YES - will heal with no hospital for cities, at a rate of 1 HP per day

      and a NO - will not heal with no hospital, for provinces - even tho' it should, since provinces also have population, smaller towns and villages, as such some basic resources available for healing, hence game-concept in this area needs some attention

      not to mention, a healing rate of only 1 HP per day, is way - if not outrageously - slow, considering it's a round-based game that will eventually end...

      yes, I know the reasons why, that's why is gold for, but still...


      how about city buildings, damaged - yet not fully destroyed - will those heal over time??
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      Teburu wrote:

      if you conquer something then it's yours; if he conquers it back then it's his
      there is no giving back of country other than him conquering
      with the exception of conquering enemy cities/prov that were once your coalition partners. example if teburu and i are teammates... if he loses half the country and cities. then i come to rescue ;) the cities dont go to me they revert back to your coalition partner .
      yes mate, that's why I said that it's part of a good reason to be in a coalition... however, with only 3-5 members maximum per coalition, the concept of coalition-alliance per se, it's almost useless... it's great we have it, just this members limit is so small, that's almost irrelevant...

      and I fully understand the reasons why, from a game-owner-admin vantage point, divide and conquer, keep us small so we can jump at each other's troath, so we can lose our assets, so we can buy more assets, produce more, lose more again, and complete the cycle of not growing too strong, as a coalition-alliance and/or as an individual part of a coalition-alliance...

      for the record, I'm using the term "alliance" for the in-game coalition, or multiple coalitions working together to a common goal with a uniform strategy, like all attacking the same target in a coordinated manner...

      the general term of "alliance" used in this game here, is a misnomer after all, in my humble opinion... an alliance, is and does what here in-game a coalition is and does... that's why, for accuracy purpose I've used "coalition-alliance" combined as a conceptual term...
    • no its not ... 5 is almost too much. not sure how you can judge if havnt played game? and even 3 on flashpoint is more than enough. its a 30 country game.

      yes you can and i have worked with other coalitions .. but sooner or later only one coalition wins. its like game survivor we might work tpgether to get to final stages but we both know sooner por later we arent both winning... but sometimes coalitions reshift.

      Especially if im in Coalition 5 man A and I have 60 pct of our VPS ; 2nd like 30 pct and other 3 doing jack shit... ill dump the bottom 3 and merge with Coalition b top 2 or 3 as when we where working togeterg the combined 5 were doing all the work.

      I barely want to carry 2 - 4 other people defintly wouldnt want more than that.

      Have seen when people want to be safe and friendly with everyone.. but then no one to attack.. its a war game not a peace game.
    • Buckeyechamp wrote:

      no its not ... 5 is almost too much. not sure how you can judge if havnt played game? and even 3 on flashpoint is more than enough. its a 30 country game.

      yes you can and i have worked with other coalitions .. but sooner or later only one coalition wins. its like game survivor we might work tpgether to get to final stages but we both know sooner por later we arent both winning... but sometimes coalitions reshift.

      Especially if im in Coalition 5 man A and I have 60 pct of our VPS ; 2nd like 30 pct and other 3 doing jack shit... ill dump the bottom 3 and merge with Coalition b top 2 or 3 as when we where working togeterg the combined 5 were doing all the work.

      I barely want to carry 2 - 4 other people defintly wouldnt want more than that.

      Have seen when people want to be safe and friendly with everyone.. but then no one to attack.. its a war game not a peace game.
      yes, I tend to agree with everything you said...

      including the fact I may not be able to fully assess the efficiency of having more, or less members in a coalition...

      I also agree, it's a warlike game, not a peace game, me personally I have nothing against PvP and I'm all for it, if and when it matters...

      however, I think in my case I can't fully grasp the implications of the round-based game, like this here, with a clear "Game Over" since me personally, as a gamer, I avoid such games and I go with endless-sandbox type of games, I mean the ones where I keep my work, my assets ongoing, not lose it all due to a Game Over, or a game reset, or a round that ends... sure, I may lose some, or even all of my assets, but on my own volition, either in an encounter with a better stronger adversary, or if I intentionally and willingly delete or destroy them, but that's my own decision entirely, I won't lose everything, just because it's Game Over... no offense to anyone, but Game Over style of games are a bit outdated in my opinion and takes a special breed of a player to keep playing round based games and willingly agree to keep losing his/her assets over and over again... I personally can't quite understand that approach or that gaming style... for rankings?? just rankings?? it's not good enough reason for me to spend time - and maybe real money too - just for rankings...

      that being said I can see your point in chasing VPs to "win" the game and up to a point, I will agree, me either, I won't keep in the coalition one that is not willing to attack when there is a need to make a move...

      but, there is more to it... from my end I mean
      I'm enjoying now a flash-point game, but I don't think I'm a good fit for round-based type of games, so I don't thikn I;ll stick artound after my current active game will end, simply because for me, as a gamer, it's not rewarding enough just to be in the ranks, or to stay there, or to be on top, for a while, and to pay the price of losing all my assets eventually, all my "hard work" so to speak during the game session, just for rankings and bragging rights and some reputation here and there... nah, it's not for me...

      but you're right, even to the point that I can see teammates, from within the same coalition-alliance ending fighting with each other, at each other's throats, just to chase victory points... to me, it's a no brainier, I prefer to chase assets, virtual and non-tangible as those assets may be, but still assets nonetheless.... not victory points... and when the game ends, then what? start all over again, build up assets again, for the rankings, only to lose those assets again at the end of the game... nah... that's Sisyphus myth of constant useless work with little to no rewards...

      the more I think about it, talking to you guys here, the more I realize I'm not a good fit for this type of a game-concept... which I already new from years of experience as a gamer, in this case, I just said to give it a try, as the game has great potential, from what I see at a first glance... if it would be sandbox, endless type...

      either way, thanks mate for your comments...
    • yeah its not a clan long term game like Final Fantasy or something. Flashpoint games although good map filled with new players and not a good representation of overall game. Noob players swarm to fast have no long term game plan ... then quit.

      Flashpoint games last 12 - 20 days typically and long term strategy not really rewarded.. its more a run fast and hard map.

      Maybe try a World map and those games can go 60 - 80 games and more long term strategy and diplomacy (not as much as never ending games obviosly) but bigger coalition then you have a subset of friendlies or NAP Coalitions to conquer the world. Its more of a phsed game (early get out of continent) mid.. position in outside regions.. end... conquer the world.

      See but im the opposite .. i didnt like grouping with dozens; 100's over months as too many farmers vs warriors who wanted 10 pct of us to protect the flock. so definitly different.
    • yep, interesting analysis of the game dynamics and how it evolves during this limited time round base system...

      thanks for sharing your opinions, it helps me better understand...

      I may try the full world map, just as an experiment, but really, I feel bad for this game, as an enterprise, I won't stay long, I already know it, because I simply resent the fact I will lose all my "work" that I've put into it, at the end of the game...

      even if I will the game, why lose all my assets... now, for example, I'm on top of my game session, and still I have no personal satisfaction knowing if tomorrow the game will end, I will lose all that I've put into to get on top...

      even if I won't win the game from a VP standpoint, even if someone else will win it, why have a Game Over and lose once again, everything that I've worked for to build up my lil' country, to develop the cities, to research the units, to build the units... why the heck lose all that..??.. is making no sense to me, I resent it...

      I'm a long time gamer, hardcore gamer, I'm in Eve-online since 2006, we've been trough major significant wars together, with complex strategies, with advanced, multi-stage tactics used, with multiple teams working together, or trying to work all as one, in unison... we have long time friends, and also long time rivals, as much as an online environment would allow us to do... there is a real connection between players, as much as real it can be in a metaverse world... we take weeks to plot against a strong and powerful adversary, we take even more weeks, to execute the plan, we may win, we may lose, but in the end, we all say "Good Fight" as a sign of respect and recognition for our adversaries skills and for the enjoyment of the war, even if it was with casualties and loss of assets... but we never lose it all, just because it's Game Over and start all over again, fresh from the ground up, again... and again and again...

      I'm just expressing my views and opinions, here, I think I'll just do like my ancestries - Romans - Italians - did ... Veni... Vidi... Vici...

      but, I won't stick around...

      in my humble opinion, if they'd make some sandbox-endless servers, games, with no end, so we, the players-users and often paying customers, we won't lose our assets, then this game will grow exponentially, and in users, players-base, and in revenue for their owners-developers, and in entertainment value for everyone...

      and they'll even do that, I hope they'll send me an email to invite me back... hehe...

      this game here, reminds me of Supreme Ruler 2020, launched under Paradox label, back in 2010 (or so) that was a great success and made millions for the owners-developers...
      this here, looks and feels just like the adapted browser flash-like version of that game, except is round-based and much more simplified... me, to this day, I find myself playing that game once in a while... that's why I'm here, 'cause I was somehow thinking someone did an online version of that game...

      well, I hope the dev's here will seriously consider making a version for sandbox-endless style...

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Sandblast ().