Gentleman,
I have never written here before, although I’ve been visiting this forum quite often, looking for clarifications and tips - and I’ve done it, as an anonymous user, well before registering this account.
A few days ago, however, while talking to my coalition companions, in the last match I played, about the news regarding the possibility of rebels appearing at different times of the day, I shared with them, quite unpretentiously, an insight I had; my ally Pavel_t_5 said he liked the idea and encouraged me to introduce it to the administrators - and this is what I'm doing now.
First, I will deal with this specific aspect of the game's dynamics - the rise of the rebels - based on the way it works today, since that update; then, I’ll explain how different it could be.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
At first glance, the modification implemented on January 21 could even look like a gold trap, something intended only to make impatient players spend their money to guarantee an immediate and artificial elevation of the morale of the newly occupied cities, thus allowing the continuation of more aggressive invasion campaigns.
In my opinion, however, this change has made the game a little closer to reality: for those who do not intend to spend gold, it makes sense that the nation that just conquered a city needs to keep there for some time - at least until the dissatisfaction of the local population is dissipated, to some extent - an occupying force.
We, the players, should rather thank God the same care does not need to be observed in the other provinces of the occupied territory, but only in the cities.
Therefore, within the current conditions, it would perhaps be interesting to just send a notification to the players, informing them of the moment when each revolt could have broken out - if none of the cities it runs were the scene of an insurgency, in which case such notification would, of course, be unnecessary...
Of course, anyone can find out about the occurrence of the uprisings, if they have not been personally affected by any of them, by consulting the CoN News... but perhaps it would cost little to send such an alert, letting each player know that, at least that one moment on, and until the next midnight, they can move even their occupation troops without the risk of an insurgency in the city.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Anyway, in my opinion, the establishment of a single time of the day - however random - for possible revolts in occupied cities, of another single time for possible revolts in annexed cities and of one more single time for possible revolts in homeland cities is not quite what we would see in the real world... we are in a better position than we were before (“midnight or nothing”), that's for sure; even so, it seems natural to me that, as long as morale is below 35, a revolt could break out (or not) at any time, in any city, no matter what happens or not in the other cities.
In other words: if player number 1 has occupied cities X, Y and Z, a revolt could happen in city X at 07:42, another in city Y at 18:20, and none in city Z. That would be way closer to reality than two revolts breaking out at exactly the same time, don't you agree?
It should also be noted that, in any case – if the game stays as it is right now, or if you add the possibility of revolts in occupied cities (which are, by far, the most likely ones) at different times, midnights remain important moments - that's when every city morale gets updated, after all.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
From now on, I will present the most “radical” suggestion - the one that would certainly impact the game in a more significant way.
I must say that I have absolutely no idea how hard it would be to implement it… so, if you tell me that would be simply impossible to adopt, I’ll take it. I can only hope it’s not…
Straight to the point: I think it would be way more interesting (and also realistic) if, instead of these random rebels, cities with good morale before the invasion could create some resistance from its own civilians to fight the new occupants ... and maybe have them turned into national guard after two or three days, if not destroyed before.
We have to agree: in the real world, there is very little in common between the inhabitants of Paris occupied by the Germans and those of Seoul invaded by the Japanese that could justify the eventual appearance, in these cities, of troops that were neither French nor Korean, but belonging to a “single rebel nation”, as is currently the case in the game.
The natural thing, in my humble opinion, is that civilians want to go back to what/where they were before - and not to make the city nobody's land.
In a similar way, if the same Paris had been occupied by the Germans for several days, already with a reasonably high morale, and were invaded by the British, the troops that should appear, from the popular uprising, would be German - not French, nor “rebels”.
Such "resistance members", without prior military training, could have very reduced mobility, very little attack and defense capabilities... and would not be controlled by the player who commands that nation while they remain in those conditions, but only after the "conversion" - if they were able to survive that much, of course.
In this respect, there would be nothing so specially new to the game: after all, there are units produced by the players themselves that, under certain circumstances, they are already not able to control (it happens during certain flights, am I right?).
The way the game is, all that civilians are allowed to do is, basically, to die ... and that’s kinda sad. They should be able to play a role in defining their own destinies, don’t you think?
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Rebels could still keep coming from homeland or annexed cities… maybe even from occupied provinces with extremely low morale - under 10, 15 or 20, right after the capital of the invading nation falls, for example.
If the morale of homeland or annexed cities gets too low, perhaps they could generate “resistance members” supporting the enemy, instead of rebels… civilians who might prefer to join an opposing army, if current conditions were particularly bad. That would also be more real than the appearance of insurgents of a “single rebel nation”.
Maybe widespread dissent should have some bigger impact, too… not only increasing the possibility of rebellions, because of the effects of civilian losses in the morale of each city, but also making AI players more prone to attack you, perhaps?
Guess I’ve taken too much of your time, already... some of these last ideas may become the topics of future posts, ok?
Thanks in advance for your attention! (And I’m sorry for the quality of this translation!)
I have never written here before, although I’ve been visiting this forum quite often, looking for clarifications and tips - and I’ve done it, as an anonymous user, well before registering this account.
A few days ago, however, while talking to my coalition companions, in the last match I played, about the news regarding the possibility of rebels appearing at different times of the day, I shared with them, quite unpretentiously, an insight I had; my ally Pavel_t_5 said he liked the idea and encouraged me to introduce it to the administrators - and this is what I'm doing now.
First, I will deal with this specific aspect of the game's dynamics - the rise of the rebels - based on the way it works today, since that update; then, I’ll explain how different it could be.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
At first glance, the modification implemented on January 21 could even look like a gold trap, something intended only to make impatient players spend their money to guarantee an immediate and artificial elevation of the morale of the newly occupied cities, thus allowing the continuation of more aggressive invasion campaigns.
In my opinion, however, this change has made the game a little closer to reality: for those who do not intend to spend gold, it makes sense that the nation that just conquered a city needs to keep there for some time - at least until the dissatisfaction of the local population is dissipated, to some extent - an occupying force.
We, the players, should rather thank God the same care does not need to be observed in the other provinces of the occupied territory, but only in the cities.
Therefore, within the current conditions, it would perhaps be interesting to just send a notification to the players, informing them of the moment when each revolt could have broken out - if none of the cities it runs were the scene of an insurgency, in which case such notification would, of course, be unnecessary...
Of course, anyone can find out about the occurrence of the uprisings, if they have not been personally affected by any of them, by consulting the CoN News... but perhaps it would cost little to send such an alert, letting each player know that, at least that one moment on, and until the next midnight, they can move even their occupation troops without the risk of an insurgency in the city.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Anyway, in my opinion, the establishment of a single time of the day - however random - for possible revolts in occupied cities, of another single time for possible revolts in annexed cities and of one more single time for possible revolts in homeland cities is not quite what we would see in the real world... we are in a better position than we were before (“midnight or nothing”), that's for sure; even so, it seems natural to me that, as long as morale is below 35, a revolt could break out (or not) at any time, in any city, no matter what happens or not in the other cities.
In other words: if player number 1 has occupied cities X, Y and Z, a revolt could happen in city X at 07:42, another in city Y at 18:20, and none in city Z. That would be way closer to reality than two revolts breaking out at exactly the same time, don't you agree?
It should also be noted that, in any case – if the game stays as it is right now, or if you add the possibility of revolts in occupied cities (which are, by far, the most likely ones) at different times, midnights remain important moments - that's when every city morale gets updated, after all.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
From now on, I will present the most “radical” suggestion - the one that would certainly impact the game in a more significant way.
I must say that I have absolutely no idea how hard it would be to implement it… so, if you tell me that would be simply impossible to adopt, I’ll take it. I can only hope it’s not…
Straight to the point: I think it would be way more interesting (and also realistic) if, instead of these random rebels, cities with good morale before the invasion could create some resistance from its own civilians to fight the new occupants ... and maybe have them turned into national guard after two or three days, if not destroyed before.
We have to agree: in the real world, there is very little in common between the inhabitants of Paris occupied by the Germans and those of Seoul invaded by the Japanese that could justify the eventual appearance, in these cities, of troops that were neither French nor Korean, but belonging to a “single rebel nation”, as is currently the case in the game.
The natural thing, in my humble opinion, is that civilians want to go back to what/where they were before - and not to make the city nobody's land.
In a similar way, if the same Paris had been occupied by the Germans for several days, already with a reasonably high morale, and were invaded by the British, the troops that should appear, from the popular uprising, would be German - not French, nor “rebels”.
Such "resistance members", without prior military training, could have very reduced mobility, very little attack and defense capabilities... and would not be controlled by the player who commands that nation while they remain in those conditions, but only after the "conversion" - if they were able to survive that much, of course.
In this respect, there would be nothing so specially new to the game: after all, there are units produced by the players themselves that, under certain circumstances, they are already not able to control (it happens during certain flights, am I right?).
The way the game is, all that civilians are allowed to do is, basically, to die ... and that’s kinda sad. They should be able to play a role in defining their own destinies, don’t you think?
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Rebels could still keep coming from homeland or annexed cities… maybe even from occupied provinces with extremely low morale - under 10, 15 or 20, right after the capital of the invading nation falls, for example.
If the morale of homeland or annexed cities gets too low, perhaps they could generate “resistance members” supporting the enemy, instead of rebels… civilians who might prefer to join an opposing army, if current conditions were particularly bad. That would also be more real than the appearance of insurgents of a “single rebel nation”.
Maybe widespread dissent should have some bigger impact, too… not only increasing the possibility of rebellions, because of the effects of civilian losses in the morale of each city, but also making AI players more prone to attack you, perhaps?
Guess I’ve taken too much of your time, already... some of these last ideas may become the topics of future posts, ok?
Thanks in advance for your attention! (And I’m sorry for the quality of this translation!)