Tariffs, Diplomacy, Loyalty

[Sebena]

yes I am aggainst UN...

This way new players would be destroyed aswell like I mentioned tariffs would be active and player joining as a part of his own country (I did with BiH) so they would need to switch nations to one of the big nations making them impossible to achieve rank of King but that's least important most important thing is they would need to get loans to start normal life here and they would fell in debt causing them to quit and causing bankers to lose money... It hurts game in more ways than it making it better

[Donald Trump]

yes I am aggainst UN...

This way new players would be destroyed aswell like I mentioned tariffs would be active and player joining as a part of his own country (I did with BiH) so they would need to switch nations to one of the big nations making them impossible to achieve rank of King but that's least important most important thing is they would need to get loans to start normal life here and they would fell in debt causing them to quit and causing bankers to lose money... It hurts game in more ways than it making it better

When I said the UN, I just called on the idea of Nation Integrity, not the entire UN.


Who states that the newbie trader cannot just switch ports. Noobs are FAR MORE flexible than pros. This is so unlikely, I don't even find it noteworthy. A noob trader can trade at different port.

In all honesty, this would just hurt those pros with a huge amount of ships at trading card warehouses.

[Maha]

Diplomacy Tab Recommendations:
1. People's Loyalty - Say a nation has owned a port for 1 year, then in case that the port gets taken over by another nation, the nation taking over that port loses half of it's influence in that port, and the original owner's get their influence doubled in that port. Effects 2x per year owned.

-1
how does this improve gameplay? the attacker needs 3 to 4 times more investment. make i simple spain holds chalkos with 500 influence, Kuwait has already 450 influence and opens an attack by adding 150 influence.
old situation kuwait 600 spain 500; Chalkos becomes kuwatian.
new situation: kuwait goes to 600 loses half ends up at 300(200 less than before the succesful attack), spain had 500 gains 250 ends up at 750 Spain keeps the port and say thank you so much. please do again, we even pay for the voodoo
new situation better attack: to overcome the 50 influence difference Kuwait must invest 1052 influence to get 1 influence more than spain.! (450+1052=1502, lose half for winning 1502/2=751. spain = 500+250 = 751

This will destroy all attempts to take ports!

2. Tariffs - Say Spain goes to war with Bermuda, and Spain decides to impose a tax upon all Bermudian players. Such would be that for all items bought from Spanish ports from Bermudian players, the Bermudian players must pay 5 gold to Spain's treasury per item bought.

+0 but needs to be worked out a bit more 5gc is too much. not sure whether this this would stimulate action, but it rises the stakes.

3. Allies - Nations can impose Tariffs without warfare, but, they would be less aggressive than number 2. Allies can evade these Tariffs. Allies cannot buy enough influence in a port to overtake its other allies ruling that port.

-1 most favorite nation status etc (allies) works against newbees who sign up with their own country.

4. NAP - Same as number 3, except Tariff still applies.

this is already an automated game feature

5. Declaration of War - Nations write a Declaration of War against another. All Declarations are recorded in the Nation History Tab (Who knows, maybe this will become a thing in the future). The Declaration would involve how long the war lasted, who settled the war (signed to remove), and greatest soldiers of the war (based on hostility gained). - Just a cool thing to look back on for a nation's history.

-1 nice for the records but nations normally declare war after the fighting has started, blaming the other nation to have started. why take away surprise attacks.
kuwait to spain: "we declare war on you". Spain"thanks for the heads up, we shore up our defenses"

[Donald Trump]

Diplomacy Tab Recommendations:
1. People's Loyalty - Say a nation has owned a port for 1 year, then in case that the port gets taken over by another nation, the nation taking over that port loses half of it's influence in that port, and the original owner's get their influence doubled in that port. Effects 2x per year owned.

-1
how does this improve gameplay? the attacker needs 3 to 4 times more investment. make i simple spain holds chalkos with 500 influence, Kuwait has already 450 influence and opens an attack by adding 150 influence.
old situation kuwait 600 spain 500; Chalkos becomes kuwatian.
new situation: kuwait goes to 600 loses half ends up at 300(200 less than before the succesful attack), spain had 500 gains 250 ends up at 750 Spain keeps the port and say thank you so much. please do again, we even pay for the voodoo
new situation better attack: to overcome the 50 influence difference Kuwait must invest 1052 influence to get 1 influence more than spain.! (450+1052=1502, lose half for winning 1502/2=751. spain = 500+250 = 751

This will destroy all attempts to take ports!

2. Tariffs - Say Spain goes to war with Bermuda, and Spain decides to impose a tax upon all Bermudian players. Such would be that for all items bought from Spanish ports from Bermudian players, the Bermudian players must pay 5 gold to Spain's treasury per item bought.

+0 but needs to be worked out a bit more 5gc is too much. not sure whether this this would stimulate action, but it rises the stakes.

3. Allies - Nations can impose Tariffs without warfare, but, they would be less aggressive than number 2. Allies can evade these Tariffs. Allies cannot buy enough influence in a port to overtake its other allies ruling that port.

-1 most favorite nation status etc (allies) works against newbees who sign up with their own country.

4. NAP - Same as number 3, except Tariff still applies.

this is already an automated game feature

5. Declaration of War - Nations write a Declaration of War against another. All Declarations are recorded in the Nation History Tab (Who knows, maybe this will become a thing in the future). The Declaration would involve how long the war lasted, who settled the war (signed to remove), and greatest soldiers of the war (based on hostility gained). - Just a cool thing to look back on for a nation's history.

-1 nice for the records but nations normally declare war after the fighting has started, blaming the other nation to have started. why take away surprise attacks.
kuwait to spain: "we declare war on you". Spain"thanks for the heads up, we shore up our defenses"

1. That is the prize Spain receives for holding the port a while. I find it more realistic the people would rebel against the new owners.

2. Does not have to be 5 gc tarrif, that was an example.

3. Minimal losses, and newbies should be encouraged to join bigger nations in the start.

4. Declaration of War can be written AFTER the suprise attack .

[Bmw]

If anything I would have it where the population drops by 1% or so for however many months the port was owned aka the people left for the country side or they left the area the game map is

[Haron]

I'm with Maha on this one. Particularly point 1. You really want LESS fighting over ports? This is done way too little as it is. We don't need to make fighting over ports more difficult. We need more ways to fight over ports, and more significance for holding a port, and being members of a nation doing so.

[Donald Trump]

I'm with Maha on this one. Particularly point 1. You really want LESS fighting over ports? This is done way too little as it is. We don't need to make fighting over ports more difficult. We need more ways to fight over ports, and more significance for holding a port, and being members of a nation doing so.

The way I see it, it balances out.

Tariffs and War Declarations pressure warfare, while port loyalty evens out the chaos.

[Haron]

I disagree. None of the other suggestions balances this.

More port action is desirable, but these suggestion would work contrary to that. There are, however, several other ideas which WOULD increase port action. If the devs were to give some signal as to what direction they want ports to take, we can start discussing some details and specific options.

[Donald Trump]

I disagree. None of the other suggestions balances this.

More port action is desirable, but these suggestion would work contrary to that. There are, however, several other ideas which WOULD increase port action. If the devs were to give some signal as to what direction they want ports to take, we can start discussing some details and specific options.

It seems that the fact that the nation held the port for a very long time is ignored, or not represented. This is a very hard thing to do, and not many nations have accomplished this. It is still possible for a takeover, if planned correctly. Say the owning nation has 12mil influence in that port, Take over the pot with 13mil right before the update, after update, you are halved to 6.5mil, then build it back up. Effect does not reapply after the takeover was done once.

Or, you could just hit the owner's nation down to 6mil, and even if halved, you will win.

Point is, this isn't really that bad of a barrier. There are players that can buy in 100+ million influence, and most ports don't carry a heavy amount of influence. If planned correctly, you can easily overcome this.

[Maha]

the lowest influence a nation has is in a port 22 million.

all this does is making it so expensive for the attacker and cost free for the defender.

There are players that can buy in 100+ million influence

any idea what percentage of the player base you're talking about? or just hard numbers?

what if they get the ports? game over?
what if they are not interested in more ports?

why tweak the game for the benefit of skulls&bones of Avonmora?

imo game improvements should be balanced (not favoring certain groups) and promote action. a slight imbalance that favors new players is a good thing, their noob actions work already against them