a thought crept into my head...

for the longest time FFA remained the same, and all of a sudden theres a million things in the game etc.

some of it is great, some of it is just plain retarded imo...



but anyways...

maybe fluff in the game should just be resetted, back to how it was... in like... 2000



too much stuff isn't always a good thing you know

change favors those who can adapt.

I'll be honest, I'm the type of player that understands the old strats and basically when the really good players in PAN start discussing strat ideas, I adopt what they come to a consensus as the best option.

I think it's healthy that the game is changing, even though it means a lot of people are passing me by because I'm unwilling to put the time in to figure out how to make the most out of every change.

Perhaps they've done too much too fast, but dammit, I'll take an active interested admin group that's willing to try new things to make the game better rather than Mehul who seemingly forgot Earth even existed (except when us FFA types caused enough trouble to bother him long enough to delete half the server or shut it down completely).

LMAO, back to how it was in 2000? Like with unlimited countries? They'd never go for it.

nah, not the unlimited thing, though they could probably triple the number of countries you can play now and still be ok.


I'm talking about the aspects of the game, as far as playability and how you'd run your countries

desperado.. where do i know ur name from?

can we have a one time old, old school era game.. maybe not an existing server, but offer a two week long 99-00 era server where bushels were 3 dollars and however else the game was ten or eleven years ago without the nw change and all that other jive fluff i was fourteen years old for and can't remember.. that might be fun.

just a thought

boltar, probably from here? lol



as for prices, i don't think they've really ever changed... aside from recently i think

hmm thought maybe u frequented #neofederation back on 2025

I like the way the game has been going, It was just the readiness penalty that screwed things up. All in all, Well done to the admin crew!

I just feel special that Despy put me in his thread title :-)

How do you think Pang feels then?

We don't have the formulas from 2000. Without those, there's not even any point to discussing if this is a good idea. It's simply impossible.

Even if it was possible, this thread has already revealed another problem -- many people like many of the changes, and there would never be agreement on which ones to roll back. Do we want unlimited countries again? Do you want the interface changes rolled back? Attack Formulas? Oil? $2b bug? Conditioning tech? Oil? Attack formulas?

Different people would say yes and no to different things. It would be impossible to build a consensus and in-the-end almost everyone would be pissed off because they didn't get their way on something.

The admins are focused on the future, and further development. I know that this community has been without major change for a long time, and some of the changes in the pipe-line might cause a couple seizures when they're introduced -- but give them a try. I think you'll like most of them.

(If you have suggestions for individual things you think worked better a long time ago, feel free to make those suggestions. An en-masse roll back is not feasible though).

-Fooglmog
Guy with no clue.

I think the concern in FFA is that the game was coded and is being run by historically Alliance Server players. Much of the focus appears to be protecting the interests of those that consider themselves to be "netters" over "killers".
When those changes start interfering with the enjoyable gameplay of the warring nature of the Free For All server, you will have an uproar and, likely, a loss in player-base.

you mention oil twice, foog. you from texas? :P

Primeval, the war vs. netting debate is one that has taken place many times on this forum. It is simply not the case that one has been preferred to the other.

Some of the largest changes to this game have been designed to improve the dynamics of how wars have been fought. If you ask Pang and QZ what changes they're proudest of, those are some of the ones that they mention first.

Beyond that though, there are very few changes which are strictly "netter" changes. A couple of the de-stocking tweaks might qualify, but that's it. The majority of the changes you'd call changes to "netting" are actually "country build" changes. They're neutral, because how you build your country matter in both netting and warring. The most important part of winning a war is how you've built your countries before hand, so those changes are aimed at every player.

I can see this, and I think most reasonable players can see this too. And it's not like I'm some netting snob. I was Rage FFA's hWar at one point in time, and held that same position in iMagNum on Alliance for 4 years -- and played there for nearly 8.

When war oriented players have had a genuine grievance with a specific change, I've taken it to the admins. But overall, the changes have been pretty balanced.

-Fooglmog
Guy with no clue.

@2000 rule set: Regarding the market prices, that was mehul's inane effort to address the 2 billion bug. If we went back to that set up then you'ld hit 2 billion 10X faster. Of course although the bug is long gone, a cap can always be put back, unless you are suggesting the "bug" be re-implemented as well, which I guess it could be:P
Removal of readiness and DR wouldn't be too hard nor would putting the turns back to to what they were (if anyone remembers them).
MOst of the other game mechanics were unchanged from the 2000 rule set although putting "readiness tech" and those useless missiles back would probably not be worth the effort.
You know, most of the changes made since 2000 until the end of mehul were actually very strong anti-war changes.. people don't admit this:P

I have been extremely happy with the changes that have been made. And specially to FFA side of things. The new interface is quite awesome. (my only wish is to be able to control pacts from the interface). Some warring changes could be pretty cool....on Team/Alliance servers.

Personally I enjoy warring on FFA over Alliance....quite frankly I can typically play my turns 2-3 times faster during a war on FFA than I can on alliance. This is because if I really need to I can usually kill countries solo with relative ease. Although I of course prefer to hit with others. But the added time to kill in FFA would take way to much time for the majority of players on the server. I could deal with the game only allowing to send one attack per second, but I don't want to lose readiness over it. And sitting here trying to guess if I made my attacks within a second or not.

Really I would love to see some new tweaks to war on the alliance and team server. I think nukes could be improved, the fact that it's almost impossible to kill with them, is a bit silly to me and of course cruise missiles can be made to cause more destruction. And of course all the other suggestions of bunkers etc...

I noticed how you meantioned most of the changes have been not the netters. I don't see how DR helps the warriors. But personally the attacking DR doesn't bother me as much as Spy DR. I know a pretty good arguement can be made that attacking DR is in place to help untagged and small clans. But I just don't see that for spy DR. And the fact that it's so effective. In attacking DR, I may only get 25 acres per grab, but I'm still getting something. However in spy DR. Let's say I have a 200 SPAL, and they have Zero spies. Within only 25-30 ops, I can barely do a successful op.

Back in the day I remember, if you were losing a war. You would be able to use ops to wear down on the other teams breakers, and maybe you wont win the war, but it doesn't keep it so lopsided. I was pretty sure part of these attacking changes/discussion are suppose to help make wars not so lopsided. I think taking away spy DR would help in that.

I know some have asked to be able to have a ops news feed, I think that takes away from what an op is personally. However it would be cool if it was tracked, for personally records to be added in profile stats. Like sucessful ops, unsucessful ops, sucessful op %, and maybe ops recieved.

I agree with pappy

confirmed, I like ops!

nice list slag, but what I gather from that is most ops, even normal are at about 50% success rate, lol.

Also, Gambit... runs fluffty spal countries, lol