Declaring war is highly imbalanced

[Fox]

If rank 1 declares war on the lowest rank its gives rank 1 who will obviously win all the lowest ranks money. Highly unfair.
The rank modifer should still apply.
The lower players dont stand a chance if thats the case.
On top of this your can declare war and then peace at will...not very realistic...
Perhaps you shouldnt be able to declare war on someone if they are below a certain rank...just an idea but something should be done.

[Replisean]

what you saying that maybe top 500 can only declare war on other top 500 players and so on, this sounds like a good idea if the system was being abused the way u said it was.

[Gatedialer]

If rank 1 declares war on the lowest rank its gives rank 1 who will obviously win all the lowest ranks money. Highly unfair.
The rank modifer should still apply.
The lower players dont stand a chance if thats the case.
On top of this your can declare war and then peace at will...not very realistic...
Perhaps you shouldnt be able to declare war on someone if they are below a certain rank...just an idea but something should be done.

"A 1 sided relation has little effect"

[Jean Gregoire Gabriel]

From the Game Updates

"Being at war: Adds enemies to enemy ranking. Increases the Naq you will gain per successful attack. Doubles the military losses your troops suffer (you give up caution in favour of trying for excessive gain in battle).


If both sides have declared war -- the Naq gained again goes up, and the military losses on BOTH SIDES increases substantially."

Seems to imply there is a (smaller) effect when only one has declared war.


J.G.G.

[~Phoenix~]

From the Game Updates

"Being at war: Adds enemies to enemy ranking. Increases the Naq you will gain per successful attack. Doubles the military losses your troops suffer (you give up caution in favour of trying for excessive gain in battle).


If both sides have declared war -- the Naq gained again goes up, and the military losses on BOTH SIDES increases substantially."

Seems to imply there is a (smaller) effect when only one has declared war.


J.G.G.

that´s not that true, i just stole 3.5mil naq from someone with a one side war affect and i stole all they had with 15atk turns

[Sleipnir]

Yup, it's being abused already.
Nox Nox(304) has set their relation with you to: War 18:52 reply delete
18:52 Nox 3,258,791 Naquadah stolen 15 28 19 details
Nox Nox(304) has set their relation with you to: Neutral 18:52 reply delete


Might I suggest at least a 24H wait before you can change relations again?

[Jean Gregoire Gabriel]

Maybe the declaring and backing out of war should cost naq. I think it'll mean fewer abuses, and more thought into picking of enemies.


J.G.G.
an idea, no?

[Guest]

You should have to wait AT LEAST a day before being able to change status. Whilst it is as it is I am doing it but it isn't fair.

You have to wait a day when chnaging your commander and that isn't as important as DECLARING WAR so you should also have to wait a day for that. Maybe even two or three days.

[forgive_me]

the above idea is good but if it is pout with the limiting of a war....

i mean that u can only have total war to only one person at a time....or 5 wars with users.....and u can change wars onece every 24 howers...

it close to reality...

u only fight one cide or a couple of enemys...and it will take time to rebild from a war....

[Forum]

guess the doulbe military loses don't stop this, eh
something will be done...
something... .


every upgrade comes in phases.. this one is in phase one,a dn not even bug free yet.... soon ... very soon

[™Fûr¥]

If rank 1 declares war on the lowest rank its gives rank 1 who will obviously win all the lowest ranks money. Highly unfair.
The rank modifer should still apply.
The lower players dont stand a chance if thats the case.
On top of this your can declare war and then peace at will...not very realistic...
Perhaps you shouldnt be able to declare war on someone if they are below a certain rank...just an idea but something should be done.

I know what you mean. I was at a very very low rank and people ranke 5 and up steals over 4 million 2 or 3 times and takes every last drop of naq and which is kinda bull cause theres no wy possible to get them back, at least for a lol and when i tried that war thing and had attacked anyone higher rank that me, i never was able to get even close to all, even with rank 4 attack lol.

[Guest]

what if there was a sort war equivalent of the realm alert.

you could set your war mongering level to a certain percentage which would increase how much naq you steal and how high losses are...but like realm alert it would reduce your income ...maybe justified that when at war more resources are put towards a war effort and less towards economics

also set it so that if you set your war mongering level higher it can't be changed for 24 hours or something like that.

[myFriend]

just like to say that i declar war on peps so i can get ALL there naq with just 15 attack turns and all i lose is the equal to 30 attack turns if i am nutral so basicly i save 1/2 my attack turns and lose the same, sounds like people know how to do economics.
now if i was at war and i lost 4 times as much and attacks cost 2 times what they usally do and i gained about 36% naq then if nutral i would think twice about going to war