Summit to These Ideas!

Day 2,039, 13:32 • Published in Canada Canada • by Shoi12


...that was an AWFUL pun and I fully apologize for it. However, perhaps I can make your while and repay my debt to society. The summit is coming in a few days, in case it wasn't blatantly obvious by the media and free publicity. Some have given up on this game, but I see potential in this game. Stuff like ingame alliances and airstrikes are positive contributions, and rumors that the economic overhaul is at long last coming is quite encouraging. I hope this game will become glorious as it once was, and I mashed together some neurons to come up with some ideas. Perhaps they're stupid, perhaps not. But let's see if you think any of these are interesting 🙂

1. Turn Off Auto-Reload

Okay, this is a personal gripe. But certainly, I can’t be the only one who might be working on something on the front page, then all of a sudden, the screen refreshes. Maybe it’s silly, but it actually really bothers me when I’m trying to figure something out, sometimes on the map, and sometimes just looking through stuff. I’m not saying to turn it off, since for the most part it’s a great thing, but an option to switch it off so that it doesn’t refresh would be very very very useful and would save a lot of tears. I just wanted to take a picture. 🙁

2. Airstrike Symbol

First off is a relatively simple change. On the wars screen, each battle has a little symbol of a tank between the attacker and defender. Usually, airstrikes are quite important, and it'd be helpful to be able to differentiate the two. Just add a little plane symbol as a contrast. Is that too much to ask?

Also, I'd like the wars screen to show the battle score without having to click the battle, but I digress. Baby steps 😉

3. New Map 2.0

The beta map is nice. It's clean, sleek, and for the most part, gets the job done. I also like that while it looks utilitarian at first glance, it contains a load of information, just a couple clicks away, without covering up major parts of the map. However, it IS beta. There's still a lot of things that can be put in, to make it better.

Some may be aware of the egov map, which hosts a variety of interesting tidbits and information. Some of this can't even be found on the eRep map, and it's high time that some of these features be added. There's also stuff from the old map that need to make its way to the new map as well. From the egov map, can we please have a map filtered by alliance? Wouldn't it be beautiful to see the map glow TWO's pink? Ermm...regardless, it's a great feature of the egov map and I'd love to see it in eRep's map. Something like the core filter is also nice, though perhaps a tad excessive. Seeing Italy with more than 4 regions would be nice, though. Last but not least, it would be mighty helpful for bordering regions to be highlighted when a region is selected. Simply knowing which regions border which isn't as clean-cut as it may sound in some instances, and some help would be a godsend. Yes, Kaliningrad DOES connect to Moscow. Jeez!

In the old eRep map, it had certain features, such as the resource being visible at a glance. It could simply be tacked onto the bottom, next to the name of the province that pops up. What could be even better, though, is to bring back the resource filter. It's ridiculously helpful to check where the resources are coming from. Simply put, the map is wonderful. However, bringing back some of the features of the old map, and adding a couple extra bonuses would be wonderful.

One last feature that could be added is if the overseas borders could be highlighted in some fashion. Perhaps by scrolling over the region, a line could pop up, connecting the two regions together. That would save unnecessary clutter, while letting information become more accessible without going through menus, which can be confusing for a novice.

4. More Accessible Revolt Info

You know the little orange progress meter that shows up in occupied regions, showing how many people have supported the RW, or, in other words, how far along it is? Yeah, unless I'm completely wrong, there's no way to check it unless you're actually in the region. Since you can't fund RWs unless you're in the region, and it's foolish to waste CC on regions that won't be opened up, sometimes it ends up being a guessing game as to where the closest RW is. The information should be more accessible. Otherwise, it's just a waste of CC, moving around from region to region, looking for an RW to sponsor. Perhaps, under the province info, the 'under occupation' tab could have a little detail, showing how many people have supported it. Wouldn't that be more convenient?

5. Newspaper Series

Again, I've brought this up before. Lots of players write a lot of stuff, and many have various series that they put out to the public. It'd be extremely convenient to be able to group the articles into different series, wouldn't it? Just a thought, but it'd be really nice. And perhaps, beneath the 'previous article' and 'next article' tabs can be 'previous episode' and 'next episode', just for articles in that series. It'd be unbelievably convenient, not only for readers but for the ones writing as well.

6. The Kosovo Dilemma

Ah, the joys of Kosovo. If I could go back to the past to present this idea, I would, but obviously that won't happen. The idea is still there, though, in case RL ends up shaking up something. If there's ever any thought about bringing Kosovo as a country, how about leaving it under Serbian occupation, and Kosovo has to either negotiate or fight its way to independence? It'd be a solid medium between simply it being a region and stealing the region away from the Serbs. This means that if Kosovo gets a large influx in population, it could see its way free, but if there's little support for them, there will be little difference. Perhaps it's too late to talk about this, but it's just an idea. Just in case things change.

Note: this isn't about what Kosovo is or isn't right now. It's about what the admins could do IF something IRL changed. Until then, I'm fine with how the votes turned out, since it was a fair vote.

7. Location Bonuses

You realize that just by sitting in a country with lots of MPPs, there's essentially no reason to ever move? Ever? Well, how about if there's an extra little incentive for players to move? Attacking nations choose which region that they'll attack from, and which region to attack. The attackers that are in the province from where the attack is launched gets a small damage bonus, perhaps 5%, while defenders staying in the defending region also get a 5% bonus. The twist, however, is that the bonus only applies to players that were in the region before the battle begins.

This means that players have more incentive to move around, and it also has a little layer of strategy. Players could coordinate attacks, amassing troops in one region for a massive attack, while players defending a chokepoint could rush all the players in to hold the territory. It would also mean that attacking would have another planning level. Attackers may avoid certain regions with high population, planning attacks to go around strongholds. It'd simulate a level of strategic planning and fortification, and while small, the bonuses could swing a large battle, and reward the team which had planning, not just the biggest guns.

8. Tiered MPP System

What's the worst part about being in a small country? Not only is it difficult to show a great presence on the battlefield themselves, but it's also impossible to bring in support with MPPs in the needed quantities. Weak countries sputter along with lackluster economies, and fall short on funds to bring in heavy hitters and defend their sovereignty or fight for freedom. What could be a fix would be to have different tiers of MPPs, and varying costs for each one.

Tier 1 would be similar to a defensive pact, with nations only being able to help each other with defensive battles. Of course, this would have a lowered cost. Why sign Tier 1 MPPs? This means that weaker nations could afford more support, which would let them hold their own against invaders, without having the attack bonus that would make it broken.

Tier 2 MPPs would allow the same benefit, while also allowing nations to help when attacking core regions. Core regions, obviously the most important, should subsequently receive some benefit. This also means that large empires and conquering nations can't simply sign Tier 2 MPPs and steamroll over countries.

Instead, in order to receive benefit in all non-RW battles, including when attacking non-cores, nations would have to sign Tier 3 MPPs. The current cost of such an MPP is 10k, and it seems about right. Perhaps some tweaking is possible, but certainly, the lower tiers should cost less.

What does this do? This means that a weak country, such as Norway, could sign many more MPPs with other countries, not boosting its warmonger urges, but giving it a fighting chance against a stronger invading country. The disparity between strong and weak countries is astonishing, and letting weak countries have some life while giving the stronger countries a benefit is crucial.

9. Overhaul of Resistance Wars/Occupation

Finally, I've saved the best for last. Now, when I look at the map, I see the massive empires of Poland, Serbia, and to a lesser extent other countries such as Slovenia and Hungary. And well done, really. More active play, at times smarter tactics, and a larger fanbase certainly all played a role in the victories, well deserved. However, what's the problem here? There's nothing that a France or Germany can do. Why would they sign deals that cut off large parts of their nation? The only way that a conquered country can fight back is an RW, and what of it? Against a stronger country, it would take much more investment and funding to win the resistance war. And if such a wonderful stroke of events happened, what of it? The occupying nation quickly NEs the weaker country, and it's back to square one. The game should reward the stronger and smarter player, sure, but it shouldn't leave the weaker nation out to dry. If they play smartly, cleverly, they should be able to compensate for their lower strength, and cause havoc on a widespread scale. Simply put, the game has to reduce the disparity between strong and weak countries, so that the weaker nations don't simply die.

So what can be done? Well, make two simple changes. Simple, but revolutionary. First, when fighting a war, nations don't conquer the region, as they do now. They simply occupy them. They still get all the bonuses and all the nice tidbits, but they simply occupy the region. How can a nation actually conquer regions then? During the treaties, of course! In a peace proposal, the nations would also trade regions in between them. Other than the border changes, the regions would be returned to their previous rightful owner. This means that instead of having to tirelessly having to RW regions back, they only need to sign a treaty, and the regions are quickly restored, preventing any possible treachery or betrayal. Quick and simple, and saves both sides the trouble.

Now, how does that play into resistance wars? Now, if nations own regions that aren’t their cores, but were given to them in agreements and peace deals, there’s little difference. In fact, there would be increased CC cost and cooldown time between RWs. (edit: the extra cost and cooldown time might not be necessary, but there certainly shouldn't be too great an added benefit for RWs) This means that nations can’t simply negotiate to give away regions then betray their former enemy, and that random resistance wars won’t pop up as often. After all, the nations worked hard to earn the peace deal and the regions. It shouldn’t be that easy to retake. It also lets friendly countries hold onto landswaps and rentals easier. Of course, a well-planned strike can still turn the tide, and this merely weakens underhanded methods, not prevent them.

But what if the nation never surrenders? In such cases like in the Balkans, what could be done is to allow multiple resistance wars at a time. When a resistance war is successfully funded, the resistance’s CP will have a short time (perhaps 30 minutes or less) to delay the resistance. If the resistance isn’t delayed, the RW continues as standard. This means that RWs that are started randomly won’t be held off indefinitely, and will simply do the job it’s supposed to do, which is minor drain and BH feeding. However, if the CP decides to delay it, that’s when the fun starts. The resistance war can be delayed for as long as perhaps 24 hours, during which people could also fund RWs in other regions. That’s right, multiple region RWs. The downside, of course, is that the RWs would cost increasingly more to fund, so the battles would have to be a massively coordinated effort in order to impact several regions. Once the timer ends or the CP decides to start the resistance movement, all the wars start, causing havoc in the oppressor’s nation. Currently, nations have to wait 24 hours to start another resistance war. However, under the multiple RW system, nations would have to wait 24 hours per resistance war. In other words, the guerrilla forces could put it all out for one big push.


This solves the recurring problem, where nations can only secure a region or two before they’re violently put back in their place. Of course, this requires lots of planning, and loads of funding, so it’s not something that can be pulled off effectively at a whim. And with the extended cooldown time, a successful suppression would provide a lengthy peace for the victorious occupier. But, at the end of the day, this gives weaker nations with solid strategy and intellect to start massive rebellions, possibly securing them several regions, and thus a good chance to kick out their occupier. Of course, the stronger conqueror would still have an advantage, but, when used well, this would let nations potentially kick out foreigners in one swift blow. Again, this lets the Davids of the world stand up to the Goliaths, but only when there’s solid planning.

What does that mean for the attacking nation? The attacking nations would be more willing to have fairer, less oppressive deals, balancing the benefits of regions with the downside of having a possible mass rebellion. It gives bonuses to nations that diplomatically solve their problems, using their muscle as a tool, not their whole arsenal, while giving greater risk to those that simply wipe out enemy nations with no regard. And, let’s face it. In all of occupied Italy, does anyone actually find one mere resistance war every 24 hours to be exciting in the slightest? Imagine the joys of bringing a conquered, dead nation back to life with a large scale rebellion that ends up securing several regions and a chance to finish off the enemy. It would not only help smaller countries, but also bring some energy back into this game, more than simply diverting a couple MUs to deal with the petty RWs. And what should this game be if not fun? 🙂

Note: the one issue that could happen is that smaller, unstable nations could be PTO'd, then regions could be signed away. However, currently, such nations already are under PTO, and their regions more often than not are being partitioned. This increases the importance of having a strong, stable country and having allies to help.

Well, let me know what you think of these ideas! The summit is coming up, and if these ideas are worth it, perhaps they could make a difference if the admins actually heard it! Let’s make eRep fun again 🙂

Until next time, take care!



Archives here