Join the new world

Pluto's community management approach

Pluto has invited discussion from players to consider how the resources of the map should be shuffled.

Once a reasonable amount of posts with suggestions and concerns had been collected, they were all ignored and Pluto did something else entirely.

To summarise the changes:

- The core capital region of each country will be changed to Fish.

- Each country may nominate a list of desired changes to the resources of their other core regions. Securing the resources will cost Resource Tokens, which come from campaigns or donation.

- New campaigns started on day 2625 (until 263😎 will award a Resource Token to the winning country, and Event Points (matching the amount of campaign points).

- Failed resistance wars don't give anyone Resource Tokens, but the occupier still gains Event Points.

- From day 2639-2640 Event Points may be used for "bidding" on remaining Resource Tokens. There is no detail released on how this would work, except smaller countries will supposedly get priority in a tie-breaker situation, but with no guarantee of winning anything.

- The total amount of each resource will be the same at the end, they will only move location. The amount of regions in each eCountry will remain the same.

Good or Bad?

Some possible implications here:

- In the short term, Pluto will see some people fighting and conclude he was successful. In reality, countries will be cycling artificial wars just to farm for tokens, and stop again after two weeks.

- Smaller countries probably won't win any resource tokens. Had they hoped to lose some "rare" resources, they probably will be rid of them - but it won't help since they will still be attacked for the other resources. And farmed for tokens.

- At the end, the bigger countries might swap some duplicates, and they will still be able to perm-capture what they are missing from a wide selection of 10x smaller countries.

Any Alternative Ideas??

There are a lot of possibilities, but here's just one idea for the sake of including something constructive.

At the moment, resources are tapped without limit, and overpopulation has no bad consequence. In reality all resources are limited and severely strained by high population. Therefore, adding a reduction to resource % bonuses based on population size would make sense, and re-balancing in this way could allow more countries to be active (instead of all their new players quitting immediately).

For example, imagine if half of the world's population is within one particular country, that one country would be very powerful but with that should come an added challenge of increased upkeep in some form.

If it won't be based on population, another way to implement could be to just to taper the %bonus;
instead of linear returns when holding a number of resources:
1 resource type (+20😵, 2 (+40😵, 3 (+60😵, 4 (+80😵, up to 5 (+100😵

there should be diminishing returns, such as:
1 resource type (+20😵, 2 (+40😵, 3 (+55😵, 4 (+70😵, up to 5 (+80😵.

In this hypothetical, for the larger countries it would still worthwhile to struggle for the last resources, but there will just be a smaller gap between big and small. At the same time, a reduction in the max bonus would help to curb overproduction, which is a whole separate issue!