Major NS Shakeup

[Pestarzt]

I'm very curious and excited about the impending changes to influence, and I'm also pleased that more nations will be able to participate in R/D. I also wonder if the influence changes will effect how the Guardian system works here in TWP.

 

Summit Progression - Changes To Be Implemented

by Sedgistan » Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:01 am

While the summit was never seen through to the end, the discussion and ideas that came up during it were of great help to the admins and mods, and we intend to implement a number of the technical changes as a result. We'd like to thank everyone who took part, whether as a rep or not, for the ideas generated and discussed during the summit.

This thread serves as a general announcement on what's happening now - the changes are listed (and linked to) below, and each will be open to further public discussion, with details to be refined as the discussion proceeds. The intention is to implement these changes as soon as possible, however as there are so many, as well as some fairly significant projects, some are not likely to be implemented until next year.

The following are the changes we intend to implement:

• Influence in feeders and sinkers retained for six months rather than indefinitely.
• Delegate Elect, with certain delegate changes resulting in the new delegate having limited access to regional controls for a short period of time.
• Regional Officers, with the ability to use regional controls.
• Annex, which gives a formal in-game recognition to one region's control over another.
• Reformation SC proposal which targets a region and removes the ability of its Delegate to access regional controls for a short period of time.
• Custodian SC proposal which gives a nation access to the controls of a region, but requiring them to spend influence to use them.
• Estimated update times displayed on regions but with a "window of uncertainty" as to when they'll actually update.

Please discuss the above ideas in their individual threads - this discussion will be open to everyone, though it will be strictly moderated with off-topic discussion, regional bickering etc. dealt with swiftly and punished for as necessary.

This thread can be used for general discussion regarding the summit, its outcomes and what else may be done.

[Consular]

Mmm, that all looks very interesting. I look forward to these changes being implemented, should spice things up a bit.

[Darkesia]

I, of course, hate the idea that the SC will have the ability to invade a region without sending a single troop. But I understand that there is an effort to make the SC relevant to strategic gameplay. Since this will probably be the first change implemented, I strongly suggest we begin recruiting a pet on-site forum denizen to keep our delegate from becoming impotent.

I like the ideas of some sort of influence limits and the use of regional officers to spread the workload for the delegates.

[Karland]

This all sounds awesome so far - people are talking about NS GP dying out will be very pleased, I'm sure. The strenghtening role of the SC was something I'd been hoping for (from an objective standpoint) so that that particular dimension of GP could enhance the rest. 

 

The 'Delegate Elect' point looks... interesting. 

[Westwind]

Already, a new Delegate cannot send mass tg's for 24 hours after becoming Delegate, so the Delegate Elect restrictions would seem to be an extension of that.  And the delay in a new 'Delegate Elect' gaining full control should make gameplay more interesting for non-updaters, as their help will be needed in conflicts.   And it should increase competition for 'resources' (player WA's) among active gameplay regions.

 

The limits on Influence should be a good thing, but it's hard to see how it will exactly play out.  Some of the intentions of the change might not be as helpful as it appears. Really depends upon the calculations more than the cap.  But focusing Influence of the 'current state' of nations, rather than the long term build-up should generally benefit currently active players.  Still, there are those nations that will continue to sit at the Influence cap, keeping their endos up, logging in daily but doing nothing else.  It might become neccessary to lower the endorsement cap, to prevent those semi-active nations from maintaining too much of a threat to the active leadership nations.  The Pacific's cap of 20 might become a wider standard.

 

Or....maybe a multi-tier endorsement cap will be something to think about.  For example....if you don't endorse the Delegate/Regional Officers/Guardians, you're capped at 25....if you do, you're capped at 75....

 

Having Regional Officers with access to regional controls will require a strong trust relationships, but will also provide some relief for the daily job of the Delegate, and coverage for inactive periods (illness, vacations).  It also kind of reminds me of NS2, where you could assign various Officer levels to nations.

 

Been waiting a long time to see annexation come along.  Watch Imperialism grow in NationStates.

 

I'm not too fond of the additions to the SC.  Too many lazy players are too gullible to voting 'yes' to things they know nothing about.  "He's a bad Delegate because we said so, take away his control !"  Oh okay, that does sound bad.  *clicks 'For' button and interferes in another region's sovereignty*  I suppose this will give the anti-WA movement more propaganda to support their cause.

 

 I also wonder if the influence changes will effect how the Guardian system works here in TWP.

 

Hard to say until we see it's effects.  The need for active, high Influence/high endorsement/trusted nations to be ready and able to protect the region's delegacy will remain.  Prior to Influence, it was still a good idea to maintain a Vice Delegate or two to keep their endorsements up and be ready to step into the Delegacy if needed.  So the general Guardian concept really pre-dates Influence.  It just became more important due to the limitations imposed by Influence, and brought the need for the developement of the Slingshot maneuaver (which sort of relates to the 'update surfing' tactic that was used more before Influence).

[Papercuts and Skittles]

Seems to be making the game more lazy to me

 

It should help with former Guardians being a threat though.

[Westwind]

Heh...yeah.  Recuritment telegram scripts and stamps, mass telegrams inregion, welcome telegrams, regional officers, estimated update times.....it's all rather automating things that players have been doing manually.

[Westwind]

Having had some time for these proposals to sink in, and having kept up on the discussions.....I'm less enthused about these than I was.

 

The concept of having to spend Influence to appoint regional officers ingame is worthless.  I won't waste my Influence on it.

 

The SC resolutions......they are geared to support the r/d side of the game, but ignore the consequences outside of that dynamic.

 

Delegate Elect isn't what I thought it was, so the name was misleading.  It's just a way to extend r/d battles when the endorsements are close.  Meh.

 

Associating Influence costs with Annexation.....that would be fine in hostile situations, but would hamper friendly annexations.

[People United Together]

Having had some time for these proposals to sink in, and having kept up on the discussions.....I'm less enthused about these than I was.

 

The concept of having to spend Influence to appoint regional officers ingame is worthless.  I won't waste my Influence on it.

 

The SC resolutions......they are geared to support the r/d side of the game, but ignore the consequences outside of that dynamic.

 

Delegate Elect isn't what I thought it was, so the name was misleading.  It's just a way to extend r/d battles when the endorsements are close.  Meh.

 

Associating Influence costs with Annexation.....that would be fine in hostile situations, but would hamper friendly annexations.

 

Oh good, someone who knows what all this ruckus is about. I haven't the time or will to concern myself with the alterations, but your review seems to make clear sense. I want nothing to do with the drama and protracted debate each region will have concerning them, especially the role of officers. My fear is less accountability and more divisions within regions as people maneuver for titles and privilege at an ever hastening pace. Then again, the past always looks better than the present. 

 

/optimism 

[Westwind]

*chuckles*  Aye, the past does have that tendancy.  My quick and easy solution to reviving r/d gameplay would be to return to the 2004/2005 game mechanics.  When there was no Influence to deal with, and you could raid/defend multiple regions at update because.  Fight a battle in one region, update comes, someone wins...move to the next battle.  You didn't have to worry that your nation had already updated to participate in another battle.

 

I suppose that was the 'wild west' days of NS.

 

Regional Officers on it's face sounds great.  But once you start charging the Delegate for assigning them, its worthless.  But the reasoning behind it, is that a raider could take a delegacy and assign other raiders in the region as Regional Officers with access to regional controls, thus they could better defend their raid.  The flips side is that a native delegate can assign regional officers so they can access regional controls when he/she can't in order to better defend and manage the region.

 

'Delegate Elect'....dumb terminology...  is designed to allow a r/d battle continue through multiple updates, allowing the opportunity for non-updaters to get involved in r/d.  Blocks a raider delegate from full control of a region until he/she has a solid lead in endorsements.  Nice intent, but then it would be a bother in regular delegate transitions, as the new Delegate doesn't have control until he/she has enough endorsements higher than the old Delegate.  Like I said, by focusing on r/d, they are ignoring the effects on gameplay otherwise.