新發表

作者： The Panda Jew, 07.04.2023 at 04:16

I miss Temp

I miss you too
Also lion too (I got him banned)

Dopey

作者： DeepFriedUnicorn, 23.10.2024 at 13:40

North Korea is fake Korea
Russian federation is fake Russia

i'm pretty sure north korea and the Russian Federation exist but ok

28

North Korea is fake Korea
Russian federation is fake Russia

作者： Palmitas, 22.10.2024 at 18:45

"inspired by Tengri" bro is twearking for support on his vid lmaoooo

ky5

Long ass block of text ahead, beware

AI is necessary in every strategy game at this point. Atwar is no exception.
I won't get into marketing because I have no idea on how the game is being advertised on an internal level. I also won't talk about trolls since that's just a laughable option, trolls exist everywhere, even irl, you gotta learn to deal with that. AI would also somewhat solve the power creep between veterans and newbies, therefore, there's a beginner lobby already, with tons of forum guides and youtube videos on advanced aw content, so the "hard to adapt" vote option is debatable in my opinion as well.

There is a small issue with that however. I don't believe the amount of effort that goes into developing such a system would provide as much benefit. In other words, it's a great idea, although it wouldn't have a significant impact on the retention, most likely. It may improve the situation for a year or two, or even reverse the stagnation, but you would expect a much greater result for such a huge investment of time and energy (coding an AI feature, even if it's very simplistic and "low elo").

As a proof of concept, imagine the following 2 scenarios...

You are a brand new player who just found the game and you successfully finished the tutorial, played 1 or 2 games against players, and you have reached rank 2. This is already a small portion of the people, by the way. Now you want to enter a game with players and enjoy the game, try to improve, whatever... Here's where the huge difference kicks in.

In scenario A) you see 3 games in the beginner lobby. One of them is a random scenario with a weird thumbnail, a europe preset with 1/10 players, and a world 50k game with 4/20 players. You join the world 50k game. It is turn 3, somebody has already taken the entirety of China and the eastern parts of Asia, there is basically a self-made European Union, and the last two players are fighting in north america. One of the america players is allied to the Eu player, and the Eu player is sending troops over to help. In this situation, you decide to join in the middle east and ally the asia player. He refuses to ally you and the europe player quits. Then you see the winning america player allying the asia player, so now it is 2v1 against you, and you have barely taken the middle east with your limited knowledge of the game. They are also higher rank than you or alts of high ranked players. You either abandon/surrender and try to join another game, or host one yourself, or you try to play with these impossible odds and basically not enjoy the game.

In scenario B) there's 15 games in the beginner lobby, with most of them having 2-3 players, and at least 10 bots. There's a 50k funds world game with 7 players and 20 bots so that is 27/40. You join this game. Then you see that South America has 2 bots only and no players. The bots are set to easy mode in the match settings, so they are not that difficult to kill. You manage to kill the Brazil : Southeast bot while playing argentina, and you have the Colombia bot expanding in the north. You ally the america player and you defeat the Colombia bot together. Now the rest of the world is in chaos with the bots fighting each other and the players, while the players also go at each other. After this long 3 hours game, you are satisfied with the 1.5k SP you earned, and the 'friend' you made (america player).

Which one sounds more enjoyable, more engaging? Obviously scen B, for the vast majority of people at least.

So while there have been solutions in the past that improve the game in different ways to keep the players engaged and show signs of the game being alive, it would not be worthwhile to work on currently (and Dave pointed this out in this very topic earlier). One idea that comes to my mind is the suggestion of making different kinds of no-go zones. There's currently a no-go zone option for mapmakers and it also exists on the default world map, where you basically cannot move troops into (or through, unless they are aerial units). The suggestion itself in the form of an example; you wanna move infantry from Tunisia to Nigeria, in a straight line. You get a movement range nerf of -3 on your infs, since that entire area of the planet is an uninhabited desert (Sahara). It just makes sense to simulate attrition there in some way or at least limit the movement of the troops. In terms of coding this, it is not that difficult either, just copy paste the no-go zone functions for the most part, then the only tricky thing will be to calculate the movement range of the troops which are outside of the zone and moving in, or inside and moving out, but not completely in it.

At the end of the day, there's at least a few dozen ideas like that, but I think AI - by far - would be the most impactful, without actually changing or altering anything in the base game, as you could just disable or enable bots to your liking, and it is an idea that can be expanded upon.

Edit:
Oh boy... I did not even mention the fact that if a player leaves, he can be replaced by an AI. Which could also be a setting you can toggle (whether you want a leaving palyer to be replaced or become neutral).

27

作者： tempest (bw fan), 22.10.2024 at 19:42

1. I'm the only noob allowed in Enigma

2. Boywind once said and I quote: "Pretend ur pro and you'll play better", this will help tremendously. Trust.

3.

bless

1. I'm the only noob allowed in Enigma

2. Boywind once said and I quote: "Pretend ur pro and you'll play better", this will help tremendously. Trust.

3.

Enigma didn't even send me cln invite...

and Dominicano wants me to join BD, but I just wanna get my lick back and git gud..

I'm good at 1v1 and 3v3 and duel but when we cw I turn to shit for some reason.. ig the pressure is different, but no one tell me what to do in my own games.. I wanna be a better teammate tho

"inspired by Tengri" bro is twearking for support on his vid lmaoooo

I'm not watching 36 minutes of video

I will send you nudes if you fund me 3757 PC

No

Please have a screenshot or DM from a clan leader / the player who wants to be moved before messaging a moderator.
Both sides need to confirm such a move. Don't even message us before both conditions are met.

If you have any further questions message me or any other moderator.

Hello,

This is a follow up to the "How many allies makes the perfect game?" poll by Commodus.

Essentially, I have posted this poll to see how people view allies in this game. This poll was designed to find out:
-How many people prefer to play games with an ally cap above 0 versus how many want an ally cap of 0.
-Regardless of people's opinions on whether the ally cap should ideally be set to 0, I also want to know how many alliances people tend to prefer in a game with alliances enabled.

Hopefully, this poll also ends up having a larger sample size than the previous poll.

The structure of this poll was designed to ensure a more accurate estimation of people's opinions on this matter.

#Justice4Death1812

Glory to Russia <33

Don't mistake my kindness as my weakness.....

It's okay to reap the rewards of hard-earned SP, especially if you spend hours everyday playing the game. But if you use your hard-earned SP to secure transient sexual relationships outside of atwar, this is considered abuse of SP.

This abuse has been happening more often with the higher level players (top 50). Especially rank 15+.

I don't want to name names but this trend is disgusting.

If you want to buy friends, clout, or whatever, then so be it. But if you're going to exploit women with your big trunk of SP, then SP police is coming for you.

Just chill out.

作者： Bella Ciao, 22.10.2024 at 02:32

Macedonian or Greek is the same bro.

I stand corrected. A new (clarifying) survey it is...

作者： Oleg, 21.10.2024 at 08:06

作者： Bella Ciao, 27.04.2024 at 16:49

You have a dream to see Greece great
Empire again?

Macedonian*

Macedonian or Greek is the same bro.

People who have last signed on within 48 hours in this clan only numbers 30... don't fool yourself people

I disagree with your analysis of the survey.

While it is true that more people polled want to have no allies in a game than any specific number of allies, 45% of people wanted at least 2 allies which is a slightly higher amount than the number of people who wanted no allies. There was also the 10% of people who said that the ideal number depends on the game. It stands to reason that even if some of them might usually prefer games with no allies, they'll admit some maps are better with them, and a majority of those people likely tend to prefer games with an ally cap above 0.

There is also the matter of the sample size being rather small. With a sample size of 16*, I do not believe that enough people answered to make the results a good barometer of how people feel about alliances in the game.
*I am referring to the "How many allies makes the perfect game?" poll which closed with 16 respondents.

I would also argue that the survey structure should be like this:
-No Allies is ideal, but if forced, I would settle for 1 ally
- ... 2 allies
- ... 3 allies
- ... many allies
-1 ally
-2 allies
-3 allies
-many allies

First of all, this structure lets you know how many people want allies in the first place, as well as how many alliances people prefer to have. I also omitted the "it depends on the map" option, as it does not give you information that could help you make decisions unless you are willing to post polls on a map by map basis.

Lol. I think that would be Nikki?

I need to protect my brand.

Dont mind me, but the name "Niki" sounds similar to that of a hooker down the road.