eRepublik Official Wiki:Suggest

NOTE: This project is dead. More details at talk page.

edit

Suggestion guidelines

Remember to sign your posts (--~~~~)

Please try to include the following information in your suggestion:

• is it a bug fix, new feature or a tweak on current feature?
• what is the issue you are trying to solve?
• is the issue a real one or it is lack of information involved?
• how many citizens are affected by the issue?
• what solution(s) are you proposing?
• what are the implications of the solution(s)?

How to post a new suggestion?
You can post your suggestion from this link: http://wiki.erepublik.com/index.php?title=eRepublik:Suggest&action=edit&section=new&preload=eRepublik:Suggest/New (link not valid anymore)

When posting new suggestion use the link mentioned above. This will automatically create separate sub-section for comments. Try to make the suggestion easy to read by using spaces, paragraphs and lists instead of huge wall of text.

How to comment on a suggestion?
If you want to comment on a suggestion, press the edit link at the comment section of the suggestion.

Like suggestions, comments should also be made easy to read. So use indents (add : to the beginning of the line). If you comment the proposal itself, use only one indent block - if you comment on comment, use indent that's one higher than the comment itself. This way it's easy to see what comments are about suggestion and what is about other comment. You can use following voting templates to state your opinion:

• {{+1}} - I like it (+1)
• {{0}} - Undecided (0)
• {{-1}}) - I don't like it (-1)

And remember to sign your comments (--~~~~).

Editing others comments or suggestions in unconstructive way or completely removing them will lead to a block!

Bring back discussions to forum

So bring back discussions to forum where they belong from beginning. Forum is better platform for discussions and more suitable then wiki. Wiki is more for giving facts and info about the game... Btw, not all citizens know how to use wiki... If you moved from forum to wiki because citizens are destroying forum (because it's as you say it 'admins place') this wont solve that problem.

Real problem is in disrespecting players by erepublik team (not informing citizens on time about changes, doing changes every few days or weeks, don't listening ideas for improving of the game, deleting their posts and banning them without warning and with no possibility of appeal...)

Solution is in fixing all things stated here and in more friendly approach to players - they are playing this game because they love it and most of them invested their free time and sometimes even money for promoting it and making it better place, so at least they deserve same respect and regardnes... That will lead to more friendly environment, more retention and maybe even bring back old players that left the game because of stated issues.

-- Dalibor / ^Talk 11:58, 26 May 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

+1 Forum is dead  :/ -- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 12:52, 26 May 2011 (PDT)

0 I do agree with You that not many people know about the wiki and this is kind of running away from the "problems", however I personally think if citizens would respect the forum in a way of respecting the rules there wouldn't be any problems like that. Now even there is just 1 section (Suggestions & Feedback) only 20% of threads are suggestions, rest of them are completely not to do with the suggestions. Another thing is they way people write on the forums: rage, shout, insult and this has been a problem for a longer while now. --" Gucio16" 08:49, 27 May 2011 (PDT)

Does forum has moderators? Oh, yeah ^^ well , moderators should solve rage, shout, insult nabz ^^-- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 13:07, 26 May 2011 (PDT)

-1 This is an excellent idea, this will bring more people to the wiki, meaning people can update more country pages, yay! -- Mikhail Alexander 19:28, 26 May 2011 (PDT)

I don't think it of that way, it will bring more trolls and spamming to wiki :\ -- Grzechooo ^{drop a line} 05:34, 27 May 2011 (PDT)

+1 -- Grzechooo ^{drop a line} 05:34, 27 May 2011 (PDT)

0 I have been thinking about this. But I don't really know which one is better, although I am leaning to that it is a good idea that it is on the wiki. Why? Some reasons: 1] Most of the people on wiki are active, experienced, nice, smart people. They can come up with good ideas and good dissucions. Forums are a messy place with a bunch of kids writing "signed" all the time, with no proper disscusion or debates. 2] Ideas and suggestions can not be "deleted" here as it will always stay in the history, so no real censorship! 3] The active sysops here are much better than the forum moderators. 4] People with good ideas will bother to register and write their ideas here. I do not think trolls will come here, but there is a possibilty, on the other hand trolls can be handled with by the good active sysops we have here. The new users can also then improve the wiki. Negative things are that: It is much harder to discuss here in my opinion. Forums have a much better layout. There is also a small risk that this wiki will be invaded by trolls, but I see that as a small.

Two more things: Perhaps one of the reason they are attempting to completely remove forum is because of the cost. If I remember correctly it is a vBulletin forum - and those cost a lot, maybe not for a company, but I do not know how big Erepublik is. Maybe they are having a hard time and want to remove all extra costs. Wiki is free as far as I know. Another thing is that I hope by moving it here, they will listen more to the people, discuss more with the people (which I doubt).--Aryamehr talk 05:46, 27 May 2011 (PDT)

Another negative thing is that not many will participate and thus not many replies. compare with the forums when you quickly gwt a ton of replies. --Aryamehr talk 14:03, 27 May 2011 (PDT)

Yes, Wiki soft is free, and vBulletin isn't free, but they can always change it to phpBB, can't they? (I think there's some way of importing vBulletin to phpBB) -- Grzechooo ^{drop a line} 04:46, 28 May 2011 (PDT)

After googling for 2 seconds I found solution how to import vBUlletin to phpBB, but I think they just don't care, sadly, wiki and forum/suggestion site should be two different places.Garda Sabijac 11:37, 29 May 2011 (PDT)

+1 This is extremely user-hostile environment. Forum-style structure was probably created because some reason, wasnt it? Red Duck

-1 A few answers:

• Will anyone of from the team respond there at all? - Yes, me in the beginning and we'll see if, with time, it is constructive to bring the "game design guys" in these discussions.
• If yes, will we get good answers or answers that say nothing? - I'll do my best to not give copy paste answers. Instead of telling you guys that "I forwarded your idea to...", I can talk directly with the key people to see if an idea is doable or not, if we will invest resources in it or not. Also, I will never have an estimation when I will get back to a topic with a clear answer (after all, sometimes, people have higher priorities than talking with me :D). Also, there will be some cases in which you will not like the answers - as in, some ideas, although they are "cool" and "interesting", they are not usable. I'll do my best to explain what is "wrong" with these ones.
• What is the idea behind it? What's the point? (Read the first suggestion to understand what I mean) - Same as eRepublik Insider; same as having a better forum - civilized public discussions between eRepublik team members and citizens of the New World.
• Any radical changes with this? Perhaps more communication? - I think that setting the first goal to provide a two way public communication channel - one that "works" - is achievable.

--Belea2008 08:56, 31 May 2011 (PDT)

But you're avoiding one of the main questions: Why is this on the wiki, and not on the forum where it should be?.

All citizens have forum accounts, but must register separately on the wiki just to suggest stuff to the game that they play? That's pretty silly :/ • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 12:00, 31 May 2011 (PDT)

I'm not convinced that the forum "should" be the place for these kind of discussions. For example, you consider it an advantage that all citizens have forum accounts, while I consider it a disadvantage. What feedback/suggestions a new citizen can bring? (I think/she he should play the game before signing or not signing in a thread.) What valid feedback/suggestions a penalized citizen can bring? (The first intention is to write - kind of - not constructive ideas addressed to the team.) And so on... from my point of view, not all citizens are informed enough and/or objective enough to participate in these discussions.

In the end, it remains the question - why do we not improve the forum then? We did - development, design, moderation, etc. - all invested towards what exactly? With what results? Only to find out that having only one section is the most constructive and manageable solution for the moment. I do not wish to support the investment of additional resources without having any guarantees about the results (especially, if the past investments only resulted in having a "thinner" forum).

Thus, from my point of view, both areas (this section in the Wiki and the only remaining section in the Forum) will be used for public communication. No resources (except moderation/communication) will be invested in any of them until the communication improves in at least one of them.

Also, no one is "forced" to use this section here. You can still use the forum, you can still use the contact page. One thing I (we) learned from the "removal" of the eRepublik Insider is that "moving discussions" to another platform without giving options, without making comparisons between the "old system" and the "new system" brings resentments and the "new shiny communication method" will start not so "shiny".

I love this game, I'm very passionate about it. I want it to flourish/to evolve. I truly believe that evolution comes from both citizens and team members. Not as separate groups, but engaged in civilized discussions. We can agree that a citizen, any citizen, will not want to be involved in a discussion, any type of discussion, if he/she does not feel that the other side is listening.

One one side (the team's), copy paste answers do not help, vague and/or succinct answers do not explain/do not offer information. On the other side, there are a few techniques used by citizens which cannot be described as "civilized" or "constructive". That is all!

--Belea2008 09:32, 1 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 Oh hello, I, an active player, had no idea this was here. Neither does anyone else. Even if they do, this is a pain in the ass to use, and is honestly just a way to reduce feedback. Out of all the horrible recent changes lately, and there have been many, this is quite possibly the worst. --Vincent Garibaldi

+1 Wiki software is not built and programmed to be a discussion place. If you know a bit you would know that discussion places have always been platforms where the possibility of easy interaction between parts is the strong point. That's why we had mail-lists, irc, message boards (aka forums) depending on the necessity of a faster/permanent way to discuss arguments. Wiki isn't this, is a platform where you share knoweledge that has been already discussed or require minimum discussion (it's so fun to wait 45 secs to see the wiki server responding just to add a reply), so not a medium for discussion about the evolution of a game which gameplay changes weekly and generate a gigantic amount of feedback.

In relation to some Belea's point:

all citizens have forum accounts Yes it's an advantage since anyone can easily access the platform (so every idea can storm in), on the other hand you can, easily, create different discussion sections based on required experience level to discuss a certain argument

What feedback/suggestions a new citizen can bring? the kind of feedback that a seasoned player cannot give anymore, about the way the game has evolved in respect to the first crucial days

What valid feedback/suggestions a penalized citizen can bring? the kind of feedback that a less critic player cannot give, not always the good ideas come from the adoring masses but only from key excluded citizens living in theyr tubs ;)

development, design, moderation considering that the development is made by vBB company and the design is a basic theme, not much resources have been invested (cosidering that moderation is a player based project). In reality much more should've been done, creating groups of discussions with subforums per area and many more things. There are voluntary run forums in the world, well managed, with 10^6 times discussion than yours and they run just fine (personal experience).

if he/she does not feel that the other side is listening that's a defect on the staff part, citizens, by playing daily, always listen. On the other part staff rarely gives feedback on citizens ideas.

--Furio ^"UBW" 07:39, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Results are already shown, we can see tons of people discussing here on wiki ^^ hell yeah, WIN WIN WIN, ka ching ^^ -- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 14:52, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Hai, in the history file showing you that ppl editing are always the same. Please recalibrate your scale :D --Furio ^"UBW" 07:08, 11 June 2011 (PDT)

Too many free licenses

Maybe like me other player have a small problem with the license.

In the past when the license was moved from the company in the account if the player have more license then the country number the admin erase these extra license and give the gold to the player. Now the same problem appear with the dissolve tool of organization.

When you dissolve an organization you receive a free license but if the player has yet all the license these are useless, so take in consideration a refund of gold also in this case.

Sorry for my bad english, i hope at least that it's clear the problem.

-- darden / ^Talk 12:06, 01 Jun 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

This: "In the past when the license was moved from the company in the account if the player have more license then the country number the admin erase these extra license and give the gold to the player." - was done again today. We'll do it again next month. --Belea2008 05:47, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

This is true, I got 6 licenses from dissolving my organization and I've used 2 of them out of the 6 in the last few weeks. The other one's are not used and I'd rather try and get them sold as they are just taking up space. -- Mikhail Alexander 14:27, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

Can you add the possibility to "sell" licenses when you have more than a number? For example I have 53 free licenses, so... I wont use all, because I cant see which country of that 53 is better to sell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Borjoselu (talk • contribs)

The whole concept of market licenses (in terms of usability) is "awkward". We have plans to tackle it a later date. To the point, our easiest solution was and will be to give citizens 20 Gold for each free license they have and do not intend to use; but this only in the long term future, when there will not be any organizations in use. --Belea2008 07:36, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

MU: Members

	“ MUs: Members from different Countries ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

You can have members from different countries - once a member joins a military unit, he/she can change location or citizenship without any MU restrictions. Is there something I'm missing? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Well yes, you are missing the part that you can not join a MU where the CS is different than yours. So to get join there, you have to change your CS to the MU one. Also, the list of MU of each country only shows MU of CS country, and the list is not complete, I've checked.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:20, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: I think what could be changed is allowing joining the military unit without changing citizenship to the one of the owner - seems small trouble, but can be pretty frustrating. --Belea2008 05:37, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

All right. It is clear so far. Why the citizens of a country should be allowed to apply or join the MU of another country? Why Indonesian citizens should be allowed to apply or join Australian military units? Why Brazil citizens should be allowed to apply or join South African military units? And the list of similar questions can go on... --Belea2008 05:43, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Because it's a known fact that is possible even in the real world, they're called International Cooperation Forces (if endorsed by national sovereign bodies) or Private Defense Groups (if they're commercial). It'll be also a way to form groups that aren't solely based on natonalistic interests and promotes social interactions between players from various IRL nations (without losing the ingame national identity). --Furio ^"UBW" 07:53, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Indeed Furio, and i have to add: The last word belongs to the MU Leader, so he/she will decide if that person is allowed or not to the MU.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 08:56, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

I'm a German citizen and I'd like to join a Military unit and that can't happen if I have to change citizenship twice. As said above, its up to the MU leader, he/she decides who is let though. Its simple! -- Mikhail Alexander 14:29, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

I dont want to add new subcategory since this is only small suggestion but adding MU search (to search MU-a by name) can be useful :) --Stevica I 21:50, 12 June 2011 (PDT)

Nice to have, Stevica. Also, it may create technical issues in the long term. --Belea2008 07:42, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

Getting back to the main discussion, the military units (in game concept) were not designed to be "international cooperation forces". Also, military units appeared (in game) because citizens organized themselves into such entities ("out of" game). Thus, you know that the "international" military units are not that common. Again, nice to have; not a must have, from my point of view. --Belea2008 07:42, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

MU: Storage

	“ MU: Storage ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What is the purpose? Also, wouldn't that feature be similar to current storage buildings (which are associated with the land and citizen entity)? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Since its stupid (and likely illegal) to share your citizen account with other users for the purposes of supplying soldiers in your MU, you need a central store for quartermasters to draw stock from that is not dependent on company owners being online at the same time as troops get supplied. Simply put, it gives a place for citizens, who are now forced to own companies on behalf of their military units and national organizations, to put goods to be redistributed by others. It allows community, teamwork, and cooperation. --Miyagiyoda 21:04, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The purpose is to give the units common store, where they can share food, weapons, etc. It should be similar to the current buildings, with the difference that they are personal. --Belea2008 06:09, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

If you implement MU storages, you have to also implement their management and distribution chain inside the MU (which would be a similar feature to the current donate system). Also, "begging" for products or money or Gold inside of MU (or outside of it) is not fun. In the long term, it is a doable suggestion. My current thoughts about this - it is a "nice to have" feature, not a "must have". Keep also in mind that we wish that citizens become independent (their own lands, their own products, their own money). Social structure of the game should not be about "daily begging", social should be about "achieve your personal goals faster if you are part of a group". --Belea2008 06:09, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

And there is nothing bad about a supply chain and collaborative work inside of a group. We all know it's again your vision of ppl buying gold to create a personal empire, but a new player is not going to spend 1200 eur just because your game has a cool graphics, groups and social interaction play the biggest part in player retention. A player who's alone and doesn't receive help is not going to stay in this game more than 5 days, that's why MU needs a way to make the grouping effort worthy of something (and no, a private comment area isn't worth it), and that's easily achievable with a common storage and a common producing structure where all the members can collaborate giving all the members a sort of safety net and a good springboard to start theyr own adventure--Furio ^"UBW" 06:58, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Its know in all countries that work with new player retention that the faster you you get them involved in the community the more likely they are to survive past day 3. Boot Camps and Mentorship schemes all prove higher retention rates through the simple act of interaction. While it is laudable to have personal goals and achievements, it missed the point that eRep is no a solo game. It is a mass social game. People play it to be social. Social achievements mean more than personal 'achievements' since they are essentially empty. Any idiot with a credit card can get a Battle Hero or have a Q5 company. You cannot buy being elected a CP, CM, PP (unless you found the party), Military Leader (unless you now buy a MU instead of getting there by popular choice). Prominent positions of authority and trust in the community have real meaning. Instead, the changes seem to force the opposite despite the desire for people to achieve recognition in their communities.--Miyagiyoda 11:09, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

I would like to add to this conversation that, if you think in the spirit of collaborative economy in the military unit, the easiest way will be to implement a mass donate feature (MU leader has the ability to mass donate, par example). Just saying... --Belea2008 07:51, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

MU: Companies

	“ MUs:Companies ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Again, purpose? Again, wouldn't be a similar feature with the company buildings (which are associated with the land and citizen entity)? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

The purpose is to prevent users from having to share citizen accounts in order to cooperate in manufacturing supplies for their MU. It allows MU to build assets for all their current and future members instead of locking everything into individual citizen accounts which can disappear without notice. It is unfathomable that militia and armies are seen as individual driven islands who get together to chat yet ignore supplying the new and supporting the strong. A military unit or army is not by definition a collection of self-sufficient mercenaries. One man does not an army make unless your ideal is a warrior culture of heroes rompering across the battlefields caring naught for cooperation or tactics or anyone else. Social games require social structures or else they merely masked solo games. --Miyagiyoda 21:18, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The same purpose - allowing multiple unit members to administrate the common companies. --Belea2008 06:28, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Point 1: supplying the new and supporting the strong - Also read the previous section. I'm all right with supplying, if it does not transform into "begging". I'm all right with having social structures, if it does not transform into "full dependency". Also, why the mindset "support the strong"? The "strong" can be support themselves. The "new" - that is a real concern, from my point of view.

Point 2: allowing multiple unit members to administrate the common companies - Cooperation from an economy point of view? That is doable and can be done in the economy module. Why associate this "economy cooperation" with the MU structure?

On a side note, I'm all in favor of having buildings or goals or social structures or rewards in the MU (military). But new ones. Taking existing concepts from the economy and applying them to military...? In general, I (we) are in favor of implementing original/new/etc. concepts/ideas, not the same concepts with certain tweaks.

--Belea2008 06:28, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

And, again, there is nothing bad about having existing and working concepts inside a social grouping structure like MUs. Economy collaborations with current tools is not doable (will you ever play this game?) it requires tricks and possible law breaking actions to mantain a working collaboration between multiple parts. Moreovere the possibility of having MUs related companies gives everyone a springboard/safety net where to start or go back to and incentivate the creation of strong bonding social groups (giving a reason to play) where everyone is focused towards a goal since everyone is equally responsible.--Furio ^"UBW" 07:09, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

The primary reason people give on IRC for not leaving the game when they get bored is the social fabric. The community heart keeps them involved when their mind tells them to leave. They usually recover and regain vigour for play. Why chip away at social interaction when it is the biggest attraction of eRepublik? Allow people the tools to share companies and other forms of interaction within their communities. It keeps them involved long past making their next million in sales. Making even more money and even more damage in battle means far less than knowing a community relies on you and misses you. Unlock the tools to interaction and the users will make the game fly again. --Miyagiyoda 11:17, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

It is an excellent idea to add storage to military units. This makes it more manageable and just an easier experience. -- Mikhail Alexander 14:33, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

Economy of MU consists of Companies, Storage capacity, LC and gold accounts, possibility to donate and receive finished products and gold and currency so it should be looked in that way and not to add just one of those features since MU needs all of them. Please check tread on forum with proposed new MU mechanism :)link at least #1 and #3 posts with edits from comments and page 5 with answers for Beleas feedback and questions :) --Stevica I 21:40, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

You think in terms of "economy of MU", Economy = my land. Collaboration aspects in MU, yes. Rewards in MU, yes. Affiliation to MU, yes. Buildings to MU - maybe no. From this whole conversation (and the rest) - one thing is clear, very clear - this: "Unlock the tools to interaction and the users will make the game fly again." --Belea2008 08:07, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

MU: Logs

	“ MUs:Logs of fights and distributions ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What do you mean by "logs of fights"? What do you mean by "distributions"? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Mmmm i think not log, they meant stats, to see if they fighting where, and how many damage have they done. With Distribution i guess they meant about multiple Distribuiton to the soldiers inside the MU, an easier way to deal the supplies. --Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:37, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Logs of fights would mean that MUs could receive more detailed information on where and when members fought. "Distribution" - allowing the unit leader to send members money and items from the common storage, for example. --Belea2008 06:44, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Regarding distribution, see the "MU: Storage" section.

Regarding stats/logs, doable. We add these types of tweaks one at a time. In the mean time, feel free to add any concerns/ideas/advantages/disadvantages you see regarding these MU stats/logs.

--Belea2008 06:44, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Would be nice to have but it isn't essential. -- Mikhail Alexander 14:33, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

IMO it is essential because every MU wants to be more efficient and tracking donations to and from MU and statistic is must have to add some strategy to it

From MU tread on forum that Belea answered with feedback :)

MU Donation Log - Donation log visible ONLY to MU members with donation only to and from Mu and members with statistics and different sorting types - by member, day .. ect. and this may or may not include statistic of former members

MU Statistic - of influence done by MU and/or members in different battles and ect what is important for statistic for MU (production of finished products form all companies could be in one place to ) and what was wall percent in that minute when that influence was made

--Stevica I 21:33, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 Totally for it....it would be awesome-- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 03:07, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

SOLVED - Higher food fights

	“ Unlimited/higher Food-Fights (related to the WP and unlimited fighting issues) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

One of the short term goals is to offer to all citizens an increased number of "food fights". I estimate that the first phase of this project will be implemented next week. Summary of the project: features to increase "recover health limit" (currently at 300). Let me know if something is unclear here. --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Just limit WP, and remove limit on food. Therefore more food demand and more NORMAL CITIZENS can fight. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:19, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Any specific info on this project(limit number etc)? Will the number of wellness that can be recovered with food only change, or is the limit raised in some other way? Garda Sabijac ( talk) 06:29, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: I'm glad this is a part of the researches.

@Garda Sabijac - No specific info on this project.

--Belea2008 06:47, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Main concern - this increased "recover health limit" can be used to WaM? Because main reason of increasing that limit is to increase consumption, BUT if you also allow of more WaM, then you will get the opposite effect - increased production. (--Adam Nowacki 02:50, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

You could kill two birds with one stone by reducing wellness gain from food back to it quality level, so Q1 give 1W. The next thing is to reduce Health to 100 (or keep it higher at 200) but make it an unit eat limit and not a wellness gain limit. You eat 100Q1 for 100w or 100Q5 for 500w or any mix. This differentiates the food market and provides more fights for people prepare to pay for higher quality food.--Miyagiyoda 11:48, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

Either remove the limit on Food fights or raise it to 500. Over that week we had at 500 wellness food limit, I got halfway though my rank up. Which I was extremely happy with. I just want new citizens and citizens alike to have the chance to fight and give even more damage to battles. Please take off the limit for food fights and put one on wellness packs! -- Mikhail Alexander 14:36, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

• That is not the solution IMO since Q1-4 becomes worthless then and noone would buy it and use it and only Q5 will be sold. WaM needs to be tweaked and limited more than is now WaM and WP problems and solutions tread because more food need to be spent on fight and not on more WaM. that is rough suggestion but still can be doable :).--Stevica I 19:35, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

We got 2 types of health buildings so why not make them like this

- Town center stays like this with upgrades but health form it can be used only for food fight and for every Q player get 150 health (150 for Q1 and 750 for Q5)

- +XY health building should be in 3 (upgradable) Q types and health from that can be used for WaM only. new player gets Q1 when registering and it restores 100 health for WaM. Q2 will be this +50 we have right now and it restores 200 health form WaM and this +100 would be Q3 and that restores 300 health from WaM.

you think about what upgrade would be like in terms of LC and/or gold but still should have lvl limit like this

1-14 lvl only Q1 WaM building

15-24 lvl can upgrade to Q2 WaM building

25-∞ lvl can upgrade to Q3 WaM building

AND PLEASE DONT TWEAK PRODUCTIVITY ANYMORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--Stevica I 14:14, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Solved. And without tweaking productivity. :) --Belea2008 08:12, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

SOLVED - Health kits limit or price

	“ Wellness Pack limit or with rising price (related to the WP and unlimited fighting issues) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

I disagree. See the answer to the previous section. The vision/strategy/plan/etc. is neither to impose new limitations, nor to complicate the gameplay. The main idea here is that "everybody should be able to fight more". --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Then you forever make the average citizen worthless. Well done, you've broken the game. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:11, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Agreed. When the overarching rule for success is winning by outspending everyone else, it is no longer a strategic game with rules you can master, but an auction. "Strategic social game" implies a need to interact socially and tactically instead of being able to solve every problem with cash generated outside the game parameters. Limiting WP does not complicate the game any more than limiting Health. It is only with limits that we are forced to make tactical decisions. I don't even understand what "everybody should be able to fight more" means as a goal when the limitation is defined by your out-of-game credit card limit instead of an in-game mechanic. Its tantamount to playing chess with an unlimited ability to buy more pieces. --Miyagiyoda 21:32, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: "Everybody should be able to fight more" applies only to the moment, where the so called "tanks" use gold they bought to inflict millions of damage, making impossible for small units and individuals to make impact on battles. Limitation could be placed in various ways, without complicating the user experience and decreasing the profit of the game owners, but still making weaker players feeling more valuable. --Belea2008 07:39, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

In order to be more clear, I (we) acknowledge the issue: "average" citizen feels "worthless" from a military point of view (damage wise). I only disagree with both suggestions proposed. Health kits limits = a new limitation. Health kits with rising price = more complicated gameplay. --Belea2008 07:39, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

No complication. HK price is present in the war page, if you update that dynamically there is no problem. If one want to continue fight it'll click and consume the new amount of gold otherwise he'll stop. --Furio ^"UBW" 08:22, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Also, I understand the point about complication, but I don't think this should be a dogma that's supposed to block all changes. After all, currently the lack of limits on HK purchases makes not only the average citizen, but also the average gold buyer feel useless, which removes any incentive to buy gold. Why should I spend money on something that will have completely no real effect in-game? With rising HK prices (and possibly lowered initial prices), you can have the best of both worlds - heavy spenders will still be able to buy lots of healthkits, but their influence on battles will lessen. On the other hand, people who would like to spend smaller amounts of money could buy the cheaper, initial healthkits and still feel they are contributing something extra to the war effort, while not feeling worthless. --Ilintar 15:45, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Instead of rising WP price, you can implement lowering health increase. You already have +10 health on interface, so changing it to "+9" etc. would be perfectly clear for players. (--Adam Nowacki 02:56, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

• this is repost from tread shown in my post above and it concerns health kits and their increasing value it would be unlimited as now but; WP cost 0.1 gold and rises with every use by 0.01 gold so you can have more people using it (making their contribution larger than now) and people who were using them a lot by now wouldnt be worse off than now this would be IMO good solution for all players

1. WP - 0.1 gold

2. WP - 0.11 gold

3. WP - 0.12 gold

4. WP - 0.13 gold

5. WP - 0.14 gold

...

20. WP - 0.29 gold

...

30. WP - 0.39 gold

...

∞ (--Stevica I 19:41,7 June 2011 )

Are You aware what is going to happen to game if you don't limit this? Players are leaving one by one, and soon only gold buyers will stay, and eventually, they will stop playing too, cuz it's not fun to have one citizen in every country...-- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 00:26, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Solved. And without limiting anything. ;) --Belea2008 08:15, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

NOT DOABLE - Damage formula

	“ Damage Formula: Diminish the gap between tanks and new players ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Would that be unfair towards "old citizens"? I presume that in this case, there is a valid issue. Could you please detail that issue? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

The problem is less about the damage formula than linear Strength progression which effectively guarantees that new players can never catch old players. The best alternatives suggest an incremental progression akin to the way the Experience Levels, Economy Skill and Ranks work. This means that older players maintain an advantage if they play regularly, but it becomes progressively more challenging to attain the next level of achievement. While new players still cannot catch older players in absolute Strength skill points, the performance gap does close over time. --Miyagiyoda 21:42, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: After we discussed again this suggestion, we also agreed that this is unfair. --Belea2008 07:45, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

No trade routes

	“ No Trade Routes ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Why? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Because it's harder to keep a long route, and if you lost a link, it is worthless to keep the rest of the regions, that means less epic battles for a region far, far away. --Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:24, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

But trade routes mean more epic battles about the important links ;). I don't really understand why you want to remove the only thing that can be seen as strategy in wars. I thought you wanted to get back some strategy but you start it by removing strategy... Too complicated for me :D -- sampo555 | Talk 21:40, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: I personally didn't approve this suggestion, but I think what was meant is making "oversea colonies" easier to control again. --Belea2008 07:49, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

I would like to second this opinion - "why you want to remove the only thing that can be seen as strategy in wars" (+1). I thought the overall view is more strategy is needed, not less. :| --Belea2008 07:49, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

-1 It removes strategy and the current rule naturally limits empires. The heart of the dilemma is when countries agree to region-swap but cannot. This is better solved by allowing countries to trade or rent surplice NRB via a mutual proposal in country administration. That way we keep the strategy, but provide a way for countries to trade. It would be one of the few positive things you can do to make small countries (population-wise) survivable and maintain territorial integrity. It would also give allies real incentives to fight for each other if defeat means they lose access to a traded resource. --Miyagiyoda 11:26, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

What is the problem implementing both? One eCountry can rent resource bonuses to allies and on the other hand some other from other alliance can take just that region they need. That eCountry wont get wiped from map because of that and would give more strategy to alliances and messing up other economies with that. If all would rent out bonuses then we would only be in constant boring neighourhod conflicts over basically nothing :( just for NE bonus . IMO it would be easy to implement your Congress proposal and to remove that "must be connected to capital region" rule :)--Stevica I 22:00, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Old MPP rule

	“ Old MPP rule ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Again, why? What is the issue with the current alliances system? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

No strategy, just steamrolling. Perhaps have you noticed the never ending cycle of useless battles done just because there 28 active MPPs and self spawing fronts. There is no more higher/national purpose in battles except getting few px, the endless battles transformed the war in a sort of endless training field --Furio ^"UBW" 07:44, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

I support it. It makes wars less frequent so more important, and more interesting. Currently there are a billion battles everyday, and it's just plain boring. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:27, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: It gives aggressors a strong advantage, which they didn't have in the old version. Not allowing first attackers to use their MPPs would bring some strategy back into the game and this is one of the main concerns of the players, I believe. --Belea2008 08:27, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

"Old MPP rule" had one disadvantage - "stalemates" (the defender would sign a lot of MPPs and no one had incentive to attack that country). We initially changed the MPP price from 30 to 100 Gold (in order to reduce the number of MPPs a country can have). That did not worked. If you guys find a solution so that attackers still have high incentives to attack, you have my support. (As a side note, I agree that "endless battles" can become "boring" and that more "strategy" should be added to the game.) --Belea2008 08:27, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Give to the attacker of the war (not of the battle) a % attack bonus based on the MPP of the defender (that will be lost if its own MPP get activated)--Furio ^"UBW" 08:39, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

This is completly unrealistic and gives other problems, as Miyagiyoda already pointed out. (--Adam Nowacki 01:29, 5 June 2011 (PDT))

Yeah because the current war module is based on a total realistic reproduction of the common war xD --Furio ^"UBW" 03:43, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 Great suggestion. +10% per MPP should stop the mega-stacks. It does small countries no favours though. They can barely afford MPPs as is, and now they would actively work against them. An interesting strategic dilemma though. Would the own MPP activation be by the defender or a third party? --Miyagiyoda 12:01, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

There is no way to save tiny countries if everyone can open a war front for free... ehatever the defense bonus is (even the beta +250%). Natural enemy shouldn't automatically open a free war front and the good old War Declaration should be used again (with currency burning instead of gold), this way, on the long run, senseless war fronts should be reduced. I agree anyhow that trying to balance those things will ruin economy sice it is totally war based right now, so a fix here must contemplate also an economy fix ^^ --Furio ^"UBW" 03:43, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

I think that right now you cannot afford not-having many battles every day. Whole economy is based on war and battles. Also, if you truly remember - there was less that 10 epic battles during about 2 years of playing, and many boring days without even one battle. So the way is not to limit battles - the key is to make some of them really important, like "months important". Mine idea is some more complex (i'm sorry ;( ). Introduce "World Wonders", "National Wonders" - you know, the Civilization idea. Wonder should be build in company, and building of it should take many, many days. After that wonder should be deployed in some country region. Of course wonder = some bonus. Now if someone gets that region he should have choice "keep or destroy". There can be applied limits, like "only 1 wonder per region", "that wonder only on aluminum region, other only on seaside".

Pros:

- make some regions very important for epic battles

- epic economy battles (who will build world wonder first)

- wonders can decay after like 2 months - assures fun will be repeating

- wonder builind could use massive amount of raws

(--Adam Nowacki 01:29, 5 June 2011 (PDT))

And other change which addresses few issues at one time. Do you remember "kamikadze" from V1? And "training battles"? How about creating somethig like that now? I mean: you could store fights from many days and then - in one day use them all. You would had button: "train fight" - it would use wellness points and weapons just like normal fight. And there would be counter of this "train fights". Quality of weapon should somehow influcence it - for example hand fight counts as 0.5 "train fights", and q5 as 1 train fight. Then, you could use this stored "train fights" in true battle. In true battle train fight doesnt use wellness, but uses weapon.

Pros:

- more weapon usage

- if someone doesn't want - he doesn't have to use that feature, and no harm for him

- no influence on wellness packs usage

- average player can get BH medal. All he needs is to stack train fights long enough and then use them in one battle

- new level of stragegy - should military units fight today, or train for other battle?

- small countries have chance for revenge - train long enough, and you can win battle against big opponent, who is involved in constantly fight

- if you change MPP rules so there will be days without battles, there still be weapons, foood etc used.

(--Adam Nowacki 04:37, 5 June 2011 (PDT))

A simple system could be that you are awarded an Energy Bar at day change for every day where you Train and do not use 150 Wellness. This would require either that you can store Energy Bars by excluding them from auto-eating to only be used via a button on the battle screen next to eating, hospitals and wellness packs. --Miyagiyoda 19:18, 9 June 2011 (PDT)

SOLVED - Limit Gold buying

	“ Limit Gold buying ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Have you taken under consideration that the implementation of this suggestion would reduce sales? I would like to know what is the reasoning behind this idea. --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: This idea was related to the limitation we proposed on WPs, but we all know that this is impossible and we dropped this idea, focusing on the others. --Belea2008 07:56, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

I see that there is nothing about "Premium Membership" option (as reduced sale replacement), which was proposed several times on forum, for example here (--Adam Nowacki 03:09, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

-1 Totally no, just limit WP...-- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 00:28, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Solved by the latest update. ;) --Belea2008 08:17, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

NOT DOABLE - New players progress

	“ Make new players progress faster in damage than older players ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

I'll quote myself from one of the above sections: "Would that be unfair towards "old citizens"? I presume that in this case, there is a valid issue. Could you please detail that issue?" --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Again, after hearing response from a wider society, the players who attended the meeting dropped this as well. --Belea2008 08:32, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

SOLVED - Damage cap

	“ Damage cap per battles/campaigns/days (problems on who would get the BH and CH medals) (related to the WP and unlimited fighting issues) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

I don't fully understand. Can you please detail this suggestion? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

I think they mean that every player should have a limited number of influence/damage he can make in a battle/campaign/day.But this could cause problems on who would get BH and CH medals, since all players can make the same amount of damage/influence. Garda Sabijac ( talk) 07:04, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The idea is again related to the enormous difference between gold-buying tanks and ordinary players. What we propose is that there is a certain damage cap (for example 1,500,000 or a little more) for every player in each battle or campaign. This would suggest that there will be 2 or more battle heroes per side, so that more medals will be have to be given or there should be found a way to declare only one of them as the battle hero. If this idea is implemented, tanks can still spend gold in different battles/campaigns without being limited on WPs, but not making minor players feel like "a drop in the ocean". --Belea2008 08:40, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

This one depends a lot on the results of the "everybody should be able to fight more" debate/discussion/implementation/resolution, I think. --Belea2008 08:40, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Solved by the last update. ;) --Belea2008 08:21, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

More limits

	“ Food/Companies/Wellness limit per day: 500-700/30/100-200 (related to the WP and unlimited fighting issues) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Again, it is unclear what this suggestion means. Could you please give me (us) more details? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The suggestion is about placing/changing limits on those three things - food consumption goes up to 500-700, work as manager is limited to only 30 companies per day, and WPs are limited to certain amount. Again, these limits are proposed in order to make ordinary players and armies more valuable to the basic idea - battles.

See also previous (above discussions).

--Belea2008 08:43, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

This suggestion is more complete, because every "increased food limit" has to be connected with "not increased work as manager count". (--Adam Nowacki 03:08, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

* IMO increasing food limit while limiting WaM should be reverse proportional to WP cost. In this tread tread on forum is explained how WP cost should be cheap to begin with and increase progressively but still unlimited and then you can put 750 or even 1000 health per day (WaM limited of course somehow at least) See posts above with this suggestions :)

--Stevica I 22:15, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Battle bar

	“ Make the Battle Bar show not only percentage, but also amount of damage ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What for? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Seriously, I don't mean to be rude, but are you playing dumb? Show damage so you can estimate how much you need to fight to get to 50%, and whether it's worth fighting at all. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:26, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Indeed, you can calculate how many damage you need, and you would do a better distribution of it.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:27, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

It allows strategists to calculate the wall needed to win. Percentages are relative and useless for planning if you don't know what 100% means in actual damage dealt. A damage total is a quantifiable number. --Miyagiyoda 21:48, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Strategic purposes. For example, 1% could mean 100,000 damage, but can also mean more than 1,000,000. This can help making vital decisions in late battle stages. --Belea2008 08:45, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Exactly. Number are only useful if they have meaning --Miyagiyoda 12:25, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

I think this is a good idea, it will help give either side the advantage and make battles more interesting :) -- Mikhail Alexander 14:25, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

• And while you are at it add in MPP list % of influence contributed for that round from players from every eCountry in MPP list (eCitizenships). So we will finally know what use from MPP in some important battle we have - again for strategy purpose

You should also check this tread on forum about tweaks for battle module so more players can participate and be more useful since that is what you want ;)change--Stevica I 22:30, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

MU: Strength bonus

	“ Strength bonus for being in a MU ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

And what about those which are not in a MU (the majority of citizens at the moment)? --Belea2008 06:59, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

What about the people who lives in a Country (with CS) that hasn't a NE ? it's almost the same case. Solution is simple: pick one, or create it, it's better for you because they need to waste golds.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:33, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: That's why we called it "bonus" - only for a certain part of the players. This is still just another suggestion on developing the MU functionallity, because 40 gold is way too much for just another posting wall.

We would like citizens to create military units for strategy and/or social purposes, not for a "bonus". If we would add this bonus, than everybody would create his own military unit. Yes, it would remove 40 Gold from the game with each one which is created, but the main purpose of military units is not to remove Gold from game. --Belea2008 08:53, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Surely ppl are going to spend 40 golds for a private bullettin board. The bonus can be easily dispensed, if all the players (so no tricks there, set a miniumum player count to get the bonuses) fought during the day, the next day (if they're all still inside the same MU) they'll get a tiny bonus (it could be combat related but also a % related to health recovery or to str training)--Furio ^"UBW" 03:18, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

You could make it a training bonus equivalent to a free friend instead. --Miyagiyoda 12:19, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

This would encourage people to get into military units and this gives you more gold, no? -- Mikhail Alexander 14:40, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

Strategy: Retreat

	“ Strategy:Retreat button back ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What about PTOs? We had cases in the past when a country was PTOed and the entire country was "retreated" by the president. --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

We still have PTOs. What we don't have is the tactical advantages that came with having the retreat button. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:25, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Indeed, John. Look at Bolivia, they are PTOed since month ago, and they don't need a retreat button to do what they're doing. Retreats could bring more epic Battles, or simplify regions exchange.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:38, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: It can be limited to 3 retreats per week or something like that. Or, as another tactical solution, presidents can give up just battles, not campaigns, again - in a limited amount of battles per campaign or battle per day. --Belea2008 09:03, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

• What tactical advantages came with having a retreat button?
• How retreats can bring more epic battles?
• Why would we want to encourage regions exchanges?

From my point of view, this button was and will be a feature used by a limited number of people with not so pleasant results in some cases. Bringing back the retreat button how it was implemented at one point in time will not be constructive from my point of view. Who can retreat? How often retreat can be used? What can be retreated and cannot be? What will be the purposes of retreating? Will retreat button be used for malicious purposes (e.g. destroy a whole country by fully "retreating" it in one day)? --Belea2008 09:03, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Other than simplicity in region exchange, retreat can be used for gaining tactical advantage, such as taking enemy closer to your neighboring MPPs thus creating a possibility of combined attack. Using retreat, you can split enemies regions by opening RWs. You can protect your country by having an agreement with a third country to take all your bordering regions between yours and aggressor country. Also, however unethical, PTO is not against game rules unless you use multies. PTOed countries, with or without retreat option, needs to be considered as destroyed countries anyway. --Ercuu 10:02, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Strategy: Ceasefire

	“ Strategy:Ceasefire (10 days) when a country reappears on the map ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

So, with the right strategy, from 30 days in one month, I would stay conquered only 3? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Better than 30 times. I guess this is more to Small countries, who don't have a strong power to retain their regions for so long, so they must to have time to rearm or get support (look at Peru's case).--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:41, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

It is possibly better solved with Enforced Peace options in the political module. A defeated country passes a CP proposal to surrender for an enforced peace period of 1 or 3 months. The victorious country (CP proposal) can choose a mixture of 3 terms (a region, up to 5% of GDP in monthly reparations, or a lump sum of up to 10% of GDP in Gold). The surrendering country then can reject some terms for an enforced peace period or all the terms for the war to continue. One month peace gives 3 terms of which 1 can be rejected. Three months peace give 6 terms of which 2 can be rejected. All regions not specified in the terms are returned to the respective countries. So for a 1 month peace you could choose e.g. 3 regions, or 2 regions + 2% GDP/month, or 5% GDP/month + 3% GDP/month + 10% GDP lump sum. An Enforce Peace will also mean that any region agreed to cannot be RW during that period. You can also allow the attacking country (in the other's territory) to propose an enforced peace, but the surrendering country can then then reject 2/3 of terms. Strategic, introduces negotiation, and gives countries an option other that total annihilation. --Miyagiyoda 12:37, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

Set the ceasefire as mutual and there will be no problem. After the first region of the nation will reappear, no one can attack it for 10 days, but also the newly reappeared nation will not be able to start wars and/or RWs. So it'll be 10 days protected but with one region, enough for meager survival and regroup but not enough good to be employed as a tactic to stay on map without a long term plan.--Furio ^"UBW" 08:27, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Fully conquered - yes. But it is a good reason why this is not a well thought suggestion. Still, with the right amount of desire, it can be developed. For example, ceasefire's duration could be 5 days, etc. --Belea2008 09:05, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Energy bars for LC

	“ Just an idea to help remove local currencies and stabilize the economy - allow the purchase of energy bars for suitably large amounts of local currency. ”
	(Artela)

--Lonestar The Brave 05:12, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

Interesting. I would be very careful with this one. Higher availability of energy bars leads to lower usages of health kits. ;) For future reference and documentation, here are the initial concerns regarding this:

• "seasoned" citizens have high amounts of local currency - thus, the implementation of this feature will put them in advantage;
• same can be said about "government funded tanks" - that would not be a problem if all countries have the same flow of local currency - thus, "small countries" will be in disadvantage;
• if I had to choose between buying extra food or energy bars with local currency - I would go for buying energy bars - thus, a direct competition will be created between energy bar selling and food companies owners (we already started receiving complains that we "destroyed" the food industry);
• a new item on local currency does not automatically lead to a more stable local currency - you may end up with shortages of local currencies in some or all countries.

That is about it for now! --Belea2008 09:12, 6 June 2011 (PDT)

About currency stability - we all know, that main reason of currency UNstability is bot which prints money. And main reason of bot existence is massive overproduction of goods, which cannot be used due to fights limit. But this has nothing to do with energy bars idea, so shouldn't be used as argument against them. Ideas of solving overproduction are in other places. Anyway, i'm against this idea, because we should create industries, not replace them (like tickets were replaced). More different products - less overproduction and more fun. (--Adam Nowacki 10:14, 6 June 2011 (PDT))

Limit WaM

	“ Limit WaM ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What is the purpose of this new limitations? Also, how do you envision this new limitation? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

As i see it - WaM limit should be added so any increased food limit can be used on fights only, not more WaM. Deleting WaM is not an option (it is good feature), but there shouldn't be more of it. So simple limit would be "max 30 WaM per day" - so no one will be hurt, like when limit would be like 10 (many players have more companies). Houses makes possible working in 35 companies, but houses are temporary, so we can skip it. (--Adam Nowacki 03:16, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

From Squall: The purpose is to stop the overproduction, basically. It could be set to working in up to 20 or 30 companies per day. I don't have any calculations, but I think this is the main reason for overproduction. --Belea2008 06:15, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

I'll tackle "overproduction" in a different (new) section. --Belea2008 06:15, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Gold buying limit

	“ Rise the gold buying limit (20 or 30 a day, or by level) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

I don't understand this one. Could you please detail it? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

They meant (i guess), that Rise up the limit that you have per day for exchange gold, the limit that you put some month ago (when was the first "revolution"). --Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:45, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: This is about the limit of monetary market and donate gold receiving, which is 10 gold per day. I believe it is set to prevent 2 things - cheating and national donations to tanks. If I'm right, a limit of 20, 25 or even 30 gold/day would be just as effective as this one against cheating on big scale and as well as on tanking - 10 gold means 20 WPs, which is nothing in big battles. On the other hand, ordinary players sometimes need amounts around 20/25 gold (in form of loan from friends) for quick operations in short time and they would find this very useful. --Belea2008 06:29, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

We do not wish to prevent "cheating on a big scale", we wish to prevent cheating in general (not remove cheating, that would be idealistic; but limit it as much as possible). All in all, this is not set in stone; I would wait for other phases to be implemented and analyzed first (e.g. more free fights for everybody). From my understanding, this suggestion (as well as others) appeared because of the overall concern that the game is too Gold intensive (too much Gold required and not enough ways to gain it). --Belea2008 06:28, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Employees limit

	“ Bring back the employees limit ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Again, purpose? Again, what is the issue in this case? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

I think that purpose is to make more fun for players. If one player can have 100 workers in his company, then other 9 can't have them. Other purpose is to make sense of having more than 1 company of same type not for WaM. Just make it that way - hard limit of workers, and you can't hire more. Productivity not affected. (--Adam Nowacki 03:21, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

From Squall: This is another cause for overproduction. --Belea2008 06:32, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

I'll tackle "overproduction" in a different (new) section. --Belea2008 06:49, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Also, another limitation proposal? --Belea2008 06:53, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

In the overall context, I consider the entire concept - "work as employee" - not helpful:

• less than 1% of citizen have fun working for others (everybody wants to be a "manager");
• even less citizens make a profit out of having employees (every one wants to be "profitable");
• and, as a result, it is just a very high incentive for creating illegal multiple citizen accounts.

--Belea2008 06:58, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Remember Erepublik Rising concept? That "In the overall context, I consider the entire concept - "work as employee" - not helpful" is similar.

• "less than 1% of citizen have fun working for others" - how did you get that statistic? I think that every active citizen works for somebody. I work for somebody and i found it really helpful - i always get my money, withou selling on market.
• Remember, that you "Destroyed the economy" ? Fix overproduction first. And removing work as employee is not a solution of it. Don't turn erepublik into farmville.
• Really? And without WaE goods cannot be transfered between multiplayer accounts?

(--Adam Nowacki 08:05, 7 June 2011 (PDT))

• If we have healthy economy WaE would be great and for that WaM must be reduced somehow. Please don tell me that you are considering removing Job Market.

Economy is really important part of game and needs fixing in order to players really enjoy mil module... --Stevica I 22:40, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Rewards for rank and work skill

	“ Add Medals (Rank, Worker Skill achievements) or Gold for Rank or Worker Skill advances ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

You already receive "rewards" for those two (rank, higher damage and worker skill, higher number of created products). Wouldn't your suggestion add "rewards on top of rewards"? Over rewarding, although interesting and fun, becomes boring at one point in time. --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Thinking it over, it is really not a valuable suggestion. --Belea2008 07:02, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

• Worker skill advance for above Guru could be rewarded with at least 1 gold :)--Stevica I 22:42, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Random gifts

	“ Random gifts (gold, energy bar) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Details? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The idea that a certain part of the active players, on random selection, should receive from time to time gifts. As we well know, a gift can really affect everybody's mood. It can be a little amount, but shows good will. --Belea2008 07:21, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

I would add it to military as "random loot".

To economy, I would tie it to "scripted events".

Those two links are not the best examples (feel free to share others).

User story can be improved. Some RPG elements can be added...

--Belea2008 07:21, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

No. No random gifts. Useless, time consuming. Everyones mood - what's the point really if everyone is going to get something? Might as well just give everyone nothing. --Aryamehr talk 08:39, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

Storing energy bars

	“ Be able to store Energy Bars ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Energy bars are placed in your storage. What am I missing? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

You're forced to use em instead of food. Storing them is impossible. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:18, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Energy bars are placed in the storage, but they must be consumed before food, therefore if for example I want to keep it for an important battle next week, I must not consume anything in this period. The idea is that it can be kept and used on demand and not necessarily in first place.

Using them before using food was our most viable option in order to prevent "energy stockpiling". --Belea2008 07:29, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Why do you want to prevent energy bar stockpiling? Isn't it a good thing to use them at any preferred battle? --Ercuu 10:11, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

• We cant donate them and/or sell them so I dont see problem with this--Stevica I 10:11, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

The best suggestion, as a balance, is to allow players to only store 1 energy bar. If you have more you must eat until you have 1 left. --Aryamehr talk 08:39, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

CC and Gold

	“ Sell CC to the game in exchange for gold. Or swap between CC and gold when paying for companies, boosters, storage, wellness packs, etc. ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

First question: at what ratio? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: This is just a basic suggestion. I believe that the math should be done by the ones who have all the data in the world. Any ratio I propose would be just a guess and can be way of target. --Belea2008 07:30, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Donate raws

	“ Donate Raws ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Taking under account that anyone can create raw materials buildings for local currency, what is the purpose of this suggestion? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Don't know purpose, but if would make import of raw materials without import tax way to easy. But Belea - your answer is also worth of commenting "anyone can create raw materials buildings for local currency". I think that game should not focus on "i can play alone without marketplace at all". (--Adam Nowacki 03:25, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

@Belea: in a militia (like mine), giving WRM to the boss to be able to work at a company is really difficult. ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 12:57, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The purpose that a player may want to only produce food and not food raw material, for example, just like people did when this restriction wasn't enforced. It can be used to avoid taxes, as well. --Belea2008 07:32, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

A few concerns:

• I don't think it is a good idea to encourage tax evasion - after all, countries need local currency at some point in time;
• I think that game should not focus on "i can play alone without marketplace at all" - valid point; but on the other hand, the alternative is not "pretty" - being totally dependent on the marketplace: what happens if there are no offers on the market? What happens if sellers reach a "gentleman agreement" regarding the "fair price" on the market on a certain item? And the list of similar questions can continue. Although "emergent gameplay" is interesting; it can also lead to "play to destroy the fun of others" strategies;
• I don't think it is a good idea to encourage this "only produce food and not food raw material" - some of the raw materials buildings can be created with local currency; more of them are created = more local currency is removed from economy. :)

--Belea2008 07:51, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Hurr, Raw materials have got VAT? ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 08:52, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

• "being totally dependent on the marketplace" - whole V1 , Rising, V2 until WaM worked that way, and nobody complained about that.
• "what happens if there are no offers on the market" - highly unlikely, but companies from other countries will export goods, goverment can lower import tax - don't worry, everybody seeks for new markets.
• "What happens if sellers reach a "gentleman agreement" " - never happend. Many tried, but its just impossible.
• "more of them are created = more local currency is removed from economy." - this is irrelevant. Fix economy so buying bot will not be printing loads of LC - its all you need. Other really simple solution - why not change bot into "wealthy uncle". What bot does is impossible for other. "Wealthy uncle" could buy gold, then buy LC from MM, then buy goods. To put it simple - bot buying LC from MM is what you need (for now)

(--Adam Nowacki 09:29, 8 June 2011 (PDT))

After changes - i was producing on lvl 14 360 FRM (Q5). Now everybody produces more - 500 FRM. I do understant that eliminating economy skill makes game better for new player - but i've got a question:

• You made production soo big, that everybody can produce for himself - they are even getting free companies for that
• That means - prices on marketplace are going down, cause there are not many customers
• So how newbie can earn money for his next companies, if he cant make money on selling on marketplace? :/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Nowacki (talk • contribs)

Easy... it's credit card time :/ You must've noticed by now, every time something is going to be removed there is a change that makes it useless. With the last changes marketplace is going down, nations will follow soon (or they'll go on autopilot) and we'll finally have another Travian clone. Yay \o/ --Furio ^"UBW" 15:04, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

Sell raw companies

	“ Sell Raw Companies ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Why? See above (anybody can create raw companies). --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

What if i don't want anymore the raw companies in my possession and I want to do some currency with them (maybe selling them under priced?). They're endlessly stuck in there??--Furio ^"UBW" 08:30, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Exactly (--Adam Nowacki 03:26, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

From Squall: Everybody can create weapon and food companies, but they can't be sold, right? At some point, everybody might change priorities and realize that they don't need a company and be willing to get more than half of the money he invested. --Belea2008 07:53, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

And by the time you change your priorities, you already gained "more than half the money you invested". Thus, you want to keep all the money that building has helped you gain and also receive as much as possible by selling it. Isn't that just greedy? --Belea2008 07:58, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Exactly in what twisted world do you live? xD If i make some gain with my company i cannot sell it because i've already had a profit and it has to stay with me till my death? Wow that's a new conception of market. If i want to change my production line from food raw to weapon raw i've to keep the whole food and buy extra spaces just because i cannot sell/demolish them? Seriously that's a twisted way to force players to burn currency out of game --Furio ^"UBW" 02:11, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

I made some calculations (based on Poland, which is in pretty good economy when compared to others). With 14 economy skill i produce 320 WRM in Rubber Plantation. With 1 GOLD = 335 PLN, and WRM price = 0.18 , it gives 0,171 GOLD/day. So i have to work 200 days for my rubber plantation to be payed off. Or, after 100 days i can dissolve it, and be on 0. (Food cost on WaM not counted). (--Adam Nowacki 04:30, 8 June 2011 (PDT))

• Or since raw cant be sold enable dissolving for 75% original price instead of 50% ;) - more than fair IMO--Stevica I 07:58, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Donation list

	“ Donation list ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What for? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

So we can track donations :| Like we used to, so we can look for multis, use it for evidence, etc etc. Again, silly question • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:17, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Well is not a secret that you took this option off, to cut off the Tickets based on seeing Donations (for multis or whatever). I don't know if put this again, but a list of your last donations, where only you can see them, could be usefull to the dealers, or ppl who use this feature (donation) very often, because sometimes recaptcha or server lags, makes that you don't know if you donated or not.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 20:54, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: In the past, when these were active, they were used to track cheaters and help for information. For example, this way public events (donations for national organizations, donate campaigns and such) can be followed without speculations. --Belea2008 07:59, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

I consider that citizens should be focused on playing the game, not gathering evidence and doing everything possible so that their competitors are banned.

If the recaptcha or the server lags, then we should invest resources so that it does not happen any more.

To sum up, a "list of your last donations" is a doable, "nice to have" feature.

Also, I strongly consider that the described public events should be improved - concept, the way they are handled and all.

--Belea2008 08:06, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty and in the final analysis, its only keepers are the people" in the end no system that strive to offer liberties can survive without theyr users being vigilant on such liberties. So yeah users should be focused on theyr ends, but those ends are possible only if they're able to be sure that everything abide the system rules, otherwise the competitors might get advantages by using unfair means of competition. In conclusion a system that doesn't promote transparency is doomed to implode due to dishonesty. --Furio ^"UBW" 08:27, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

Optional news filters

	“ Make the filters optional. See all the articles visibly in the main page (like before), and offer the filters only after, additionally. ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Is is unclear to me what is the purpose of this improvement? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT

> "See articles visibly in the main page"

That is the purpose of the improvement. To SEE ARTICLES. No one can be bothered to look through these crappy categories. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:22, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Most of persons don't likes that new categories, you only have to ask and you'll know, it gets tedious to swim among those categories. Maybe you can use both system, old and new, merging them or whatever, i don't know, what i do know is that this system discourages their own use and also the good journalism. I'd add as a tiny, but important suggestion: add more pages to our suscriptions, if we get subscribed to one NP is to read it, not to lose it into spam articles in 2 pages.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:03, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

To make peoples read newspapers again. Look at voting statistics. (--Adam Nowacki 03:27, 4 June 2011 (PDT))

+1 The more you hide information, the less likely people are to access it. --Miyagiyoda 12:03, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The previous view of the press module was better, if we can believe what people say. It was more interactive and really important articles were "hitting" you right away. --Belea2008 08:08, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

• I would like to add interesting discussion on forum I found about Newspapers licenses. They can be in LC and allows player to buy license that can enable him/her to publish articles in different countries without moving ...license tread and there are some useful comments on it as well :)--Stevica I 14:20, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

Shared newspaper

	“ Shared newspaper ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Again, purpose? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT

More realism, allows people to publish project articles? Seriously what kinda question is that? • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:16, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Sometimes there are people who like having common newspaper. For example from my personal experience, two guys from Bulgaria try publishing their articles with the same "design", but from their separate newspapers and I believe it would be a lot easier and pleasant for them and their subscribers to read from one place only. On the other hand, I agree this is much low-priority project, compared to other issues. --Belea2008 08:16, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Government space

	“ Replace National ORG with government space ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

What do you mean exactly by "government space"? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

For govt companies and storage, I presume - this is overdue now that you've raped orgs >_> • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:23, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

You also should look at Government, Congress, Hospital, Defense System - Must Read thread (--Adam Nowacki 01:04, 5 June 2011 (PDT))

From Squall: This is pretty much related to the ingame ministries - if they exist, it could be an additional menu for players, approved by the president (or congress) for ministers. --Belea2008 08:20, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

• big points here are

replacement of government orgs and ministers institutions ingame - more fun for those who like that module

raw and LC sinks that can make WaM work in economy ;) - that tax LC has to go somewhere so why not in Hospitals and Defense Systems when we are fighting every day anyway ;) and in some time after this is implemented we will see again "issue money" law proposal in congress.

keep in mind that #2 post on tread with improved mechanism for Hospital and DS --Stevica I 22:50, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

• IMO you shouldnt be looking at this as "another feature to be added" but to look now ministers (invented by players around orgs and used as such) should work in regard of their current use and to incorporate that ingame. Why add storage and company possibilities to them? to close circle of economy since that tax LC that is collected should be spent back in economy (we had stone and hospitals and DS) and I proposed similar system that can be introduced and help economy.--Stevica I 23:29, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

Ministries

	“ Make ingame ministries. ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Could you please add a list of ministries and their responsibilities (what new tools should each ministry have)? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

There are 3 Major Ministries:

• Ministry of Foreign Affairs: it's about FA, so don't manage almost anything except a Bulletin.
• Ministry of Defense: is on charge of Military stuff, so it has to manage some companies and a Bulletin ofc.
• Ministry of Finance: is on charge of Economy. The States companies, the Central Bank, the Monetary Market control and taxes or countries-arrangement are its business.

That are some of their responsibilities. They are allways in the game, even if the game doesn't support them, it would be good if you make them fit inside of.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:31, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The Responsibilities of all ministries are almost only organizational so chats, lists of players and such should be key for their functions. A loose list would be something like this:

• Ministry of Defence
• Ministry of Youth
• Ministry of Economy
• Ministry of Finance

...and others. Each government has diferent ministries, but I think if the basic are covered, the others could stay withouth ingame reference. --Belea2008 08:21, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Contracts

	“ Contracts ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Could you please add more details about this subject? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

They surely talk about old contracts. I guess it's hard to handle with the whole population, but i think that at a Countries level, could be work.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:06, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Back in V1, in the forum there was a section in which contracts on trades and such things were signed, being followed by moderators. If one of the said failed to complete the contract, there were penalties from the moderators. I think this was great idea, I don't know why it was removed. --Belea2008 08:26, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

That would be far better (no erepublik staff required!!!) Contracts / Judical Module - project (--Adam Nowacki 08:41, 7 June 2011 (PDT))

Make a section for judicial module instead. Contracts does not mean judicial module just like that. --Aryamehr talk 08:39, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

PP medal

	“ Party President Medal ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Are you all right if we remove MM medal and add the PP medal? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Geez! no! About PP medal, it could be a nice goal for a lot of people. --Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:09, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

@Belea: please, please, PLEASE AND FUCKING PLEASE! If you destroy the Media Mogul Medal you will destroy the Erepublik media forevah, changing the conditions would be nice though. ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 12:54, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: I don't think one is relevant to the other. --Belea2008 08:29, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Never ever remove the MM medal. There are a lot of people working hard to gather enough subs. I dont like the PP medal as well, there are countries having 100 parties und inner-national PTOs would be the result. -- Freiheitskaempfer | Talk 10:05, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Medals are useless, time consuming, unfair. Remove them all I say, haha. --Aryamehr talk 08:40, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

CP moving capital

	“ CP Moving Capital ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Wouldn't that make the "cut resources" strategies obsolete? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

It'd be more realistic. Countries can designate new supply points and even the capital irl. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:14, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Not at all, the country could be divided in two parts, so decide wich resources does he want could be funny and could get strategy. Obviously, this is related with the question above about delete "cut resources" strategies.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:13, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

My answer is same as to the remove trade routes: I thought you wanted to bring more strategy in that meeting but instead you want to remove it. This is another thing that reduces strategy wars - not improve it. Like I said, if this is going to give more strategy in wars, it's too complicated for me to understand. -- sampo555 | Talk 21:52, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Not all countries in the world have trade points, the Falkland Islands in Real life don't border the UK but they still get resources. That was just a bad move and makes it even more complicated. I thought this game was meant to be realistic, because if thats what your aiming for, your way off target. -- Mikhail Alexander 00:15, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

Spanish RL capital is not eSpanish capital :/ +1 to moving capital. ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 12:48, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: Yes, it will, but will allow defending countries more tactical moves. It can as well be a limited option, once per month or twice per year, etc. --Belea2008 08:31, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Only CP can propose NE

	“ Only CP can propose Natural Enemy ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

And if the president is not available to change or set the NE? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Belea, ask that about any other power the CP has. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:15, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

0 This allows countries with a PTO CP some response, but it does move the ability to declare war back into the hands of the CP where it belongs. --Miyagiyoda 12:07, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: That is why he is chosen for president - to be there to rule the country. I believe all president log in at least twice a day, so this shouldn't be a problem. --Belea2008 08:33, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

In game referendum

	“ Ingame Referendum possibility (limited, as law proposals) ”
	(Squall Leonheart)

Comments ↑ back to top

Could you please give me more details about this one? --Belea2008 08:02, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Possibiliy to do a Referendum like: "To wich Alliance the people want to join ?", "do we need an Impeachment ?", "do you want to declare a war/sign peace to XXXX country ?" ... and so on.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:18, 2 June 2011 (PDT)

Nah, just: Type of law: Referendum and then Type here the question for the referendum.. Only available for the president, once in a week, and a message (like the one with "election day") would appear in the main page of every citizens. ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 12:45, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

From Squall: The referendum's idea is to make possible making public votings on important decisions like declaring war or changing alliances, using the election system. For example, when eBulgaria was changing sides, we had to use article and the comments bellow to make referendum on Phoenix/EDEN. 300 comments or so were posted, while at the elections there were more than 2000 votes (if I remember this well). On the other hand, in order to prevent abuse, it can be made with limit, one for month, or on set date - every country can make referendum once a month on the 10th or 20th each month. --Belea2008 08:33, 7 June 2011 (PDT)

Mass mail feature

“ I would like mail options to have a checkbox that will take a message and... ... send to entire friend list ... send to all employees in companies you own ... send to all members of your party ... send to all members of your MU ... and maybe you guys can think of a few more. I had to send a mail to EVERY employee I have, and it was a pain in the arse to click on each name individually, and paste the message, and jump through the stupid captcha hoop every half dozen or so people. It was just a tremendous hassle, and it shouldn't be. ”

(Bhane)

--Lonestar The Brave 05:48, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

+1 - Without being to involved in this I would support this, naturally the spam rules will still be applying, so if any citizen uses this to spam, he should be punished. But other than that, I support this idea, I spent almost 6 months being the Party President of Swedens biggest political party and it was a pain in the ass to send out PMs to all before party president election so ensure that they would not vote for the PTO candidate. I also think that this could improve the activity among the players, if more players get information, they could become more involved in the game and that means higher activity. I would suggest implementing this for MUs and Political Parties to start with. --Lonestar The Brave 05:49, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

• You can now send mass PM to 30 citizens from your friend list. I don't really like that you could send mass message to everyone just by one click. It would only increase the size of spam and advertising. Some people send friend request to every random profile they come across. They could use this mass message option to advertise their articles and other stuff. Let's have an example: Citizen has 2000 friends and he decides to send some illegal stuff via mass PM. I presume that the current system works like this: go trough every recipient and send individual message to them. If the case is this, moderators would need to remove all 2000 messages one by one. I like the idea but it needs a little tweaking (like the current limit). -- sampo555 | Talk 00:31, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Permanent STR upgrade

Well, the thing is that, i played this game for a while now, and i like it, and i probably always will do so, too bad some changes, aren't good, and as you never try them out before, sometimes...you sorry the word...fk up the game, and after do not even regret it, so i thought that maybe i could say some things that could help making the game a more enjoyable place for all players. The first two Upgrades i suggest, are actually profitable.

As you know, erepublik has a basic problem, its impossible for new players to grow stronger than old players in Battle stats matter, this upgrade, would not make it possible for them to reach old players, but maybe just enough for them to have enough damage to "make the difference", so they can be happy, and be able to get BHs, with gold, as always.

How would it work, it would have a limit for you to be able to buy it, i believe, the best limit would be if you have less strength than the 40% strongest of the game, and this package should provide enough strength for you to jump 10% or 20% in the total STR rank, and it would only be available with Loyalty points, or a looooot of gold. And the most important, you could only buy it once, in all your eLife. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

The loyalty strength booster

This is a simple idea, on the booster page, would be displayed something like a locked booster, with a lock over it, and if you clicked it, you would be automatically redirected to the Loyalty page, this booster would require a certain "loyalty level" to access it, you would have to unlock it, using loyalty points or gold, what suits better, it would be an 180% booster, so it wont change the consumption of napoleon (don't do it over napoleon, because then the hole STR concept will be destroyed), the point of it, would be the price, instead of costing something close to napoleon, like 1.5g, it would only cost 1g, or 0.8g, so, it would be the best cost/benefit booster, bringing more people from the lower boosters, but without taking the ones that use the Napoleon.

Both of these ideas, would need the loyalty page to be unlocked for everyone to see, i do think this is the best idea, as you used to do in the V1 with the areas of game you unlocked, and medals you got according to you achievements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Comments ↑ back to top

This sugestion is very good and we will analyze it carefully. We also need to see from the gameplay POV what are the benefits and what problems can occure if we decide to add something similar. Also, the idea of a special items store is already in our future projects, but we are currently working to finish the econonomilitary. --Belea2008 08:24, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

• most cost/effective IS 10% free booster.
• 50% booster equals +40% for 0.19GOLD, effectivity = 210% for 1 GOLD
• 100% booster equals +90% for 1,49GOLD, effectivity = 60% for 1 GOLD
• 200% booster equals +190% for 1,79GOLD, effectivity = 106% for 1 GOLD

Everone can see that Caesar has no point of existing (besides marketing of Napoleon). Loyalty booster could replace Caesar with something like 160% for 0,71GOLD - effectivity = 211%, so it is as cost effective as first, but gives almost Napoleon.(--Adam Nowacki 10:44, 8 June 2011 (PDT))

Test server

This is the most expensive idea, but might be worth it, this is a simple copy of erepublik in a new place, just like you did to test V2, with a limited number of players that want to help, that would test, for about 20 days the new upgrades, after giving a feedback, so this would request first trust, since they are testing something new, and they would be responsible for detecting bugs, for giving opinions, and for making better, and time, since their feedback should be detailed.Regarding that if anything comes out, it might be a serious problem for the testing team, so testers should be added slowly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Comments ↑ back to top

+1 so yeah, this is awesome idea...-- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 03:02, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Media module

You killed the media module when you took of the top 5, and the recent articles, this is not a question or a suggestion, is a statement.

Everyone in the game know that the media module the way it was, was a risk for you, but killing it does not solve it either, and the media module, is one of the only, if not the only, player-player direct interaction, the main question, is how to revive it, without taking any risks, and making it more enjoyable for everyone (I'm using enjoyable a lot, because I'm not sure about the interesting spelling), well, for this question, i got the answer.

The first thing is to take out from initial page that ugly icons, since they are pointless, useless, and again, ugly, make the media module OUT of the normal game page, create a new page with a dynamic system and nice design, that is probably not hard for you. In this new page is also valid to add some new and nice features, that were claimed long ago, the search for article system, the newspaper name search, and also, bring back the latest articles, and the top five. For the top five to be safer for you, you could make a point that only already revised articles can appear on it..so you will be able to apply your censorship...

And last but not least, the new punitive precautions, i know it is hard to deal with 10.000 articles saying bad things about the game, but wait, you will be able to distinguish which ones are saying bad things, and which ones are actually making suggestions and giving nice ideas, for this, the main thing would be a decent, well written (do not write it like the laws, sorry but it would just make it look more stupid) and with clear ppenalties for clear violations, I mean:

• Bad propaganda about the game - 7 days no articles the first time, 14 in the second time, and make him unable to write articles in the third time including a one day temp ban.
• External advertisement, 5 days, 10 days and 30 days.
• Racism, which i consider the worst one, would be the toughest one 20 days, 60 days, permanent suspension from his newspaper, including a 3 days temp ban for him to cool down.

I got more ideas for punitive system, but I'm not putting everything here, since i have no idea how the reactions are gonna be like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Party gold and ads

What to do with the 1.000.000 gold stuck on parties accounts? Simple, newspaper, no, it would not cost 2g, it would have a price for every article, like 1,2 or even 3g per article, and then, the return of the advertisement module, but the good part, it would be, at least in the beginning, only allowed for parties to use it, they could only put newspapers link on it, and you would need to be a PP to be able to put it, so, anything that goes wrong, a simple permaban would solve everything, and only experienced players would be able to put it on, and most of them are not in the mood to do this kind of sh*t. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Comments ↑ back to top

+1 I don't like the idea of paying for each article, but the return of ads for parties (and I would expand it to National Orgs and MU) to use would return a much missed part of the game that made politics fun. --Miyagiyoda 12:19, 4 June 2011 (PDT)

Military units and the end of organizations

As you might know, the organizations were largely used by military groups, in a way of making easier for them to administrate their companies and to ensure no one would steal their stuff, so, my suggestion is, to turn military units, in a organization...ok, but how?

An upgrade in military units, the company upgrade and the newspaper upgrade, the second one would be really helpful and easy, each of those costs 5g, the news one, enable a newspaper in the MU, with the exact name of the MU, the subscribes button, would not have a number, 1st to remain unknown, second, to make it clear that it does not matter, and the second one, would enable the MU terrain, a profile, if i can say so, and one account, to keep money. This upgrade would also require some new options on the MU, im going to make a list, otherwise it gets too complicated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Comments ↑ back to top

You also should look at this All in one suggestions thread (--Adam Nowacki 01:00, 5 June 2011 (PDT))

Land enable, as Newspaper and account

The land would come with the acc, otherwise it would be pointless to have an Land, and the newspaper would come in a separate part, just as i said in the beginning. The MU would need to buy storages, and companies, as anyone else, the difference is that people can donate their companies to the MU, the donation must be applied, and the leader/co-leader must accept it, once is donated, it loses 10% of its production, no more manager, and it cant be donated back for the next 15 days, or more, as you want. It would also be able to donate items/money to it, without any accepting/refusing system, only would be blocked if the Storage of the MU is running on 80~90% of its capacity. The administration of the companies/Storage/Money would be done by the leader and the co-leader, which takes us to the next upgrade —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

MU: New positions

They don't really need to be filled, so they don't need to be displayed at the presentation page, the Co-leader and the Assistant. The Co-leader would have the rights to accept/refuse a company donation, as well to add and remove players, and accept new applied players, deal with companies, mostly everything, except the Leader Status and to remove any of the Assistant/Leader. The Assistant, would only be able to buy sell stuff on the local market, donate things to members (all the things on the inventory can be donated to anyone in the game but the assistant can only donate it to members) and manage company details, doing this, he would be more like a supply giver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Comments ↑ back to top

+1So an Executive Officer and a Quartermaster/Supplies Officer. I would make it work like assigning managers to an organisation worked with the difference that instead of logging into the MU account, they access it directly via their citizen account. I would also not limit the number of officers of each type and assign them permissions via an edit screen with simple check-boxes. --Miyagiyoda 19:29, 9 June 2011 (PDT)

MU: statistics page

This is, i guess, one of the most awaited things to be done, this would detail the average STR on the MU, as well as the Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4, Q5 and bare hand average, top, and weakest hit, the average daily damage as well as top and weakest, individually and of the entire MU, and one status page, similar to the fellas page (not sure if I'm allowed to say the full name here, but still this should give an idea of what I'm talking about). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Change MU leader and name

The leader has 100% of the rights, he can change the Leader and reset the name of the MU, making sure it is shown that the name was changed (from-to) and it could only be done once in every 60 days, including all the other rights gave to the Co-Leader and Assistant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppandp (talk • contribs) 16:28, June 2, 2011

Comments ↑ back to top

We already implemented these two features - the MU leader can change the name of the military unit. Also, he can appoint a new leader if he/she wishes to step down: http://wiki.erepublik.com/index.php/Military_unit - Is there something else I should know about this topic? --Belea2008 08:30, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

New Food Consumption System

At the moment as we know we have 300 food health / day i think this is a big limit for erepbulik, and for the people that want spend more time on erep, in this moment the only way for fight more and have more fight is spend gold ( i have a good amount of gold so if i want i can fight more but i think that this isn't only a problem of mine) so people that can't spend and the new player are really boring, this can be a solution.

New Building (active from the begin) in this building you can convert your food in different KIT ( 10 food for a kit):

- Work Kit -> you can use this kit for working

- Fight Kit -> you can use this kit in the battle

How this work?

When you done a work if you have in your storage a work kit your health didn't go down, if you haven't you will lose 10 health and a counter named "Work kit Usable" will have a +1. In this way if you haven't at the moment work kit, you can work until low wellness like now and then you can use 1 work kit for each work you have done and increase your health.

When you done a fight you lose 10 health, then you can use a fight kit that restore your health ( this is like now only with kit instead food).

How many kit?

Every day a player can create 30 Work Kit and 30 Fight kit, but you can accumulate this kit like the other storage object ( in this way also worst player can reach in a easy way an hero or small country can have more chance for win a battle).

Every time you create the 30 Fight Kit a flag "Daily creationd done" is put on true, in this case if you reach 0 Fight Kit you will gain 1 creable fight kit each 3 minutes until a max of 30 and again and again. So in a day if you are a great player and you spend your life in erep you will done somenthing like 510 fight.

What does this change?
In this way

• the consume of food for work is separate from the consume of food for fight.
• who want spend time on erepublik can.
• the gold consume didn't decrease because who spend money for gold will done the same that know for being stronger.
• each minibattle is like a new war because if you fight at the begin in the next mini you will have other kit.

There are a lot of BrowserGame/FacebookGame that use this kind of system and in all of this there are more active player and more fun then in erepublik, so take ispiration from them isn't a bad thing. :P

Btw i don't know if this can be interesting also for other player or is only a mine crazy idea.

PS: maybe in this way the consume of food and weapon

--Darden 02:15, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Informing users about forthcoming changes

As we all know in the past few months[excluding the leak of info few weeks ago] the users are probably the last to get any info on forthcoming changes. The question is simple: Why?

In every other game/site, basicly any product that I use, the users are notified of changes that lie ahead and are explained what that means to them. Some do it with blogs some do it with forums, hell some even post forthcoming updates on tumblr [for example: minecraft]. But the point is, the users are notified, which is not the case in erepublik. And here, in a social/multiplayer game that relies on many variables working together where every aspect and every change no matter how small it is can have great impact on players and game itself, that's not done properly[read: it's not even done poorly].

We as players are going to face changes whether we like them or not, and that's a fact.

But I think that we at least have the right to know what's coming. Right now I could wake up tomorrow and find that the whole economy module is gone, I'm pretty sure it won't but I can't be certain because even if it did I wouldn't have any chance of knowing it before it happened.

My suggestion is: bring back eRepublik insider. Or some other sort of announcments, but I think that erep Insider would be the best choice because more players would have insight into changes than, for example, only those who browse wiki/forum.

Another example, Belea I see you mentioning a project that'll increase number of "food fights". And that it's starting next week. Did you have any plans about notifying the players? --Garda Sabijac 11:16, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

Good idea. Users should be notified about forthcoming changes and implemented changes. Erepublik Insider works - but it does seem a bit childish that it is a "newspaper". I suggest they add something on the main page with the latest news, and this will have forthcoming changes and implemented changes. At the same time this will even have other information, for example discounts and stuff. --Aryamehr talk 12:25, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

My suggestion regarding "inform players about upcoming changes" is that there should be a wall post from Plato on every citizen's homepage with some nice highlight (like Plato's PM have different color in the list). This twitter-type information thingy doesn't take a lot of resources from the Community Officers: they would only need to write few sentences - not huge walls of text like at the forums. This would also bring the information to every citizen - not only to the ones who know how to find it. If the announcement can't be said within the 160 character limit, you could add link to forum or wiki for external reference/discussion/documentation.

Commenting this post should be disabled - being able to comment Plato's posts will lead to a mess ;) Tech guys could also use this to give heads up about some lag, performance issues or maintenance.

With simple like and dislike buttons, this post could be used for simple feedback gathering method. The eRepublik team could just add the question (e.g. "Should citizens be allowed to change their name for 20g?" - "Like/Dislike") and all citizens can easily voice their opinion. Liking/disliking should only be possible if the eRepublik team chooses so. This section could have a link to forum where citizens could share their thoughts with other citizens and eRepublik Team. Sometimes simple things are better than complicated systems. -- sampo555 | Talk 13:00, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

This is a great idea, also something like that already exists in erepublik. It's the "shout" system in MU. They could easily implement that with Plato and hyperlink that shout with any external links with more info etc. As far as that goes, I still think the easiest way to bring "long posts" to users is via erepublik insider it could be simply edited to look more official, because as Aryamehr said it's kinda "childish" because it's "only newspapers" --Garda Sabijac 13:41, 3 June 2011 (PDT)

They can use the abandoned "blog.erepublik.com". This is already here and if they advertise and tell people about it, people will go to it and find out the necessary information. -- Mikhail Alexander 14:23, 5 June 2011 (PDT)

This should be priority. This is the most important thing. It should be upcoming changes and recent changes. --Aryamehr talk 08:41, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

Donation Improvement Feature

	“ Donation  ”
	(Bhane)

Originally form this post on forum

Donation by Bhane

I would like the donate options to have a checkbox that will take a donation and...

... send to entire friend list

... send to all employees in companies you own

... send to all members of your party

... send to all members of your MU

... and maybe you guys can think of a few more.

I could choose the "all employees" checkbox and put "2" in the donation box next to finished product I want to donate. By clicking the donate button I would send 2 finished product to every employee.

If I don't have enough in stock to send to everyone on the list, then NONE get sent, and I get an error message telling me to reduce the number in the donation box. I would hop the devs don't make it so that half the employees get the goods, and then I have to figure out who missed out, and who got it.

--Stevica I 23:54, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

0I would agree to donations to natural groups - company employees and MU, political party members at a push, but not your entire friend list. Being able to tag/label your friends to create sub-groups and donating to these seems more reasonable and less likely to cause performance problems on the servers. I say tags/labels, because being able to sort friends into multiple categories is less restrictive and more intuitive. --Miyagiyoda 19:41, 9 June 2011 (PDT)

• Ive reposted Idea in original form but agree with your suggestions :)--Stevica I 22:20, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

same xp for fights and works

Who got more experiment in game , a citizen used all 300 health to work in his own company or a citizen fights for his country/Alliance ?? Now we got 2 xp for working and 1 for fighting . I think citizens for both this activities should obtain equal experiment point (XP) , with this way newbie interested in companies but the sprite of this game is fighting in battles and wars are the engines of economy .
same xp for fighters and workers !!! Ali Emami talk to me 17:28, 8 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

Actually i dont understand why working gets you more XP. But at a certain point you dont care for them anymore. so just change it to 1 XP per work -- Freiheitskaempfer | Talk 12:17, 9 June 2011 (PDT)

V1 battle system

We all know that V1 battle system was simple, but fun. Every single point of damage had sense. Yesterday, I made 290k influence, but nothing important...

Minibattles every 2h (1801 points) is pointles IMO. I can fight in 1-2 minibattles, but if I don't fight, it's not that important...

In V1, i was making 2k damage, and when i make it, i know i moved that wall a bit...i felt needed. If you make an international survey about this, I am 100% sure that you would get at least 80% of votes for that change.

It doesn't have to be pure copy of V1, you can make improved copy of that module, and I can guarantee that players will be satisfied.

Mark Your votes:

• +1 - I like it (+1)
• 0 - Undecided (0)
• -1 - I don't like it (-1)

And remember to sign your comments.

+1 from me :) -- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 03:14, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

• +1 I definetly love the wall of v1 in comparison to the situation now. -- Freiheitskaempfer | Talk 03:30, 10 June 2011 (PDT)
• +1 • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 03:26, 10 June 2011 (PDT)
• -1 I like the old V1 wall but the mini battles made game more interesting . Ali Emami talk to me 07:35, 10 June 2011 (PDT)
• +1 -- Mikhail Alexander 06:06, 10 June 2011 (PDT)
• 0 Admins just don't mind. They won't do it, be sure. ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 08:45, 10 June 2011 (PDT)
• -1 I liked the V2 since everyone meant something but tweak to this module could make it good also. Id shown you forum tread about that idea but when it gets back online :)--Stevica I 22:10, 10 June 2011 (PDT)

FORUM

	“ Bring back forum ”
	(Stevica I)

Yes I know you think it is useless and only read it and rarely answer on topics there but still it would be nice to have it back ... Ive sent ticket about it and received info that it will be resolved soon and it would be great since it is much better way of communicating than wiki and at least we can discuss about various ideas there and when they are complete to some extent post it here :) --Stevica I 22:00, 12 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

+1 Yes goddamnit • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 14:55, 12 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 signed hard -- Grzechooo ^{drop a line} 08:40, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 Signed even harder -- Hurkancs _{Talk page / Hurkancs} 10:08, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 Do you ever heard about social game without forum ? Ali Emami talk to me 17:10, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 I would like to have the forum again to do these stuff, it is a nightmare to follow this page.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 22:17, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 this is not the media we want to communicate!just bring the forum back,plato Eleme911 Talk to me 03:26, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 Currently there is no in-game way of getting a new player into some community. If somebody has no friends, it's really hard to get some at present (no IRC, no chat, no forum). I think that forum, where people can only suggest things, which will not be implemented anyway, is useless. All feedback was erased anyway. IF forum would be back, it just needs at least Help Section. Any off-topic is welcome as well. Try to keep these new players in game some way. It would be a good start. Using outdated Wiki by new players is just nonsense. Bukimi

+1 Yes, I want it back now! -- Mikhail Alexander 21:09, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

Introduced the Career Tree again

At the end of eRepublik first year and their until the time when v2 was introduced, there was a career tree on which players might follow their achievements. On this tree, players could also get information about what the next achievement consisted of and what was necessary to reach this.

It was referred to as the "eRepublik Career Tree". As a citizen I had a lot of help from this tree, I could easily follow my past in eRepublik, see what I had done and what I had yet to achieve. When I later got involved with work within the government and started writing guide for new citizens I had lots of help of this since I could predict when new players could do new things and send out the right information to the citizens that needed it. Ie. sending out information about parties to citizens that had reached a level where they could join a party, sending out messages to my fellow party members that now could run for congress with information about congress, what it was and how to get in.

Overall, this is something that could be valuable for citizens on all levels of experience and it would also give new citizens a view of what they can achieve in the New World that we call eRepublik. --Lonestar The Brave 08:10, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

I didn't remember that ^_^ Yeah, it would really help the new players, so +1. Also, I expect not to see an "unlock this level for 29 Gold". ||||||Khebit ^T_C| 12:18, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 I remember the eRepublik Tree very well. When I was new it helped me out a lot to what I had to do to get to join a party, etc. I'd really like to see this introduced again. -- Mikhail Alexander 21:08, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

You mean this: Career Tree ? (this image). I remember, i saw it A LOT :3, it would be nice to have it, for new players.--Santirub ● «say me hi :3» 21:47, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

Town Center

• http://prntscr.com/20tfa

To upgrade the Town Center to level 4, I need to have "fruits orchard" but i think you should count if I have a superior company like fishery or the other 2, because I dont want build fruits orchard and i've superiors company than that. *—Preceding unsigned comment added by Obadia (talk • contribs)

Comments ↑ back to top

You have to get them. Its the only way you can upgrade, there are no other options on the table. -- Mikhail Alexander 14:45, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

That's exaclty what should be changed. Or upgrade of RW's should be possible. It makes no sense to inbest in not needed and unprofitable company that can't be upgraded later. --Bukimi, 00:16, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

Marketplace sort

Items in the marketplace are primary sorted by price and secondary it`s random.

Problem: if the items are ordered randomly, then there`s a situation when after switching pages you miss some seller products - at first they are showed in 2nd page but after switching to 2nd page, they are showed in 1st page.

Solution: primary order items by price and then by date ascending; Then also the oldest products will be on the top and it`s fair to the sellers.

--Kristto 15:25, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

Battle Module improvement

	“ Battle Module improvement from forum ”
	(Damjan Grozni)

I remembered one tread from forum about Battle Module today and idea goes like this but Im not 100% sure that I remembered it correctly in original form but it goes like this:

Instead having one battle bar we would have 3 which will categories of players based on strength and influence that they make in their respected categories.

• category 1 0 - 1500 strength
• category 2 1501 - 3500 strength
• category 3 3501 - ∞ strength

- best of 3 battle bars win that round

- after each round there will be BH medal for every category (only one CH medal for every battle ;) ) and since we just wont be allowed by admins to get that many BH medals per battle in current system (read free gold) maybe tweak for that Country points system can enable to rounds last min 2 (or more) hours

Why? instead of having max 15 rounds per battle like now (8 to win) we would have only 9 (5 to win battle) and still

--Stevica I 13:30, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

I would like something like this since it would help player retention because they will have leveling and not having spent all they have to get BH medal just to have some +5000 strength player come and take it from them in last minute :( --Stevica I 13:30, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

+1 - But I dont think admins will listen. • John F. Baker (Talk | Contribs) • 16:59, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

Fire all the game designers.

It is becoming increasingly evident that those people whose job it is to choose the direction of eRepublik do not know what they are doing, in the slightest. The direction of eRepublik development can best be described by the headless chicken at the top of the page - it blunders first one way, then the other, without looking where it is going.

I understand that a key principle of eRepublik design is "KISS" - Keep It Simple, Stupid! This is a very useful principle, but I would temper it with Aristotelian ethics - aim for a moderate approach, rather than this "extremism of simplicity"!

"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."

eRepublik today is far too simple, and from the current trends it looks like it is only going to get simpler.

By "simplifying" the economic module you have removed all its depth: there is no longer any challenge in running a company well; there is no longer anything to progress towards with the removal of economic skill; there is no interplay of different products. You have pretty much replaced the entire module with a "give me stuff" button, and for all the entertainment that gives you might as well remove it entirely and just have the game as one big "fight" button.

By "simplifying" the military module you have reduced it to a game of numbers. At the moment it is a game of "who has the biggest credit card", but even if you solved that gaping flaw it would be back to "who has the biggest population", both of which are exceedingly dull propositions.

Going into V2 you had the right idea, but the wrong approach. The new military module buckled under load and was full of security holes; it was also heavily unbalanced. But it also showed promise: there was something challenging and fun there to do, for players and military leaders. If you had gone through a proper testing period first, these issues would have been avoided! It also took too long to play, but that sort of issue can be incrementally refined in the same way you've refined on the current, simple war module.

Equally, the new economic module was well intentioned but nevertheless cocked up. Yet it worked orders of magnitude better than what we have now! The product customisation mechanic gave managers flexibility and interesting tradeoffs to make. It did turn out that you hadn't thought out the formulas properly, and so there were only a few "good" customization options - but compared to now where we have exactly four worthwhile companies (and two worthwhile products) that was a piece of game design genius. This too could have been improved if the designers a) played the game and understood the impacts of changes to the game mechanics or b) tested the damn thing!

The bad reaction to v2 was because it was horribly broken, not because the players wanted the game to be simpler! And yet in response to their reaction, whoever it is that decides these things is doing what I can only describe as dismembering the game in the name of "simplicity".

The three years I have spent playing this game I have also been observing the development process - observing a myriad of bad decisions not limited to what I've described above. I am utterly without hope for the redemption of whoever it is that has been responsible: the only solution I can see to eRepublik's crisis is to fire the lot of them and start afresh.

Please, because I really do love this game - and the potential that I can still, somehow, see in it: HIRE SOMEONE COMPETENT. Someone who tests their changes properly. Someone who actually plays the game to understand the changes (s)he makes. Someone who has a sense for what makes games fun!

END RANT--Draaglom 23:05, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

Comments ↑ back to top

+1 I agree that changes seem to be going wrong way. It's all about removing things. There was no NEW option introduced since v2. Think about all things that got limited recently: MM, number of industries, orgs, health in productivity, economy skill. There is almost nothing left to remove from this game. Sad thing is that most recent changes are irreversible. I can't think of a way to reintroduce economy skill. New staff would have a really big problem to solve. Bukimi, 23:43, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

I also agree kind of.

1. New things are not being added. It is either removing things or changing existing things all the time
2. This game is turning into a military game. Look at the latest update today. All the changes are done to make people fight more --> thus more income (nothing wrong with that, of course I want this game to have income otherwise it would not exist - but be clear and say this is not going to be Erepublik we thought from beginning but a military game)
3. They make stupid decision. It is really sad. I mean is there not anyone in the Erepublik team that says "enough"? Or maybe their bosses make all the decisions themselves, possible.
4. Worst part is they make bad decision and never learn from them.
5. They will not add IMPORTANT things like changelog of what was changed or what is going to be changed (the reason is simple: They are making changes they know themselves that the players don't like, so they don't want anyone to find out. Example: When they removed the work level, a lot of people did not notice this at first before a week after or so...)
6. They lie. Look at the forums, closed because of "technical issues" as soon as the update that removed worker level etc. became live last week. If you know people will rant - don't you think something is wrong then?. Sure if a small number ranted I wouldn't care, but a lot of players are angry with the chances - A LOT -.

There are more but I have said this so many times that I am getting bored now. --Aryamehr talk 05:08, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

I think that the fact that nobody from "the team" bothered to comment on any of recent entries is even worse. Does switching discussion to Wiki have any sense if even here our words are not read and feeling of hopelessness is not gone? Where is so called "communication"? Because "customer service" is a thing that was always mythical here. --Bukimi, 05:15, 16 June 2011 (PDT)

Salary management

Problem: it`s annoying to change the salary to each single employee

Solution: there need to be a feature to change salary to all employees. It would be great if I could enter an increase amount, e.g. after I enter +10, then all salaries will be increase by 10.

--kristto 11:45, 16 June 2011 (PDT)