This truly needs to be nerfed a bit more then it currently is. A restart shouldn't have more CS then what it died with. When I died in team in a friendly war vs tso, I restarted with 2 times the amount of CS I invested in. It should not go by how many turns total in the reset. The restart should be based off of how many turns the individual country has played. There is no true "art of war" anymore with how "circular" the restart's can obtain so many goods, and land from the previous country. Keep the restarts as it is, but make some modifications to how quickly they can become useful in a war. I know this isn't like earth2025 where if you die, you have to restart from scratch, however this isn't very beneficial to 2 warring sides. All they have to do to pad their war starts is restart, come OOP and start killing other restarts with at least 4ka and grow off of it. Please take this into consideration as this has to be addressed in a long term war effort.

Do you like playing whack-a-mole everytime you or your clan goes to war? Do you enjoy hours of wholesome entertainment for the entire family, while dodging fluffs and other vitriolic conversation on a message forum? Do you absolutely love crunching numbers and writing scripts just to get a slight edge on the competition? Does your mother enjoy you leeching off her hard-earned paycheck every 2 weeks from her retail job just so you can sloth your way down to her basement? If so, Earth:Empires is the game for you!

It is.

Then tell me how a country has only played maybe 500 turns, give or take and restarts with a crap ton of CS?

It goes by total amount of turns played, not the last country they had

Maybe what MrTan1 meant was:

Restarts should have 10% of the amount of turns played as their previous country built into CS instead of the amount of turns played as their previous countr(IES).

For Country A that has died when he had spent 1000 turns, Restart Country A would have 100 CS.

If Restart Country A died again when he had spent 500 turns, his Restart Country A no. 2 would have 50 CS.


Alternatively, restarts can have 80% of their total CS in the previous country regardless of the number of times the country restarted.

For example,
Country A has 300 CS when he died,
Restart Country A would have 240 CS when he restart
If he died again with 240 CS, he will restart as Restart Country No. 2 with 192CS

If Restart Country A built an addition 100 CS, total 340 CS and if dies again, he will restart with 272 CS (80%).

Ah; it's turns played by the player, not turns in the reset; though yes, it does include past countries.

that whole past countries thing shouldn't aid the new country... I applaud the idea of a faster restart, but it does get kind of insane if you kill a month or so into a reset, especially if the player started from day 1.

Please nerf this.

Disagree. New restarts make war alot more intresting.
Nerf restart = FS wins.

MrTan, you are reffering to the old e2025 wars - more kills = better.
But why more kills is better? It shouldnt be so. War should be a strategy and tactic challange, not just "hit attack button".

On the other hand, right now youd get 250 CS+. So on the winning side of a war, and with 2 FA packages, a restart can farm to 7k land, buy up/ get FAed to 3m NW, and rebuild in a day (asssuming they saved turns before coming oop)to have a fully functioning country that just needs to buy tech with the remaining money.

So I dont see why a restart on the losing side of the war being able to get to 1m NW in 2 days is over powered :P

Yeah, you just restart, get too many CS to start off with, explore to turn 99 as a farmer, come oop with a nice amount of cash then get FAed and start killing again. It is was too circular for making "wars interesting." Unless you waste countless of turns AB/BRing or even the land farming, making a restart have 67 bpt at the beginning is way too much... You can explore to 4ka and be fully built by turn 99... that is way too much land for a restart to be fully built with. You want it to be interesting? How about nerfing it where it doesn't receive as many CS to make a restart actually WORK for the country instead of being given on a silver platter. I know that some alliances love to be given stuff without working for it, however, that isn't apart of this game. You want top spot for NW? You got to work for it, you want top hits in a reset of war, you must work for it, you die... You get a restart given to you so easily without work.

Total fluff!

An add on for the previous post.

If the terms were, "If Alliance A to Z tag killed Alliance A to Z for original countries and after that was achieved a CF would occur and the restarts can netgain peacefully." Yes, I can see restarts needing some help, but not if "Alliance A-Z hits Alliance A-Z for weeks on end for AB/BR/Land farming and they still ankle bite kills." Then, it is too circular. You really think restarting after the 5th time is fun and gaining more and more CS so you can get land farmed or maimed is fun? Then go play FFA for that. This is alliance, where we tag kill alliances and not going in circles.

MrTan1, wasnt war circular all time? What changed in circularity?
Its just now restart has better abilities to damage.
Its alot easier to damage 3M country with 1M country than damage 300K nw country with 100K nw country. And even big one can be damaged with 1M nw countries.

War wasn't nearly as circular as it is today... You want proof?

Earth2025 underneath Mehul Patel/OMAC.

You get killed... You go back to 4717 NW and 100a of land, you start from scratch.
Earth2025 underneath qzjul/Pang

Over the reset you gain more CS, more land, you are still given military and cash, you can keep banked turns.

You think that war isn't circular now? Once an enemy was pretty much killed in earth2025, it was rather obvious. Now restarts can hit faster after a few days and be able to pad fluffing war stats because everyone CARES for war stats.

Like I have fore mentioned... Restart "gifts" need to be nerfed a bit more then already are. You want to freely hand out 250 CS or more because Evo land killed tiny countries after they were maimed so they can restart better? Then, so be it. Just a bunch of fluff for those who can't war properly.

in the old days killing up was 3x faster than killing down

it was still circular just different

id like to maybe see something that gives more to the first country or less to subsequent ones, and something that gives extra either to countries killed within the first x period of the set or within the first x turns run

back before these changes the two things i was thinking of was making it so a blindsided alliance can come back and reducing the boring non attacking time

perhaps it was just easier to code but i always felt the idea of having a lot more turns in protection that you have to use before you get more turns and get straight away more interesting to reduce dead time

and some of what you had before was more interesting to allow comeback from blindside

rather than a pretty arbitrary, your bigger each time

there was no real need to be any bigger than humanitarians and not have to wait 1.5 days, right now you still need to wait .5 days for no real reason and usually extra so you come out and run some turns

its basically removed the requirement to fa restarts so they can join in kills on worthwhile targets reducing choice

and obviously the cs count gets so high theres no need to choose longterm or shortterm there and even dict isnt a huge penalty since you rarely can build all acres straight away as a restart

MrTan, I think was circular now and before. It was just longer circle, when you needs to grow from 4717 nw, but its still cirle. And now, as cirle lower, losing side has more chances to fight back. Whats bad with it? You want to blindside FS and be happy? Seems kinda unfair for me.

Duna - I don't think anyone is complaining about your *first* restart coming back relatively strong.

Its when every restart is stronger then the previous, before they've exited protection, that their's an issue.

how about a clan like tie. we did not do a blind side fs. we are winning our war and a 3rd and 4th restart are getting to 800k nw and breaking first restarts that are 1.6m but have much less cs so cant grow as fast as a 3rd restart.

my restart is over 2000 turns old but still very breakable with some demos and cd because they can get to 500k troops plus in 3 or 4 days on their restarts. to prevent this we would have to kill 10 of them a day if you go by marshals they are still very killable theory.

my bpt is 25 they get killed and come out with a bpt of 75. 1 cm on me kills 300 buildings and can destroy a full days growth (10 turns). 1 cm on them kills 200 thats 3 turns of growth. so the only reason tie hasnt been able to beat rival back is they keep restarting and get to 800k nw faster than we can kill them and they can still easily break one of our countries thats older and double their size.

im all for giving them a chance but once they die 3 or 4 times they should start to get weaker not just keep getting stronger

there needs to be some sort of penalty for the 2nd and on restarts as well as fixing the cs cash issue

Dooman, and what the issue?

crag, sry, but this is B&S forum, not AT. Your restarts are same as rival (and half of rival countries played less than 2K turns, so tie even have advantage). You are in same situation as Rival. So, what you want to say with your post?

duna this is the exact place for his post, he is explaining the problem with restarts now.

Warster, he is telling how TIE good and how Rival bad (even if they in same situation with restarts). I dont saw any expanation of the problem. If you saw it, can you please tell it to me, since im to stupid to see it.

no where in that post does he say ANYTHING about how good or bad rival is or how good TIE is.


he's whole point is that restarts should not get better when someone is on their 3rd - 4th restart compared to their 1st restart

duna its called an example. they are things used to illustrate the problem in a manner easily understood by less intelligent people.

the same problem is being felt by alliances on 1a and ffa.

older restarts that have managed not to get killed 5 times cant compete with the bpt of countries killed 3 or 4 times so older restarts are being punished for not getting killed.

i dont think that a restart should be able to catch and pass an older restart (assuming its not killed or crippled) so easy due to its better bpt. many restarts have better production than older countries. only difference is the tech the older country has managed to get over time

crag, but why? Thats question. Or is it just your opinion? You dont told any reason. I dont see any good reason for this.

Warster, he dont answer why. He just wrote it as axiom.

making 2nd 3rd and 4th restarts weaker than the previous restarts would help deter self killing if they were going to come back weaker than their current country. also encourages walling since they just changed the rules to make walling easier since so many ppl were complaining walling was to hard.

current system rewards multiple deaths and running all troops no turrets to get killed and restart. death should be a punishment not a reward for getting killed

Ok, now it seems alot meaningfully for me.
But as for this suggestion. This change will give less chances to fight. You want to make wars less intresting? Strange suggestion.

How is a "war" interesting when you restart better then the other? That makes no sense. You should die and have to restart over with, not given more CS and such... Totally against all principles of any war game I've ever played and real life war as well.

War is intresting as long as both sides can damage each other.

MrTan, as for real life. Does your RL country has more spies than population? This is game and it just need to be intresting and not realistic.
But if we refer to RL, there is alot more economy wars than military. So, sometimes its better to not kill enemy, but just destroy his economy. Also, you cant kill whole country in RL.

self killing isn't actually worth it; i showed that in the previous thread =/

i think killing restarts for 4 weeks does not make a war interesting.

Well, that's up to politics; the goal is to make it so that alliances can still be *in* the war after being smashed by an FS

seems like they are not looking into it then... :( disappointing...

We are paying attention. But realize that we are talking to players beyond those who post to this board (and no I'm not just asking people in sof).

The other side to the argument is that if you smash a tag into the ground on week 2, those players would probably not play for the rest of the reset. In addition, players on the other side would also lose interest and typically wouldn't come back until the following reset either.

We rarely had that problem in earth2025, but whatever Admins/Game Mods.

which problem?

that other side stopped warring after tag kill, although it happened on some servers like limited and ffa.