there needs to be a system where regions of little geopolitical value (example Pacific and Indian) are devalued overtime by calculating how often they are sieged... ships present and ontop of that sinks.

Unreasonable af lmao

You can't keep making suggestions to nerf your enemies because you're losing yourself

Removal of siege regions has only been done to pacific, because there was no other nation near to contest it.
Back when sahara was still around, coalition wasn't winning the europe regions because of the exact same reasons you guys are losing right now:
- lack of motivation
- lack of numbers
- lack of resources

Lets see what you (alii) said when WE adressed the issue you are adressing right now

"The difference is we don't have the facilities in Asia to contest Pacific but oh no!!! Coalition towns 400 BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE REGION. Zaify had clarified this before, you have everything you need to take the region except for a brain. Kicking out your best pilots out of coalition starting to set in eh?"

Why is it that your own arguements can be completely used against you with this suggestion?

You just want an enemy nerf. Making you change your opinion because suddenly youre in the position we were a couple of months ago
In other words, cope & get good

Excuse me, this is quite a rude tone.
We can not contest Pacific or Indian due to having no ports available and the time the region is set at.

What should be done is as I sad, regions are based on their strategic and battleworthy credits... that way nations don't just print free money.

No one is sieging pacific, because its quite impossible... No one is sieging Indian because its 2pm on a work day (and we have no ports).

The only regions we can contest fairly are Atlantic.

You did have a pacific port, for about 50 out of those 77 days, as well as briefly having control over okinawa. If you chose to remove it, that's on you

No we didnt?
Sop had the port for a bit... and was never giving it to us... and that port had stuff that would have taken days to get it out of.

And secondly, the other port we had I'm pretty sure was just for scrapping because it was saharas and they died.
so no...

As before it should be removed as its never being sieged again, you only talk here because you have like what 2 uncontestable regions printing you money?

It makes no sense to award money for nothing.

I still think that we need an automatic system that logs what I said before and bases the reward on that.

I do not appreciatiate this condscending tone. It is unnecersary and is merely adding tension in this suggestion.
I made a legitimate suggestion with facts to back it up and you have decided to patronise me and bring up irrelevant quotes.

You cannot compare the coalitions situation back when Sahara was at its prime, to right now.

I distinctly remember the numbers being in your favour alot of the time, Remember Sahara region? How we kept pulling less and could rarely win?

What about the Indian region siege? You guys won that.

We won in skill sure, we still win in skill e.g South Atlantic.

However you cannot expect us to grind the resources for ships, money for printing and scrapping, paying wages to train pilots, recruit, pay upkeep, develop a nation and make ports around each siege region only to get body slammed twice and lose months of progress.

We are not in possession of ~700 thousand dollars as the coalition is. We GRIND for our stuff and that is extremely demotivating on its own, I know personally you do not sit at a silver farm grinding all day long because of that sweet sweet region money.

So next time you respond I would appreciate an uplifting tone and a positive attitude because remember their is a human behind the screen and your words DO mean something.

Alii is mentioning pacific and indian, but also sahara and america pvp region. Those two are possible to reach for you.
Im purely reacting to this suggestion and to me this suggestion is only a scream for help because you guys dont have your stuff together

PandaDeltaFrappe, You say we chose to remove it however it was illegal due to the fact it belonged to Sahara who literally got banned for duplication, it was literally on water, it was a one town nation, If I recall correctly it was not exactly good looking either.

Pacific is not a time we can contest. Sure, we can have a laugh and siege it randomly and pray nobody logs on, but if that is the combat you so heavily desire maybe you are not experienced enough to talk about this.

Having a port is one thing, having the facilities to contest is another.

Illyt, I'm talking about ako's port off the coast of PNG - you guys printed a load of ships there so could have feasibly used it to siege the region with

Think about this in F1 terms, if the biggest teams get more prize money than the smaller teams and more development time... then the larger teams will remain at the top. Hence they added a cost cap and development cap to make it more level.

If a nation holds a dead region for 3 months, of course when it gets challenged eventually... they will resources to crush the challenger leading to region being untouched again for 3 months....

Therefore we NEED to reward wins and NOT holding a region.

Panda that port never took off because Sahara died, so shop was packed up, it didn't have the resources to actually sustain itself and if I'm correct it was scrapped because the money used to print it was duped.

even then, that is irrelevant now... and doesn't change my point.

Ali is mentioning the Pacific and Indian... Who are you clarifying this with, Blue? Everybody here is talking about the naval regions...

Sahara is NOT contestable due to the fact it is COATED on both sides with enemy towns. Not to mention we could print 50 tanks and be flattened every time from 2 sides.

"This suggestion is only a scream for help because you guys dont have your stuff together"

This is coming from a guy whos fort is more hollow then a chocolate donut.

You said (Paraphrased) "I am not worried about functionality and am primarily focusing on looks, nobody is sieging it anyway lol."

It is not that we do not have our stuff together it is that we are GETTING our stuff together and then realising the 100k of ships we just printed are useless because of the 700k check you just got.

Alii im sorry but you legit turn into a crybaby when someone says something you dont agree with, so quit the clownact mate

Coalition was heavily unmotivated before the banwave so when we complained about the same inactive regions in europe we were told "just get better", why should we not say the same right now?

I think theres no point to a war server when you cant win without the server changing HEAVILY in favor of the losing side. Yes, ccnet has to stay alive so we need to favor the losing side a bit more, but removing entire regions removes the entire purpose of sacrificing all of your hours of effort and money into getting it, with in mind you will then hold it longer and make profit from your sacrificed resources

It does though Illyt - you had the resources and capability to siege the region but chose not to. It was decided that the port was supplied and funded with dupe-free money and items (if it was duped it would have been deleted)

Bruh my fort has nothing to do with this lmao what are you even on about xD

1. Sahara region has quite literally enough space to make a siege base at, if this wasnt the case, zaify would literally change this and give you guys enough oppertunity
2. 100k worth of ships IS enough, you quite literally are experiencing it yourself, coalition isnt always 700k worth of ships, sometimes its even less than your 100k or even 50k You have enough chances to take regions, but your own motivation is in the way, which we shouldnt pay the price for

"Alii im sorry but you legit turn into a crybaby when someone says something you dont agree with, so quit the clownact mate"

Cut it out, do not attempt to bring other topics into this debate that is childish behaviour and would never hold up in court. I have treated you with respect and heard you out. We can play the game of "Oh you are a crybaby outside of suggestions" However I do have limited time due to the LIFE that I have.

Did you complain about the regions or did you make a formal suggestion? Enlighten me? Did you sob in Naval chat and expect Zaify to heed your every demand without providing facts and evidence and instead saying "uh uh erm out grinders are bored".

Sacrificing all the hours you put into it? You just got 700 thousand dollars.... not a sacrifice. a PROFIT

Sure, lets say you put in 10 hours towards making an indian port.... You just made 180K out of it.... thats a profit and a half.

"It does though Illyt - you had the resources and capability to siege the region but chose not to. It was decided that the port was supplied and funded with dupe-free money and items (if it was duped it would have been deleted)"

Okay.... So we had the resources... what about the pilots?

I was talking about:
'the other port we had I'm pretty sure was just for scrapping'
' it didn't have the resources to actually sustain itself and if I'm correct it was scrapped because the money used to print it was duped'

"My fort has nothing to do with it." It is a comparison, You are saying we have time and we can prepare, so do you but you do not prepare. Your team does.

Do you remember the Atlantic Region? Christmas weekend? ENTIRE fleet got wiped you pulled 26 players. We cannot contest that.

At the end of the day it does not matter WHY we cannot contest wether it be numbers or money or motivation or materials.

We cannot contest it.
Full stop.

So why have the coalition rake in hundreds of thousands for zero work?

Panda you straight up just repeated Illyt's response. Regardless I will respond, ports are sustained using a regions money, if we no longer own the region we no longer have the money to sustain the port.

yes i was quoting him :>

Why are you quoting him in a response :sob:

The requirements for regions are

- are there two teams near enough to it to contest?

Thats it
Why should we be limited because we're simply just stronger? We dont have a unfair advantage in all the regions other than the asia ones, we just have more active people and motivated grinderd. I cannot put my head around why this is a reason for a region (we worked for, literally fighting ppl who duped money and printed ships like its nothing) to be removed now

Ask yourself the question, " if sahara was never banner and coalition made this suggestion, would I agree with it?"
I dont need an answer, we both know it

LOL WHAT.

Who is the team that will contest Indian and Pacific? Who has a port anywhere near that?

"We dont have an unfair advantage in all the regions other then the asia ones" Did you know .... shockingly maybe but.... Pacific and Indian are in asia.

You cannot wrap your head around why 700k into the ecnomy is a bad thing? I hope you dont do finance because you would screw SO many people over.

"Ask yourself the question, " if sahara was never banner and coalition made this suggestion, would I agree with it?""

What did I say about comparing the situations. Regardless Ill play into your BS.


Would I agree with it? No. Pre ban it was matching numbers with the variable of maybe 4 people at most.

If coalition was in the situation right now we are in I would agree. However you were not. and are not.

Less hypotheticals more facts please.

Sowwy to interupt but panda could you check the mail i sent you? (In ccnet website (here)) Blue you also.

Ty ^^

Procoder! I need to talk to you after you get back so shoot me a dm on discord when you can
love ya ^^

Aliit. IM IN CHINA BRO

NO DISCORD. NO VPN. AND MOM TOOK MY COMPUTER SO I CANT PLAY CCNET.

:(

Use in website mail. Click on my profile and use the green mail button on the right.

I got you coder :)

Ty ^^

Just using myself as an example shows that it’s possible to get to regions that our far away, you have a big nation called Rome, just make a vassal nation or some shit in like 2 weeks and make a lil port for pacific and Indian not that deep, you can make a port, the money to print the ships is your own issue, coalition having too much money shouldn’t be a server problem, it’s yours, bc after your whole team gets banned for duping, you can’t just say “oh, I have a life now so I can’t play” because you were perfectly fine grinding when your team had unlimited money whenever you wanted it, I don’t want to hear this crybaby crap from you guys at this point, you’ve lost the war because you had a scummy teammate, it’s over, you can make efforts to change it, but you won’t, and it is completely fair for the people in coalition who sat for months competing against unlimited money and resources to take these regions, it is completely fair for us to keep this money and the resources that come of it and if you can’t keep up, too bad

Meant are not our

I believe what Ali is trying to say is that there is a monopoly on the server, and this is providing unfair gains.

Besides, a different approach should be implemented instead of deleting.

I dont remember the coalition making such suggestions like these when we didnt have all regions

EnormeFrikandel, honestly i agree with you.

Megalith, it’s not a monopoly, it is a team who won perfectly fair and square, the fact that you guys can’t keep up is not our problem nor the admins of the server, we won fair, we did not get lucky, we fought from nothing where you could have ships reprinted within 1 day after med and make these big ports everywhere within 1 week, then it ended and we won, we deserve to be rewarded for the work we put in, alliance is dead, get over it, next thing is for the coalition to decid what is next for the war of the server

This is just plain skill issue. You dont attack it like a normal person but you start making a suggestion to remove the whole siege when you are too scared to fight. This is completly ridiculous

If we would try this i suggest moving the places a bit from somewhere else. I think sahara could go more south as it is being camped by a sole nation. If we are unhappy with pacific i suggest moving pacific to the american side. People from asia can still go there with movecraft so it wont change much.

Bad suggestion overall

Nobody is stopping anyone from contesting a region if you want these things to change do something and nerfing isn't it. The regions dont provide unnecessary money they provide what you deserve for having it under your control and if you have it for 70 days good for you.Just cause no one wants to fight you doesnt mean you should gey devalued

Get*

i completly agree with blackninja as i tried to say the same. ''coalition overpowers'' if thats your only arguement to make a suggestion its stupid. if you really think alliance members. you have good movecract too like tanks and ships and have the players. why cannot you siege it? but rather make a whole suggestion to stop the whole siege/assault

If there are any spelling mistakes feel free to correct me

Times change and situations change with them.

Illyt's suggestion of reducing the payout the longer a region is "inactive" isn't inherently a bad thing, but it should be pared with a corresponding buff. E.g a region has been owned for 50 days and the payout has been reduced by x%, the new nation in opposition wins and receives the daily payout + y% (depending on how long the region has been under "opposition" control"

Seems like a nice compromise

I agree with Kingstanchez, Implementing different approaches, such as reducing rewards, could be one possible solution. Additionally, a new system could be introduced based on the geolocation of nations

more than 21.000$ all going to the same side (Coalition) every day, that's 600k+ per month, gg. and coalition is "stronger" than coalition, only because coalition has more people.

We dont need ijust coping aswell just recruit new people it aint that deep
We didnt make cope suggestions when alliance was holding the regions for months did we? While sahara was duping millions aswell

crazy that the alliance is talking about injecting money into the economy after half a dozen of them got banned for duping millions

daily reminder we didnt KNOW THAT THEY DUPED