powerneg
My feedback
23 results found
-
395 votes
AdminFizzer
(WarLight Creator, WarLight)
responded
We’re definitely looking at ways of managing your friends list better,
Thanks for the suggestion.
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
agreed, whatever kind of subset you want in your invite-list you shouldn't matter as long as you can make this subset yourself.
powerneg
supported this idea
·
-
39 votespowerneg
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
Can there be an option added to review just finished games ?
sometimes the # of active(multiday) games goes down and if i even notice it i have to search through a lot of games to figure out which game just finished.
especiallyin fog-games i like to review what happened exactly during the game, but a while ago i also had game starting and my opponent immediately surrendering(i assume he didn't read the settings very well, something with negative bonuses ) pretty much invisible to me until i actively searched for the game myself manually.
just having the option that whenever a game stops to add "game finished" to the chat would already do the trick ;) -
8 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
wouldn't it be better(fairer) to use the blacklist of all players who accepted as the game's blacklist ?
(maybe game creator should allow this option)a sort of first come-first serve.
this could be (unintentionally) be abused by joining all available games and stopping someone from joining any game, though i doubt that would happen a lot.
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
though other may want to know your previous name ... ;)
i suggest you give your vote to the option to play anonymous games or something like that instead, i m sure i saw it somewhere on uservoice
-
60 votespowerneg
supported this idea
·
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
minimizing the risk of a wrong gift ?
when you want to give a territory to someone in your own team you ll need to figure out who in your team is gonna get it as well, and if you fail to do so ... -
1 vote
-
5 votespowerneg
supported this idea
·
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
This would give trolls more power, because they can start an ongoing argument and put down the last comment with no-one to counter it.
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
they could just both add and change orders together, changing each other's orders as if they were their own orders, i don't think many veterans are interested in this, but it would allow someone to "mentor" someone else into the game.
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
additionally, a system message could appear in chat when someone becomes bootable
-
13 votes
-
11 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
To further this idea, you could have a unit called "general" who is selectable on top of the map, who can move around (change his speed with settings) who changes all teritories he moves over to "supplied" untill the other team conquers it (possibly have the setting available that it is "supplied" again as soon as you reconquer it, but meh) and you can distribute on any territory that is supplied as long as that territory is connected through supplied territories to your general.
You could have the setting that any territory next to a "supplied" territory can be distributed to as well (possibly they couldn't attack immediately?)
general dies when the territory he 's on is conquered by the enemy, he wouldn't move if he had the order to move towards a territory that's just conquered by the other team, if the territory he's on gets conquered but he still has a valid move-order to do he could instantly execute that order(optional?).
If the general dies you can set a new general but it would cost you your income from that turn (or part of it)
I 'd vote against losing all supply lines upon losing your general, because that would almost be an instant loss, plus for bigger maps you would want to have more generals.
Maximum number of generals could be a certain number in settings (1,2,3,...) or could possibly be dependanton your income and/or total number of armies) (or no maximum, as long as you're paying with armies for extra generals)
Opional you could also "earn" a general through cards, only i think i would prefer it if every territory you conquer brings your next general a bit closer, and not only the first territory you conquer in a turn (think of a game with a lot of players, and you're getting big, but you still have to work with as many generals as the opponent)
Possibly you could also seperate the unit that makes territories "supplied" and the unit that actually supplied those territories (a non-moving headquarter, possibly with increased stats and an "engineer"-unit) -
16 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
2 things:
1) if a territoty is seen by two players it doesn't mean they see each other seeing it, if this were implemented a spectator(multi-account possibly) could give a little more info.
2)spectators would still see so little of the game it would not be worth watching (untill the game is over, obviously)
-
45 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
how about you just join a tournament without choosing a team (who cares which letter you get) and you would have the option to choose which other participants you would like to be in a team with ? You should also get a notification about it when someone wants to be in a team with you and have the option to to choose to not want to be in a team with another player, once the tournament starts the game would just create the teams based upon these settings as far as possibly and then assign the rest randomly.
Would, btw, also be interesting if this option could be turned off for a tournament if the creator chooses to do so, so everybody will have to play with random team-mates. -
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
basically, use some diplomacy in free for all-games
-
107 votes
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
review time should be a set % of the normal turn time by the host
i like this card, because it will teach new players how to react against attacks, while right now they re just mainly surprised by attacks
some single player scenario with this card would therefor be aprreciated too -
6 votes
-
8 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment powerneg
commented
we can already do this
main problem is still that a scenario is played/won once, and then you often already know the scenario and want another, anyway, if you keep checking the open multi-day games now and then, you ll see a few interesting scenarios come along though
For clans and the like a controlled subset might be interesting, aka the leader of the clan makes the subset and the others just use it.
One problem i see with this is that if you have a bad leader he might remove/add players without consent or even informing the rest of the clan.
(someone in a clan could possibly shed some light on how clans do this now, but i suspect the problem would be biggest for new/non-established clans)