The Development forecast for 2014.

Alright viceroys, here's my question for everyone, including the Community, Supporters, Moderators, and Admins: Where will AtWar go in 2014? Will development continue at the current late (Most likely not, according to the Admins), will it grind to a halt and bask in HTML5? Or will it start pumping out updates on a weekly basis? Also, how complete IS AtWar? Will it ever be complete? Or is it a project that can always have new things implemented when the idea arises? What would you like implemented, personally? Sound off below!

If any of you are interested in my opinion on what needs to come:

More Random/Strategical elements (No, not starting as PD Turkey and repeating the same expansion every time you play as it, but reacting to changes in real-time, unpredictable changes).

(Even) more Cartography customization.

Weekly Dev blogs/updates, to let us know what the devs are up to.

A UI facelift.

Holidays/Events.

Elimination of Upgrades/Strategies, and implementation of an in-match store, akin to Dota 2, as an example.

Less focus on promotion, more time spent on making it worth promoting (It is, obviously, but it needs something golden along with it).

More focus on artistic themes in every place you look, such as the soldier silhouettes.

I swear to god if this gets weekly updates instead of centennially updates I will never play another game again.

Skrevet av Utah, 22.11.2013 at 14:39

I swear to god if this gets weekly updates instead of centennially updates I will never play another game again.

Ditto, friend.

Skrevet av Goblin, 22.11.2013 at 14:43

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:36

(No, not starting as PD Turkey and repeating the same expansion every time you play as it

Wut?

Right now, strategy = repeating the same exact thing, every game, or using a pre-defined set of expansions/strategies/upgrades to achieve a win, which, to me, seems like mindless repetition, instead of, let's say, you're opponent having the ability to switch from PD to NC, and demolish your port cities, while using an upgrade to boost his Infantry to ensure he's also dominant on land. Would that not be a much more fulfilling and strategical experience, having to adapt to your surroundings, and to outwit it, than to do the same thing every match?

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:49

Skrevet av Goblin, 22.11.2013 at 14:43

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:36

(No, not starting as PD Turkey and repeating the same expansion every time you play as it

Wut?

1st turn, blitz. 2nd turn, PD. I have a big advantage.

Right now, strategy = repeating the same exact thing, every game, or using a pre-defined set of expansions/strategies/upgrades to achieve a win, which, to me, seems like mindless repetition, instead of, let's say, you're opponent having the ability to switch from PD to NC, and demolish your port cities, while using an upgrade to boost his Infantry to ensure he's also dominant on land. Would that not be a much more fulfilling and strategical experience, having to adapt to your surroundings, and to outwit it, than to do the same thing every match?

If you play pd turkey the same way every time you're doing it wrong.

I clicked thinking it was a thread by Amok telling his plans for 2014.

Skrevet av Acquiesce, 22.11.2013 at 15:51

If you play pd turkey the same way every time you're doing it wrong.

The factors that are put into a match are easily predictable. Starting as PD Turkey, you always should head for the Balkans first for your expansion. If you head anywhere else- unless you manage to pull something of a grander scale off- you're usually doomed. The factors that go into playing are easily predictable, yet are met with unpredictable upgrades, unfortunately. I find this to be extremely stale, personally.

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:49

Skrevet av Goblin, 22.11.2013 at 14:43

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:36

(No, not starting as PD Turkey and repeating the same expansion every time you play as it

Wut?

Right now, strategy = repeating the same exact thing, every game, or using a pre-defined set of expansions/strategies/upgrades to achieve a win, which, to me, seems like mindless repetition, instead of, let's say, you're opponent having the ability to switch from PD to NC, and demolish your port cities, while using an upgrade to boost his Infantry to ensure he's also dominant on land. Would that not be a much more fulfilling and strategical experience, having to adapt to your surroundings, and to outwit it, than to do the same thing every match?

you know youre the second person ive seen spout this and it makes no sense. interestingly like the other person that made this comment you do not seem to have played a lot of duels or 2v2s/3v3s. each country has numerous possible expansions depending on the country(s) your opponent(s) picks. and of the areas you can expand into, youve to consider what strat your enemy might be using, and whether theyll try to expand into the same areas you will, and how heavy youll go into 1 city.

and thats just the first turn. after that your strategic choices, the pressure you apply, whether youre defensive or strategic, whether you rush or prepare for a longer game of attrition, your skill all come into play to complete the game.

im yet to encounter games that were the exact same as ones i've previously played. why dont you ask tophats or goblin whether they feel theyre playing the same games over and over

Skrevet av Permamuted, 22.11.2013 at 16:15

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:49

Skrevet av Goblin, 22.11.2013 at 14:43

Skrevet av Guest, 22.11.2013 at 14:36

(No, not starting as PD Turkey and repeating the same expansion every time you play as it

Wut?

Right now, strategy = repeating the same exact thing, every game, or using a pre-defined set of expansions/strategies/upgrades to achieve a win, which, to me, seems like mindless repetition, instead of, let's say, you're opponent having the ability to switch from PD to NC, and demolish your port cities, while using an upgrade to boost his Infantry to ensure he's also dominant on land. Would that not be a much more fulfilling and strategical experience, having to adapt to your surroundings, and to outwit it, than to do the same thing every match?

you know youre the second person ive seen spout this and it makes no sense. interestingly like the other person that made this comment you do not seem to have played a lot of duels or 2v2s/3v3s. each country has numerous possible expansions depending on the country(s) your opponent(s) picks. and of the areas you can expand into, youve to consider what strat your enemy might be using, and whether theyll try to expand into the same areas you will, and how heavy youll go into 1 city.

and thats just the first turn. after that your strategic choices, the pressure you apply, whether youre defensive or strategic, whether you rush or prepare for a longer game of attrition, your skill all come into play to complete the game.

im yet to encounter games that were the exact same as ones i've previously played. why dont you ask tophats or goblin whether they feel theyre playing the same games over and over

Would you not rather have more real-time elements? I hear many supporters of competition/3v3/2v2's saying they want more updates for competition, and less for customization. I'm not sure about you personally, but wouldn't this only add to the competition? Being able to, say, pay a cost in resources to switch your strategy in-game? Or better yet, so it's not OP: Give them a cooldown? Many Rank-related problems exist, were if you have Upgrades/Strategies, you can always beat someone who doesn't, no matter the skill. Wouldn't this solve that, and add to Competition among everyone? I guess you guys just rustled my jimmies and I had to come up with some bullshit, but this is what I'm trying to state now, even if I do think memorization is less intuitive than sporadic and real-time strategy.

Sure having the ability to change your strategy during a game will allow more diversified play, but what your proposing sounds a little like a game of paper, scissors and rocks. Sure you will have to predict your enemy's strategy changes but that itself brings a huge element of luck, just like paper, scissors and rocks. Sure it may make things interesting, but more so than that, it may potential ruin the game because of the havoc it can cause. Moreover, anyone would agree that paper, scissors and rocks isn't exactly strategical.

What others have stated about how competitive games are not always the same, is true. There is no doubt whatsoever about how there are numerous expansions that are possible depending on the strategy you choose. This especially includes PD Turkey. Not only do you have several options for your first turn expansion, you need to adapt your play style according to your opponent's as you are severely limited by funds. Nevertheless, even if there is a limit to the things that you can do, there is a reason for it. It helps balance the game out. If Turkey could do anymore than it can now, it'd be devastating. Plus, I assure you that it can do a lot of things as it is.

Trololo gob

Skrevet av Goblin, 23.11.2013 at 04:33

I love blitz turkey <3

I thought I was the only one

It should never be complete. I like updates going on