In instance, why do you think the gaming industry was developed into many different styles and genre, even though each game had different "Base Line" for their ideology? Yeah, maybe they had some debate or crucial issues with itself, but the point is that they just took their own path and continued, without interrupting someone's game by hacking or taking developer's life away (like killing millions of Jews because Hilter thought that they're one of the dirty races in the world). How awesome is that we can just live on without major conflict or extreme conditions of taking others' life?
@ConnarKenning As I said, the example that people think about war is mostly subjective, and not accepting as a objective thinking. You must also acknowledge that he just took millions of lives in Earth just to gain his power and establish his own idea forcefully toward the others. IN fact, each nations' or governments' ideology (including Nazi) had similar experiences, since the way of thinking with Liberty and Justice was taken by their own thoughts, cultures, and influences with power. However, even though the principles of each side are different, there's a thing called arrangement, which is to just put aside of each other and bring out logical reasonings as we make comparison in peaceful communication.
War can be deal in many possible ways when it comes down to games. The goal of the game can be casual, realistic, authentic, and sophisticated, it's just that it's the creator's choice to how they're going to focus their game on. I don't know where you got the idea that war = realism, but people have their own point of view, and it's their variety to choose to express the details about the war itself. It's none of your business to set your own principle about war over Liberty and Justice and Fairness.
@ConnarKenning, I was only pointing out that the morality of your statement or the "Unfairness" is nothing but flawed. Just because the thing exist in the world doesn't mean it's going to be logical when it comes down to judgmental conditions. Besides, it's nothing wrong when the developer adjusts the game for pure fairness, because it's not going to be useless unless it violates the basic line of the game. The thing is, did the developer mentioned that realism is necessary for the strategy war game? They didn't state a single word about it in comment section, and they want you to make your own user map if you're not satisfied with the original content. Am I clear?
Ok, I'm back, and I just want to apologize all of you guys for inconveniences that I gave from my previous comments (especially the examples that was addressed). I was too sleepy and my brain was completely tampered as I wrote down the comments to reply ConnarKenning's statement about Unfairness. If anyone is confused with any of my comments, then do not worry about it. Everything that's misplaced or irrelevant to the topic is nothing but my fault.
For disclaimer to my previous comment, I was only pointing out that my connection between my example and "fairness" is not solid at all. In fact, I didn't mention anything about the morality of the examples as a flawed thing to the real world. Please understand the message behind early comments :(
I agree with you. The examples I have given are just too weak to support part of my argument. I'm very sorry for the inconvenience that I gave you through my words. However, the other two comments of fairness will still take place as a response toward your comment and to the developers of the game. Have a great day:)
This is a strategy game, and the community wants a fairness to have a perfect logical conclusion when it comes to "win-and-lose" results. They do not want the developers to interfere the whole game by adding premium contents and block-off the other users from the user maps. That's abusing power against then, which is a ideal of "Authority over logic (game itself)" or "Authority over fairness". Who would ever support that kind of nasty thing?
By the way, can I share a little about one of the quote that you gave, "The World isn't fair, get over with it."? The idea that the world isn't fair can't justify the fairness as a little fallacy when it comes to competence ( such as hiring or official competition), unless the justification of either the name of Liberty or peace comes to hand. Did you ever see a time when US and Europe will give ISIS a chance to prepare for a war, while the ISIS will continue killing innocent people and abuse the name of Islam? Did you ever think that it was necessary to not support a charity for poor people, just because that the world was unfair and that you wanted to keep the money for your own sake?
@ ConnarKenning It seems that you contradicted your argument when you said that unfairness must go, even though you're trying to criticize the ideology of fairness. Let me get you straight and clear. The antonym of unfairness is a thing called fairness. Fairness can be achieved by giving same circumstance, resource, and support at the first place, especially in strategy or tactic genre. However, the way of management or development will be on player's hand, which can be carried in million possibilities of different game plays. This rule will be ruined if the pay 2 win methods are applied to the game, which can be only achieved throughout real currency.
I want to advice the game developer that free games such as WOT or War thunder already took the majority of the tank game market. I'm in doubt of how this game is going to survive as a unique flash tank game. Anyway, keep up the good feedback/discussion and have a nice day.
Hello,
Thank you so much for your care. Our game stays closer to history by restoring more authentic aspects of history. Also, our game is a browser game, you can simply open browser at any time to play our game and no need to download client. Large of players have joined us. We will continue making efforts to improve the game experience and hope you can keep supporting us. Wish you a nice day too. :-)
+ In other words, keep communicating with your ally all the time. Ask where he'll put the troops to attack and expand. Ask when he's going to back up if you need defense. Ask which one of the others is an ally to him. Observe and analyse his personality toward the enemy and you (is it sympathetic, neutral, hostile, cautious, etc?). Try to figure out all the informations that will be beneficial to your side, so that you can decide whether the circumstance allows you to fully trust the person or not. Have a nice day sir.
To @McHammers1: It seems like the risk of getting "backstab" was something that bugged you from trusting your allies. I would rather recommend you to let your logical view be explained to your ally, which may prevent him to choose and betray you. For example, if there's a nearby country that wants you to be killed at the early turn, just say that he will only waste troops on attacking the territory, while the others are freely expanding their territories. The person will then reconsider himself about the decision, and you'll gently ask if we can ally peacefully until the end of the game. Make sure to communicate briefly as you play the late game, and be free to be a buddy with him. He'll only lose the game if he chooses to even betray you :D (P.S: Back-up is always required in this alliance tactic).
Everyone, hands down. This is one of the few masterpiece out of tons of flash rpg games. Graphics, gameplay mechanics, statics, weaponry, ost are perfected fitted, and quests are solid enough to give simple but influential experience to the players. I may be over exaggerating, but everything is direct, clear, and interesting. 4.75/5.
To be honest. This game's mechanism is purely focused on army purchase and micro-movement, no other critical factors are added into the game. I wish there will be an option to upgrade your army or economy in-game, which will really change the depth of the gameplay and strategy.
P.S. : To increase the risk to those who expand, why don't we also add the "morale" to the cities, so that rebellions will occur if either there's no military control, or there's dissatisfaction on economical failures or political exchange (?).
All of these ideas are inspired by the Total War series.
Ok, I don't understand why there's so many dislike on the comment section, but I will answer to each one of them as clear as possible.
@raymond442,@zombiemaster22: Silverlight is basically Microsoft's extended web plug-in or web extension. It's confirmed to be safe to use it. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1296949
@jaxx20: Pay 2 Win is a very controversial topic. Please do not just assume that this game is made to be unbalanced toward f2p users. However, I personally agree with you about it. You can go back to the comment section and check my comments to know my reasoning behind the statement.
@That_kid_milosz: I'm not a technology expert, but since this game runs with silverlight, I highly recommend you to reinstall the program and refresh the browser. If that doesn't work, then please go to the game's website forum and address the black-out problem. They'll give helpful advices that you may take a shot at. :D
@DoNotResist Thank you for your honest comment and I seem to agree that even premium strategy may only increase the diversity, and it's definitely not a series of overpowered strategy that dominates the others. In fact, the refutal that I made at the last last comment was just to prove that this game is pay2win, which is not only premium users do. However, I criticize premium users and the devs for their private access to usermaps with money, since usermaps are made by users' name, and the devs have absolutely no right to use it as their own product. In term, all credit and profit must be given to the creator of the usermaps, and that the creator must have their privileget to do anything with their own property/ies, whether to sell it, give it, share it, or keep it.
@DoNotResist That's right, even though it's completely free to open up the world game and enjoy it, I disagree with the dev's decision for making us pay to even play the user map. Even though the user map was made to expand the game in user's name, the developer are taking their name and selling it for their own sake of profit and money. You can see more details at the comment section, where I talked with trolxer about this problem. Also, I'll be more careful when I discuss ideas or suggestion, but I want to know that the whole purpose of this action is to let everyone have a fair chance to enjoy the game. Thank you!
 "atWar"){kind=icon}
 "Ground War: Tanks"){kind=icon}
 "Vilesteel"){kind=icon}
Hello, Thank you so much for your care. Our game stays closer to history by restoring more authentic aspects of history. Also, our game is a browser game, you can simply open browser at any time to play our game and no need to download client. Large of players have joined us. We will continue making efforts to improve the game experience and hope you can keep supporting us. Wish you a nice day too. :-)