Bring Back Whole Country Bonus

Your blog says you removed it because it was "complicated", citing population casualties, but I completely disagree. Of all the concepts unique to Afterwind/At-War, Whole Country Bonus was one of the least, if not THE least, complicated of them all. One could explain it in one sentence (hold the whole country, get more money). I don't see how the system had anything to do with population and was based solely on the country. I not only think the system be reinstated for the purpose of added income, but also to make map making easier. It would be integral to creating a modern world custom map by helping you to decide which income to use for cities. Often, I run into the problem of not knowing whether to use the income of the city proper or the metro area. Without the feature, I now am forced to compensate for the lack of "rural" income for a country by disproportionately and inaccurately adding to the city's income. The feature should be brought back, and for those who choose not to use the feature, can leave it blank or put in 0 for their countries.

Yes please

Support <3 i still didnt get the new system

Support

I wholly support this and do think that this would make creating good custom maps easier. Only being able to adjust a regions income by the ones of it's biggest cities isn't representive for reality and also restrictive.
Also, in most of the current custom maps I find myself skipping the smaller cities with only like 11 income, because they will earn me less than their guarding militias upkeep and aren't really worth taking.
This would not happen if there was country bonus.

If it should be too complicated to implement the old system I have some suggestions:

- % bonus to country income depending on the number of cities
- bonus to income growth rate of the country depending on the number of cities

I really miss whole country bonus. If there is any way to bring it back please do so.

Learster is right, that is why it is a problem.

vril's suggestions are pretty good, maybe that could work well.

NO
>noob camping in usa should not get bonus.

While I agree with VRIL's first suggestion, I don't believe the second one would not have the same effect. The original full country bonus was beneficial not just because it gave additional income, but it also had that income coming from the country itself, not as a percentage increase to the cities. This is beneficial to map making, the primary reason I personally want to see it restored.

Support. Now you get instantly the 100% income of a city and that's too much.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 08.12.2012 at 09:22

Support. Now you get instantly the 100% income of a city and that's too much.

what about players in USA, againts players in europe?

The overall income is less though on the default map.

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 08.12.2012 at 09:35

Kirjoittanut Guest, 08.12.2012 at 09:22

Support. Now you get instantly the 100% income of a city and that's too much.

what about players in USA, againts players in europe?

What do you mean?.

Kirjoittanut Guest, 08.12.2012 at 09:22

Support. Now you get instantly the 100% income of a city and that's too much.

wait, is this true? theres no 50% and climbing thing?

Kirjoittanut Tundy, 07.12.2012 at 21:55

NO
>noob camping in usa should not get bonus.

and the better players in africa/the mideast deserve nothing either? and U.S won't MURDER europe unless only 1 guy sits in there
and whole country bonuses would also give you a reason to defend less populated/wealthy cities,otherwise nobody will give a sh** about towns like jaksonvile or samsun,so supported

Kirjoittanut Cherse, 08.12.2012 at 11:09

Kirjoittanut Guest, 08.12.2012 at 09:22

Support. Now you get instantly the 100% income of a city and that's too much.

wait, is this true? theres no 50% and climbing thing?

There should be, unless you capture the capital.

Kirjoittanut Ivan, 08.12.2012 at 13:50

Kirjoittanut Cherse, 08.12.2012 at 11:09

Kirjoittanut Guest, 08.12.2012 at 09:22

Support. Now you get instantly the 100% income of a city and that's too much.

wait, is this true? theres no 50% and climbing thing?

There should be, unless you capture the capital.

Did that respond to the suggestion? I dont think so...

Bump for a very important suggestion that benefits all of us.

Why arent Amok and Ivan replying to this?

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 09:37

Why arent Amok and Ivan replying to this?

Because we have a lot of things to do, and we have to prioritise them. Whole country bonus will be added back, it will be 10% of the total country income.

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 09:50

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 09:37

Why arent Amok and Ivan replying to this?

Because we have a lot of things to do, and we have to prioritise them. Whole country bonus will be added back, it will be 10% of the total country income.

Im just wondering what was wrong with the old system. Having each country have it's own independent value for its bonus would work perfectly for both gameplay and map making

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:01

Im just wondering what was wrong with the old system. Having each country have it's own independent value for its bonus would work perfectly for both gameplay and map making

It's better to have a fixed bonus for all countries, makes things more consistent.
Edit: old bonus worked exactly like this. Old old bonus worked as you described, but we changed it a while ago because of the reasons above.

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 10:06

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:01

Im just wondering what was wrong with the old system. Having each country have it's own independent value for its bonus would work perfectly for both gameplay and map making

It's better to have a fixed bonus for all countries, makes things more consistent.
Edit: old bonus worked exactly like this. Old old bonus worked as you described, but we changed it a while ago because of the reasons above.

So thanks to "consistency" my map has to have cities that have incomes far out of proportion to what they actually are? and with the new system, I think it will be even harder to properly account for whole country bonus. The old system worked PERFECTLY for making people want to capture all cities, AND for map making. The new system will likely only accomplish the former, leaving the latter with something to be desired.

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:40

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 10:06

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:01

Im just wondering what was wrong with the old system. Having each country have it's own independent value for its bonus would work perfectly for both gameplay and map making

It's better to have a fixed bonus for all countries, makes things more consistent.
Edit: old bonus worked exactly like this. Old old bonus worked as you described, but we changed it a while ago because of the reasons above.

So thanks to "consistency" my map has to have cities that have incomes far out of proportion to what they actually are? and with the new system, I think it will be even harder to properly account for whole country bonus. The old system worked PERFECTLY for making people want to capture all cities, AND for map making. The new system will likely only accomplish the former, leaving the latter with something to be desired.

Just proportionally increase the income of the cities if you need to increase the overall income of the country. What's the big deal about that?

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 10:58

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:40

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 10:06

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:01

Im just wondering what was wrong with the old system. Having each country have it's own independent value for its bonus would work perfectly for both gameplay and map making

It's better to have a fixed bonus for all countries, makes things more consistent.
Edit: old bonus worked exactly like this. Old old bonus worked as you described, but we changed it a while ago because of the reasons above.

So thanks to "consistency" my map has to have cities that have incomes far out of proportion to what they actually are? and with the new system, I think it will be even harder to properly account for whole country bonus. The old system worked PERFECTLY for making people want to capture all cities, AND for map making. The new system will likely only accomplish the former, leaving the latter with something to be desired.

Just proportionally increase the income of the cities if you need to increase the overall income of the country. What's the big deal about that?

*sigh* I give up.

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 10:58

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:40

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 10:06

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 10:01

Im just wondering what was wrong with the old system. Having each country have it's own independent value for its bonus would work perfectly for both gameplay and map making

It's better to have a fixed bonus for all countries, makes things more consistent.
Edit: old bonus worked exactly like this. Old old bonus worked as you described, but we changed it a while ago because of the reasons above.

So thanks to "consistency" my map has to have cities that have incomes far out of proportion to what they actually are? and with the new system, I think it will be even harder to properly account for whole country bonus. The old system worked PERFECTLY for making people want to capture all cities, AND for map making. The new system will likely only accomplish the former, leaving the latter with something to be desired.

Just proportionally increase the income of the cities if you need to increase the overall income of the country. What's the big deal about that?

The problem with the lack of country bonus isn't really with balancing the total income of a country. I find that the real problem comes from people having no incentive to capture smaller cities.

For example, when playing as ukraine in europe you will often go take moscow first turn for the high income you get from it. With the old system the player would want to go get the other 3, smaller cities around moscow in order to get the country bonus and the much needed income, but with the new system the player can just leave those other cities neutral. I mean why would he waste money and reinforcements to kill 1-2 reinforcement cities that are guarded with infantry? It also gives a reason to guard/attack cities other than the capital.

Basically what i am saying is that it was good for gameplay and really should be brought back, even if it makes income a bit complicated.

Kirjoittanut Puzzles, 10.12.2012 at 11:51

The problem with the lack of country bonus isn't really with balancing the total income of a country. I find that the real problem comes from people having no incentive to capture smaller cities.

For example, when playing as ukraine in europe you will often go take moscow first turn for the high income you get from it. With the old system the player would want to go get the other 3, smaller cities around moscow in order to get the country bonus and the much needed income, but with the new system the player can just leave those other cities neutral. I mean why would he waste money and reinforcements to kill 1-2 reinforcement cities that are guarded with infantry? It also gives a reason to guard/attack cities other than the capital.

Basically what i am saying is that it was good for gameplay and really should be brought back, even if it makes income a bit complicated.

Kirjoittanut Amok, 10.12.2012 at 09:50

Whole country bonus will be added back, it will be 10% of the total country income.

Kirjoittanut Puzzles, 10.12.2012 at 11:51

The problem with the lack of country bonus isn't really with balancing the total income of a country.

Do you make maps? It is a problem when making maps.

Kirjoittanut Runway1R, 10.12.2012 at 14:07

Kirjoittanut Puzzles, 10.12.2012 at 11:51

The problem with the lack of country bonus isn't really with balancing the total income of a country.

Do you make maps? It is a problem when making maps.

no is not.
whole country bonus if unrealistic