Happy start to the 2023 year developers! I have a small(ish) wish list to provide some functionality to the game. A lot of these features are already being done in the form of scripts, but it would be much better to formally introduce these features as part of the game: 1. Increase markers available. I believe the maximum is 10 per alliance and 1 per player. This needs to be expanded. I recommend 10 for each type of alliance marker as a starting point. Additionally, players should have more than 1 marker available other than a reservation marker. Each player should be able to add 5 markers. 2. Provide officers the ability to mark up to 50 NPCs at one time for planning purposes. This feature should allow alliance offers to mark a base for shooting. A generic term such as "Target" or "Shoot" along with the Forgotten NPC lettering to change color which will help differentiate the targeted NPCs from nontargeted NPCs (similar to the blue background when players save formations). 3. Tunnels should "glow" green or red when a player uses the move function. This will help players determine if their base will activate a tunnel or not. 4. A count of qualified NPCs should be provided during the move function to provide players information on how many waves the move will place the base into. 5. Limited NPC layout sharing should be added. There is a nifty script called Baseshare. Essentially, any alliance member can view a base further away as long as another alliance member base is within range of the base. This feature should be incorporated into the game. It doesn't take away from the essence of the game, but it does provide a more enjoyable experience for the player.

@EE_Elephterion, @enigm, @gamerdruid I have an idea for a World Series! I think it’s doable, but feel free to rain on my parade. Over the course of the year, EA/TA releases 3 small worlds:1. Forgotten world;2. A morale world;3. A unique world.The unique world is the final world. No RT, CP, or packages can be purchased. Rather, EA assesses a “fee” to join this world (have the financial department determine equivalent fee needed to cover costs + profit). Each of these worlds are graded on a points system:1. First, second, and third place badges;2. Most PvP and PvE done by an alliance.After completion of all three worlds, whichever team has accrued the most points wins first place and Tiberium Alliances World League Champion badge. Also award individual awards:Tiberium alliances World League Champion - Most PvE / PvP badges. This would be weighted by calculating the total hit points of player or NPC bases. This would eliminate players gaming the system of hitting low level bases to try to win by hit count.Honestly, I feel this would inject some competitive life into the game. Create a bracket system of qualified worlds (similar to a Premier League concept) and have teams battle it out on worlds throughout the year. You’ll need to make the worlds small enough where they can be reasonably completed within 3 months or less so there are buffer months for alliances to regroup and strategize before the next world starts.

Imagine a world with a limited number of badges and a smaller alliance size, say 15 members max.Not sure how it would work balance wise but it would make holding POIs a lot more difficult and potentially spur on a bit more competition.

They haven't implemented any suggestions in these forums for a decade and you think they are going to start now with your alien invasion nonsense? never gonna happen.

"zrine;c-2228522" wrote:The drama to this game political wise is only up to the point of the first fortress kill. The 1st winning alliance retains huge bases, becomes the 'big daddies' that dictates who is next and so forth. Obviously they continue to stick around to help their alternate accounts to thrive. I will like to suggest that once a player's account has successfully participated in killing the fortress, all bases for that player are permanently destroyed and these accounts are locked out from that server. They can enter to watch but they can't participate. In this way all the high valued POI is again open for grab and the drama continues. No big daddies around to dictate the sequence. The alliance that lost out to the 1st winning alliance still has a chance to take the second spot. They don't have to walk away empty handed. And please do not increase the Fortress level with each Fortress kill. I think there will be a lot more chaos and PVP with such model.This is not a new suggestion and it has been rejected by both players and developers. One of the arguments put against this is that the alliance that controls the server (the one that could kill the fortress) would simply take the centre and hold it (as they do now) and not kill the fortress thus controlling the world forever (as they do now). When the game first launched there was no fortress to kill and I'm told that this is exactly what happened (I wasn't on the first 30 or so servers!)

New worlds are typically announced 2 weeks before launch. I agree, a Twitter and Facebook announcement of launches would be good. Maybe it's something the new member of staff @EE_kalyn could handle.

2023 Wish List of Features for Developers to Implement Into the Game

b97cbae3213388e
2 years ago
And I think that maybe the 24hr cool down before a base can attack once destroyed is too long a time.
If it remains a cumulative penalty it can be as short as 1 or 2 hours.
F1jjYR3
2 years ago
"b97cbae3213388ee;c-2233906" wrote:
I've mentioned elsewhere but, defensive artillery calibration times could be much shorter. Like 75% shorter come to think of it since they increased it should be more like 80%...

For PvP? Yes.
As for forgotten it will have an effect only if multiple bases calibrate their artillery on a forward and exposed base I guess then leaving themselves exposed?
b97cbae3213388e
2 years ago
I've mentioned elsewhere but, defensive artillery calibration times could be much shorter. Like 75% shorter come to think of it since they increased it should be more like 80%...
one_cIown
2 years ago
A POI that gives $$$$ ;-)
gamerdruid
Hero
2 years ago
Whilst many can't play during the weekend, the vast majority can. This means that is where the money is made!
gamerdruid
Hero
2 years ago
New worlds are typically announced 2 weeks before launch. I agree, a Twitter and Facebook announcement of launches would be good. Maybe it's something the new member of staff @EE_kalyn could handle.
BailandoYo
2 years ago
At least there is life if I look at the discussion. How about updating the Facebook and twitter social media with at least the new worlds that will be released so that one can plan a bit. I sometimes struggle to land on the home page for some reason and it would be nice to just check in on Facebook or Twitter to get an idea of upcoming worlds
gamerdruid
Hero
2 years ago
"zrine;c-2228522" wrote:
The drama to this game political wise is only up to the point of the first fortress kill. The 1st winning alliance retains huge bases, becomes the 'big daddies' that dictates who is next and so forth. Obviously they continue to stick around to help their alternate accounts to thrive. I will like to suggest that once a player's account has successfully participated in killing the fortress, all bases for that player are permanently destroyed and these accounts are locked out from that server. They can enter to watch but they can't participate. In this way all the high valued POI is again open for grab and the drama continues. No big daddies around to dictate the sequence. The alliance that lost out to the 1st winning alliance still has a chance to take the second spot. They don't have to walk away empty handed. And please do not increase the Fortress level with each Fortress kill. I think there will be a lot more chaos and PVP with such model.

This is not a new suggestion and it has been rejected by both players and developers. One of the arguments put against this is that the alliance that controls the server (the one that could kill the fortress) would simply take the centre and hold it (as they do now) and not kill the fortress thus controlling the world forever (as they do now). When the game first launched there was no fortress to kill and I'm told that this is exactly what happened (I wasn't on the first 30 or so servers!)
tokenting
2 years ago
They haven't implemented any suggestions in these forums for a decade and you think they are going to start now with your alien invasion nonsense? never gonna happen.
gamerdruid
Hero
2 years ago
No new players are able to join many old worlds. I don't have any say in these sort of things either.