Political online game and economic simulation

No military features , thats discouraging. Can you please at least think about it as a possible upgrade in the future?

Why do don´t wanna have military features?!! It makes the game more powerful and interesting.

Only as reminder to all engaged military fans: This is an english-speaking thread! I have to ask all german speaking regents to follow our "rules of the house" and to post here in english.

Ok. I'll try it in english.

First of all I totally agree with

fleischidambach
LordKnuffelchen
Nemuck
IzyE
GreenPolitics
GreenWarrior

@GreenWarrior
Special Forces as a OWN PART of the military would be a great feature, but GSG9 or for example SWAT arn't Special Forces! These are only elite tactical units in police departments. i think what you mean are military forces like KSK, Delta Force, SAS ... and thats a big difference!
-----

deutsch:

Zu allererst stimme ich

fleischidambach
LordKnuffelchen
Nemuck
IzyE
GreenPolitics
GreenWarrior
mit ihren Meinungen und Vorschlägen voll zu.

@GreenWarrior
Special Forces ale ein eigenständiger Part des Militärs (also auch mit eigenem Budged) wäre echt klasse und würde auch viele interessante Möglichkeiten bieten (kann ja mit Geheimdienst verbunden verden), aber das GSG9 oder z.b. das SWAT sind keine Spezialeinheiten! Das sind sondereinheiten der Polizei und haben bei weitem nicht die befugnisse (und ausbildung) wie es die Spezialeinheiten des Militärs haben. Was du (vermute ich mal) meinst sind militärische Spezialeinheiten wie z.b. KSK (deutschland), Delta Force (USA), SAS (England) ... da muss man schon einen Unterschied machen

yeah, you'r right there...

but so far as I know, is GSG9 much better trained as KSK. I ment specialforces as "spies", who kill our steel in the name of a government to force another government to positiv decisions without a military ofence (such as the Iraqu-war to control the petroilprieces).

I hope I've made it clearer...

(sory if my english is wrong, I'm not that god...)

I think a 'cold war mode' would be funny.
If you activate it, there can always be the possibility of a nuclear war. Because of this you have to buy many nuclear weapons and send spies like James Bond...

The cold war mode would cost a lot of money, but you can steal technologies and other things from the other state/s. If it's going to be too boring, you can deactivate the mode or destroy the world...

*endanswerandpressredbutonatthetableandlookingatthegreenscrennandwatchthemanyred pointswhicharemovingtoallcornersattheworldanddgotothewindowandseetherocketflying directlytomyhouseandscreamandrunawayand...*

I think that war war should reduce your reputation and popularity. But if you are a capitalistic and you attack a socialistic country the popularity should not be reduced as much as if you attack another capitalistic country. If you attack a neutral country your popularity and reputation should be reduced very much.
The popularity should be reducedfor every killed soldier of you, the reputation is reduced for every killed enemy soldier...

so liebe freunde:
1) wir haben mehr als 1300 staten, jeden tag kommen neue dazu.
da ein diplomatiesystem aufzubauen ist extrem kompliziert. im RL haben wir ein ganzes ministerium, das sich darum kümmert, hier in regendi müsste jeder einzelne spieler sich um gute beziehungen zu ca 1000 staaten bemühen.

my dear friends:
we've more than 1300 states, their number encreases every day.
thats why it is very complicated to build up a diplomacy system. in the real life there is a whole ministery to handle the diplomatic relationships, in regendi every user has to care himself.

2) dazu kommt das verschiedene alter der staaten. wie kann zB ein staat im jahr 2020 krieg gegen einen staat im jahr 2007 krieg führen?
die technologische entwicklung wäre ja vollkommen unterschiedlich.

moreover you have to pay attention to the different age of the states. how is it possible that a state from the year 2020 leads war against one from the year 2007? the technological developments would be completeley different.

3) warum stellen wir nicht alles staaten, die gleichen alters sind, in eine welt? so haben wir für jeden die gleichen startbedingungen, eine gemischte (deutsche, amis, inder) und doch übersichtliche staatenanzahl (vll 10) in jeder welt. und dann bräuchten wir auch keine friedenswelt und kriegswelt, da kein staat so mächtig werden kann um alle seines alters auszurotten. außerdem wäre er dann dämlich weil er sich alle diplomatischen möglichkeiten nimmt.

why not to put all states with the same age in the same world? so we would get the same conditions for every one, a mixed (germans, americans, indiand) but also well arranged number of states (maybe 10 per world). so we would not need seperated war- and peaceworlds, because no state can become powerfull enough to destroy the other states of its age. moreover it would be very foolish, cause this state would take itself all the diplomatic possibilities

ich find meinen vorschlag gut, wer noch?

I've come here after having played 'Cybernations' - a similar browser based online game. The game itself is quite a bit less detailed than Ars Regeni, but the activity that goes on outside the game, but still related to it, is much more complicated. That activity goes through the alliances.

In Cybernations there are close to 28,000 people playing - around 90% ish are in alliances. As a group, in an alliance, there is a diplomatic section that takes care of treaties, declarations of war (an attack on a member of the alliance, or an activation of a Mutual Aggression Pact, or any number of variants on treaties - some stronger, some weaker) and communication with other alliances. There have been cases in Cybernations where a single act by 1 player triggered world war among say 15,000 players. All done through the alliances.

A model used in cybernations (I don't mean to be a booster here, but they've got something) is the 'Nation Strength'. It calculates a number of factors and gives you a number. As a player, you're only allowed to attack someone else with 33% higher or lower nation strength. But be careful who you attack, because if you act out of your alliances line, you could get sanctioned or set adrift to be destroyed - as you lack protection from your alliance.

Ich will Euer Engagement wirklich nicht bremsen, aber:

This is an English speaking thread.

Könntet ihr also bitte auf englisch posten? Einfach der Fairness den englischen Membern gegenüber.

Danke :)