Leaderboard

Since some people think DOWs are passe, it fell to me make it for posterity

Hello everyone this is first post of House Arryn Alliance. As BK declare war on us, so it's our responsibility to give them a big gift (how to respect other). I know BK reserve the right to attack enamy alliance and their Ally's. But I think young people feel bad when old person come and give them extra knowledge like BK. Idk what is problame with BK. House Arryn have neutral stand in this war. I'm not Post too much as this is my first time doing this kind of silly thing because of one stupid alliance which think they are best Idk they get enough food in real life. BK show their total overdose. Best of luck for hungry ? BK fungry (unknown word hear from neighbor) members. Finally no one understand this ??

Please don't copy paste directly from Discord. CTRL+SHIFT+V. Know this. Learn this. Use this.

As opposed to not forcefully declaring war?

Welcome to coalition b , hope you enjoy ur stay

Thinks for this advice.

XD thanks for the Education i just got a laptop so my bad.

Arrgh? ARRGH ARRGH ARRGHHHHH?

thats going to be a short war. Cant even defend yourselves against micro BK

Micro drama. NPO should be involved, biggest micro of em all

Yeah but except the US military actually has planes, unlike a certain group. Was a good meme though, ;,,P

this happens.

no idea what you're even saying but frick superchola-X is always a message I can get behind

Why does shit like this keep happening?

valid cb

As someone who uses the dark theme, I'm pleasantly refreshed by not seeing a white highlight for once.

12 out of 10, the world is better by a bit, GG fam ❤️

The Greatest Intergalactic Empire Of Universe People and it's Animation Domination disctrict hereby declare war on The Coal Mines for the reason of "Not agreeing with our opinion on what makes for a valid CB"

So there's no difference between signing treaties and getting caught planing to roll the two smaller spheres? And NPO was declared on? Good to know.

Truth be told, however long this war drags on, it doesn't change the outcome, IQ loses the war, but everyone loses because after two years, we put the final nail in the coffin of hopes at a changed game. IQ wants nothing less than game domination and a bi-polar world. Rinse and repeat as all they ever want to do is fight the same stupid wars over and over again.

Okay, but do stats matter or do they not? 2 days

Yes hello, so, I was coming off my day of doing my part in the war, reading a few posts, and I saw this: And then I went back, and I looked at my wars. One had already died down in activity days and days ago, the continuation was more just a formality and neither side was doing much of anything anymore, them ground attacking my low infra, no cash nation, me airstriking their cash when I knew they had enough to get a full hit's worth, bit of chip damage here and there. And I just... Hm. Yeah. The post was in the other war suggestion thread, which I feel had totally run its course and devolved in that unique way you lot always tend to make it do, and then I checked the thread of previous suggestions, couldn't find anything about actually, making wars shorter, so I'm putting the question out there: Do our wars really need to last five days? Looking at tactical use, well, okay, if we wanted to keep beige cycling as a thing, you could still shorten wars to 4 days. That's double the "normal" time to take someone's resistance down to a solid 50ish, unless you've spend multiple days constantly getting moderates and pyrrhics. Pretty much every mechanic I can think of would stay relatively intact with a 4 day total war timer. 3 is pushing it, for sure, I feel like that isn't really enough time, I think like, 3.5-3.8 would be a sweet spot for faster gameplay, but that's pretty much 4, and 4 is a nice even number. It'd make wars faster, it would make beige cycling harder, but not at all impossible, I mean, giving the person an extra day of breathing room isn't that big of a deal. There's no way, I think, that 4 days isn't enough to complete a war, even if you were evenly matched for the first two days and hit day 3 with both at 70+ resistance or something, but at that point maybe not having enough time to beige, is totally warranted? I mean, that sounds like a stalemate to me, if you spend two and some more days completely matched with your opponent, which I've never seen myself, but I'm sure has probably happened. The current global war will probably go on for months, and I honestly expect people will get bored of the wars at that stage, and I don't like that the game is in a way set up to become more boring over time like that. A bit of a faster pace would go a long way, I think. It's not even, a faster pace in unit buying or anything, just simply allowing wars to expire a bit faster will free up more people to do more things without actually affecting the resource/unit balance of the game. Also as an offshoot of this branch of thought, slightly shorter rebuild times could go a long way, maybe reducing each of the non-soldiers by a day, or down to a 4 minimum, so like, 3/4/4/4 (someone in the thread said that too, I think, but not in quite the context of what this suggestion is) I'd like to think this isn't a particularly partisan suggestion, because, well, harming beige cycling and sitting time seems like it'd hurt the side that can control the lower tiers and actually effectively cycle beige, more, but I'm not sure. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the idea overall!

"Yeah, EoS is probably gonna declare war on you if you feel like it. Is Tuesday at 8 good?"

I'm sure most of you precious snowflakes don't agree but sometimes you need to punish your wayward children to get them to behave properly. OFA refused to follow the house rules so they got sent to the NPO boot camp.

There is no hope for him monkey, just like the leader of OFA. topkek

I wont give up that easy, theres hope for you....

Im not gonna explain that joke nor do i expect ur braincells to understnd it if i did explain it.

....the irony of a side that initiated action on a large group of alliances because it was a threat that they were all treatied to each other simultaneously not able to draw a straight line to why alliances that might be treatied to them may constitute some kind of inimical force to the alliances they just hit for similar reasoning...

oh cool we're posting logs from the peace server now?

You heard it here folks. All of your treaties are CBs. All hail IQ.

You must pray for the forgiveness of our lord and savior Roquentin.

The wishful thinking part where they say that getting looted is going to make us want a short war is what I'm referring to. Everyone who runs planes only is fully aware of the downsides at this point and a little looting isn't going to compel any capitulations from competent alliances, especially NPO and BK which are specifically referred to in the post Micchan quotes.

Latest Picture of how the war is going for TKR and Friends:

I think it is unfair of you to blame Partisan - a well-renowned TGH gov member - for all of this unfortunate confusion that is resulting from the civil unrest that is currently affecting all of the fraggle folk.

Currently, if you win a nation vs nation war, you have no dictation over what happens next. Often, the beige timer that your opponent is going to get will leave them better off than if you didn't win the war at all- especially if there's no money to loot. Instead, I would suggest that as part of the act of winning a war, the victor should be able to declare terms. These terms could include all the things that currently happen, and more (and these are just ideas and examples); Loot from the nation, Loot from the alliance bank, Not being able to declare new wars for a period of time, Enforced debt (i.e. a portion of the opponents tax income is taken and handed to the victor until it is paid off), Not being able to buy military units above a certain percentage for some time, Forcible conscription of some opposing surviving military units, Destruction of infrastructure, Destruction of improvements (at random, so we can't forcibly choose hangars or power plants). A beige timer would still exist, but the number of turns spent in beige would depend on the harshness of the terms inflicted. Therefore, if you won the war, and you chose to not attach terms, the beige timer should be relatively short (for example, 6 turns). If you won the war and decided to inflict as many terms as possible, the beige timer would be much longer. The value of the terms inflicted, and thus the length of the beige timer, should be capped at no more than the percentage of resistance you won the war by. If you won by 6 resistance or less, you wouldn't be able to select any terms; if you won by 20, you'd be able to select maybe one thing, if you won by 50, something harsher, etc. These changes are one possible idea, I'm sure there's other better ones to be thought of.

Compared to past declaration reasons, which very blatantly were a DoW themselves, that means literally nothing.

Have fun fighting!

Nice alliteration there :3

An alliance with 19 members who average 1K score per member wants to give BK a "Big Gift"? Hush my sweet summer child, just throw yourself out the Moon Door now, save yourself the pain.

A cap is an awful idea. I remember the dark days before scaling damages and how there was no way to destroy more units in a day than the other side could rebuy. Also, I thought the strategy didn't work which is why you're all saying that you're winning and we're losing. Clearly the all planes strat needs to be buffed according to your propaganda.

We would of had to have one “bite the dust” prior to this event in order to have “Another one bite the dust”. I think you meant to post this song:

Nah in the words of Lil Wayne: "I'm here to distinguish the bears from the penguins" VIP is for the bears If you ain't got credits, you must be in nuclear winter, cuz u got no bread "Life is just a gap get some money in between it" VIP or bust

Literally none of us were complaining about this mechanic. Attacking enemy or unaligned nation's with poor beige discipline has always been a tactic and nobody to my knowledge has really complained about it. Attacking the protectorate of your direct allies and trying to pay them to beige you is something else entirely. If Smith was hitting blackfyre nation's to get beiged I'm sure you'd all be reporting him. I know I would be. The problem here is there are legitimate reasons to attack someone with no hope of victory. Maybe you are going to suicide in to help someone else or just be an annoying ankle biter. Maybe you're Od and occupied but plan to missile/nuke in a guerilla campaign a la 69 day war. I suppose attacking and doing literally nothing ever wouldn't be much of a fight, but even still it is on the enemy to actually reward you with the beige. I can't see it as applying to any of the current rules, though I could see the argument for a new rule in those edge cases. I think it would be very hard to define though.