Leaderboard

RIP the first fallen alliances brought down by Noctis.

So Escobar died and we decided to head up to Manhattan As you were We physically met, our fingertips touched, We both transformed into previous tenant dust, Our bodies dissolved in the fallout. We were the last ones left. The Medellin Cartel and The Manhattan Project formally disband. The Manhattan Cartel announces its existence. Our discord https://discord.gg/8ugtWZj CURRENT GOVERNMENT Leadership: @Kim2019 @Otto Von Bismarck High Government: @Drek Smoking Snek - Head of Military Affairs @Gatorcock - Head of Foreign Affairs @kiwi - Head of Internal Affairs @Chapsie @SwedenfrickYeah The Autismo Council @San Fortunado - Deputy of Internal Affairs @The Reggin - Deputy of Military Affairs @Ok! ? - Head of Micro Foreign Affairs Protected by Fark

Did you know that test makes up less than 1% of all alliances but is the cause of 100% of this game's problems?

Nuclear weapons are strong enough in the right hands, given that the require no strategy past a press of a button, buffing them seems unbalanced. Turning them into a weapon that can attack people at any war range, outside of combat, is overkill. Planes don't need a counternerf. Planes should remain the dominant unit. I'm hesistant to propose changes to the meta since sheepy has a tendency to take ideas and warp them into something worse, but tanks need a cost reduction, and the score ranges need to be adjusted. That is about it. Game balance is more important than realism. Seems reasonable. This game has too many nation centric mechanics despite its design forcing alliances to be the obvious meta. More flexibility for alliance leaders is better than less afaic. This has been requested for ages. Would again be good for alliance administration and flexibility.

chanting Admin Bomb, Admin Bomb

@Noctis Anarch Caelum I'm going to say this one last time, and I'm going to be harsh about it. Not a single person in this community is taking you one bit seriously. Nobody cares about your threats to not work with alliances in the future, nobody cares if they are on Kingsglaive's target list. Nobody cares if you are giving them "one last chance to peace out" and nobody cares about the "ruthless and aggressive" Noctis destroying their nation. The more you incessantly whine and complain and threaten, the lower your reputation and credibility will go. Seriously, just stop, clear your head, take a break. Come back when you can be a contributing member of the community.

I am taking some very thorough notes very vigorously for the improvement of rose based on the conclusive interactions between Prefonteen and Noctis. All this is in hopes that one day a government comes into power that can finally do something meaningful and make use of this treasure trove of information.

Hi y'all. In the light of bank shenanigans we've been recently witnessing with the cheaters, along with the fact that ever since it was made possible to create alliances super easily -- therefore practically keeping your bank untouchable, and after seeing @Alex's bank caps suggestion going down in flames, I've had some thoughts on how to handle the issues that have surfaced and decided to share it here. Some of you may know me, yeah - I'm that guy that loots offshore banks. So why the hell would I want anything changed, you're probably asking yourself now. As someone who has been juggling bank funds for the past few months from offshore to offshore, I dare say I am enough of an expert on it (and as any kid from elementary would quickly be able to claim their expertise on the subject as well), to say we gotta face the facts and recognize how gamey this deformed feature has become. You declare your wars, get your 8 slots filled, send the bank away, remake the alliance, voila, you are safe again. Not a penny lost. It's OP and it's gamey, and I believe we need to change it. So, here are my suggestions on how to effectively make offshoring obsolete, but still possible, without removing bank looting or any other mechanics, along with other suggestions that could help prevent shady or rule breaking bank shenanigans in the future. Forthwith, one nation can make a new alliance every 45 days. This eliminates the never ending cycle of declaring wars and remaking your offshore immediately. The purpose is clear and it can not hurt real alliance creation in anyway, as I doubt anyone except Sean Anthony is going around and making new alliances every 2 weeks. Further, for all nations one year or older, creating a new alliance should cost something. Lets say, $20M cash. The profitability behind remaking offshores in an endless circle of several government members functioning outside the alliance would be questionable, at best. I've included nation age so we do not impede on micros. (could be exploited as pointed out by ArcKnox and Dryad, better to make it a universal cost) And for an actual, real alliance creation - if you are not ready to invest $20m into your alliance creation, you should probably not make a new alliance. Also the actual figure is just an example, if the consensus in the thread deems it, it can be easily increased to 30, or 40, 50m. To prevent this from happening, as you must have 1000 score to make a new alliance, the same principle should exist for promoting leaders of the alliance. So, 1000 score for creating the alliance and 1000 score for being eligible to be promoted to the leader of the alliance. Further, to prevent abuse of setting wide bank usage permissions to circumvent this mechanic (ie, someone 1000+ score makes an alliance, invites a 0 score nation over, sets member, officer or heir-wide bank perms and leaves), if you are the only member of the alliance and you are not the leader, you should be locked out of using any bank mechanics. If there are 2 or less members in an alliance, and you are blockaded, you should not be able to use the bank. But alas, salvation would still be at hand - you can invite someone unblockaded over to help you send the funds away. This further makes offshoring complicated and creates more offshore hunting possibilities, but I can see why some people would not like this change. Nerf the bank loot formula. For example, on a bank worth $10b cash and 5m resources each, if on an average nation max looting was up to, say, 0.005-0.01% ($500K-1M cash and 250-500 of each resource, on the aforementioned example) of your entire bank, in the face of increased difficulties of maintaining offshores, your average alliance would see this loot as inconsequential, and they would likely move their bank operations back to alliance HQ. Current bank looting formula is (RAND(0, (player score/alliance score)))/3, which can be easily adjusted. However, on one man alliances, I believe the 33% max loot should still stay. You could still offshore, but with increased risks of being blockaded and completely pauperized by good raiders, etc. As the bank looting formula would be severely nerfed, the compensation towards raiding is necessary. The best way to do this is to increase nation cash beige loot percentage from 10% to 15%. I believe this is all easily implementable, it only uses already existing mechanics, and most importantly, it does not eliminate any existing mechanics, meta or impedes on players in anyway. The goal of these suggestions is clear - make offshoring obsolete by making home banking the most viable option, while *still* allowing offshoring and saving every penny at an increased risk. Tell me what you think and share any insights you have yourself. I believe there should not be any loopholes in my suggestions, but if there are, kindly point them out.

While we complain about NPO, IQ, GPWC and all those pathetic low lifes, we forget about the person who is at the core of all this. Esquire Templar has researched well and the dots( and the star guiding my one ship) have pointed to a small alliance called test. Our autism meters broke when we neared the shores of this alliance but we are estimating a level 9 threat here. The Esquire Templar Paramilitaty Forces, formerly known as Esquire Templar Liberation Front, have successfully deployed themselves. We have begun the assault to take down Test for good. Hope we have a good fight @Alex. P.S- Nuke me.

Great, now I can't get the idea of Don Draper smuggling and selling dope in Manhattan out of my head.

looking forward to working with you Otto. Exciting times ahead

Wishing you folks all the best!

First, ZI is basically impossible in this game. Second, Yarr couldn't do it if we wanted to, eventually you'd be out of our score range. Third, I think all of the talk about what to do with you in the channels I've seen is along the lines of "He's offering peace now that he can't get enough MAPs before beige to launch another one" followed be some "no chance" type messages. Fourth, and this is the big one here. Most people view themselves, or their side as "the good guys". Not many people actively seek out the villain role. If you're thinking you're the good guy, you're not. You're not the plucky hero standing up to the evil-doers. Just because you're not the good guy doesn't make you the bad guy either. From what I can tell is you're desperately making moves to maybe save face, or some personal respect, or whatever. But you're all over the place. Your stances and statements seem to wax and wane with each hour. The people who have suggested you take a break aren't wrong. The best thing for you to do in this situation is accept that there are no real moves you can make at this point. Accept what has happened, stop lashing out in almost every direction and learn from what has happened. Let this go, move on, and remember...

I buy soldiers to have them aistriked because they cost like 100k to me and 2-3M to my enemy

No one could act against Partisan and speak of it being in 'good conscience'. To act against Partisan is to be in the wrong by definition.

Its not that I view myself as anything. It's that I am, objectively speaking, the good guy.

Just disband already.... Oh wait

New kin, same dream A smoke for the new times and a drink for the fresh minds

Ezpz, lets get this bread.

They're the nutjobs?!!

I’m sure you mean well and I’m happy to hear that you have enjoyed the few conversations we have had over the last decade. However, that doesn’t dismiss DNFJ’s assessment of this particular situation. I agree with some of the other members of the Orbis community that perhaps it is best that you take a break to assess what kind of image you are projecting. You are currently in a hole, but that doesn’t mean you can’t climb out. It may be time for you to put the shovel away so you can come up with a solution to be on the same ground as everyone else.

Why are you dodging my questions, twisting around any meaningful discussion and spitting on my extended hand if you want to get along?

From someone on the other side of the treaty web, I can say that DNFJ has conducted himself in a manner that deserves respect. Personally I would not be opposed to working with such an individual in the future. I’m willing to bet that the membership within GOONS are happy with their current leadership set-up.

Man this entire dumpster fire has just been a roller coaster of idiocy and self-wanking. I wasn't even aware that one person could have such an incredible rectal-cranial inversion that they were able to brush their own teeth by sticking a brush up their ass. Please, go on. It's entertaining as hell. And yes, I signed up just so I could post that. Because that's how entertained I am.

But you were doing so well..

Is that a wall of text challenge? Tread lightly, goons.

I'd like to switch the channel back to Abbas & Partisan Philosophy Hour please.

Dead or in voice chat? ?

Anyways, doesn’t really matter now. I don’t even care to tally the $$ worth of infra damage I took, unimportant.. Edit: Also this thread was only recognizing war with Alexio's alliance, who attacked aggressively. The other posts were joking back and forth with people. Some people can't take a joke.

hey

you da best

Kongo Replies to Noctis speaking, 2019, Colorized

Awesome set of plans. But once again, the vast majority of the community agrees that (the current) offshores are no hazard to the game’s health. It seems that only Alex finds so due to moderation issues. An extra moderator could resolve that.

Frankly the score to even create an alliance should be increased. Not necessarily related except in that it would stop completely bombed out nation's from making offshores unless they're hella big.

Defending someone who abused game mechanics to get ahead, regardless of how, when, or why, is reprehensible.

Hi noctis, big fan, just curious are you gonna scream and cry in this game when you lose too or can we expect a new you.

Noctis, I have been on Orbis from the beginning, and you are the first player I have reported for anything. I reported you as a multi. You are a cheater, and you consort with cheaters, and then attack unrelated parties to draw attention to yourself. I hope you and your 'brother' get what you deserve, trash.

Nobody forces someone to exploit a bug, you know. Of course bugs shouldn't happen in the first place, but they will because no program is perfect. Purposely using that for your own gain is not an accident.

Yeah... that ship sailed like a year ago.

It's noctis, who cares?

mfw when the only downvote is from someone with an anime pfp

Uhm. So, if we make wars slower, this war is going to last 9 months, at the bare minimum? Twelve if we're lucky? I don't see your point. Let's make a slow aspect of this game, even slower. Why do we need 6 month wars at our current snail pace, when we can have thirteen month wars at an even slower pace. The cost of war would barely take a hit. Losses will be slow, and the less attacks you get off, the more infrastructure your opponents will have. With that infrastructure they can continue to be making resources and war stuff. They aren't forced to switch to a military build for a few days because they won't have to deal with the loss infra. That means that war is going to last even longer because we're going to have way more resources to keep fighting them. It will also be slower to progress wars. 1. What the hell is wrong with you? Why declare a war when you will have no advantage. Numbers will become the end-all be all in wars because there's going to be literally nothing else that could decide it. Who needs strategy when you have four bloody turns to counter. The attackers will only be able to down-declare so much, or up-declare so much. Double buying after update would do literally nothing as you couldn't get an attack off. It will only increase your score for other people to hit you. "But Citrusss. Think of the players. Think about how easy wars will become if this happens." Well, war would be really easy. I will admit that. You won't need to be active, at all, and you can create a horde of players and control the game. You will worsen the issue that we already have, and the results? The longest-running players will quit after the first year-long war. The players who create new strategy's will become useless because strategy won't need to exist, when all your opponent has to do is log-in once a day and airstrike your planes. 2. What, in God's name, is wrong with you? Not only are you slowing down the start of war, you want to give the defender even more time to respond. So, instead of three turns (six hours) to launch an attack (at the minimum) you want the defender to have ten hours to defend against an attack. This is the way that BK and NPO takes over the game. You can declare a war, be unable to attack, and instantly be slotted before you even got to land an attack. You wouldn't be able to play the game without begging to NPO for bloody mercy. I don't know what pit of hell your idea came from, but I can't express how much distaste I hold for it. Take this for example, I as a city seventeen nation, could go and declare on Bob, a c13. I would have to wait six turns to launch an airstrike. In that time, Bob's alliance, has put three city twenties on me (all within the second turn of declaration). So, I get to airstrike Bob once, before my planes get torn to literal shreds. That's not something I would particularly enjoy. It would take six days to rebuild those planes, and I would be sat on for fifty-eight turns, unable to do anything. That doesn't seem like a fun game. Log-in, declare war, get zeroed, wait 58 turns, rinse and repeat. That's not a war system, that's a system of control.

Also improvements being invincible is a completely made up problem, since they aren’t at all. You want to make them so easy to destroy, there is almost no disadvantage to selling off infra at the start of wars to pad stats. Also remove any strategy regarding choosing a military policy which makes them easier or harder to destroy. (As well as make nukes less useful)

You say this like a math problem I posted didn’t trigger your entire sphere yesterday.

I think we ought to just eliminate alliance bank looting as it's a mostly useless mechanic that just causes moderation headaches.