Leaderboard

Earlier today I tried to launch 3 airstrikes against an opponent and got three Utter Failures despite having around 400 more planes on the first airstrike. The first one was 1925 vs. about 1550 planes and each of our planes went down by a similar amount(75-100) with each airstrike. The chances of getting UF each of the times individually was about 2%, and the chance of getting it all three times is 0.008%. The opponent had ground control, and I was sure it must be a bug with GC still grounding planes. I had no MAPs so I asked someone else attacking the same guy to do airstrikes and screenshot the detailed battle report page. Here is the planes used in the battle: And here is the result: As you can see, according the army value, Magister's planes are being affected by GC, as he should have an army value of closer to 3k because plane value is planes*3, but actually only has an army value of 1,668. Here is the link to the opponent: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=16132 Here is my war against him: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=659252 And here is Magister's war against him: https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=659251

I want my money back .

I'm also breaking the rules by saying this.. But this is a NO discussion form.

The latest change to the safe-money cap seems to have been poorly thought out. You've essientially considerably cut down any raiding profits to be made in the lower tiers on what seems to be an arbitrary number. I don't see how it makes any sense that the safe-money cap is the same across the entire game from a 1 city nation to a 45 city nation. 1 million means extremely different things to both nations. Would it not be smarter to tie the cap to cities? Say 100k per city or something? You've already basically killed making new alliances from scratch in this game with the other changes, raiding was one of the very few ways people could attempt to catch up.

Flatten the curve!

Thinking score = competency. Some people never learn.

Congrats! If it doesn't work out you can always try turning it off and on again

Hedge Money invested a lot of time and money into our virtual communication methods during quarantine. However, someone *glares at SRD* forgot to put in place a defense against malware. We continue to give our best efforts to protect our assets against these intrusive threats. Hedge will monitor these attac-....oh dear God.... WARNING!: BREACH! WE HAVE A BREEEE *static*.....VANEK, WHER- *static* YOUR PANTS??? *static* DENISON FOR TH- *static* -OVE OF *static* ST- *static* EATING GLUE! KEEGOZ! FLIP THE OFF SWITCH! HURRY! THEY'RE GETTING THROU- *static* GAHHHHHHHH GOD HELP US!!! *static* Preamble Error 404 enter into treaties of mutual defense with Guardian, Knights Templar, Grumpy Old Bastards and Children of the Light. Article 1: Money Grows on Hedges Should someone try to interrupt our hedge money growing scheme, the signatories shall eliminate the weeds. Article 2: Money Talks The Signatories agree that if they gain any insider trading knowledge, to inform the other signatories so they can also benefit from the profits. Article 3: It’s Just Business If profits from this scheme are not satisfactory for a signatory, they may withdraw relations from another signatory giving 72 hours notice. Guardian Memph Vanek Children of the Light Kev Keegoz Grumpy Old Bastards Sweeeeet Ronny D Error 404 Basebond borg Knights Templar Denison

I'm not sure if this is a troll or if you've been living under a rock.

I originally agreed with him, it did leave a lot to be desired. Mainly spelling my name correctly. Now that that egregious error has been rectified, I think it's perfect. Side note to all those making jokes, any joke must be put in italics so that the reader can properly pick up tone. Otherwise anything said will be taken 100 percent seriously. Since we all play a web browser game, social ques are not our strong point and any statement has the possibility of being taken poorly. Amicable SRD is out!

Basically you.

Tying the treasury cap to city-count also provides an avenue for an easy project addition: a national treasury that buffs the per-city cash cap. For example: At 33 cities, a base $100k/city cap allows me $3.3m unraidable; a project that buffs the per-city treasury cap by 50% allows me $4.95m unraidable; a project that buffs the per-city treasury cap by 100% allows me $6.6m unraidable.

The people of Orbis have spoken as the Hizulian-Atlantis has been founded! While we are still small we continue to grow and do our best to protect and strengthen our members, we build on trust and strive for it as well as honesty just like YOU. we're determined to do our best and to achieve our and our members's goal. Our perseverance benefits both us and our members, and you could be one of those members.

Don't Worry Kev. I've Dispatched my elite Panda Repair Team to fix your computer problems.

Good luck out there. And keep us posted on how your alliance fares every so often.

1. It's new... therefore has not been "successful" yet 2. This is usually a comment you would make about another AA, not your own.

HELL YEAH

I've just realized, we need an 'x to doubt' reaction on these forums.

Please merge with more micros and just keep tacking on the new ones' names, not even hating on micros here I just want to see a 100 character alliance name with a 10 character abbreviation.

This is an awful lot of text from a top 5 alliance leader to a former micro leader trying to explain that his alliance isn't a pathetic laughing stock for only having micros as allies and then to distract people from that truth by talking about some wacky idea one of said micros had. Methinks his lordship doth protest too much.

Kev none of this would had happened if you used Nord VPN, if you go to Nord VPN and input the code HEDGE MONEY you will get a 50% discount on your first 3 months! Money back guarantee.

Don't worry, I know how to help.

This was in line with one of the things I was looking at tweaking, it was 50k per city though, 500k for 10 cities, 1M for 20, 1.5M for 30 etc..

It's pointless to devote a certain amount of time and effort into a feature that isn't expected to see much, if any use, in contrast to devoting that that same amount of time and effort into more significant/worthwhile updates, such as the recent update and the Alliance QoL thing. It's simply a matter of investment vs return, and the latter options offer far better returns for the investment involved. As such, I'd be encouraging a greater emphasis to be placed on the latter two. This is inconsequential enough to where it could very well just be added directly as changes to the improvements themselves. Which would allow far more people to make use of them if they were so inclined.

Well this thread took a turn I didn't expect. Good luck y'all

Alright, good luck man!

0/10 please form and then immediately disband

Most of us ended up in Atlas Tech - others went abroad I believe in Error 404 or other places. It was a fun alliance to be in tho.

please no insults, it doesnt bring anyone any closer to anything. have a nice day - lars

this is all so interesting, is he a multi?!? is he not?!? give us answers!!!

Who else is 99% sure this is related to Hizu alliance?

A noble goal, to be sure. I wish TEst and you guys the best in growing and bettering yourself 🙂 Error 404, welcome to the club 🍻

Why are you bothering? You're discussing the person who thinks that describing an allied alliance leader as a crackhead on discord is a good way to win friends in a global. Everybody could do better lmao.

It is a good suggestion and should be implemented

Because they made the tanks the new planes. Planes were an all powerful unit but now tanks are the all powerful units. In the previous system, it was still possible to kill the planes but in this, you cannot even kill the tanks which is infinitely frustrating. Added with the score changes, this makes sitting on an opponent very easy, forcing Dial Up like war situations more into the game. In fact, the only ones I've seen supporting the change are ex-IQ and the new IQ ie Swamp. This update massively benefits the 100+ member alliances and literally destroys the alliances with smaller counts. It only benefits older alliances with massive stockpile while throwing any new alliance into the gutter. Hence, if you are supporting these changes, you should get ready to be sat on by hoards while being able to do nothing but delete and quit the game.

The war changes tbh its difficult to offer a analysis rn due to the bugs, so I'll come back to that later. In regards to the score changes (which imo is the most significant change of the lot) to address several points which have been bought up: The score adjustments are not 'minor' - if you haven't noticed that much difference its probably because you are running a high infra/military setup; for those of us running a leaner build the score change is massive (for example: I've gone from 1590 > 2640 overnight) The net result is heavy tier stratification; for the people who think this is inconsequential I would invite you to think back to the last global war: NPO operated a 'death tier' around the 20 City Level; the new scoring system effectively means that if you were in that range there would be no prospect of escape - ironically (given the score change has been partially motivated by people complaining about 'downdeclares') this would have resulted in a lot more people quitting. a global war, where someone with no military can be declared on by someone with max military at the same city level, offers little to no chance of staging a comeback (given the predominance of blockade cycling tactics); this results in a stale, predictable and boring war - whoever has numerical/military superiority will win for all the people complaining about the last global war I honestly don't see any issues with the tactics involved (and I say that as someone on the opposing side); the only reason why NPO was able to engage in a prolonged airstrike campaign was because they were printing money via GPWC - once the bans came in the NPO machine crumbled because they were no longer able to economically sustain the military campaign throughout the last global war there were numerous attempts to regain control over the lower tier; the lines shifted but periodically safe zones were established at certain score ranges (e.g. <1000, <1200 score etc.) - with the new scoring system this quite simply would have been impossible due the majority of people being stuck inside the NPO death zone running planes only is a valid tactic; I honestly don't understand peoples complaints with this - the solution is to run a lean setup where it costs them more destroy cheap troops (soldiers) than the damage inflicted - under the new system max military will become the new meta, so effectively zero tactics involved, again resulting in stale/boring gameplay And no, we don't need to 'wait till the next war' to see the impact these changes will have. Imo some sort of middle ground is vastly preferable to the new scoring system; personally I don't think changes which make global wars predictable and hand an unassailable advantage to the larger side are desirable or healthy for the game in general.

Honestly we don’t need more slots right now. Giving nations more slots will just cause them to get most projects. It is better if we are forced to pick and choose how we specialize our nation.

CAN YOU SHUT THE frick UP AND ACTUALLY POST SOMETHING RELEVANT FOR fricking ONCE?

No no no, down voting bad content is toxic and some how doesn't self moderate towards a better community.

When it comes to war, People in Cam/Rose-sphere know how to give em hell!

Still not toxic eh bro? maybe take a break on this whole forum posting thing for a while.

As a rich whale who had more wealth than Elijah at his prime, and for the other rich whales who went to war with him, I can assure you it has nothing to do with his city size. If I had his nation I would have deleted it because the war stats alone were horrible.

...both cheated....

Thank you all very much for the fascinating game. I wish all players good luck. As a community you are amazing. Don't let the AFRL affect your IRL. Goodbye.

So, was their disbandment part of the peace terms then? You can tell me, I wouldn't think any less of you. Since my opinion of IQ is already at rock bottom.

Of course a micro leader doesn’t know the difference between a real alliance and a micro lmao. On a more serious note, and I’ll say this from the bottom of my heart, the fact that you initially *declared wars* against CoB, got immediately countered, sued for peace and blamed the whole situation on tI just shows your whole alliance’s mentality. If you care for your alliance, disband or at the very least resign so someone more competent can take reign.

please bring back downvotes so I can downvote every single one of these shitposts