Leaderboard

Afrika Korps. Also please don’t bother to apply to TKR in the future.

Most of the time the only people who care about that distinction are fascists and Neo-Nazis. To the rest of us, they're all just trash.

Who else is 99% sure this guy is trolling?

Only way I like my nazi alliances. Gone.

Yes, yes. Let's substitute one supposedly exploitable mechanic with a more complicated, more easily exploitable mechanic that will definitely end up being another point of contention 6 months down because "its not working as intended". Tbh, this suggestion spree is ill-advised because the core mechanic which was functional has been borked out of laziness.

I have a radical alternative suggestion guys! Why don't we, and I want you to hear me out before thinking im crazy, Why don't we reinstate beige under the old mechanics and instead of implementing a bunch of half-assed, overcomplicated mechanics that'll end up not doing what they are intended to do, just apply consistent, structured moderation? The mechanic wasn't broken. The moderation surrounding it was (ill-defined rules that were/are open to exploitation but more importantly, arbitrary moderating decisions due to a lack of consistency in application of the already ill defined rules as well as hardheadedness when unsurprisingly, contradictory decisions cause controversy). Or we can continue fricking up the meta until the elements that constituted PW's unique selling points relative to other browser sims are entirely substituted with ass. Either way, i'll be here.

All wars that expire, end in victory or defeat based on the remaining resistance. If a war ends with a tie in remaining resistance, the defending nation is declared the victor. Once a war ends in victory/defeat, the defeated nations gains 4 turns of temporary beige status to prevent that slot from being instantly filled. This status does not stack and thus can never exceed 4 turns. This is to allow for an 8 hour window in which a nation may choose to use their beige bank after a war ends. When a war ends by expiration, the defeated nation loses portion of the infra and loot they would normally lose. The portion depends on the remaining resistance of the defeated nation. If they have 50 resistance left, they only lose 50% of the infra and loot they would have lost. Is they have 25 resistance left, they lose 75% of the infra and loot they would have lost. Nations who lose a defensive war gain 24 turns of beige bank. Nations who lose an offensive war gain 12 turns of beige bank. Nations can hold a max of 96 turns of beige bank (8 days) Once a nation gains time into their beige bank, that time expires in 16 days. Once a nation activates their beige bank, any wars that expire with the bank active add to the active bank timer but cannot exceed the cap. A nation cannot leave beige with more than 36 turns of beige unless they are a newly created nation leaving beige for the first time. Once your beige bank is active, when you leave beige your bank is reduced to 0 even if you leave with a remaining balance. You cannot activate your beige bank while you have an active offensive war. This is designed to put the control of beige into the player going into beige. This will add a new level of strategy into when nations/alliances should have members move to and come out of beige, and provides the attackers strategies to extend the maximize the amount of time their targets will receive a sub-optimal beige count as well as disrupting timers for the coordinated return. Damage and loot lost at the end of a war is determined by how much resistance was lost by the losing party, it's effectively 100-remaining resistance to give the percent. Nations repeatedly losing offensive wars can also gain beige timers to assist with raiders being able to find a reprieve. Slot filling rules will need to encompass the prospect of a nation declaring upon another nation and then performing to guarantee a loss and the addition of 12 turns of beige.

Definition of fascism 1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition So outside of the "authoritarian" piece of fascism, Authoritarian being a different word btw, fascism is almost exclusively defined by Nazi principles of racial purity, ubernationalism, and the like. Also nice troll, former GOON or NPO player.

No, it doesn't. I'd prefer you didn't waste everyone's time trying to claim otherwise either, it is for this specific reason when I talk about almost no one on this subforum knowing what a bigger picture is that you're one of the first names to come up. At least unlike pre you're not also blatantly disingenuous, you just chronically fail to observe other details than the primary one which has garnered your eye. When one seeks to solve a problem one must consider the other effects their solution may have. Honestly I think you're vastly out of touch from being in TKR for basically ever that you do not know or do not remember what it's actually like to be in an alliance that is not just generally all around good generally all the time. I made my point with size, it gets exponentially harder the bigger you are, but allow me to illustrate how little size actually matters to my point. Let's say it's a more middling alliance. 45 members. These mechanics are introduced and war has broken out. You were hit with a well executed blitz that completely rolled you and your allies, unsuspecting of it, into the dust. As milcom you just spent the last several days putting up the best defense you could, ensuring warchests were had, builds switched, units and their rebuys used and timed correctly, counters sent where they could be sent, communicating with your allies as you start to setup a centralized command structure and planning a large scale counter attack with the beige banks. Stuff looks pretty bad right now, you got blindsided hard and as a middling alliance, poor morale especially in the face of a superior enemy is a far greater concern to you than the Titans you tug the robes of. Even they are concerned, but your enemy all beiged you, no fancy delaying their timings or anything to screw you up, they made it easy! So it's decided the beige banks will be used ASAP to launch a counterattack! Your new job is to now organize and manage 45 warchests, nation wide city builds, unit buys, activity, personal daily reset settings, beige banks, you need to setup squads, pick your targets, assign people to them, coordinate all of this with all the hundreds of other nations being managed by allied milcoms. And don't forget, if your enemies are intelligent you're also still managing current wars, more incoming, potentially counters for those or allies, oh and I almost forgot spy operations! All this while planning a coordinated blitz a week+ in advance and hoping people show up or don't quit or VM or leave or that your enemy guesses you're coming and correctly blunts you with their own counter blitz. And God forbid anybody particularly in gov, just can't spare the time because of life, lol. Now all of this, doesn't sound that bad to you I'm sure. For Pre, he ran an alliance of elites, it wasn't necessary to do all that. For TKR, there's just so many bloody government members, not even counting retired ones who could still be called in to help, the task is great but so is the manpower to tackle it. That, is straight up, not the case, for almost every alliance in the game. They either lack manpower or the knowledge or often both. Even in the four whole alliances I think could handle pulling an operation off like this, it's still alot of effort on the people doing it. And don't forget, bigger alliances attract more people, particularly people with skill and knowledge. A larger alliance is not merely more powerful because of its many members, but also because it's very power is a positive feedback loop that attracts more individuals with the ability to push that even further. Which is a very long winded way of saying, most alliances simply cannot field a milcom department large or experienced enough to do this. TKR has probably what, 5+ what might as well be milcom heads, good ones even, if it needed that many? Syndicate has at least three, and they're some of the best period. Rose has Valk and DtC both of which have no life Roses milcom into actually existing single handedly before. Lastly, my own alliance, just in active gov currently, effectively has at minimum 5 major Milcom personnel who could walk into damn near any other alliance in the game and suddenly that alliance would have a respectable milcom. As much as I wish the game to be more skill oriented because I'm a self biased patrician who would benefit from such, go too hard in that direction and even I'll quit the game because I'll be bored, and everyone else will quit because why bother when the logistical operations demanded by these mechanics are so significant that compared to a TKR, they might as well not have an MA to begin with. And then at the end of it all, even if that entire anecdote is wrong, you will still be crushed and lose to a cadre of alliances who have more resources than you, more people to fight on, and more commanders to get them to do so.if you don't want 6 month long wars then at some point, making an enemy bend the knee and keeping it bent, must be possible. Perma warring is after all, included in the rules now.

Except the beige he's testing out is neutered in accordance to his priorities/considerations, which haven't changed. Expecting him not only to return to old beige (which he clearly doesn't intend to do), but implement one which, for his purposes/considerations, is even worse, is unrealistic. Before beige got removed, they could escape if they put the effort into it anyways. As for flaws, just to cite a few: People intentionally UF'ing (mind you, this was already happening to some degree last war), so to still kill units whilst not grinding resistance (so to deny beige to their foe). Thing is, there'd be a much higher incentive to do this now, since being just one res below the other guy would deny him the beige. Given that the infra/loot damage would also be fractioned, rather than the full value, taking this beige wouldn't be as punitive either. And no, the trade ratios wouldn't be that much of an issue with air, due to how dogfights work. It wouldn't just be a matter of people not wanting to win their wars (which seemingly bothers Alex); people wouldn't even want to win those individual battles. This is also a further nerf to aggression. Being the aggressor has it's own set of costs, which include political ones, if not properly justified (it doesn't matter that you're tired about that "old song and dance"; other people aren't, and it's a relevant matter for politics, and it'll continue to be a relevant matter for politics). It also takes genuine effort to put together a good offensive. These costs and efforts should come with a set of tangible benefits of their own. One of them being conventional control. This benefit has already been nerfed with the casualties reduction. Given that it's already harder to bring these nations down, they shouldn't just be able to rebound effortlessly. Else, there would be no incentive to be the aggressor, which would lead to no one wanting to be such, and with it, a staler (read:boring) game. And no, there isn't much disruption that'll happen, given that you'd be able to hold beige for 16 days. This is guaranteed two war cycles if all wars expires; else, it'd be more. It's simply too long for such to be possible, as you'd be all but guaranteed to get more than enough beige time for a comeback. I'd also suggest you actually try to address the point raised by them, rather than just smugly reduce them to one or two talking points and discard out of hand. You're the one trying to argue for this mechanic; make a proper defence for it.

Definition of Swamp 1 : a wetland often partially or intermittently covered with water especially : one dominated by woody vegetation 2 : a tract of swamp 3 : a difficult or troublesome situation or subject. Best avoided when travelling alone or when ghosting; that way lurk monsters. I acknowledge I should’ve read the signs to ‘Get Outta My Swamp’ and will stay clear in the future.

Just curious, there are losts of communist alliances, but couldn't find anything fascist using search. Btw, the game creator stated that fascism is not banned in the game: https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/26981-strong-political-slurs/&tab=comments#comment-433368

I'd say 'join ordo draconis' like I do to everyone else, but we let people set their own taxes and have free speech so you wouldn't like that I guess.

I swear I made a post earlier in this thread but maybe not. Basically great creativity on the suggestion, it looks like you closed a lot of earlier loopholes people mentioned. The bad piece is that this puts a lot more "favor" towards the defender than it does the attacker in my mind, and I don't see a way to avoid that due the nature of a beige bank. Giving complete control of rebuilding time to the losers of the initial blitz just seems, in my mind, to create a strategy of "wait to get your beige bank and we all go beige at once to rebuild and blitz." Then, despite only having a 12 turn window to leave beige before it expires, you basically have the ability to "counter-blitz" and then that pattern continues until someone runs out of rebuild resources. That doesn't seem like a better alternative to what we see now. With the proposed changes on the test server, the attackers can at least force someone out of the fight WHILE they rebuild for a set amount of time. Beige is guaranteed no matter what (unless you're an aggressor but hopefully that gets redacted @Alex ). I think Alex's original idea for beige, with a few tweaks now that we've had time to see how it works, would be a better fit for the game than the Beige Bank.

How do you end up with fascism being derived from socialism or are you merely commenting on the authoritarian commonalities shared between communist Russia/ China etc and that of Nazi Germany / fascist Italy? In terms of actual ideology, the two of them are quite different with considerably different origins. You could state that fascism developed in response to the advent of socialism but it is incorrect to state that fascism is an offshoot of socialism albeit both of them are considerably opposed to traditional capitalism in differing regards.

Oh I have seen a few funny fascist memes in my day, typically relating to the utterly fabulous uniforms they wore 🤷‍♂️

Note that azaghuls own suggestion was actually my suggestion which was a scarf suggestion with added crap to it from aza that are currently the parts on the test server people removed. This is to say, he added the parts people don't want, the parts people do, came from people not him. Hence I say again, he, like this @Grave fellow who I guarantee has never actually organized a full scale war for any alliance let alone his 300 man behemoth, is out of touch and lacks any ability to see a big picture, focusing on small, wholly irrelevant details. Grave himself in particular, clearly just straight up lacks any actual significant experience. A solution is not good merely because it solves the problem it set to solve. If it solves that problem but creates a myraid of new ones, it is a bad solution. And frankly as Valk said, this needs to slow the hell down. There's a very serious case of Mitt Romney here with the constant flip flop pancaking and sudden changing of directions. The parts on the test server disliked are known, their wanted removal is known, that the rest of it is essentially what has been asked for for years is known. There is no further need for YET ANOTHER pivot to something else.

The argument between Big Brother and Fancroist was fun, but uh... you're both right ig. Fascism is an offshoot of socialism, in the same way Nazism is an offshoot of Fascism. So if socialists get to distance themselves from Fascists, Fascists can distance themselves from Nazis. But every Non-Nazi Fascist Government was run by !@#$ too. Nazis weren't the only bad fascists. So no one should defend them either. Make a Fascist AA when you have the funds if you want, I don't have anything against it not being against the rules, but part of having a fascist OR communist theme is dealing with people whose sensibilities you've offended.

Similar to what I said in this post here, Is this supposed to go hand-in-hand with the other changes? Combining beige bank with reserve units, for example, makes defense so immensely powerful. Whenever defense is too powerful, like what @Shiho Nishizumi mentioned earlier, it crushes the incentive to start a war. Aggressors are taking on way too much risk if defense is too strong as there is a political cost to being the aggressor. We already have a 6 month NAP in place. Knightfall technically didn't even end with an NAP, but still had a long period of peace following it (could be wrong here, don't quite remember). Alliances need to stockpile resources to fund their war efforts. It's why wars don't last 2 weeks anymore like they did when this game first started out. Now, when tanks were buffed recently and planes nerfed, alliances then had to make sure to stockpile more steel. The combination of steel costs, political costs of aggression, buffing of defense (and therefore weakening of aggression), stockpiling behavior, and rampant changes (whoever wants to start the next war is going to have to consider being the guinea pig for this plethora of untested changes) is just going to stifle aggressors from starting wars. And again, like what Shiho said earlier, that'll just lead to a more stagnant and boring game. I'm not saying there should be zero changes to the war system. You may indeed want to help people get out of perma-pinning situations. But it's unclear what the effect of all these various suggestions are going to be when combined. For example, it's been implied that two of the previous suggestions are already going to happen, yet we haven't even been able to test them yet, let alone see them on the live server and judge them before moving onto another suggestion. I know the player base tends to beat up Alex about a lack of updates, but maybe we should slow back down a little bit, lol.

I m gonna be honest here, everyone is suffering, just in different ways

pirate meme also, I dont know about nation states or cyber nations alot, but a quick glance at cyber nations wiki page showed me that theres far more alliances there then in Politics and war, I know the numbers arent exact, but there are 5x more alliances in cyber nations then in poltics and war which means theres more chance of there being a fascist alliance there then politics and war, I assume the same for nation states

All the data is collected, the issue is that displaying it all can cause issues. I have it set to randomly select whether each day's record is shown or not (for all alliances, not just yours and not just "micros")

so heres the thinking process behind this : theres more popular communist memes then fascist --> theres more people meme about communists then fascists --> more people create communist alliances also, theres a lack of fascist memes, which also means theres a lack of fascist alliances, so to answer your question, its either no, they do not exist anymore or little knowns ones or not publicly declared about, unless you can start a 1 man dictatorship in the orbis or someone declares their alliance fascist tmrw, the straight answer is no

see, both of these ideologies are allowed, but fascism is just not as funny as communism

"but I have a black / gay / something friend, I'm not racist / homophobic / something" 😭 From someone who has personally lived in both an authoritarian far left wing country and an authoritarian far right wing country, you have no idea what you are talking about. I just hope you'll find out when you grow up and enter the real world, before you make mistakes you'll have to live with for the rest of your life.

There isn't any, how about you start one? Selling popcorn for 2 bucks for those who came to read the comments.

Boy am I glad downvotes are back

See my issue with this is you are micro managing every slight aspect of your members war effort instead of teaching them how to do it themselves and reprimanding those who don't meet expectations. This also expands to MA/MilCom, you can make almost anyone who's active and willing to learn into someone capable of leading a large alliance. I guess the key here is you should teach a few people (MA) really well so they can teach the rest of the alliance to be self sufficient so your MA can focus on coordinating the war and yelling at the few stragglers to learn and execute that learning.

I don't have time right this moment to address criticisms but I think this is a much more balanced system than before. It allows people to eventually get a reprieve from being endlessly cycled while still giving a big advantage to those who strike first.

why does the beige have to last up to 8 days if a full rebuild takes 5? I don't mind that it stacks up, but I don't think it needs to be stacked up for over 5 days. maybe, we could add a max stack of 5 days and once that is reached (3 total beiges) all other wars automatically expire. This also means the loser will only be plundered 3 times and winners will likely race to be amongst the first 3 beigers thus, encouraging the proper use of beige. That would ensure the defender 5 days of uninterrupted beige without nations "sitting" on them. Another little tweak could be that a war must have at least 1 attack every 24 hours from either party or the war will expire. That's easily played around but it will also help the whole "sitting" strategy we are so used to to circumvent the purpose of beige.

I'm just gonna copy paste what I said in the discord tbh. The only thing on the test server preventing is literally two small changes. Ones that don't require having to bullshit people that it "adds a new layer of strategy" while anyone who actually understands what strategy is sees that it's just replacing one existing level with a different one. Literally the only part about the "different one" I actually like at all is offensive nation's still get beige, and that the cap is higher than 5 days. AKA, the two changes to the current test server that would make your entire spiel irrelevant. And that I'd frankly prefer to trying to plan and coordinate with noobs a week in advance of activity and actions just it utilize it properly. Because shocker, most alliances aren't your proper TEst level of elite who can figure it out alone while you sip a martini. Large alliances are already unwieldy to handle and coordinate, your "new level of strategy" just makes an already difficult task and leaves it so that maybe 3 alliances over 100 and 4 if you expand to over 75, would actually have the present skill, experience and sheer hands on deck to handle not being gutter trash. And if you're TI forgetaboutit, at nearly 300 members you're just RIP.

Gonna have to disagree on that last point. Tactically, you are correct. However in the realms of Strategy and Grand Strategy, your enemy winning on a tactical level can sometimes be an unexpected massive gain (see: German 1918 Summer Offensive, a tactical victory, marred with the typical German strategical shortcomings that left the army in a worse position than before with less men and less supplies to hold that position). The art of strategy itself mandates that, at times, to be defeated is the superior outcome to achieve overall victory.

I fundamentally disagree with the bolded part. Setting aside straight up cheating such as multis and exploits. Alex should never need to intercede into the actual gameplay. Any place he does need to indicates a failing of the mechanics. In this instance without Deus Admin the meta would be slotfill everything and stare. Which is obviously not workable, but that does not make banhammer a good fix. Here that fix has created the 'toe the line meta' in which various parties on all sides have pushed the limits of what they can get away with on everything from slot filling to bank hiding. Its lose lose lose for everyone involved. The only proper way to fix these kind of issues is to mechanically shift the meta so grey area tactics aren't appealing anymore. And, Yes I'm a mechanical purist.

Before the beige changes, @Alex, one of the ways people would break out of being perma-cycled was by declaring wars on less experienced members and trying to bait them into beiging you. It stopped easy nation cycling by preying on the less experienced and requiring individuals to be disciplined and milcom teams to be very on top of things in terms of keeping up with memberships and not awarding too much beige time to people. The concern people have is that even by giving beige back, without aggressive wars awarding beige (or some other change that accomplishes something similar), it is still too difficult for people to break out of being permablockaded and makes it too easy for the winning side to permablockade the other side. In short, the old beige mechanics required a lot more strategy and skill to maintain permablockades, the recent changes and new proposals remove a lot of that strategy and also make it more difficult to break out of permablockades/turn a war around.

D O C U M E N T A T I O N rawr

Applications have been closed. I will reach out to applicants with a series of questions and a decision will be made from there.

WOAH I DIDNT GET THE MEMO TO VM WTH SWAMP

I was too small for round one and now that its round two everyone in range is slotted, guess I'll just kill some spies or something.

Well now that he has 0 improvements, and 0 infra, all you guys need to do is cycle blockades on him and ground attack his daily log in. You can probably keep him locked down for as long as you want or until you get bored of it.

He only did a billion in damages? He had a whole week and only did a billion? Pathetic.

Too much salt will make you dry out.

You are literally making shit up because if you caused a billion+ worth of damage to us, we would have demanded a billion worth of reps. Seeing as you could barely afford the 400 million and needed Wei to pay a portion of it, we would have simply ground you and your AA to dust. You are a joke and a sad joke at that. But hey, keep going. I'm sure your AA is really happy to watch you try and save face after you had to give away all their money.

If you caused Swamp a billion in damages so quickly and so easily, what's stopping you from giving them a few more bil damage? Why did you run to your protector so quickly? Who are you trying to save face for?

So what, after being a coward and completely silent while making Wei negotiate on your behalf, now you're going to make up random numbers so that you can make bankrupting your alliance look like a W for yourself?

Let's hope this is a line in the sand and the issues are no more. Because next time I wont let you out of this and no one will save you.

You are the one that called me racist and decided to immediately try to get me banned when I just started playing. So who is being hostile?

I don’t really understand the point of this tbh. Sounds like it’s just a money printer for those who choose to stay at like 1-3 cities raiding to print money which raiding at that range already earns a lot. i think it also rewards lazy play for lower level cities , you don’t actually have to search for targets and determine if they’re worth the raid. This change is also pretty much obsolete for anyone past city 5-7 as raiding past that range is pretty hard edit: typo

Hey I got a warn recently for a thread where I said EM was going to sell GATO ingame tech for irl money. Judging by how he just got banned and banned for in-game rule violations/cheating, I believe my comment wasn’t flame baiting or fictional, but factual in that it is not beyond his character. In addition, the warn does not serve any purpose now that he is banned and isn’t a protected forum member (the purpose of having a flame bait clause is now null). @Alex ps: I’ve got 2 warn points that don’t have an expiration date. Thoughts?

Hello everyone, If I were to create some sort of international body of nations (think: United Nations) in which players could (voluntarily) join and participate in voting on resolutions and other such international affairs, what might such a body be called? In a nutshell, I'm looking for suggestions for what we would call our United Nations or World Assembly if something like that was implemented in this game. Please post your suggestions as replies, and if you see a suggestion you like, please "Upvote" it so I can somewhat gauge support. Thank you!

Hello all. In this thread I will be aggregating all the comics of the "P&W Balls" series appearing in any other forum threads. P&W Balls is a Pollandball rip-off. Since this is a rip-off, I am neither going to copy the Polandball artstyle nor the language use. Please accept my own style. I would like to thank everyone for their constructive comments and their support, and for creating enough content for this series to come to life. Please enjoy and don't hesitate to contact me to share your ideas or ask for your own P&W Balls comics! You can send me an in-game message or find me on Discord as Ripper #3870 (e.g. at the Arrgh channel). For more details regarding the cast of the series, visit the P&W wiki. Special thanks to Shadow! You can view all of the comics episodes in the following posts. In case you want to have a look at the announcements on which the episodes are based, you can use the following list of the Episodes (with links): The current family photo of the alliance/bloc-balls (as of episode 13): The current family photo of the nation-balls and other special-balls (as of episode 21):