Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/23/21 in all areas

  1. Making moderator names public would go a long way to dissuade this. Faceless moderation inherently fosters a "us vs them" when there's disagreements, whereas each party knowing the other adds that level of humanity to it and makes things a lot less confrontational in the long run.
    11 points
  2. Hi everyone, I want to let you all know that I have officially released a new set of Game Rules. I would encourage you to review the new rules here: https://politicsandwar.com/rules/ These new rules have been in the works for many months now, with my proposed draft posted publicly for community feedback just over a month ago: https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/31931-8182021-proposal-for-new-game-community-rules/ Fundamentally, the rules themselves are the same as before with no major changes. However, we do have a new moderation system. Previously, nations received “strikes” and after 3 strikes you were out (permanently banned). The new system has “Moderation Points”, and a player is only banned upon reaching 100 Moderation Points. You will see in the Game Rules that each rule violation listed has a guideline range of moderation points to be issued for that rule violation. For example, the War Slot Filling rule has a guideline of 25-75 points. This allows the moderator issuing the warning to use their discretion regarding the severity of the warn. Additionally, Moderation Points (for most violations) will expire automatically after a set amount of time. For example, the War Slot Filling moderation points would expire automatically after 2 years. Some rules violations expire sooner than this, and there are a select few that never expire (such as buying and selling accounts.) Again, I would encourage you to review the new rules at the link above which cover these nuances. You will also experience an upgraded moderation interface. Previously, players got a direct message from me (Alex) with information about the strike they received. Now, if you received Moderation Points, a popup will appear with all of the information about the warning and you will need to acknowledge it to make it stop popping up. Warning history is still available on your Account page. Under the previous warning/strike system, warnings never expired or were removed. This update to our moderation policy is essentially serving as a one-time mass expiration for all strikes issued under the old system. This means that if you had a strike or two against your nation under the old system, it was not transferred to the new system and you essentially have a “clean slate”. NOTE: THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE HAVE UNDONE ANY BANS. ALL PLAYERS WHO WERE BANNED UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM ARE STILL BANNED. The purpose of this system was to create a more transparent and fair moderation system that works better for you all (the players) as well as for me and the game staff. (We worked on a very improved backend UI for issuing moderation points as well.) These new rules and moderation points system are designed to allow me to bring on additional game moderators, with the ultimate goal of freeing up more of my time from moderation duty to development duty. I know that many of you have concerns about new moderators and any potential abuses of power. I share your concerns, and I am taking many, many preventative measures and steps to prevent any instances of that happening. Should that fail, I have also setup extensive moderator action logging so that I can review all actions taken and at least catch and reverse any abuse should all preventative measures fail. At this time I have only brought on two highly trusted game moderators who had extensive experience with existing moderation teams. Currently we are going through a feedback and improvement phase; I am still primarily taking all moderation actions but with guidance from these new moderators. All moderation actions are required to have bilateral agreement, meaning that at least two separate moderators are signing off on all decisions before any actions are taken. I am the only person who has authority to unilaterally make any moderation decision. We will continue to refine our moderator training protocol and procedures based on experience and feedback under this new system here in the near future. At some point in the future (TBD) I will look at bringing on additional moderators to help out and may open up a public application process. I know in the past I have received many private messages from those of you who would love to help out. While I appreciate it, at this time I am taking things slowly to ensure that it’s all done correctly and that we build out a robust framework to ensure a high quality moderation system and experience for players. The future public application will be the best way to volunteer as a potential game moderator. I hope that I have answered most, if not all questions you may have about this new system. As stated previously, fundamentally nothing major has changed, and I think overall these new rules and moderation system are both more transparent and fair and in favor of you all (the players). If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to me or post them publicly in this announcement thread where I will answer them. Thank you, and I am looking forward to the continued improvement of our community and development of the game 😊 -Alex
    9 points
  3. 8 points
  4. Thanks for looking out for the player base and community.
    5 points
  5. Thanks for your continued efforts on improvement and your activity.
    3 points
  6. 3 points
  7. 3 points
  8. Someone had to take the bullet to allow the game to restore itself after several months of non-stop warfare which alienated most of the players of that time. The community took a huge dip in activity, there was a ton of rebuilding to do, and even then - a lot of players continued to leave the game. That "worst precedent" was meant to be a reset to the game. With one side of the war almost completely gone, it allowed the alliances and players that remained to rebuild after. You can !@#$ about it all you want, but you're still here, there's new faces around here leading since that time, and there's new alliances and new political schemes going on. Get the !@#$ out of here with your bullshit "worst precedent" crap. You can go through my history and see my various stances on NAPs. You can also talk to many of the leaders of that time and ask them what was my opinion. I'm pretty sure most would say I was against NAPs, or preferred short ones (Like 2mos, tops). The 6mo NAP after that war was necessary. Not my damn fault if you chose to follow or allow other newer leaders to followup on that precedent. (And if anybody is crying about a 6mo NAP after that hell of a war, you're a !@#$.)
    3 points
  9. Aww, now I can't make fun of all of my friends who had strikes :^)
    2 points
  10. Nice. Can't wait for the public application for mods. I've haven't been here too long and I'm straight up addicted to this game (I login daily lol).
    2 points
  11. 266 Glad to see you here too!
    2 points
  12. 265 ay hellow there, i did not, but glad to see you here
    2 points
  13. 264 And hello Titan, you probably didn't expect to see me here!
    2 points
  14. Making it easier to permaroll/kill alliances by denying them valuable tax income for post war/rebuild is a bad idea, and since you know about NPO I hope you understand where I am coming from here. Yes they may be gone, but it does not mean other alliances can't/won't repeat what they did.
    2 points
  15. This was a fun project, but due to changing political circumstances, I am no longer accepting new clients.
    2 points
  16. It's also not been used as a precedent for any of the subsequent NAP's, fwiw.
    2 points
  17. City defenses as build options. (AA guns, etc)
    2 points
  18. This actually makes sense, it cuts the alliance off from the resources of that nation so they can’t tax it during the blockade and benefit. It’ll force alliances to break the blockade.
    2 points
  19. Nations on beige (or gray) don't pay taxes, so if you can beige cycle an enemy, they wont be paying any taxes. Typically its the losing side that ends up being mass blockaded, so I don't know if this helps from a game balance perspective. Plenty of things in this game don't make irl sense, from nukes not killing any units and only 2 buildings, ships being 30 tons etc.
    2 points
  20. i would think that is closer to the intent of the blockade, since the point is you wont be able to move your resources, and if your taxes are set to 100% that just means you are moving all your resources off nation, with our without blockade, I would be good with this change.
    2 points
  21. Can we put the nation link back in the forum name, so when someone posts something, I can click the link and look at their nation?
    1 point
  22. now i can break the rules once every few years :evil:
    1 point
  23. Hi, I'd like to apply for mod mhm, I'm gonna be a good mod mhm, totally won't ban @mcm the first thing I become a mod mhm
    1 point
  24. Hey look! The alliance pips work now! They're all the same (VE?) but they work!
    1 point
  25. Ive told alex how to fix it on discord, so hopefully he will fix it soon.
    1 point
  26. I made a request to have a reset or a second server to start fresh on which was completely shot down.
    1 point
  27. Downvotes show experienced player bias. Ofcouse energy put into this game might seem wasted. That might be also a problem with this thread. Veterans react most and will stick up for their interest, mainly maintaining the status quo. How about a forced reset for all.nations above c35 to c15 but with a banner saying 'I had over 35 cities!'
    1 point
  28. Honestly maybe change up how gaining superiority in certain areas works. So instead of making it a blanket Nerf (like air control does) maybe make it so players have to choose whether they want to focus on weakening either the offensive or defensive capabilities of the enemy. For example when gaining air superiority you would pick either the enemy tanks are X% less effective in attacks or X% less effective in defense, this could help with down-declaring issues and allow people who are being dog piled to heavily fortify to punish enemies. Similarly I would say change ground superiority from the current form to something more tactical, such as increasing the operation costs of air attacks (for muni/fuel) by X% and adding a debuff to the overall effectiveness of the planes. Alternatively make it so that while someone has ground control you can only recruit half as many planes (to simulate the captured airports and delayed production lines). Naval battles should be a lot more decisive, rarely when two fleets engaged in battle did they both come out unscathed. Essentially I want to see the system evolve to where players need to think a little more long term/strategically rather than the immediate "Haha Tanks go BOOM" or "HaHa Planes go BRRRRRRR"
    1 point
  29. Please fix the military action point to about 1 minute
    1 point
  30. Fix spies pls. Takes forever to build spies. They all die in a matter of 3 minutes
    1 point
  31. 3 V 1........FIX or nerf zig before i riot https://gyazo.com/2f41de4a51fce3fd0a92d7029c811ae6
    1 point
  32. Last time KT decided to become a farming aa and ally someone, they got themself rolled, became a raiding alliance and rolled their previous ally. @Cataclysm Watch yourself, they'll come after you next
    1 point
  33. My nation is rebuilt, the warchest could be a little higher, but I’m not the one that wanted the NAP, or was the one crying about how hard it is to rebuild. We will be up and running again in fairly short order.
    1 point
  34. That's fine that you felt like you needed a break, and I get how Buorhann, whose alliance dissolved during/after NPOLT, wanted a break. Plenty of people did! Take a break! It's good for you. I've taken several myself. Stop dragging entire chunks of the game with you though. It's that easy and simple. It's irresponsible for major alliance leaders to purposefully stall PnW politics for multiple months because they're tired or burnt out, that's what retirement and passing the torch to the next generation are for. NAP's are, at best, a redundancy as people are highly unlikely to immediately jump back into war. At worst they have a negative impact on the politics of the game for reasons I already described. The contractual safety of alliances on a large scale, for extended periods of time, is bad for a competitive political sim where most of the politics are based around war.
    1 point
  35. Thanks Indger! The end of this GW made me turn to the forums again, so after Hw vs Bw, whats the next gonna be? :-).
    1 point
  36. NAP's don't suffocate the politics of P&W, it's the crappy, lazy alliance leadership and the continuous dogpile wars that does that. So don't blame NAP's for the failings of alliance leaders.
    1 point
  37. Yeah, okay, no. Much as I am not much a fan of NAPs, we all needed a $&@%ing break there, after 9 months of war and the game as a whole needed to recover. NAPs were signed before NPOLT too, you know. An extraordinary circumstance that I hope to God is never repeated is not the cause of what you're proclaiming when it's been something that's been prevalent for years and people have been complaining about since at least ToT.
    1 point
  38. 9/17/2021 Report: I have currently serviced 3 clients, nuking 3 targets in the process. $70,542,235.60 in infra has been destroyed. 526,367 people have been turned into shadows and ghosts. Improvements vaporized includes a farm, a subway, 2 supermarkets, a factory, and an oil well.
    1 point
  39. -said BW, after dogpiling HW with Rose who could give a rat's ass about the idea of fair wars and minispheres Minispheres only really work when everyone is following the rules and right now everyone is more or less spoiling the pie since they wanna come out on top but don't expect their competitors to play fair either. My hot take is that all spheres are still too large and should ideally be halved at the very least in order to break up the simplicity and mundanity of politics these days, but until then I don't not see there always being a big bad where wars are hopelessly predictable.
    1 point
  40. I have 60 spies. He has 3. How does this keep happening? Bug? Exploit? Joke mechanics? X has executed an espionage operation to sabotage tanks in your country. They successfully detonated an explosive in a factory in your nation. 1,625 of your tanks were destroyed X has executed an espionage operation to sabotage tanks in your country. They successfully detonated an explosive in a factory in your nation. 1,005 of your tanks were destroyed. X has executed an espionage operation to sabotage tanks in your country. They successfully detonated an explosive in a factory in your nation. 1,005 of your tanks were destroyed. X has executed an espionage operation to sabotage tanks in your country. They successfully detonated an explosive in a factory in your nation. 670 of your tanks were destroyed.
    1 point
  41. With Ayylah as our witness, jihad begins today to defend the holy land from non-believers and to rid the world of infidels. We shall fight to the death to defend Jerusayylmao, the Dome of Dwayne “the Rock” Johnson, and all of our other beloved holy sites. Then we shall push towards Rome and convert the entire world to Ayyslam as He has commanded. There is no God but Ayylah and Lmaohammad is his messenger.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.