Alex

In a humorous context (like this) sure. You're welcome!

Thanks, this will be fixed in the next patch.

It's not cheating to go on a Vacation when you're at war. And Avruch is correct.

There is a bit of a gray area here, you are correct. Just like in a government, when a legislative body passes a law, it will be up to the courts (in this case, the moderators) to interpret the rules and set a precedent of what is and isn't a "terrorist" group. In my opinion, the United States is not a terrorist group, regardless of what happened 70 years ago in WWII. I would say that the KKK is a terrorist group, but that a Confederate themed alliance is not. The Confederate States of America is not equivalent to the KKK. The rules expressly state that we will allow you to discuss Nazism in a historical context. If you want to debate the social policies of the Nazi regime compared to the social policies of {insert other country here} that's fine. If you post giant red banners with swastikas and write "Heil Hitler!" you will be warned, and have that content removed. Seems pretty clear to me.

Updated

You never fail to disappoint.

No, the reason you got a verbal warning was because of this incoming change. You still broke the rules (at the time.)

Updated

Well, hopefully you won't hate my changes, but I do have a reputation to keep up you know Here's a list of small updates I've made. Nothing mechanical, but relevant changes nonetheless. First, we've revised the Game Rules a touch. I'd suggest that you revise them: https://politicsandwar.com/rules/No major changes, just some clarifications on some stuff, especially related to Nazism/Terrorism Second, we've revised the Forum Rules as well. We're no longer enforcing a strict ban against Nazism, and you will now be able to discuss Nazis in a historical context, as well as in a funny/satirical context (in good taste). This does NOT mean that you can post Nazi banners, promote Nazi activity, or advocate for Nazism. At the same time, we're tightening the rules to expressly forbid supporting or promoting terrorist organizations here. We'll try and apply to same standards to Nazism as we do to Terrorism. We have no intention of fostering or supporting these groups (the rules also mention other "hate groups", so potentially groups like the KKK if that ever became an issue) but we also don't wish to stifle free speech and humor in good taste. Please review the changes to the Forum Rules yourself: https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=extras&section=boardrules When someone signs up and lists you as their referral, you'll get a notification saying that someone has signed up and that you referred them. On nation pages, you'll now see a row that indicates how much time a nation has left on Beige (provided that their color is Beige). This is located immediately below where their color is listed Nation backgrounds for VIP members have been updated so that they're fixed in place, and will not scroll with the page. No more nasty conflicts with the white background when you scroll down. City images have been replaced, and you now have the option to choose one of 22 (currently) available real-life cities to represent your city(s) in game. For the time being, all of your cities (and all new cities) will default to an image of a smaller, plain city. This is all cosmetic of course, but it gives you some more freedom on what your cities are represented as. That's all. Expect new city images in the future, along with other general improvements of course. Enjoy!

#1 will go out in the next patch. #2 is not a good idea imo. If you start by looking at the end of a message, (assuming it's long enough) you'll have to scroll up just to start reading it. It makes more sense for a browser game to read top to bottom. #3 isn't necessary, because if you look at "My Trade Offers" it defaults to sorting your open offers at the top already.

This is going out in the next patch.

Updated

Looks like it's working, this is just fallout from all the nations we lost last night.

These should be automatically removed, let me double check that the script for it is working.

Okay. What's the bug?

The topic of this thread was not a debate on the merits of Islam. Because this is so far gone off topic, I'm closing the thread.

You're only initially at the mercy of an RNG, however you can easily increase your odds if you're looking to acquire treasures. There's a treasure specific to each color; if you moved your alliance to Pink or Brown you'd seriously increase your chances of receiving a treasure randomly, and also there's no alliance penalties on either of those colors. If you get one treasure in your alliance on Pink or Brown, that's a 3% bonus for everyone in your alliance, just by being tactical and smart. Furthermore, there's treasures specific to continent, you can encourage nations in your alliance to switch to continents that have less nations in order to increase your odds. Finally, if you want to get treasures, you can fight for them. Maybe you're a smaller alliance, and you're not going to take a Top 10, but treasures spawn in lower score ranges (generally better alliances have higher average scores). If you can be strategic and active you could steal treasures from other small alliances, and form diplomatic agreements with larger alliances for protection. There is equality of opportunity here, not equality of prosperity. Not to mention this bonus is generally not too significant unless you do have an abhorrent amount of treasures in your alliance, in which case if you all (the players) decide that's unfair, you absolutely have the ability to work together and do something about it. The fact that you're here bickering about how important this bonus is to you is evidence that we've made a more dynamic and in-equal system that relies on you (the players) to balance and figure out. And even if you can't figure it out yourselves in the short term, you're protected by the fact that half the treasures will respawn automatically every 30 days.

Hm, that's odd. I'll take a look, but do let me know if it doesn't go up to 20K tomorrow.

Updated

Yes, that's the correct behavior. Visiting an alliance page when the alliance has 0 members removes the alliance from the game.

I know; this is sort of ironic. But the activity stats still showed ~1.8K active nations anyway, which is more or less the norm (we're not losing nations). I wonder what the active nation count for (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) is

Looks like we're going to lose just over 1000 nations

Updated

Thanks, let me take a look at that.

Most likely, yes. This explains why the nation count was increasing so rapidly, I had thought that was a little awry Ah well, we'll see a more accurate picture of our demographic in an hour and a half.