Rin

For example, let's say B is getting curbstomped and A wants to slot fill B. A could hit B with less troops on an unwinnable war, do like 28 resistance damage in total. B would fortify and turtle, fight the other wars. A would automatically win this war and turtle B. If B gets beiged by someone else, they could peace out with A, saying that they lost too much resistance to fight that war. If B won the other wars and didn't beige, A would beige B on timeout. This is a harder call than previous slot filling. Before this, you could plausibly disguise your slot fill as a raid at best. This gives it a wider range of use. Maybe one amendment is to get rid of Point 3, and change Point 1 so that it has to be a 50 resistance difference or so. Or lowering the benefits of beige as per Point 2 would make beige less appealing. Maybe like reducing military rebuy capacity while someone is in beige. But this means that first to beige loses their other wars. It's still a better alternative than no beige, and yet balanced enough to keep a small alliance from pinning a much larger one. Legal slot filling would basically mean two "alliances" hitting each other indefinitely. Maybe a CN style peace mode is a better alternative?

I'm probably the only player who unironically likes this change. Yay Alex! 💛

It would make slot filling worse though, i.e. having a nation hit a friendly but unallied alliance, and then get it beiged with minimal damage.

Definition: "Declaring war on a nation without the intention of fighting them is punishable by a nation strike and additional punishment for multiple violations. You are not allowed to declare war on nations to prevent them from being attacked by other nations." So here's my interpretation. Attacking someone for the purpose of raiding them is definitely not slot filling. Attacking someone for the purpose of protecting them from harm is definitely slot filling. Beiging someone is a form of protecting them, and is possibly slot filling. Doing so in a war allows someone to rebuild. But outside of a war, it doesn't do a great job of protecting them. This one falls in a grey area because it appears tCW had reason to protect him AND reason to raid him. This is just one of those rules that's about intent and not actions, and it's really hard to make the right call. Sort of like murder law vs manslaughter, except we don't have a lesser punishment for 'accidental' slot filling. Given the evidence, I'd rule it as slot filling at first, then backpedal upon Sphinx giving further evidence that it was not intended as such.

Ads: Run your own nation! Own a military! Actual game: Buy max planes and soldiers and press 10 buttons every 12 hours for 3 months, so that you can press no buttons and complain about how boring the game is. Honestly, if it weren't for politics and spreadsheets, I'd be out of here. Alliances have to educate newbies that the rest of the game is fun and involve them in the gov pipeline right away. tS, Camelot, and Rose seem to be doing a good job at this, but most alliances are still too focused on growth and dismissive of newbies who get bored when they don't see any better gameplay.

Welcome to the club

I usually take a long break from the game every few months. You're right, it gets monotonous, and the quarantine isn't helping. We'll still be here whenever you get back. Take care 💛

Only as long as I can't calculate warchest from this.

Roughly by power projection, ability to move the world. Not necessarily winning wars, but there's a correlation. t$/e$ Grumpy TKR TEst Rose tCW/tHL Camelot TI CotL Error 404 Other alliances that should be a tier higher: Guardian Yarr BK Carthago KT Eclipse TCM OWR Church of Atom Morningstar Golden Phoenix Honorable mention: TFP. Top 10 in some measures, but not this one. disclaimer: does not reflect the views of my alliance, might have missed someone

After years of avoiding making a proper forum account, I finally got one for my nation. Hello!

Am I late to the downvote party?