Charles Bolivar

I totally and 100% believe you.

Well yes, Caesar would would never have allowed himself to be a deputy leader of tS. It's rather more likely he would have been the leader of a crappy micro instead of a mere deputy. Im paraphrasing of course. But considering the amount of spin and propaganda found within his commentaries, the PR angle isn't entirely incorrect now that I think on it 🤔

Ah but he was declared an imperator under the republic. But then the word imperator itself hasn't been translated perfectly or correctly into the English language either for that matter. It forms the root word of 'emperor' without meaning exactly emperor itself in a manner of speaking. So yes, better roleplay is required if we are to resolve this travesty.

I came, I saw, I cancelled.

I'm gonna go out on a limb (not really at this point) and guess eclipse and co whispered in the ears of the immortals and co as being the reason this whole war kicked off. Yes, I can't be bothered learning all the sphere's names because they change every 6 months anyway.

I remember making a very similar point about alliance sovereignty overriding treaty obligations eons ago. It didn't go well for me. On this occasion, however, I'm oddly gladdened to see history repeat whilst disagreeing with the specific action taken.

This looks fun.

You could say it's the way the cookie crumbles.

Yes.

Whilst you may view catching an opponent in a unmilitarised state as lacking much challenge, I tend to believe it's the height of folly to willingly give up any and all possible strategic advantage in the name of 'fairness'. After all, there is little difference between managing to catch an opponent both off guard and unmilitarised, and bringing numerical superiority in terms of nations against a fully militarised foe in my opinion. All is fair as the expression goes. Also, o7 to this treaty announcement and everything it validates and invalidates. Respect 👍

Tigger was my favourite character as a child actually. I knew the song and all. Good job 👍

If a leak isn't acknowledged, does it really exist?

So say 3 c25 nations declare on a c30 buddy of mine. The three attackers all get the buff against the larger nation and inflict higher casualties combined to a higher % (and the extra damage inflicted will quickly compound), but any c30 nation coming to the original c30 nation's aid in turn has penalties imposed upon them when they declare upon and counter the c25 attacking nations. So what's the point of buying cities? Where is the incentive to compete via the growing of a whale tier? This is pretty much the implementation of an ingame war mechanic aimed at addressing what is an in-game economic issue which really impacts upon a few particular alliances more so than others.

It would be a better system than imposing a penalty upon subsequent city purchases. All this does is strengthen up-declares and weaken down declare counters against up-declaring nations.

This essentially penalises players who optimise their city growth whilst rewarding these who are less efficient in growing their nations. I'd rather you limit people to attacking targets with the exact same amount of cities instead of implementing this idea (which is also a terrible idea I might add).

Play from around the 15:50 mark. It might perhaps prove to be somewhat illuminating.

Who did we hit that was weakened? Or are you referring to our strategy of attacking before our opponents were fully militarised?

Whatever happened to the perks concept which was floated around years ago?

So basically, people don't know how to properly beige bait. Topic over.

When have you met a hippo that wasn't grumpy?

For a retirement home, we sure do a lot.

Good to see we are on the same page.

All warfare is based on deception.

Putting the blitz back into blitzkrieg essentially.

That would be economic expansion I believe?