Deborah Kobayashi

This Plus being able to filter by score for war ranges or city counts as well.

This is the Greatest thing Ive ever seen

Where's the 2 turn NAP??

I can agree to lowering if missile rate increases

as for the upkeep cost, the purchaser is not effected by the selller's upkeep cost, as well as the fact that 9 people can build and sell them that turn before paying upkeep, then the purchaser can fire before paying upkeep, essentially gaining the power to build and launch multiple nukes, instead of paying upkeep for days as they build up their stockpile and risking them being wiped. an alliance or coalition could easily coordinate both the breaking of blockades and the build and sell and launch on an enemy on one turn, so noone pays upkeeps, just the build price. and a solo attacker could easily pay someone to break blockades or run max ships they can also just buy 3 extra Nukes before being countered, so that even if the 3 daily ops are used to wipe nukes, they are not stopped. and can do this every round unless you're rotating blockades on them. there is also the politcal mess this would cause, as there could be a "neutral" alliance in a conflict serving as a Nuke Factory & Storage for one side of the conflict. for this to ever work there would have to be caps & restricitions a cap on how many you can buy per turn/per day a requirement for the nuke to be a turn or day old to sell. and so on..

but if you cant collect a bounty that was posted after the war started, then they would take a minimum of 2 days to defeat anyways, that's not really going to help unless someone is holding you under a full blockade until expiration or rotating blockade cycles. also its kinda bizarre that you cant collect bounties while blockaded, but you can still place them when blockaded and have someone in your alliance collect your loot or come back for it yourself later, which seems way more exploitative than the former.

this would cause a couple issues, like moving nukes around in an alliance when an operator with a large stockpile has gotten his spies wiped, and it being essentially a way to circumvent military build reset and military upkeep cost of maintaining a large stockpile. you could have 0 nukes declare on 6 people, get 3 counters and then when your MAPs hit 12 on all wars, buy 9 nukes and nuke all of them with them having no way to stop you.

This buffs missiles, You would no longer be able to hold any one with a missile pad under a 5 day blockade or let it expire, theyd just beige you. All missiles would always hit an improvement, and always hit your resistance. I was just being dramatic, id probably just perma VM.

So guaranteed improvement sniped, and guaranteed resistance damage. Yeah this makes iron dome completely worthless, if you implement this I want a refund. Its one thing to tweak a project after releasing it on live, but completely changing it to what is essentially a completely different project, with an entirely different function, since most people with iron domes didnt build them to protect infra anyways, is just completely ridiculous.

that moment when the guy named toxicpepper is one of the least toxic people on this forum

I dont Agree with just having no NAPs ever, but NO NAP SHOULD EVER BE LONGER THAN THE ACTUAL WAR. or even longer than a month regardless. i feel like having the Long NAPs means that when they end everyone is looking to handle all the issues they wouldve had small scale wars over during the NAP and just bloodthirsty regardless trying to find their "valid CB", which leads to these massive coalition wars, and very little happening in between unless you're a pirate or a micro. whereas if you would have just had like a 14 day NAP for this war, war would likely have not broken out at the end of that, atleast not between the whole coalitions and that new wars would come naturally when an actual issue occurs.

he banned me from his news server for "Verbally Abusing & harrassing his members" when i pointed out that his alliance was always >10% Grey.

Is it really violating the NAP if neither bloc existed in the war and both have people from both sides?

Ayy LMAO

I like it

LONG LIVE THE NCR!

I Really like the idea of a spy defense system

i would like to see the treaty web be able to be expanded beyond just top 50, especially to see offshores, vassals, & academies, as well as micro blocs. And to have filters included or be able to expand the treaty webs of individual alliances beyond just the 1st degree of their web, their treatied allies, to see blocs & their spheres of influence better.

All awards every year are unbalanced towards those that participate in the awards.

instead of proposing a "micro" sub-forum and pushing micros & nanos in there, i would rather like to suggest that a subforum be added to Alliance Affairs where all alliances can post news they normally wouldn't post in Alliance affairs because its not that relevant to geopolitics, such as minor government changes, Protectorates, O-treaties & minor deals, micro blocs, etc. This also allows micros that might not be ready to post in the alliance affairs to post things like DOEs and MicroBlocs & treaties, as well as even war declarations. However any brave enough should still be allowed to post things like war declarations in alliance affairs.

That akward moment one you forget pantheon with more oasis treaties but remember the grey soldiers of liberty with only 1

Freshwater swamp becomes oasis, saltwater mangrove swamp filled with ghoulish ogremutants. Nice.

Do you mean january 1st @midnight? Because midnight of 31st was last reset.

Arrgh!

Y'all can dog them all you want but atleast they have enough honor to burn with their allies, unlike another M-level treaty pantheon has that is currently silent 🤫