Hexapolis

Spies definitely still kill too many spies. That, or spy repurchase rates are just too darn low: as soon as your spies are down, you have no hope of recovering (ever). Our whole alliance, as well as many of our allied alliances had our spies sabotaged for almost two months with 0 chance to regrow: the moment someone got around 50 spies, they were destroyed. and all that by a ~10 member alliance, Oblivion. If 10 players can easily do that to around 50 players... I think it's a serious concern. Just to elaborate: it only takes two spy operations to kill over 40 spies. That means at least 20 days of recovery, in which that same one person can hit 20 other people and do the same thing. Of course, this is often a non-issue since the spies are caught and identified. but if they get lucky on their first couple strikes using 60 spies and covert ops, hitting all players with 60 spies, then it's next to impossible to identify them (which is what happened for us, we were not able to identify them even once for the first two weeks).

NWSRotFE has been around for over a year now (also known as compass, "that long-@$$-name alliance", or formally: NorthWesternSouthRegionoftheFarEast). TGUR is an alliance older than ours, but rebranded. I'm heart broken that you could forget us Lossi! To be fair, we have had very minimal interaction with CC, though I suppose I should likely remedy that, and get to know you a bit better.

Good luck. While I don't like your methods of dealing with things, or your thought process on what is logical, at least you stand your ground. Naturally, we are going to continue countering: a failure to do so would be dishonourable to both ourselves and to our allies in need. Your request for us to do otherwise is like a pirate telling their target to sit back and let themselves be raided, otherwise they'll come back again. We don't roll over; it is simply not our way. Best of luck in the war. We still hope for a quick resolution, and peace is an option, though without peace, I will personally enjoy my counters.

The North Western South Region of the Far East It will come to no one's surprise that while we did follow our initial counter-only policy, Black Skies has escalated the situation. Their reasoning roughly equates to: "Pantheon is fighting back, so we will escalate the war with you since we can't escalate it with them.". We formally recognize hostilities from Arrgh. We formally recognize Black Skies' unwritten declaration of war, and recognize that we are now at war with BS as an alliance. While I wish them luck as players, I hope to see a quick resolution to this war, including the destruction of Black Skies. At the very least, let's have fun out there!

I did consider it, but since we are not engaging any of the alliances as a whole, a DOW would encompass too many non-participants and run the risk of unnecessary escalation.

The North Western South Region of the Far East We recognize that a multitude of alliances have begun blitzing our close allies, Pantheon. We hereby declare our support for Pantheon and will aid in countering any aggressing nations. We do not wish to escalate the war, and as such limit ourselves to countering attacking nations only at this time; as a result, we are not declaring war on any specific alliance at this time. Should the war escalate, we will stand by Pantheon, who has only ever been courteous and kind to us. We hope things can be resolved peacefully in the near future, for everyone's sake. As for you long-name-micro "haters", please enjoy another opportunity to mock my posts.

Warning: I am not eloquent, and I just got off of a night shift. Sorry that it's dry and boring. NorthWesternSouthRegionoftheFarEast (AKA: NWSRotFE, NWSRFE, Compass) was recently at war with Black Skies. Peace has been achieved: It has been requested that we clarify our CB: Compass partook in the war at the suggestion of it's allies, some of which were already involved. We did not and do not have any ill-will towards Black Skies, and Compass was merely assisting it's allies, in particular at the time, Atlantean Council (AC). We have parted ways peacefully and happily. Signed: Tristen, Foreign Affairs (FA) of the NorthWesternSouthRegionoftheFarEast.

I think you could propose this as a project, but I don't see how it is quite similar to this concept. It would certainly be interesting

Okay, fair. Based on the above argumentation for the fact that war is a resource sink, I am inclined to agree that it is one of the intended purposes. However, I do not think that is the main purpose of wars. Wars are for resource acquisition, wars are for fun, but most importantly, wars are a political tool: Do what we ask, "please" (with 200k soldiers, 10k tanks, 1k aircraft, and 200 ships on standby). I will not deny that the reasoning that resources must be consumed is logical. However, based partially on the fact that the steel cost of tanks was halved due to their un-usability due to the absence of steel supply comparative to the consumption causing drastic inflation. Steel is currently more than 250% the price when I joined in February, and one can only imagine that as in the real world, the inflation has been pretty constantly upwards.

I thought this was a serious post at first, wherein Panth was involved in something regarding the militarization of the world. Glad to heard that that is not the case. No one except Kongo dude and Panth knows the situation exactly, so it's out of everyone else's hands at this time.

You asked and I will answer: War is not meant to be a resource sink; it just is a resource sink. If you like it that way, that's perfectly valid, no complaints from me. Reasons this should be in the game: to help battered nations recover, as well as for realism. There is nothing wrong with having a touch of realism: I'll have you note that the ships don't fly in the skies, for the sake of realism... Not to mention pollution, disease, and crime mechanics. So realism is a thing, though I understand your desire to keep a game... unrealistic. Concerning inflation: this project is expensive, and requires a fairly substantial investment. Few nations will use it unless they are either raiders or frequently raided, as any nearly any other project would return higher profit (and inflation) such as Emergency Gas Reserves. I understand your concerns, and I respect them, but I feel they are presented in an extreme light. Can you provide your opinion on how to make improvements?

Thanks!

In the event that it was per defensive battle and not per war, unless the raider is a production power-house, it would not be an issue as the munitions would be returned as lead. So that should not be a concern, but it being implemented at the end of a war would resolve that issue.

I was unaware. Is this something the youtuber must add, or is it a bot attempting to understand what is being said?

Sorry Bud, it's too long (and slow) to listen to the whole thin\g. I recognize that you were exhausted, and I also recognize that there is a lot you want to say but you are trying to keep it brief. It might be best to write a script (general, not word for word) next time to help keep you on track as half the audio I listened to (about 5 minutes) was filled with silence, sighs, and "so, uh..."s which makes it very hard to stay engaged. It you make another more concise video, (or a post) please let me know, as I do want to hear your side of things.