seabasstion

i'll do it for a 100% Mensa // 0 % PPG split provided detailed photos of spaghettios are provided for every 5 nations successfully recovered from gray

oh ok - i see what you meant now. i thought you meant dishonest in the literal sense that critics of you guys were saying it isn't a fair fight when it actually is.

sounds a lot like you guys were triggered by banter

dishonest is an interesting choice of words. why do you feel the current sk criticism is dishonest?

i will be the first to support this. i would love to send pantheons alliance bank to my personal account

my favorite post in 2017 so far

and where are those official alliance stances?

you should probably reconsider their offer really. i mean their go to tactic was to try and spam me in the game messenger when they found my alliance name. then one of their guys attacked me and begged for peace 3 hours later. he did pay me 400k though so i guess you need to consider that as well

well yeah he kind of can considering this is his product. he can direct it the best way he sees fit. with that said i like the idea though (:

the busiest lazy person is an incredibly power person

so what was your individual alliance's reason for the war. i think thats what he is driving at is getting an answer has been difficult

prefondletaine

https://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/18027-terminus-est-declaration-of-war/?p=302175 in all fairness this post comes from 'upper management' from your alliance. it's a bit self contradictory but the way i read it 'what test did was bad for tS's business. revenge is pantheon's call. but its also our call because it's our business' the last line also clearly suggests this is about pantheon. now also allow me to say that i have no knowledge of the behind the scenes talks but i think a 'member' saying this carries a lot less clout than someone from 'milcom'.

yes. if i were to declare a war on you and immediately fortify twice with my starting 6 maps; because there are 60 turns left i would add 18 resistance to my number

fighting mensans in the first round of the new war system provided some of the most compelling gameplay i've experienced to date. we were all learning the tactics and it was a good brawl. i wish there was more of that. i gained a lot of respect for an alliance i already liked quite a bit

heres my take on fortification. i agree its entirely abusable at this point and encourages not fighting back as once you realize that you arent going to win the war you have an instant get out of jail free card. i also think that a fortification that mathematically eliminates the possibility of skipping beige largely defeats the point of fortification. so i came up with this: many people suggested we do a declining fortification system and i think there is good meat to that argument. what we could do is we make fortification a function of the turns left on the war. it could be as simple as: x = Turns Left in War * 0.15 y = round(x) to nearest whole number z = the max of (y,5) z = amount of fortification points during any war what this would result is a war fortification system that looks like this Turns Fort 60 9 59 9 58 9 57 9 56 8 55 8 54 8 53 8 52 8 51 8 50 8 49 7 48 7 47 7 46 7 45 7 44 7 43 6 42 6 41 6 40 6 39 6 38 6 37 6 36 5 35 5 34 5 33 5 32 5 31 5 30 5 29 5 28 5 27 5 26 5 25 5 24 5 23 5 22 5 21 5 20 5 19 5 18 5 17 5 16 5 15 5 14 5 13 5 12 5 11 5 10 5 9 5 8 5 7 5 6 5 5 5 4 5 3 5 2 5 1 5 this would accomplish several things. 1) the first being that it would still allow a nation to fortify enough to prevent beige, but they would need to do it IMMEDIATELY. this means they are presented with a very difficult choice right away - do they fight or do they flight. starting at the onset of the war (actually up to the first 4 turns of the war) if they did nothing but fortify and didn't waste any maps they could fortify 129 points of resistance. 14 ship attacks can do 224 points worth of damage. 100 starting resistance + 129 fortification resistance eclipses this number. however, since this is a function based on turns remaining it brings me to point number 2 2) it rewards activity. people shouldn't be able to log in once a day fortify their 12 maps and be safe. if someone were to go a long period of inactivity (like 14+ hours), they would drop their fortifications to a lower resistance value. the 129r is not the floor, it is the ceiling. someone could miss a few turns, their 8 point fortifications are now worth 6. this brings it down to 121r added - ships could beat this and is dangerously close to a ground only victory (at 220r removed). one thing to note is that this 224 points of resistance damaged from ship has 2 remaining wasted maps. this brings me to my 3rd point 3) that if the opponent is on blitzkrieg they are now not immune. at least at first. 14 ship attacks = 224 + 1 ground attack (from the added map the defender gets) = 234 resistance removed. if this effectively removes blitzkrieg as a strategic value perhaps this should get a buff of sorts to incentivize people going to this. however, and what i feel to be most importantly, is what it does on the OFFENSIVE side of things. (Basically what i did this war). under the system it is possible to declare on someone, fire off 2 nukes, and fortify the rest of your map to safety. you guys can check my math on it but i looked at a lot of scenarios for these 'cheap shot' tactics. lets look at what it would do with my proposed system 4) if the opponent wanted to fire off nukes safely the most efficient time for them would be to fire them late when fortifications are worth less. 1 nuke would equal 20r. so if i were to declare war on kylo ren (uniting orbis for the first time in the largest simultaneous celebration every witnessed), i could fortify until 13 map are left for 109 total. this would allow me to fire a nuke at the very last turn. kylo could do ground attacks and get victory on the 21st ground attack. this would happen with 3 turns left. it effectively eliminates cheap shot nukes if you are active. if you are inactive you run the risk of getting struck - which again i think is fair. activity should be rewarded, but this is probably a more rare situation. point 5 would be much more common 5) 'inactive' raids now carry risk. what i did was really effective, but also very cheap. i had no infrastructure to lose so i really had no risk. under the current system i could declare war an an 'inactive' nation (4 days was usually my target). i would then hit them with 1 ship to try and get a victory in a couple days. if they came back on i would offer peace. if they didn't accept peace i would just fortify until the war expired. with this proposed system, lets say i raid an 'inactive nation' . i do 2 ship attacks bringing me down to 0 map with 58 turns left. the next time i could fortify would be 55 turns. i would only be able to get 107 fortification resistance. the opponent that gets the email alert and comes back to the game would easily be able to use their ships / ground forces to counter this raid and beige the opponent (if they remain active). one more important bit that i like with this system 6) i kept saying ships and ground as the are the most efficient at taking out resistance. if you were to use aircraft you would only remove 192 resistance from your opponent. this would give your opponent more time to choose the 'fortify only' option to skip beige if their opponent is spamming high powered airstrikes the entire time. you would retain the damage that they can do but also retain the ability that the opponent can choose to fight back (with ships if their opponent doesn't have it), potentially double buy and win the war through conventional means now that their opponent cannot fortify spam, or just take it on the chin and get max infra damage with a fortify spam option. note that this wouldn't address the issue of what i did during this previous war (fortify most of my defensive wars the entire time and fight only my raids) - but that is what point 5 is for. this system would put a heightened importance on the early stages of a war. it would allow for some maneuverability at the back end of the war with 5 point fortifications which are nothing to scoff at. it wouldn't be a drastic change from the current system. people could still turtle if they wish (which at a certain point dissuades a perma roll for profit - probably good for the game), but they arent necessarily immune to beige based on their previous actions. it would bring it together as a whole where your decision and actions on turns 1-12 impact what you do on turns 48 through 60 in a big way. the current system is like professional basketball where the first half of the season more or less doesn't matter

my mom is retarded that makes me half retarded you wanna say that to my face?

and i suppose aircrafts land in a pile of rubble, the pilots run out and fill the cockpit with all the money they can grab, take off again and fly back to the motherland? with the new system all of the units can loot. seems fair to me

theres also the 3 air attack thing. and the 3000 soldier attack thing. people dont typically bring these up because the game has adjusted the gameplay to address these glaring holes of national security in these 2 areas (ground and air), so why should sea be any different? if youre going to adjust one you need to adjust all of them right? same concept

Those aluminum figures really stand out. You sure they're right?

we done got donged

i believe the term is 'merry band of idiots'

i just copied the alliances jess used

did you go through and manually split between dong and ts? im getting close, but different numbers http://i.imgur.com/hx11nhz.png

Lardaeron looks to be a promising young alliance