Jump to content

Optima

Members
  • Content Count

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 Excellent

1 Follower

About Optima

  • Rank
    Active Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Oklahoma
  • Alliance Pip
    The Knights Radiant
  • Leader Name
    Optima
  • Nation Name
    Adune
  • Nation ID
    13792
  • Alliance Name
    TKR

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name
    Optima

Recent Profile Visitors

1170 profile views
  1. Wouldn't alliances just force their members to pay for membership? Cities, infra, and improvements are visible, so it’s not hard to develop a calculator and present each nation with a bill for the revenue you are suggesting they be cut off from. Who wins a war in this game is largely determined by destruction and alliances track these numbers closely. What’s to prevent them from dividing the total loss by their membership and presenting another bill? If an alliance doesn’t have the funds to help their people, why have them at all? Your intent has some merit, but unless you refine the method, you won’t gain any traction. It just adds an extra step to collection and most alliances take care of their people well enough to make the rates worth it and when they don’t members leave in favor of those that do.
  2. Optima

    [Storage]

    Those of us who spend the time producing anything shouldn’t be penalized because we have the temerity to save what is rightfully ours and do our best to prepare for anything. I’ve never paid to play, so everything I have is earned through patience and any changes to that means my efforts are meaningless. Sketch is definitely an apt term to describe resource expiration. Food MIGHT be the only area this could play, but again, I cite my patience, my savings habits, and my productions plans as the means by which I survived wars and rebuilt after. This is the saving grace of my nation and my alliance and I don’t see a reason to penalize anyone for it. The only result of your changes are bankrupt alliances, nations, and constant war. Boring....
  3. My debate is the action as a whole. Regardless of the reversal, what is to keep it from happening again?
  4. I’m shocked and disturbed by the banning of Blink. I’ve read over the exploit thread, the appeal, and the outcry that followed, but several key items stand out and give me pause. They make me think this has been handled personally rather than professionally, led by an inherent bias against everyone declared rather than proven guilty. 1. There are assumptions made, accepted, and used to render a verdict. 2. Alex is clearly showing bias and anger instead of a cool head and logic. Perhaps this should be managed by a group instead of an individual. 3. Banning should be a final recourse and used only in extreme circumstances and this scenario doesn’t seem to fit that standard. I question the motive and logic of resorting to banning for unverified trading or assistance on the first offense rather than simply requiring a renewal of their verification as added assurance and to bring the players back into line with the rules. In truth I question the verification system as a whole. I can photoshop an image with the requirements and be verified without an issue. Is there a reminder in game to reduce the missed deadlines? The rules say it's a bannable offense, which makes me ask @Alex ”Do you ban first offenders 100% of the time”, if not I see room for discipline on a proportional scale rather than permanent exile. There should be room for grace and absolution as we are all fallible. Truthfully, if I verified today, missed the deadline, and made such a trade, I doubt I would be banned. This action, coupled with an very public in-game flaw seems to have exponentially increased the response due to embarrassment rather than a legitimate response to the infraction. I don't expect a radical 180-degree shift on the matter but as a long term player, I wonder how easily I could be discarded in a similar circumstance? If an admin doesn't value the players, can the players value the game?
  5. I think...Yep its confirmed, I peed a little.
  6. Sorry to see you go. Fond wishes and farewell.
  7. o7 @Lordship o7 @TheCreepyLurker You have both showed astounding leadership since I've come to TKR. The passage of time reminds us that we are all subject to the whims of change. We will work through this and the skills you have instilled in us will shine through as we begin a new path without your constant guidance. We look forward to continued prosperity under this new leadership, but please remember, we will never forget you or the selflessness you have displayed during your tenure as King. I pray blessings over you both for continued health and happiness.
  8. My prayers are with you and your family.
  9. I like the idea. Let’s make it happen.
  10. While I admire the effort you put into this post, th overall idea would have only been fair in the beginning if the game. Now it’s ridiculous.
  11. As someone who has 24 cities I would love it if the Bulk Importer Tool would allow the purchase of infra. We could change “infra_needed” to “infra_max” and the number would represent the final total we want the cities to wind up with. Purchasing in groups of 100 when possible to ensure maximum efficiency and makes it a little easier for the larger nations to rebalance their infra load. It should go without saying (I will anyway) but making the same ease available for land purchases would be marvelous.
  12. Awwwe. It’s kinda cute when you try and talk about things you will never be able to comprehend. My dad used to tell people “It's better to keep your mouth shut and give the 'impression' that you're stupid than to open it and remove all doubt.” Seriously though, if I wanted to commit suicide all I would have to do is climb to the top of the collective Hogwarts ego and leap.
  13. Come on alex. Stop hiding in the wind. All I need is one little button that says delete.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.