ArcKnox

> As others outlined extensively in the thread I linked, "balancing" planes by nerfing them would unbalance the game by neutering nations' (and alliances') ability to effectively updeclare. The nominally unbalanced role of aircraft isn't a good enough reason to nerf updeclares. That line of thinking is analogous to demands to make the game more "realistic": where that complaint fails to understand that the game isn't meant to be a realistic simulation, the "planes are overpowered" complaint fails to understand the importance, if not outright primacy, of group play compared to individual play. Your complaints of harder updeclares ring hollow when you consider that hitting up may be difficult, but hitting down is impossible due to the very restrictive nature of downdeclare ranges. Combine this with the fact that nations that lose military units naturally drop in score makes life even more difficult for someone who should ostensibly be rewarded for making the investment in their nation. The top heavy group is at a severe disadvantage because the bottom heavy group can pick the time and place of the engagement, strike with impunity, and then hold them down indefinitely because of the glacial pace at which planes (the only unit that matters) are built. The top heavy group may win an individual battle, but their opponents are then dropped down below their range and are able to rebuild in peace for another round. This group is afforded very little opportunity for group play because they are perpetually on the defensive. Giving ground forces the ability to destroy planes would add another dimension and tactical depth to a currently 1 dimensional affair.

I find it amusing that you see giving viability to ground units as unbalanced, while the current meta of only planes matter perfectly fine. >Downvotes Popular mechanics are not always good mechanics. The reverse also holds true.

Split ground attack types similar to airstrikes. 1. Assault Enemy Positions Would be the dogfight analogue. Either nerf all other types or give this one a bonus to fighting ground forces. 2. Scorched Earth Tactics Does more infra damage than all other types. Maybe buff improvement destruction chance so it's comparable to naval attacking. 3. Loot Steal cash as ground attacks do currently. Remove stealing cash from all other types. 4. Raid Enemy Airfields Ground analogue of target x airstrike. Would destroy enemy planes on the ground.

Roq holds enough grudges for the rest of the game combined.

Correction It doesn't matter what he builds, Scarf will launch missiles at him

The basic principle of this game is that, aside from a basic activity requirement, clicking buttons does not provide any additional mechanical benefit. Money, resources, and military action points are generated in this game at set intervals. The only way to get ahead of other players is by better planning (optimizing builds), or exploiting the community (trade speculation/arbitrage or raiding/warfare). Baseball flies in the face of every other mechanic in the game that you can just click buttons and magic money into the game. @Alex grow a spine and fix your game.

Thanks Sheepy for taking full responsibility for the balance of your game. You're not afraid to make the tough choices to remove imbalance, because in the end you know that the buck stops here.

Thanks sheepy for manually okaying a bot that does automatic actions for players despite making me click through this every couple dozen refreshes of the trade screen

Hi! The Council provides this service free of charge to the people of Orbis and therefore we receive no compensation for these posts; only a sense of pride and accomplishment at reducing ignorance one post at a time!

Hi! You seem to have posted the oft repeated myth that Coalition A is responsible for breakdown of peace talks. We here at the Council to Restore Pure Decadence to Orbis feel it is our duty to correct the record when and where these inaccuracies occur.

There's no way to enforce the rule on multiple accounts if the person running them is competent in hiding it. That doesn't stop us from agreeing that multis are bad and against the rules.

Clarify it in the rules then. It costs you nothing and clear cut rules benefit everyone.

Just going to quote paste my thread into this

To start off with: Bots or scripts doing button presses from 3rd party sources should be verboten. Any sort of button presses that go beyond messaging should be verboten. A bot or service that catalogues player alliance bank balances and can take requests for withdrawals is fine, as long as a person with the actual ingame permissions has to be on and take the final act of pressing the withdraw button. Also a clear rule that account sharing is illegal. This is for the protection of the players so that they can't share their password and then cry later that they were hacked. I was honestly surprised when I found that there was no such rule already on the books.

Alliance members through normal gameplay cannot access the accounts of the bankers, and through it the alliance bank without the required permissions. This is a function that the bot is creating that does not exist elsewhere and goes beyond convenience. Without the bot, an alliance is forced to either make greater demands of existing bankers, to deal with the disruption from bankers not being on immediately, or bring on more bankers and increase the chance of someone stealing from the bank.