J Kell

Please consider this again

eh, you're more of that annoy a-hole everyone likes to be around for some reason.

Right, and I was encouraging the idea to make it more.

I'm willing to bet money that Trump gets another 4 years.

that's a good idea

Well clearly... I wasn't implying that a forced defeat after a number of victories should be erased. I was just simply stating that the losing nation shouldn't be able to force a surrender. I'll edit my original post so confusion can be halted.

Forcing a nation that's winning to accept surrender is bad, but making a form in which someone can present terms for a surrender to see if the other side will accept is good!

The photo below was taken from the world map when I was pretty zoomed in, do you see how small the flags are? Please make these flags at least twice as big, that way I can make out what's even on the flags.

,

That's the zinger

Do you hate the elites?

In the chat

People are quitting again? P&W Members: "NOTHING HAPPENS IN THIS GAME!" Also P&W Members: "TOO MUCH HAPPENS, WHY CAN'T I JUST BUILD!"

I am thinking also for the endless war system some alliances roll with. If one nation knocks resistance down to 10 and then just sets around for the rest of time so it expires, I think there should be an out for the nation being attacked.

It's 2018 people, get your crap together

Can we bring this back?

Simply good, Simply Fresh.... Simply a smart idea

WATCH WHERE YOU ARE SPRAYING HIPPO!

Invader Zim discovers the joy of creation

Can we stop commenting on this?

This, this right here... Ronny, go home... You just got slammed

Pretty simple, make it so Utter Failures cost resistance. This is more realistic and makes the war progress more naturally. It would also discourage losing nations to cheat the system and send in a few planes or ships to waste the winner's WC. Nothing crazy, just a 5 resistance loss would do.

It always comes back to Mensa