Jump to content

Who Me

Members
  • Content Count

    337
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Who Me last won the day on September 4 2018

Who Me had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

538 Politician

About Who Me

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Leader Name
    Who Me
  • Nation Name
    Dont Know
  • Nation ID
    32018
  • Alliance Name
    The Commonwealth

Recent Profile Visitors

1137 profile views
  1. The only thing wrong with the current beige mechanic is that sheepy is too cheap and/or lazy to do his job. He either needs to hire some decent Mods or do it himself. If people are cheating by slot filling, warn them and if they continue, ban them. It really is just that simple. Just because some people don't like the way other people play, as long as they are not breaking any rules whatever play style they use is perfectly valid and viable. If you want to have "fair" wars, don't gang up on people 4 or 5 to 1.
  2. Unless you vastly increase the cost of each nuke, having them do that much damage would make them very OP.
  3. Proposal to allow the use of MIRV’s. This is a suggestion to allow the building of MIRV’s in P&W. A MIRV is a Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicle, any of several nuclear warheads carried on the front end, or “bus,” of a ballistic missile. Each MIRV allows separately targeted nuclear warheads to be sent on their independent ways after the main propulsion stages of the missile launch have shut down. My suggestion is that you allow multiple warheads to be attached to each nuclear missile, up to 5 per nuclear missile. The cost of the first nuclear missile would remain the same and if additional warheads are not attached it would act the same as the current nuclear missile. Each additional warhead would cost slightly, perhaps 20% or 30%, less than the first one so that the cost would still be significant. Each nuclear missile regardless of the number of warheads would still do the same amount of damage as a single nuclear missile but the damage would be spread out over the number of cities targeted by the multiple warheads. So a single warhead nuke would do 100% damage to 1 city, 2 warheads would do 50% damage to 2 cities and so on. Each warhead will be targeted on a different city either by the player launching the missile or by default as they are now. To avoid abuse it would take 24 hours to attach each new warhead before the nuke could be fired so every time you attached another warhead you would have to wait 24 hours from the time the warhead was attached before you could fire it. If the nuke is destroyed by a spy attack all the warheads attached to the nuke would be destroyed as well. The destroy nuclear missile spy attack should be random and not target Mirv’s, if any, before regular nuclear missiles. You would be able to buy 2 warheads per day in addition to 1 nuclear missile. Each nuclear missile would still destroy 2 improvements but the player launching the missile could choose the city or cities that the improvements would be destroyed in. You could make a new Project to protect the warheads from destruction if they are not attached to a nuke. Something like a Nuclear Warhead Bunker. You would need the NWB in order to have MIRV’s. Each warhead would count as 7-10 score and the number of warheads a player has would be discoverable by the gather information spy attack. Perhaps there could be a new spy attack that could discover the number of attached verses stored warheads.
  4. People have been asking for the for years. It is never gong to happen as per sheepy.
  5. I had the same thing happen. As you can see, up until today my military purchase limits reset everyday.
  6. Correct me if I am wrong but that is 3 months into the war. Well before peace talks started and before any of the bullshit terms and the desire of IQ to run people out of the game became known. Once the government of tCW became aware of the terms being offered the vast majority of the government were opposed to most of the terms.
  7. I tried to change my alliance's color trade bloc. I received a message that said Ihad successfully edited the alliance but the color did not change.
  8. No to the space program as well. There is nothing "green" about space programs.
  9. Sure, as long as you don't count any wars against inactive nations on the way to deletion. Those aren't wars at all.
  10. Yes, but Mal is a fool all year round.
  11. As long as you don't count on Fark, you know, actually fighting you should be fine.
  12. I don't think the game would survive that.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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