Don Juan

Well done and funny. I think you made good choices with the characters/alliances.

Well done, might've been better to make the capital Francograd but otherwise a small flaw on a literary masterpiece. This is indeed Smith's opus magnum.

The Age of Micro-Aggression Suggestion: The Server Sitzkrieg or The Server Shitzkrieg The latter might not be very highbrow, but perhaps apt.

Yes please, a more representative score system will be better for the game. There was also a proposal some time ago (to address the steel costs) to have it 0.5 steel and 0.5 alu.

Pretty much.

Public is more accountable than private. I would not trust a private poll. And I'd also prefer it all on the forum, the radio show could be an extra perhaps, even before the public reveal/thread, but just not exclusively the radio.

Indeed, I'm in favour of Open Layers, looks good. And it does increase the RP ability for differing stuff to IRL with regards to vegetation etc.

You should think about putting Braveheart's Script in a spoiler tag.

This would be a nice cosmetic option for immersion, if it's easy to code.

Image Type: Nation Flag Image Link: https://i.imgur.com/xL9Vn2Q.png Nation ID: 1895 Image Type: Alliance Flag Image Link: https://i.imgur.com/ZfTEsQp.jpg Alliance ID: 3339 Image Type: Alliance Banner Image Link: https://i.imgur.com/YlgzzQC.jpg Alliance ID: 3339 Image Type: Alliance Background Image Link: https://i.imgur.com/pSNYqor.png Alliance ID: 3339

Admittedly, as much as I don't think CBs are needed, they can indeed work with or against a side in a time of war PR-wise. Additionally, it also provide entertainment for the peanut gallery. From another standpoint, casus belli are part of the political side of the game, and you can justify them to your alliance members, allies, other parties as well as enemies. Whether those others will accept your point of view and the legitimacy of your reasons is all-together another thing entirely. So that is one of the things that is part of the player-brought politics to the nation sim, although it is the onus of other parties to dispute a CB justified against them regardless. Even without a CB, that doesn't prevent an opposing party in a war from disputing why they were attacked, if they can see reasons or not. So, as long as there is salt (and there is an unquantifiable bounty in this throughout the community), CBs, imagined or otherwise, will always be disputed. So Pre-pontification over this point may raise an issue for discussion, but I doubt you'll have an affect on practices as done by the community. It's good you clarified your point, because I read your post and I still came away with "CBs aren't needed to hit people", which I agree with and in the grand scale of things, it never matters which side is "right" or "wrong", that's arbitrary morality and ultimately subjective, which you've acknowledged in your initial post. Therefore this same subjectivity is applicable to your argument too, since it's also about the validity of CBs and complaining about them, or complaining about complaining about them, as the case may be.

Perhaps adding a game-wide accessible one should be like flags. But I do like the current VIP option remaining too.

Quite so, otherwise there'd be consuls and shophets etc.

I applaud your honour in falling on your sword in this manner, ODN, but it does seem somewhat wasteful. However, good luck and have fun.

Can you come back to me with a graphic with less errors please? There is a weird amount of alliances in a bloc not included and erroneous treaties depicted.