Sketchy

Should make a pot on who the last person will be.

So recently we've been getting a lot of stupid posts made in the Alliance Affairs section, that clearly don't belong in the Alliance Affairs section. The definition is currently "In-Game alliance announcements" and yet certain threads are not "announcements" let alone "alliance announcements". I propose the mods actually move those threads, and give warning points to people who post multiple threads like this. #StopTheArbitraryModerating

The person he is whining about is a single nation. Either way this shouldn't be in the Alliance Affairs thread. It's not an alliance announcement.

He liked simple so I gave him simple. lol

Tying city score relative to population in anyway is a bad idea. It's already too easy for people with larger city amounts to downdeclare, this just enables that further. Also I assume you want: =(MIN(Population * 0.15 / (Cities * 3000 * 5),1) * 50 * (7.5/165) + MIN(Population * 0.015 / (Cities * 250 * 5),1) * 50 * (62.5/165) + MIN(Population * 0.001 / (Cities * 18 * 5),1) * 50 * (45/165) + MIN(Population * 0.0001 / (Cities * 5 * 5),1) * 50 * (50/165)) * 10 Since the numbers it was putting out were in the double digits which seems pretty low. In my opinion, city score needs to be increased and kept flat. We don't need to tie it to population when we have a separate stat for infrastructure either.

Samy Kamkar will be your friend.

Also wasn't it you who said: If you can't handle other peoples opinions you shouldn't ask for them snowflake.

I have a different opinion on what is considered "performing well". I even clarified the criteria as to why I chose what I did. I'm not surprised Kastor is incapable of making the distinction between a subjective opinion and an objective fact, considering he believes everything that he says is an objective fact. I can only assume your hostility comes from my choice not to put Roz Wei on my list. Sorry I bruised your ego bro.

As far as this war goes, t$ and NPO were the best performers overall in my opinion. All the others had easy opponents or large statistical advantages. t$ took on SK with planes only and NPO rekt BK hard. I'd probably go. 1) t$ 2) NPO 3) Mensa 4) Oblivion Outside of that I don't think anyone did REALLY well just decent or crap.

Disband your alliance and join a top 20 alliance. Pick up some experience and understanding of the games mechanics and how to run an alliance and THEN leave and break out on your own. This won't work.

If you hop on IRC I can do it for you. EDIT: I went ahead and made you a flag. I'll share it to you on irc or forum pm when your around.

What does this have to do with (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways). Any good community with a warn/ban process should also have an appeal process. Also your moderator team needs to stop coddling the whiney little manchildren on this forum.

The entire discussion seems moot. The problems with the war system go waaay beyond the number of slots. In my opinion, sheepy should completely ditch the war system we have right now and build a new one from the ground up that is geared towards more alliance vs alliance combat. With the exception of raiding, which could easily be made into a seperate mechanic, basically all wars are alliance related due to the nature of the game and the need to be in an alliance. The was system on the other hand, is built on a nation vs nation basis with mechanics geared towards that which seems ridiculous.

I prefer not to use the test server as an indication until it's been added to the main server, especially when most of the war changes proposed seem pretty shit so far. Limiting offensive slots will do more harm for the defenders than good. You WANT them to be able to overextend.

I don't think reducing offensive slots would solve anything. If anything, we need more offensive slots. The more wars you declare, the more spread thin you are and the more vulnerable you become. Reducing offensive slots won't solve the downdeclaring issue either. That issue needs a warscore range. Reducing defensive slots on the other hand does help with the issue slightly, since 2 people down declaring is alot easier to handle than 3.

POACHING IS FOR EGGS ARE YOU AN EGG?

-content removed-

Go ahead.

NIGHT KING? MORE LIKE

Simply put, I'd like an option in the nation search that allows multiple filters to be applied when searching for nation. For example, if I want to search for a nation between the war score of 100 - 200, on the color orange, in X Alliance. Additionally, you should add a filter for alliance seniority and "Last online".

You could have a system where people can invest in "Research" to lower the GRI in their particular continent. Either way, don't hold your breath. Sheepy seems to be content with it how it is and doesn't seem to be open to any changes, tweaks or modifications to the system.

Brilliant idea.

This poll needs an option for "The Silent War" considering it's already a placeholder. Git gud with your polls kid.

Article III "Please don't hide anything from me UPN. I will always tell you of what I am doing. Promise?" TLF exclaimed. "Yes. I promise dear." UPN answered Article IV As the two sat there watching the Lights, UPN turned his head to look at TLF's beautiful hair. I will always be there if you are attacked." UPN said. "But if you were to attack someone I may or may not get involved." He said. TLF nodded, "I don't expect you to. You shouldn't be obligated" TLF exclaimed. No non-chaining clause. Naughty bois.

You do realize he can undo or tweak changes right? It should be capped at 25% maybe 50%, and the Global Radiation Index should be removed. It should just be a continent radiation factor. A random nuke launching in NA shouldn't affect me in Africa or w/e. GRI is just stupid.