Dwynn

Queue underlordgc backpedalling in 3....2....

Hey whatever floats your boat Hans, but you should probably get your Head of Foreign Affairs under control instead of him running around attempting to instigate fights and calling people enemies who have nothing to do with the war. Instead of saying things like "oh you can't take anything he says seriously" how about doing something logical about a problem. My guess is that it's truly how UPN feels. As you suggested, they were discussing and planning how things would play out (much like TAC was). You guys expected certain things to happen (much like TAC did). So why is it that TSG an TEst shouldn't consider you guys enemies (much like you did to TAC)? Oh, right... cause it's just Underlordgc. It's just UPN. It's just hypocrisy. You should put a muzzle on your government officials who don't know how to do their job, unless FA has now been defined as drawing lines in sands and attempting to bait people into battle.

So what you're saying as the Head of Foreign Affairs for UPN is that you guys were planning to war against TEst and TSG and that it wasn't in support of your allies that you declared, but simply as a matter of attempting to bait people into a battle? Sounds like they should consider you guys a threat then, eh? eh?

Also, even if your policies do change, it won't be shown on that page for some reason it resets to Neutral. You'll notice your changes on the nation page itself though.

From the grassy gnoll.

I'm still not sure how this version is making things less dramatic? The coding change was put in to make colors more volatile based on change. The only problem with it in my eyes is the need for an alliance to exist for 10 days. However you do raise a valid point, and one I hadn't though of. If an alliance is set to a color, and none of it's members are that color (ala beige/gray), then that alliance should be excluded from the colorstock formula. The way the current system is though, while TAC (since they just did a color bomb as part of their war tactic) initially created a color colony, the members on the color immediately provide the bonus, while no negative effects are had. The only reason the color bomb is currently effective is because they moved TAC over to purple as well. So when I just fail to see the attempts to make colorstock more volatile and part of the political and war scene, and then putting in game mechanics to limit the effect of colorstock being used as a tool. It's unbalanced and poorly implemented.

So you're going to boost their colorstock for 9 days while they're at war with you? Not... very... smart. I mean, I applaud the effort, but Sheepy feels that moves like this are abusive of the color stock system so you won't have your intended effect until Nov 9th. See Sheepy, this is why I was saying it's unbalanced to have a positive effect go into play immediately but the negative effect has to wait 10 days. Just plain broken and unbalanced.

Now it was simply posturing and not an actual threat to the alliance? You guys backpedal quickly.

This is a point I tried to make and failed at. Why are we removing non-standard war options? Wouldn't forcing alliances to police their own colors create more drama and more inter-alliance tensions, which in turn make the game more enjoyable for much of the playerbase?

Ok, so currently we thought there was a bug in the colorstock code. That's what the green bonus should have been at, yet they've been sitting on 7.82% for at least a couple days now. When it was brought up to Sheepy, he brought to light restrictions that were in place. >299 score Older than 10 days. It's the second one that bugs me. Because if a new alliance forms (Brotherhood of Steel in this instance), they IMMEDIATELY affect the colorstock bonus by being nations on that color, with no negative effects. So for the last 9 days, Green has had an artificially inflated colorstock bonus without any of the negative effects. When the colorstock change went in to place, Sheepy said it was to spread the colors out and to make colorstock a more viable tool in the game. It seems to me that the tool is currently unbalanced, and abuseable. An alliance could form a colony to join an off-alliance color, immediately boost a color's worth and reap the benefits, then return to their own color. Rinse, repeat. I suggested to Sheepy to remove the 10 day limitation to force alliances to police the colors on their own. He said if he removes it, it makes it easier for a 1-man alliance to colorbomb. The 10 day doesn't stop that, it delays it at best 10 days. During those 10 days, each alliance (the bomber and the others on color) are benefiting from unbalanced code implementation. This needs fixing. Plain and simple. When tanks were unbalanced, we got told "nobody is going to run an all-tank army". That happened and then it became an issue, then it became fixed. It wouldn't have been an issue if it was balanced to begin with. This is another example of unbalanced code.

The fact that you and other members of VoC have done this in the past and you outright stating this now is hilarious. Just because Steve is more active at playing the market PvP game he's wrong for it? You're just bitter.

FFS... this was already supposed to have been taken care of: http://politicsandwar.com/forums/index.php?/topic/2338-personal-trade-posted-as-global-trade/?p=27894

Because they're not your ally and it shouldn't matter? Or are you of the mindset that you and your ally's ally are now allies because nobody can bother to separate the garbage that they're creating.

Report it then.

Orr... just maybe he had bank access and took it on his own? You mean the same TEE guy that attacked TAC as well?

Yes roll your eyes like you don't already know that EoS allies are beefing up to come in to fight since EoS is now being handled quite "handily". Or that BoC didn't already have someone declare.

Luckily everyone KNOWS that any discreet conversations with me are old news. I haven't been "active" in a couple months. Only semi-active.

Came here for drama. Let down. Log dumping is .... well... let's say there are a few people that I won't have discreet conversations with anymore. lol

if I had to guess, I'd guess the SG members are bored and want to go fight and feel like joining in on TAC's side is more justified.

Good to see someone venturing out on their own. May the Almighty protect you.

Well Vincent, you guys would have to go in on an aggressive war, of course you're not going to. And the bravado from John Henry reeks of "dosomethingaboutit" because he obviously wants TAC's allies to jump. Personally I agree with Phiney and everyone should sit out and let these knuckleheads fight. They'll get bored in about 2 days if nobody else jumps.

The problem is, both of them are relying on inches provided by their "allies".

No, in fact Adama has stated that they're accurate... and old. From months ago when Infinity merged. I mean everyone knew it was a matter of someone pulling the trigger, but attempting to spin this any way other than "we were bored" is simply trying to e-lawyer your allies to have your back in a stupid war. If either alliance was worth a touch of salt, it would have not gone down like this.

True... he did sort of mock it though.

Denied, then posted official. Whatatwist!