ComradeMilton

Hi. So you found one example. Out of thousands and thousands of text MMOs. I think you're the one who is full of shit.

We should just post in this subforum if we're no doing well and hope Sheepy changes things so they're more in our favor, I assume?

Tribes, Quake 2: Rocket Arena, Starcraft, CN off the top of my head. Oh, and I've been playing this for about its entire run. They do not need to be changed to continue. Please name a game that didn't change anything substantial to the gameplay and had to end.

No, you don't. I've never heard of a game changing drastic elements so often as this one. It's unnecessary, alienating to established players, and only serves one group over another as detailed in the title.

They don't. To be a game you don't need to constantly change basic aspects of it.

Ask Sheepy to not damage the game again with a change like this.

It's established you're permitted to leave an AA, especially to make war on your original AA (Source: Me doing this with the approval of @Sheepy. This situation doesn''t seem dissimilar enough to warrant a change.

The existing mechanics are fine. People still use naval attacks to blockade and ground attacks to limit potential airstrikes. There's no need to change game mechanics for entirely arbitrary reasons like this. Why change? People use al units, there's nothing wrong with the mechanics (depending on whether your alliance understands them) and there's no need to dumb the mechanics down because one group's strategy is more effective than another's. These settings (aside from the massive increase in damage from Assassinate Spies attacks) have been around for a while, each of the sides that tend to gather together understand them and do what they can to maximize their advantage. You don't see the NBA changing the value of baskets vs three point shots just because three point shots have three points.

I understand this was a reply to an exaggeration, but pay to win is pay to win even if the IRL cost is relatively inexpensive. Even if you introduced time-based restrictions on its use with war you're giving the nations that pay you a game advantage over those who do not. I don't know how more simply Pay2Win can be explained. This is it. I've been playing for a very long time and throughout all of that period of time you have always limited VIP to forums tags and customization that does not affect game play. This is the beginning of you changing that. What's the next improvement that'll be concealed behind the VIP wall?

same. this is adding tedium to the game for those who aren't paying for VIP rather than adding benefits for VIP users.

You can't be smug, you're in Valmor It's regarding the affairs of a group of alliances. This could not have been posted anywhere but here.

I've gone ahead and applied to SK. Will you give me a recommendation since it was kind of at your invitation?

Neat. A permanent CB to almost anyone. Thanks!

Pfft. New people.

Neat. Sup Roq

I heard NPO came. So welcome.

Antipope

He can't be in KT and be the Pope within their theme. When were you knighted?

If so KT should really be subservient to an external Pope.

I'd've thought Knightfall properly demonstrated which alliance grouping is more likely to stubbornly out-wait he other.

When were you knighted?

What's Noctis?

gg

Kinda.

We were really fighting TKR. GOB was just kind of brought in by obligations or something. Not to be a, uh, brusque person, but I didn't see GOB even discussed except as a side effect f TKR.