Holton
-
Posts
310 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Holton
-
-
-
Good luck tS. You've seen odds like these before (granted you had BK in your back pocket
). I'm sure you all will do fine.Are you rolling in your African grave yet?
BK alongside NPO against t$.
-
1
-
-
>begins reading buorhann's logs in Kastorium voice chat
>"YO CHILL"
-
1
-
-
Let's kick this baby off with shitty MS paint pics and maybe an occasional effort post!! Pictured: BK
-
6
-
-
"Can't Believe We Let NPO Survive We Should've Known Better War"
CBWLNPOSWSKBW War
-
4
-
-
The empire would of been better off spending all those resources on its navy instead of the death star.
When you have basically limitless GDP and a command economy - does it truly matter?
The Empire was defeated by literal Force nonsense and nothing more.
-
Today I spent like 20 minutes loving star wars and dismissed the notion that the death star, or the executor, or the second death star, or any of them combined were anywhere close to superfluous spending on the part of the Empire.
The GDP of Earth is estimated at a little over 100 trillion dollars with about 7 billion people living here. Coruscant's population alone is estimated around 2 trillion but we're not even going to look at that single-planet GDP. The death star cost "more than 1 trillion credits" to build and assuming standard naval salaries as compared to US Navy salaries - the total cost per year for salaries of the crew would be $55,147,830,000 even looking at the cost in terms of materials is trivial when you have literally immeasurable numbers of uninhabited worlds, asteroids, and mines to pull material from.
Not only is the death star a trivial project for the empire to pursue it's a doable, in terms of money, project for Earth alone. Even if you consider my salary numbers conservative and double them - you're still looking at a project that Earth could support by itself and the Empire literally has 1.5 MILLION worlds, multiple ecumenopolises, and 69 MILLION colonies. That is almost an unimaginable economic scale for us but what that amounts to is basically infinite resources. So !@#$ the death star haters
-
I'll drop a large sum to the leader of whichever alliance declares first war.
-
1
-
-
Without referencing the classic strawman arguments - why oppose an ordered society that distributes surplus among the people? I'm actually looking for serious theory here, not just pointing to China and saying how bad they are.
-
I follow the Chicago Fire and we sucked balls last year.
Doing meh right now.
Sounders is the ONLY team I like from the city of Seattle.
ATL and Chicago doing well this season. 2-2-1 at #3 and #4 on the East Conference table. Looking good!
-
ODP's should be the maximum people in this world should sign. Otherwise you are signing away your sovereignty (by declaring blind following in a Mutual pact) or you're signing away your honor (by choosing to ignore a mutual pact and treat it as an ODP).
The mutual pact stems from laziness on the part of inactive allies who can't be bothered to actually put the effort into politics. They would rather be comfortable hiding away in the treaty web with a few M-level treaties to make people think twice about hitting them.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
The Church of Spaceology officially issues a declaration of wow.
Abbas, Cuzzelle, and Thalmor are awful singers. Wow.
-
7
-
Whatever happens, I know I'm going to instinctively hit NPO. This new treaty web blows by the way. Good job everyone smh. I still love me some tS and TKR.
Thank you for being the voice of reason in a sea of insanity.
-
My theory was correct, but I guess it was Moonpie not Impero.
-
In (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways), PnW, PT, PN, and every nationsim we've seen the same pattern repeated. Politics happen a bunch in the beginning, there are clearly defined sides, and conflict keeps interest. Over the next year or two, people begin doing FA work and naturally treaties are signed. But what happens when I sign with someone I like, who is already treatied to 3 people they like, and each of those has ties to various alliances? A web forms. A choking, crushing, interest-killing, and eventually game-ending stagnation begins because while everyone says they don't want to clog the web - they can't help it. You lose wars if you don't "play the game". So how the !@#$ do we avoid this bullshit?
In the spirit of incentivizing competition, creating new political dynamics, and generally pushing more conflict into the game:
Step One: Create a limited number of in-game treaty slots. Like 3.
Step Two: Provide bonuses and penalties. Alliances your treatied with have access to your shared markets, share treasure bonuses, have access to shared announcements, a percent of each treaty partner's color bonus is added on to your income etc. Trades have tariffs applied to them that get negated by the in-game treaties so non-allied people have to pay extra on your trades and vice-versa (it's very important the game adds this on, not the players themselves as to facilitate a "need" to treaty people).
Step three: in-game treaty slots hopefully matter enough to create feelings of alienation and even animosity - leading to conflict... "oh you let them into your slot but not us?" etc.
step four: ??? politics here.
step five: more conflict
Suddenly, people who have overt amounts of treaties either have to strategically organize groupings that will evenly distribute economic bonuses - or end up alienating the "left overs" that are excluded from the treaty groups.
Ideally this would create artificial competition for the treaty slots and create artificial conflict via exclusion. IDEALLY shattering or splitting up the clogged treaty web and permanently
-
"The surest way to destroy your enemies is by becoming their friend"
- everyone that signs treaties in PnW
-
First a NAP, then they merge back into each other with Impero at the helm. My post is coming true!!!
-
awkward
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Small update:
- VE has 36 members and tVE has 24.
- Out of VE's 36 members, 20 of them haven't changed their nation colors back to Lime from Grey after alex gave us all a day of free beige. Suggesting rampant inactivity and disinterest.
- In this thread we've only seen like 5 VE members post.
- Olorin has been in VE literally since I can remember. It seems very out of character that he'd just flip his shit and coup like he did.
- Impero just recently came back to PnW
Given all the facts, I present this theory:
Impero returned to a community he's spent literal years in, only to find it an inactive wasteland of disinterest and political isolation. He constructs the most elaborate plot ever to return activity to his alliance - knowing Seeker's abrasive-at-times personality and his unorthodox FA views, Impero and the rest of active VE government literally coup themselves with Codonian and Keza coming in to post about being double agents after the whole alliance bug incident. They create a new AA and drum up rumors of civil war in a desperate last-ditch attempt to bring the inactive majority of VE back from the brink. At the same time VE can effectively "start over" with most of the FA imploding with their feux-coup. Then Impero takes back control after the dust settles and basically gets a clean slate with trust being more-or-less restored in their alliance due to his reputation as a long-time successful leader of the Entente. This saves VE and its current government the embarrassment of being ousted by Impero under normal circumstances, and it allows them to reset their FA without the hassle of cancelling on people themselves.
tl;dr - this entire stunt has been a ploy by Impero to get unwanted parties to drop treaties and stir up activity in the membership.
-
8
-
This was awesome. Keep it up
-
1
-
-
I'm very confused as to how this isn't just a simple ban and move on.
If these people care so much about "winning" in this game, take the game away from them. What's the point of playing a game where half the people automate their nations to such an extent...?
-
1
-
-
Since this is a balanced game without any massive exploits in the combat system, I would like to bring to the attention of the administrator an unfortunate bug I have noticed while playing Politics & War.
Even though ground attacks and naval attacks can do significant damage to other ground and naval units, someone accidentally made air units capable of attacking all units, which doesn't fit with the other unit types. This bug also seems to have made it so air units do way more damage than ground units to other ground units, and more damage to ships than ships can do.
Clearly this is an oversight by the developer and not intended to be in production, so I'm glad I can bring it to the attention of the developer.
Currently testing changes that would fix this problem on the test server. Namely, changing Ground Control so that when you have it, you destroy a % (1%,2%,3% depending on victory type) of your opponent's aircraft when attacking.
Wow. Suggestions and proposed changes that I actually agree with.
This is weird.
I think planes should be allowed to hit all their current targets because that's just realism. Nerfing their damage and/or adding in some sort of anti-air unit that isn't just the opponent's aircraft is fine by me. Just make sure to use a scalpel, not an axe.
-
1
-
-
This would be the worst thing to happen. Stop teasing the gawking masses and lay out all the cards. You have us hooked. We want more. No. We demand more.
The masses do love their bloodshed...
-
Wait, this is still a game?
-
1
-
BK recognition of hostilities
in Alliance Affairs
Posted
You aren't creating change.
There is no more classic-(That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) tactic than the treaty-web bullshit that you guys pulled this war.
Different sides isn't change.