Callisto

As to your first paragraph, it is true that major alliances would still be able to provide AUP and UP to their members, but do realise, if you're increasing the price of food, and in turn increasing the price of UP and AUP, that also means that the major alliances in the game only get to enjoy an even greater advantage out of UP and AUP than they already do. This is a potential issue, and I think it needs to be taken into consideration. While you are increasing the burden of food consumption on larger nations, I'm not convinced that this is a true solution to the problem, and I tend to think that the people who make food will likely only serve to benefit in the long term from the change, more than whales in general getting hurt by it.

Finally, someone who understands true class.

I feel as though we're trying to fix a political problem with game mechanics, but ultimately, you can't fix this problem. We're all lamenting that "wars are never close enough" that there's no "chance to fight back", but it's the case that no one is ever going to declare a war where the outcome is undecided. No one is going to willingly declare a war that could be close, and this is part of the reason why the offensive side always wins global wars, in addition to the fact that the game mechanics already benefit the attacker. No one is going to declare a global war where they think the outcome is close or undecided, there's simply too much on the line to make that sort of jump.

When I started playing these sorts of games back in 2013, Redarmy was one of the first few people I met and made myself acquainted with, and out of the lot of people I met at first when entering this whole environment, Redarmy was one of the few people who welcomed me as a newcomer with open arms, and I'll always remember him for that. In a similar vein, he also later on helped give me the courage to be myself in this environment, and it is because of his actions that I am where I am now, and I just wish I could have expressed to him how much of an impact he had on me one last time. I also wish that I could have expressed my gratitude for his dedication to Rose during his term as Emperor, as I could have hardly wished for a better person to take on that role, and I think that Redarmy helped to set a standard for future leaders that we all could aspire to. His acceptance of others and understanding is always something I admired, and something that I think helped not only Rose, but the game as a whole. I'm more than grateful that he had the confidence in me to let me be his Regent when he held his term as Emperor, and I can scarcely imagine another person that I would be more proud to have shared a government with. What more can I say than that he was simply taken from us far too soon. I don't think I'll ever be able to load up the game again without thinking at least a bit about him.

Roberts, I find the overall idea behind the ending portion of your post commendable. I also think that we as a community should try our best to help out the alliances that need it. However, at the same time, I find it rather weird that you juxtaposed this idea with your opening statement, that the game is so easy that anyone could obviously do well if given even the barest minimum of support, doesn't that mean that, if in your opinion, the game is so easy, that no one should need help? At the same time you're over here telling the community at large to take in and help these alliances that need it, and critcizing people who are harsh towards underperforming alliances, but you undercut your own point when you, in your own post, start literally calling out alliances, more or less shaming them for not having the 'decency to take simple advice'. No wonder they don't want to participate in the public discource, even when people are trying to take up for them, they still get called out. I want to draw attention in particular to this portion of your post. You're over here trying to tell specific alliances what to do, and saying "Well it's so easy to fix your community, just do x, y and z." If it was really that simple, don't you think that they would have done those things already? If it was really just that easy to fix an alliance, don't you think these alliances would have fixed themselves? You're up here on your high horse, in a priviledged alliance, trying to lecture the underpriviledged by telling them "It's easy, just do what we do." Have you ever stopped to think that perhaps they can't do these things? I feel like you, someone who recently had an alliance fail on them, would understand their plight, and see how a post like this, telling them to just "do something" doesn't really help much at all to address their problems. Your post makes no sense, and is doing nothing to actually help the alliances that need help. You want to help them? How about you go join them, and recruit and raise new members for them for a good week or two. That will do more than anything else you've done in this thread.

Is there any truth to this, Clock folk? If so, why wasn't this delineated in the peace treaty itself?

"2a. Eclipse, GATO, and Weebunism mutually agree to work together in the best interest of improving Brown.2b. CATA, and CTO mutually agree to work together in the best interest of improving Olive." What exactly does this mean?

Decagon, if you and Clock didn't agree with what The Syndicate and BW "did to you" at the time, then why didn't you do something about it? If you felt that you were truly "forced" into this, and you felt as though Syndicate had betrayed you, or some other bullshit, why didn't you punish them. Apart from that, as you've just admitted, this was something you wanted to do anyway, and based on the logs WANA has provided, as well as Keegoz's tone in the original logs he provided, where he put up literally no resistance, I don't really see how they forced you onto this. Circling back to those original logs, Keegoz claims that WANA officially made the hit on Rose part of the deal, but WANA, in Keegoz's own logs, quite literally says "If/When Clock hits Rose". That doesn't sound like a precondition to me, if anything, that sounds like, in Syndicate's eyes, you could have either chosen to hit Rose, or not to hit Rose, and Syndicate would have helped with the MysInc/Oasis war either way. The fact that you did absolutely nothing about this at the time, in my eyes, is a tacit implication that through this entire conversation with WANA, Keegoz got what he ultimately wanted, and didn't feel forced at all. The fact that you are only bringing up all this stuff now I think is really telling

If you were truly forced into this whole situation of hitting Rose, that implies to me that you didn't want to do it. If you *really* didn't want to do it, then why didn't you just leak the logs to Rose, hit BW with Rose, leak the logs as CB, and explain your actions to everyone. The fact that you went through with the plan of hitting Rose implies to me that you were always interested in hitting Rose, whether it was "forced" upon you or not. If you truly did not appreciate the actions of BW, then why didn't you choose to punish them?

If Metropolitan Planning is to exist, I think it should have an ROI similar to the other two projects (around 5 to 6 cities depending on the market). It's current cost is way too low in comparison to the projects that come before it. I also think that there should be more emphasis on a cost of raws as opposed to refineds, since the purpose of these projects more than anything else is to serve as a resource sink, Steel and Aluminum already have major resource sinks (wars) while raw resources such as Iron, Coal, Bauxite, and so on and so forth, seem to be lacking in terms of major resource sinks. As we can see from: https://politicsandwar.com/world-graphs/graphID=14 raw resources such as Iron have only steadily increased over time, with some rather sharp increases as of late, without any large dips, while steel and aluminum see major dips around the time that any major war occurs. With the introduction of that new RPC project, I also think that it is paramount that the game has major raw sinks, in order to ensure that raw resources are something that is actually worth making and selling for these new nations with the projects.

Name the war: "Time's Up"

Regarding your first point, just because it only adds a "negligible" amount to larger nations income, that's not a valid reason for not cutting this project off at some point. The intention of this project is to help out newer nations, if you allow for older nations, and whales to get this project, you undermine this project in two ways, 1, you're giving whales more income which, even if negligible, still widens the income gap and 2, you're potentially, like you stated in you're second point, going to increase the amount of raw resources in the game which may in turn decrease the prices. I think if you want to implement this project, and have it *actually* help out newer nations, you're going to have to make it stop functioning at some city count. I would suggest somewhere in the 15 to 20 range, I feel as though once you've reached that part of the game, the training wheels are off, you generally are going to have around 2000 infra per city which will allow you to access more lucrative build options.

Literally anything but Error 522, because Error 522 can describe literally any war in the past 3 or 4 years. Go for something unique, that actually describes the war itself, not a quality that can be attributed to any war.

A pleasure to be serving under you. I couldn't think of anyone better suited for the job. Hail Rose 🌹

Government Oversight Agency- I feel that this is a good project concept, I feel that it gives more weight to Domestic Policy, forcing economics departments to consider policies a bit more closely. However, at the same time, I have a distaste for projects in this game that tend to benefit larger nations more than smaller ones; like most of the projects in the game, this is another one of those. It is in fact the case that nations with more infra, more land, and higher city counts will see larger total discounts than smaller nations, because of the nature of percentages. I would suggest that for this project, we look at a way to sort of cap out or limit the benefits once your nation is at some certain size, or that this project have some sort of curve where it is more beneficial for smaller nations to grab. This game is very skewed in favor of larger nations at times, and I'd really like to see some projects that help address that. I think this is a project, with my suggestion, that could potentially do that. Resource Production Center- Again, I feel that this is a good project, but something must be considered before implementing it. Based on everything you have written about this project, it seems as though it is meant to bolster the economy of smaller nations. However, after doing some calculations myself, it is almost certain that it would be worthwhile for any nation that could spare the slot to buy this project, and I think that would be the potential downfall of this project. It is intended to bolster the economies of smaller nations, however it is the case that if everyone buys this project, suddenly, there could become *too many* raws in circulation, and the price of raws could diminish to a point where smaller nations actually see their income hurt because of large scale economics. Perhaps this project should only work for smaller nations, and become ineffective once a nation reaches 20 cities? (In my opinion, you should also get the project slot back once hitting 20 cities if this was to occur) This concern of mine could be overblown, however I think it is something worth considering, and I don't think it would really hurt the game if large nations didn't have access to this project. As a side note, I'd also like to see you somehow address the concern of too few project slots for smaller nations. Personally, I could see both of these projects being bought at 16 cities or before, and as it stands now, I can count 8 projects that a City 16 should at least consider grabbing at or before that city count, these additional two would make it 10. With reasonable, and what some might consider high, levels of infra (2,000 per city at 16 cities), a nation would have at most 8 project slots at 16 cities assuming that they got the project slot for fighting wars. I think something you should consider to remedy this is having the first 10,000 levels of infrastructure count for 4 slots, instead of only 2. Essentially, you would get a project slot for every 2,500 infra for the first 10,000 infra your nation has, and after the first 10,000, you would go back to the normal 5,000 per slot.