Dubayoo

Jeez... you people are jerks. It's no wonder this game sucks so much. People come up with good ideas, and you just vote them down. Grow up.

PnW should just move into civilian economics. Everything doesn't have to be about military conquest. If Civilization can have science, culture, and diplomatic victories, so can PnW. Before reading any further, understand this is a game. Some of the suggestions might seem rigid, but this isn't meant to perfectly represent the real world. It's accommodating the simplicity players would look for. Players could invest in companies that give countries a tech edge - bonus to unit performance, happiness edge - bonus to income, and relations edge - reduced delay to act after declaring war. The edges previously listed are up for discussion. My suggestion is to say a country can have up to 4 edges per category. The first edge would be +4%, the second +3%, the third +2%, and the fourth +1% for unit performance and income bonus, maximizing at +10%. For reduced delay, my suggestion is the game changes so you can only attack someone 24 hours after declaring war. This prevents the autistic click spamming that kills people in their sleep which war is sorely broken by. The relation edges would grant -2 hours each for attacking someone, reducing the delay to 16 hours when maximized. Companies could* serve one nation per $10m invested in them. For example, if an alliance has $1b to spare, it could invest $1b into the company to serve 100 countries. Companies could also be headquartered in either nations or alliances. However, a nation could only host one company, and an alliance could only host one company of each type. National companies could also not serve their own nation, nor could they serve a nation headquartering a company serving their nation. This prevents gaming the system. The game could also provide an index of companies sorted by service amount, service price, saved earnings, and stock price. Nations would pay the price offered by the company where they pay a certain amount per week of service. This price could change into the future, and nations could lock in discounted contracts paid in advance for long-term pricing up to 3 months. Companies may not engage in selective pricing however. They many only offer one price and discounted contract schedule publicly to all nations at any time outside of embargoes. Discounted contract schedules must be available for 72 hours so anyone can lock them in. Stockholders could sell their stock at anytime to withdraw a share of the company's holdings. For example, if a company had $100m invested in it and $100m was earned by the company's service, a shareholder who invested $10m could sell one's stock for $20m, withdrawing $10m from the company's treasury. The founder of the company could choose the initial investment, and stockholders could vote on how much future stock could be issued. Stockholders could also vote to reinvest their earnings into the company. For example, a founder might start a company with $10m. When it reaches $10m in earnings, the founder could vote alone to reinvest that $10m directly to have $20m invested in the company. Eventually, the company could have $30m invested, but the founder wants to grow faster, so $20m in stock is issued. The company then earns $50m, so the founder votes again to reinvest. With a majority of ownership, the vote passes by default. Now, the founder has $60m invested and fellow investors have $40m. The founder might want to grow even faster though, so the founder issues another $50m in stock. At this point, the founder no longer has a default majority, so say the company has another $50m in the future and the founder wants to reinvest the earnings. The founder would have to put it up for a vote. If it passes, the founder would get another $20m in stock since he has 40% of the $150m currently outstanding. If it fails, the earnings would be liquidated among all current stockholders to do with as they see fit. If the founder wants to issue more stock, a vote would be cast again. If the vote passes, more stock would be issued. If it fails, the company would be liquidated where every stockholder gets their stock and earnings percent compensated. In this case, the founder would get $80m in cash altogether. To prevent small stockholders from trolling others, only those stockholders who own the same or more than the founder may initiate votes to reinvest earnings or issue stock. If a company liquidates, those nations being served continue to receive service until the term expires.This includes discounted contracts. Stockholders could also sell their stock on the open market. This is helpful for players who want to invest in companies that don't issue anymore stock as well as players who own stock in companies that don't want to liquidate. The expected market price per share, therefore, should be based around $10m + saved earnings/service amount. This will also be influenced by expected future earnings on the service price. *However, there's one more part to expected future earnings which deals with why "could" was underlined before - competition investment. Companies with higher product quality will provide double the edges previously described. That means unit performance and income bonuses go from 10% to 20% and declaration is delayed only 8 hours instead of 16 hours. Companies will be sorted uniformly by percentile such that the bottom 1% provides a regular edge while the top 1% percent provides double the edge. To determine product quality, a company will have a slider where it chooses how much of its investment to dedicate towards service slots versus product quality. Note that this investment never gets consumed. If a company liquidates, all of its investment is liquidated to investors. The game wouldn't account for labor, overhead, materials, licenses, and other depreciating and depleting expenses. This prevents players from worrying about investing in competitive product quality just to have a hostile takeover sabotage their investment in vain by liquidating the company. Slider adjustments would be voted upon by stockholders just like when a company liquidates earnings or issues more stock. Again, only players with the same or more stock than the founder may initiate these votes... ...so in sum... ...if you want to make money investing in stock... ...found companies that give other nations edges, found companies that give your alliance's nations edges, offer discounted contract schedules for advance payments that you can reinvest into your company, issue stock to attract investors so your company can serve more nations, liquidate earnings by failing reinvestment and issuance votes, purchase stock from other players to get access to other companies' earnings, and invest in competitive product quality so other nations are willing to pay higher service prices to your company!

The following national flags aren't working: Abkhazia Burkina Faso Caucasus Comanche Nation Earth Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Flubb Hong Kong Ivory Coast Kosovo Liechtenstein Luxembourg Montenegro Northern Cheyenne Nation Prussia Rhodesia Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic San Marino Scotland Sealand SFR Yugoslavia Singapore Starman The Flock The Flock (War Flag) Transnistria Vatican City Wales That's all I found so far.

Just sayin' frogs >>> snakes.

I make $8m everyday right now. This is too much effort to be bothered.

When people spew nonsense, it means it's all OOC since there's no IC justification. Frankly, if I was the admin, I'd probably block you people from declaring war on each other for a month until you reveal what the IC justification is here. We're not getting paid to be professional detectives here. We're playing the game for fun, but now you turn it into work. Out with it or begone.

I'm not sure you even understand how it's wrong. There's a lot of cynical presumptions in what you say... ...and then, you ignore what I said about personality being a sign of how one uses one's body. You also ignore how people can be functionally in shape, but have a butterface or not quite exactly in proportion.

This whole post is wrong on so many levels I don't even know where to start... ...except for the last line, but I'm inclined to believe it's sarcastic since it's disconnected from the rest.

If anything, this is why self-objectification happens as well - it's a cruel maneuver used to ruin men over the long-term. Men see attractive women who they have to block out or else the novelty of beauty wears off over time. It's not just something used to ruin your career by distracting you from becoming productive and establishing yourself. It's also used to ruin the development of your style so you don't have anything to offer a genuine woman who's discreet. When you get older, you'll see pretty women and think, "Meh. Been there, done that," which is where the real shame comes from. You'll want your young emotions back for a woman who's committed to you. Had society punished those women who exhibited themselves earlier who you had to block out, your emotions would still exist, but it doesn't. Instead, society treats women like they should be put on a pedestal, never punishing them because everyone wants to either be with them or be like them. By no surprise, there are so many dysfunctional households now too because people simply seek out instantaneous gratification without deeper values on commitment.

Again, if you're inexperienced, yes, you will do that. Once you get experience, you realize that looks are almost entirely irrelevant. If anything, they're a crutch used by women who lack personality in order to lure in pathetic men and reject them afterwards. Yes, looks can compliment personality as well, but only if there's some symbolism which provides deeper romantic meaning to the action. You'll find this out especially as you get older too. If anything, this is how maturity really works between men versus women. Young women and old men find romance most appealing. Old women and young men find physical action most appealing. Young women are insecure, and old men have are looking for a novel experience. If anything, old men struggle with getting hard-ons as they get older because they don't find good looks appealing anymore. It's called erectile dysfunction for a reason. The only relevance deals with functionality as in a woman with smooth skin is nice to touch. A woman who's in shape is flexible and maneuverable. A woman who's young isn't worn out.

...so said every virgin ever. You don't have to be blind to know that a good lover comes from how she uses her body, not how her body looks. Good looks get you in the door, but they don't keep you in the room. Case in point, it's better to make love with someone who's simply in functional good shape and feels tight from not being worn out than to fool around with a supermodel who feels loose inside. Hence, personality really does matter. It's a sign of whether a babe knows how to make her body move or if she's just going to lay back and expect you to nail her like an airhead blowup doll.

...so it's 1947, and there's over 60m casualties with the Axis kdr = 2:1. Finally, we've reached the point where there's as many casualties as there have been abortions in America since it was legalized. Also, I have 23 a-bombs, and I make one every two weeks. Germany and Italy tried to convert me to fascism, but I banned it and got my democratic politician as well as Democratic Opposition Voicing Protests, so the fascists can never reach the 70% influence they need to take over. Meanwhile, I have 200+ factories in the Balkans alone, and short of America, I'm the top exporter of oil from my synthetic refineries. All the majors except America are at "All Adults Serve" or "Scraping the Barrel" for conscription laws as well. _______________ This is how you report the facts instead of beating around the bush on what's really happening in a conflict. Oh... and what kind of war in PnW results in a crash in market prices? Ammo and steel are practically unprofitable now even with maximum efficiency and project boosting. You're better off building commerce and civic buildings at this point.

Still have no idea what happened. Just seems like a lot of OOC nonsense. The least you guys could do is debate on the OOC section of the forum if you want to debate RL politics. Bleh. On that note, I'm going to go back to playing HoI4 and do some world conquest as non-aligned Romania.

The concern seems to be more about thinking how you would respond if you had the opportunity to do so.

I agree with the OP. If you go into prolonged VM, it helps to not be distracted by what's going on in PnW. The point of prolonged VM is to get on with your life instead of getting lost in a game.

https://www.fox25boston.com/news/clergy-leaders-send-iconic-message-by-renaming-faneuil-hall/760994771 On the surface, this seems like a typical situation where a white religious figure is just having his name stripped from a religious building by a social justice group. The group's motives are probably that just as well in the name of opposing slavery... ...but there's a major problem. Boston is an Irish Catholic city, and the historical figure is a French Huguenot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Faneuil If you know anything about history, then you know Huguenots were Protestants instead of Catholics, and they were Calvinists at that. Likewise, if you've studied the Protestant work ethic, then you know Calvinism is the source of slavery in judging people's performance of good works to represent a predestined calling to determine if they're chosen by God to be elected for salvation or not... ...so should there really be a problem with changing the building's name? History is valuable to make sure people don't forget past mistakes, but in this case, the name represents an evil ideology - a variant of Christianity which emphasizes emotivism, functionalism, fatalism, and behaviorism. If you know the devil in the details, then you know there really shouldn't be any reason to remember this guy at all.

In honor of the great multiculturalism versus nationalism debate, which anthem is better?

Yea, I can see how it's a gray area. Let me just be clear that I don't get compensated at all for what's going on. Yes, I'm a member of the KofC, but people joining the order are not paying my specific council. I will never see a penny of any money spent on dues to join. Furthermore, the order donates way more money than even a handful or dozen of members joining here would provide: http://www.kofc.org/en/news/releases/charitable-records-set-2016.html Put plainly, I'm just trying to give my in-game resources away to people of character who I believe deserve them the most. I don't benefit from this at all. Furthermore, I have no real life use for the papers that would be written. I'm already in the order, and I'm not a student. It's not like I would be using people to get scholarship money. If anything, the in-game resources I would give away would save players time such that if they're students, it would effectively be a scholarship for them.

I didn't even get a message or notification about it being moved or deleted. All I know is I log back in today, and it's not there anymore. I can't even see it under my content or under my profile. This is really sketchy on your part. It's like you're conspiring with the people who didn't like the thread, and don't even have the decency to tell me what's happened to it nevermind what's wrong with it.

Considering how you're a contrarian who calls things nonsensical despite being sensible, that doesn't really mean much. If you want to form your own charity event, you're free to do so.

You really aren't familiar with scholastic tradition are you? Dogmas talk about faith before reason, yes, but the question has to do with how to be faithful. That is something which has to be reasoned out. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegorical_interpretation_of_the_Bible Scripture's context can be interpreted many ways when it comes to proper faithfulness. If you think literalism is good enough without institutional wisdom, that makes you a Protestant, not a Catholic.

Alright boss. Just remember denying the obvious doesn't heal cognitive dissonance. This is what scholasticism emphasizes as well - the construction of consensus. Walking away just because you disagree ends up getting you ostracized beyond the conversation at hand.

You're assuming fully free democracy is good. We don't need to live in a society where mob justice or tyranny of the majority compels people to go along with the flow. This is what makes the Catholic Church a good institution. Yes, it votes for the Papacy through the conclave, but it's grounded in dogmatic tradition via scholasticism. People have reasoned out concepts over the ages to share their wisdom into the perpetual future. It is not a tyrannical dictatorship where we follow an authority's lead just because an authority says so. We follow leadership because leadership is virtuous. If anything's dangerous, it's exposing innocent people to being abused because criminals aren't warned via the potential for punishment. That's like being a shepherd who doesn't protect the flock from wolves. The statements are not contradictory either. If pagans wish to display their monuments on private grounds, that's fine. We just need to make sure their monuments don't contradict each other. In contrast, the universal and international base of Catholicism acknowledges the many ways of life people can have.

No we don't agree. The fact is you can join the order whether you're participating here or not. Joining the order yields its own benefits. This giveaway simply acknowledges the order as a theme behind which an additional effort can be made to get a prize.

The question's been answered and shown how you're asking about irrelevant points.