Aisha Greyjoy

Money spent is not an indicator of relative power. Score needs to reflect relative power to allow for proper war matchmaking.

I think a city adds too much to nation score. It is not cities which generate power projection but infrastructure. More cities just makes it easier cheaper to get infra. I propose that the city NS factor be reduced. I'd propose going from 25 to 10. This has the benefit of having NS more accurately reflect the actual power of nations.

If alliances want to promote the idea of norms of behavior, it is up to said alliances to enforce those norms via force. Absent force, anything goes. That's why there's raids. If raiders knew the moment they hit an alliance member, they'd be pulverized, they wouldn't raid. The prevalence of raiders says more about the ineptitude of Orbis's so-called leaders then it does about the raiders themselves. I don't think raiders are a problem. I think alliance leaders bringing in norms of behavior from Bob or Digiteriea or wherever and trying to impose them on Orbis without the ability to enforce those norms is the problem.

...and I got paid anyway. I'm not one to turn down cash that's actually sent to me. Thanks. Its much easier to be noble about it when the money isn't sitting there, waiting to be accepted.

I waive any share of bounty. Thanks for noticing though, Ren.

15 is too much, too fast. I'd say a phased increase, like .50c a year, with a $12 target or so in 7 years, and after that, peg it to the CPI. I made $10 an hour when I was 16, decades ago. We're just used to America being a poor country now. All our money goes to the top and we've just accepted that people should be poor.

To the extent Southern states(aka Republican states) have taken away all worker rights and greatly empowered corporations to pollute, steal from their workers, and pay no taxes, yes the South is a very friendly place for Capital. Its a really crappy place for Labor, however. Southern States have terribad education systems, terribad healthcare, terribad infrastructure. California's economy is still a LOT larger then that of Texas. Texas and Florida both have about 25% of their residents getting Bachelor Degrees. Califorina is 30% and New York is 32%. Average income is much higher when you're not in the south. No, the south is like Mexico or China. Cheap, exploitable labor. That's all.

I concur. If each page is a record in a DB managed via a CMS, its easy to add a pageTitle field that holds the value in the table. If its hard coded its a little bit more work, but there's so few pages, it shouldn't be a big deal.

I wouldn't get too cocky. Yes, a group of nations working together can defeat a single nation. No reason to toot horns there,

I agree with the various responders, increasing gasoline makes sense, increasing munitions, not so much.

I raided a lot in the speed round. I raided for money. I could make more money raiding then by building. And if alliances were too incompetent to defend their members, so much the better.

It might be nice to see stats on a continent-basis too.

It has further to be shipped? There's a degree of wastage. But I see those points about gas being more relevant. A problem with distance is people will flock to borders, some far away just to enhance difficulty. Neutrals will all be at the map edge...

I propose that when attacking a nation on another continent, you should expend 2X the munitions and gasoline when you fight to represent the difficulties of power projection. Maybe there could be a Project to reduce it to 1.5X. Maybe it gets reduced to 1.5X if you establish a blockade (representing your attacking supply lines now being secured)

Activity is an OOC matter, I don't like that its displayed in game at all.

I believe this sort of thing is properly the realm of alliances. If an alliance was overwhelemed, its friends and allies can help. If it has no friends and allies, then perhaps this type of proposal is appropriate. I'm concerned about "throw-away nation" raiders rerolling and perpetually swarming low ranking members of alliances, but again, i see that as alliance-based issue that a properly managed alliance should be able to respond ot.

I'd love it if we talked about rational and reasonable moves rather then tea-party "a gun for every toddler" nonsense or liberal "guns are for killing and killing is bad" nonsense. I used to think the politicians abandoned the middle, but no...its the people who have fled to extremism, and the politicians who have reluctantly(some of them) followed.

I had trouble distributing them? It was meant as an example more then specific for even what foods or where. Alternately, give each continent its own food, and to get the bonus you need some of all. That would help to make some trade price variances for food prices.

National project name: Advanced Warheads Small description: Your nation has begun equipping its artillery and tanks with depleted uranium rounds, increasing the armor penetration value of its warheads. Project effect: +5% ground battle strength, 1 Uranium used per 20000 soldiers, 1 Uranium used per 500 tanks, +5% missile damage, Missile cost increased to +5 Uranium Resource cost: 750 steel, 750 aluminum, 250 Uranium Cash cost: 5,000,000 Comments: Its a modest benefit, not a "must have" but a "nice to have". Provides increased demand for Uranium outside of Nukes.

National project name: Advanced Warheads Small description: Your nation has begun equipping its artillery and tanks with depleted uranium rounds, increasing the armor penetration value of its warheads. Project effect: +5% ground battle strength, 1 Uranium used per 20000 soldiers, 1 Uranium used per 500 tanks, +5% missile damage, Missile cost increased to +5 Uranium Resource cost: 750 steel, 750 aluminum, 250 Uranium Cash cost: 5,000,000 Comments: Its a modest benefit, not a "must have" but a "nice to have". Provides increased demand for Uranium outside of Nukes. Edit: added the part about it modifying missiles

I'd like to see additional commodities available. One idea is to spread food out into Rice(Asia, S. America, Africa) Wheat(Europe, N. America, Europe) Meat(Australia, N. America, S. America) Fish(Africa, Asia, Australia) Then set populations to crave all 4, but will take any shortcoming from other foodstocks. If a population has access to enough of all 4, give them a revenue boost of 5% or something. Then you can spread the foods around to the continents to encourage more trading. Dabbling in all 4 foods is by no means required, its just something to pursue to get the bonus.

Some of us are born nobles. Some of us are born common. And some of us are born descendants of slaves. In today's America, the nobles have it best, the commoners have it worse, and the descendants of slaves have it worst of all. In what world is this different or could it ever be different? Nobles have been abusing commoners and slaves and slave descendants since we lived in caves, and will continue to do so. Welcome to Humanity.

A gun is like an insurance policy. You hope you never need it, but if you do, it would suck if you didn't have it. Governments don't outlaw insurance, but they do regulate it. I'm comfortable with rational and reasonable regulation so long as the intended purpose is regulation and not covert denial of the underlying right. In my state, I already have to "register" to own a gun. It isn't onerous to have to do so. The concerning thing I see is anytime a "gun owner" gets served a warrant, especially if he's black, the popo think its good to send in the SWAT team, which leads to terrible problems. So, I think the list of gun owners should be limited to law enforcement related to enforcing gun laws. So, if you want to search my house for drugs, you shouldn't get access to whether or not I am a licensed gun owner, but if you're investing me for gun running, you should. So, that's a restriction on government I'm proposing. Age and gun education seem like relevant things that can/should be restricted. No "everybody gets to carry a gun in their pocket without some classes" Finally, no one needs a 50 cal machine gun or a shoulder fired surface to air missile. Nobody needs a fully automatic rifle. These could be restricted without unduly restricting our freedom to own guns. As long as we stick to rational restrictions (The democrats in the 90's were F'in ridiculious saying "its a scary looking weapon, we should ban it" or "it seems militaristic") So, Age Weapon Education Registration with limits on what databases can be used for. Weapon Type That's what I think are reasonable restrictions.

Nation Name: Iron Isles Nation Link: http://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=4884

I think each nation should be limited to one buy order and one sell order per commodity. Maybe add a "Project" to allow more. The reason I say this is that trades get cluttered. I can offer 20 trades of 1 unit to bury my competitors offers and generally annoy people. Projects are also nice cash sinks.