Emmad

Sounds good, but do we know for sure he did that? If so then I say we embargo the entire alliance...not an okay way to recruit!

Didn't think of that honestly, it is very true!

I understand your point, but I think the point of that is so the losing nations won't be completely destroyed. And like you said, some people will use other means of attacking as to not cause the defender to beige. Guess you could think of it as strategy, if the war is going good for you (money wise is my main concern) then keep it on as long as possible, however if it's not...get in your attacks in and end it.

This would greatly improve the mail system! I agree with this idea 100%

Nuclear plants already cost a ton, making them actually meltdown would make them useless because it wouldn't be worth the risk. However if you tweak them a bit and make them a lot more cost efficient I wouldn't be totally against the idea.

Totally like this idea, have thought so since the start. But I can see how it would be so much work to have it done.

Don't know if it's been suggested before or not, but I would personally like to see a combined alliance GDP somewhere on the alliance page. Pretty useless information I know, but I think it would be cool to see how much an alliance puts out.

Welcome to UPN Iya!

Hartford

Of course there is demand for loans. However there is a major lack of investors. The main reason there is a lack of people actually lending is most...including me...wouldn't trust people 100% to pay it back. I know of a guy who has an interesting system of bonds in place, but again as most people say the difference there is he is an alliance member so the trust level is automatically a lot higher. But my answer to your question is yes, I think it could be a good idea, however there are people out there that would ruin it.

No, I think I do. The people who say it won't cause prices to go up don't have any concept of reality. Plus minimum wage is the bottom line for what you get paid, the goal is to go up not stay there until you are 30. It's practically the main concept of capitalism...better yourself as opposed to doing the bare minimum. If we increase it every time someone complains it just takes away the gratification of getting a raise. And another issue is that employers don't just pay the employees, they also have to pay into the safety nets already in place by the gov that they are required to pay into. So that $2 raise (here it would be about 1.75 if it goes up to 10) would cost an employer more than an additional $2 per hour. But I'm honestly not 100% opposed to raising it, I just think we need to also reform some of the tax code before we do.

People do realize when minimum wage is increased businesses also increase prices to make up for the difference. So it would be counterproductive, the people that it was supposedly going to help end up back in the same situation. However there is also the possibility that they end up in a worse situation because some employers will choose to only keep so many employees. In that situation not only is the person paying higher prices but they also lost their job.

Welcome to P&W!

No no no. I'm saying I agree with the lock. I just think the "dead topic" time should be extended a little longer because a week just doesn't seem long enough for the thread to be considered completely dead.

I see your point but my issue is if you are going to get into trouble for it then there needs to be a better system. It's silly to leave something open if you don't want someone to use it, which is why they need to be closed!

Perhaps to you there is no point but that's not true for everyone. And that's why I say they need an AUTOMATIC way to do it. And as far as lives, of course but being a Mod also has responsibilities, an automatic way would also take care of that as well. Also going off your point on not using one that hasn't been touched in forever, then why keep it on the forum?

First of all I didn't even know that was a rule, perhaps I should have read the rules better. However I find it interesting that you want more usage of forums..but when there are older topics of interest if you post in them you get warned. While I understand certain topics may have no one interested in them, in this case it actually caused more discussion in it...which according to you is what you want. Seems to me that this rule of yours is counterproductive to to what you say you want. And if you really want things to "remain dead" as the Mod said, then maybe you should set up something to automatically remove or lock them. I mean it was actually not far down on my list of posts, last thing I'm going to look at is the last post date. And of course if I read it and like it I'm going to respond regardless of the date. All this does is make me question why I take the time to get on the forum to help promote chat. That said, I think the warnings for this are unjust

Coal seems to be causing problems for a few new players lately!

Even if it was destroyed you may not have it in your report. I had that happen before, it was in my messages but not the war timeline. Dunno though, still some weird things happening in game.

Well I think that's the point. In general one would assume an alliance would want certain people embargoed, especially in the case of war.

Welcome!

Welcome!

Welcome!

Welcome!

Welcome!