Princess Seshat

I would like to propose the removal of inactives from the alliance score and member count the same way that vacation members do not count towards it. This would make alliance score more indicative of their actual power, instead of allowing alliances to overinflate their score and member count, and would no longer count those inactives when calculating bank loot. Another benefit is that alliances that are almost completely inactive would no longer show up in the alliance recruitment page since they wouldn't meet the score threshold meaning new players are less likely to attempt to join them only to end up quitting because no one accepts them. Vacation mode members are already treated this way, so I think inactives should be as well since people on vacation mode are more likely to return than them anyways. The term of inactivity I propose for this to take effect is 14 days, the time when you are moved to grey.

Tesla is completely broke, the well ran dry long ago...

^this

I disagree with this completely, no micros means consilidation, stagnation, less wars and less raids. This also makes the game less appealing to large preestablished communities looking to transfer over to this game and many others dont want to be part of an alliance were they are just another cog. What we really need Is for Alex to update the tutorial to stop giving bad advice like building farms too soon and to explain why MFGs should not be produced by new players. As well as explain things like production bonuses & crime better so they will stop building sloppily. And change the starting infra of new cities to 100 instead of 10 so that they can follow the advice of building in 100s without having extra Infra (even if that includes the miniscule price of 10 to 100 infra in the new city cost)

Y'all ain't rising again

How did this make the news?

If you call having 46 greys nations existing then yes. Guy literally has more greys than people on his own color. He just harbors them because If he dropped them he'd go from #47 to #96 and so he can pretend he doesn't run a grey dumpster fire.

Congrazzles to the land of my birth for making peace with Roz Wei and the carribeans! I mean you could still probably do that :3

I thought you got couped from the saviours as well..

Actually resource loot and bank loot many times is worth much more than cash loot and it frees the raider to hit another and force them to surrender. The cash from ground attacks is usually quite negligible in comparison to resource loot especially since if they're active they can (and should) just liquidate the cash if under blockade by dumping it Infra, baseball team, land, etc. And if not blockaded they could just put it in their alliance bank. Another issue with this suggestion is if they decide to send the surrender most likely the alliance bank would be moved to a nation for safekeeping and if not blockaded so would their nation loot. So actually I retract proposed change and oppose the idea entirely. However I will like this post for balance purposes so your reputation isn't low from all the downvotes. Since once negative it usually snowballs from there and gets worse and your ideas aren't necessarily bad it's just that your still pretty new and still learning and I don't want you to be hated for that. Just trust us on this, it seems like a good idea if you don't know better but it's just too easily exploitable even if it required mutual acceptance.

While I like the premise of a surrender option I think it should still have to be accepted by the attacker just like peace. You have to understand that in large scale alliance wars people don't always biege their opponents, they allow it to expire so that more forces can continue the assault and keep them pinned. This would be essentially game breaking if they can biege themselves and rebuild when they otherwise would not be bieged. Another issue is there would be nothing stopping a pirate from building up his infra and improvements then just putting all resources in their bank and just declaring on a bunch of inactives and surrendering to burn the infra away while keeping a large amount of overloaded improvements slots, they would then have a much lower score and could attack nations with much lower city counts than them while maintaining max military improvements. A low infra count trader could also do the same just for the biege shield time so they could put billions in cash & rss into the market without risk of being raided.

I think you should ask alexio

I was gonna go with "ask alexio" but this is kinda funny lol

Another change that should be shown that i forgot about until you mentioned airstrikes is that choosing target units/money should change the max infra destroyed and choosing anything other than dogfight should change max planes destroyed to show the correct values.