Jump to content

Cooper_

Members
  • Content Count

    224
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Cooper_ last won the day on September 3 2019

Cooper_ had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

686 Politician

3 Followers

About Cooper_

  • Rank
    Defender of Truth

Profile Information

  • Leader Name
    Cooper
  • Nation Name
    Cooperia
  • Nation ID
    119113
  • Alliance Name
    The Knights Radiant

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name
    cooper#5982

Recent Profile Visitors

1252 profile views
  1. Yes, our discussion was a lively one, Hope.
  2. Ok before this whole reps debacle continues, I think it’s important to note the point of reps isn’t to give some sort of economic advantage to the winner but rather to punish a losing side for what was seen as unfair play. We’re talking about putting 50 billion in reps, @Do Not Fear Jazz you know I love you man but 30 ain’t much different, on a coalition that entered preemptively or was hit in the case of T$. @Alexio15 has the logs on the validity of the CB, so we’re talking about rightful warfare here. And for a time, coalition B won and accomplished its war goals which were to damage Chaos albeit on Chaos’ timeline versus rebuild. There isn’t a pretext for reps between the constant stalling and purposeful attrition coalition B has engaged in. Rather, what this is, is a shameful corruption of yet another precedent by OD in how peace negotiations function. Illegitimate CBs, breaking treaties, breaking NAPs wasn’t enough. Every political institution we know is being exploited for the sake of realpolitik, and this is ironic given that NPO are the ones who espouse an ideology of working within a formalized framework. If Polar got it’s bank hit, that is their fault no matter how much their FA gov might be great or want it back. War better and play better. Don’t utilize reps for something their not meant for because assuredly you’re setting a precedent that won’t be helpful for anyone, including you, in the future. Its shameful really how desperate things have become. Shame on everyone who wishes to instigate this dynamic and allow for reps to be a vehicle for personal piggybank, and I hope you don’t have to experience it as a taste of your own medicine.
  3. I mean revenue is almost directly proportional to city count, and in this metric NPO beats all. I think pre-war NPO was at 2800 cities, most at 2k infra. You're talking about basically 2 billion per day, and the alliance collects ALL of it. With BK, it's a similar story in the range of 1.7 billion at 2400, 2k infra cities. Pre-war TKR had a lot of cities below 2k infra and wasn't at full capacity yet with 1900 cities, so likely around 1 billion. T$ was around 1700 cities albeit at higher infra levels, so probably closer to 1.5 billion. In the previous two examples though, their taxes aren't even close to 100/100. This whole debate about wealth is stupid because in terms of actually wealth generation, no one has or is beating NPO, BK and GOONS. Once those GOONS are tiered to C15 and eventually C20 at 2k infra, that's probably the better part of 10 billion a day between just those three alliances. Every single day of peace, these alliances tier closer and closer to the upper tier and generate more revenue in a more efficiently-used manner. Forcing my members and those of Coalition A to pay for the advancement of NPO from 2 cities to 3 cities ahead of TKR in average city count isn't really solving things just further entrenching the wealth creation divide that exists right now. Props to NPO for having a great econ, but don't gaslight us into thinking that you're somehow poor given that you're literally the only alliance in the game who can single-handedly fund an entire coalition.
  4. Yeah, that makes sense, but there is still the other option, which is to not consider that stockpile up of resources up to what is required for manufacturing to be considered net production under taxes. It seems kind of silly to have to continuously shuffle resources that are taxed from the nation back to the nation if the goal is to produce manufacturing goods (with the required raws being produced concurrently. I guess this could be a specific tax option or general policy, but it’s make the life of some our Econ staff much easier given that they’d have to be shuffling resources for dozens of people to maintain some of our builds.
  5. Hi, I'm not exactly sure how the tax system works, but I was hoping @Alex could give some clarification if not fix this problem. There are nations that produce a manufacturing good and the necessary raw goods, and are self-sufficient. When these nations are put on X/100 taxes though, they don't produce the manufacturing goods because there are no raws. These nations instead just provide the raws they would produce for manufacturing as just raws, which gets taxed away. Despite, producing the raws they need for manufacturing, they can't actually produce them because they can't build up a stockpile. My guess is that it has to do the with order in which calculations are being done. I was hoping that either taxes on raws wouldn't consider those being used for manufacturing as net positive and therefore taxable or that manufacturing could not just use stockpiles on the nation but also take the raws being produced that turn. It makes the whole tax system a lot more complicated if this isn't fixed, and I imagine this is mostly a QoL issue.
  6. This message has been nerd-approved. Nope, definitely not a coincidence.
  7. Seriously man? You're working with people who have tried to destroy my community and you're asking how much I enjoy trying to fricking keep it together? Not cool.
  8. Bro, add some spoilers. My eyes died five times trying to get through the signatures. -------- To everyone who peaced out, it was fun while it lasted. Horsemen, especially, @Raoul Duke y'all were great, and you got a great vibe going. Good luck and on to the future! P.S. Anyone trying to use their peace as a propaganda tactic is misinformed on the circumstances (on both sides), and arguably just as bad as the reason this happened in the first place. Let's be civil and respectful o7
  9. @SixSadistic66 What some members of (what are we calling them? TcW-sphere?) said about your alliance and you personally were unacceptable. I'm sorry that you were put in such a position. Enjoy your rebuild, and perhaps next time we can meet on the field of battle under better circumstances.
  10. I humbly pledge myself to the cause of Bo. May he prosper in death as much as he did in life... I wish we had more time together. @Redarmy don't leave me hun.
  11. Yes, and I immediately contacted @Lorhill with the following conversation. As I've told Leo in DMs, I don't release logs that could potentially be OPSEC and out-of-context. Nonetheless, I made my suspicions known.
  12. One concern here is that wars would then become a lot more focused on warchests and how you can keep people engaged versus actual tactics and fighting. This just seems to compromise a lot of the strategy of war. Instead of removing beige, I think a cool idea would be to add some sort of attrition metric (I'm thinking something like EUIV war exhaustion). A nation could have a beige counter on it that increases by 1 point for each beige, and it maybe decreases by one point every 5 days. Each point of attrition reduces maximum military capacity by 5% with a cap at 15 points of attrition. Then, beige still gives the strategic advantage of allowing someone to rebuild, but also in succession beiges will slowly impede a war effort. This also helps to force wars to end. Also, these numbers are just an example and open to change. Alternatively, the attrition could directly affect population, which would lower econ and military simultaneously.
  13. Thanks @Aero for informing how much of a pile sh** this thread has become, so while this is all very intriguing its not germane to the topic. @Chief Wiggum please lock the thread before it gets worse.
  14. I'm quite jealous of the love that @Princess Adrienne receives as Jazz's PnW Queen. He is a nice person.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.