Jump to content

Salvarity

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    55

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Salvarity

    Wayward: TSoJLJ

    in Alliance Affairs

    Posted · Edited by Salvarity

    On 9/8/2022 at 6:41 AM, Avakael said:

    Why is he in underwhelming tree alliance?

    I am a man of many mysteries, some even incomprehensible to myself.

     

    Anyways congrats to the affected parties, or condolences depending on how your next war goes.

    Development Team Update, January 2022.

    in Game Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Salvarity

    2 hours ago, Prefontaine said:

    Research and Development Center

    • This project provides two project slots (net: one additional project slot)
    • Costs $50,000,000 - 100,000 Food - 5,000 Aluminum - 1,000 Uranium

    So to clarify, if I build this, I get to build two more projects? 

    Say I'm city whatever and I use slot 20 to build this, then slot 21 and 22 become available? 

    Or do I only get slot 21.

     

    nvm answered above

    • Popular Post
    • Popular Post

    An Appeal to The Syndicate

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    For reference I am not gov nor I have ever been gov. My experience in NationSims is pretty much entirely from NationStates and I have not actively played that game in two years, but I have been in PnW since before Knightfall.

     

    -------

     

    Can you really unironically single out the Syndicate as a problem spot for childish behavior in this game? This game has always been toxic and edgy to its core. With moderation that does not care about anything as long as you avoid swearing. We have some pretty casual racism from YangMoment on the prior page and the OP is literally named Horsecock. Neither of which will be addressed by moderation and I imagine the wider community prefers it that way. We could argue about the morality of us not having a problem with that, but that's not the argument here. Eumir acts like an Eumir on the forums and Discord, but I do not think he's the t$ member that's really being targeted in the OP.

    Childishness is nothing new to NationSims and toxic childishness is nothing new to Politics and War.

    And you must admit the ideas you're parroting are pretty childish in and of themselves. The idea of fair fights and wars for fun, is childish and frankly boring. I am incredibly disappointed at the lack of political narratives and the continued attempts to smash any narratives that arise. I liked t$ vs GG. I was disappointed when I heard our FA was trying to make peace. Having actual grievances and narratives, linked to the actual game, is much more interesting than pairing off to fight over nothing every three months. GG got us here, we'll get them back eventually, or maybe we don't, who knows.

     

    You said yourself that you never use political drama as a reason for war. That is not a good thing. If your idea of fun is simply fair fights and being mechanically better than your opponent, then play CSGO or something.

     

    I see others have already jumped on the NPO comparison. I have mixed feelings about the NPO boogeyman and can't strongly argue in either direction. 

     

    I really want to offer condemnation of your highlighting of forum participation and other forms of participation as a problem. The rest of the game seems to be under a gag order, is that an t$ problem or a them problem? I make posts on the forums from time to time and upvote stuff. Which has never been an issue. It is understood to simply be my prerogative as a player to do so. If the rest of the game wants to combat the narratives set by us, comment and post, and let your members post. We do not outnumber you all. Everyone here is capable of independent thought. 

     

    And since I can't help myself but continue typing. I'll say that my military is still intact, I have not swapped to nuke turreting as of yet and I have not received any grief for that. Certain strategies beget the situation. I really don't know what you expected the gameplan for us to be. I do not do milcom, but it's blatantly obvious we cannot contain GGs upper tier. The literal turn after the blitz we had SRD 10 city downdeclaring on Tarroc. The mechanics have changed, they're changing again after this war. We're being competent and adapting. We have not surrendered.

     

    I hope we make life hell for TKR's middle and lower tiers.

    ---

    tl:dr no u, t$ best alliance, I will singlehandedly destroy GG

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 7
    • Downvote 8

    A Treatise on the Current War

    in Alliance Affairs

    Posted

    12 minutes ago, Charles Bolivar said:

    I'm not making any argument. I'm instead saying Justin should actually read Hodor's post and address the points which Hodor raised before summarily dismissing Hodor's very relevant points.

    Guardian also operates differently than grumpy when it comes to economic policies aimed at encouraging upper tier growth. We have somewhat significantly high taxes (I'm paying 28% last I checked) but we get a good return for these same taxes with these taxes being invested back into city growth allowing for shorter turnaround time between city purchases. Compound growth is just grand. TKR I believe use an entirely different strategy, one which I believe still uses elements of an economic policy I implemented 4-5 years ago ( or they did anyway 18 months ago, I'm not sure if they still do use the same system which rewarded upper tier nations who invested in the alliance's bank with tax reductions).

    The point I'm making, is that there exist multiple strategies for dealing with the very real issue of retaining an upper tier in addition to growing it. But just using the same CB over and over again hoping for a military solution when the issue is primarily an economic one is just missing the point entirely.

    Every alliance naturally needs to devise a strategy which caters to their own needs, and you are correct in that Grumpy's FA approach is reflected in their econ strategy. But just taking the easy option of declaring war and hoping for the best when it's what, the 3rd or 4th time it's been tried with little success is just a fruitless endeavour with diminishing returns. 

    Tldr: economic problems require economic solutions.

     

    I'll be honest, from your description of Guardian's policy, it sounds worse than what t$ has, I am not sure if the exact policies are opsec or not, so I'll refrain from discussing it further. 

     

    But you can't just dismiss this as an economic problem and one that demands an economic solution when you yourself acknowledge that Grumpy's FA approach is built to reflect their economic strategy. If their economic strategy is built on encouraging a foreign affairs meta that unfairly benefits Grumpy, then the responsible response is a foreign affairs response that shifts the meta in a way that is not beneficial to Grumpy. Fundamentally, I think us warring them is a good response. 

     

    I am not party to any negotiations going on, but I hope reparations as a clause are brought back. They seem to be an obvious way to shift the FA meta in a way that is detrimental to an alliance whose appeal is partially built upon zero taxes. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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

  I accept