Jump to content

elsuper

Members
  • Content Count

    385
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

144 Excellent

1 Follower

About elsuper

  • Rank
    Hedonism Bot

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Leader Name
    ElSuper
  • Nation Name
    Finisterre
  • Nation ID
    14301
  • Alliance Name
    Cornerstone
  1. Exactly; and sometimes that life coincides with server update.
  2. What if 1/12 of recruitment capacity updated every turn, stacking up to the current daily limit, as opposed to all of it once per day ? There is currently some advantage to focusing replenishment and attacks at server-midnight; this would provide a bit more scheduling flexibility to players without having to worry about missing out on that arbitrary advantage, and also reduce server strain at that time. This could obviously not apply to missiles and nukes.
  3. There are 2 other things that would need to be changed for this to work as intended: 1.) Spies would have to not contribute to score (they're negligible right now, so I don't see this as a big deal). 2.) The number of defending spies can be somewhat inferred from the odds of a successful attack. You'd need to make spy success odds opaque as well if you really wanted to have no idea how many spies someone has.
  4. IMO, it's important to remember that the New Testament was written when Christianity was an underground, minority movement. All of its commands refer to how the body of believers should behave toward one another, not how they should exercise dominion over non-believers in their society, one way or the other. This forms neither a solid basis for moralistic theocracy, nor for religiously-influenced state socialism. The New Testament simply does not tell Christians how a nation should be governed, because the idea of Christians governing a nation was a pipe dream at that time. As far as the O
  5. I think this could have a lot of potential to add depth to the market, but it would need to be done very carefully, and the obligatory "we have bigger problems, so let's worry about adding stuff later"
  6. Half those things you said apply to P&W.
  7. Well, your question assumes that the earth is round, because if it were flat there would be no such thing as going "around" the planet, only "over" it. I think the more important question would be "where is the edge?" But really, people have gone up to space and looked down and taken thousands of pictures of the round earth, which we can look at. Even if a person thinks science is some huge conspiracy, it takes a special level of delusional narcissism for one to sincerely think they've caught on to some great secret coverup surrounding this.
  8. This site is a disturbing example of Poe's Law. It seems too crass to be sincere.
  9. Would you consider a Pyrrhic victory to be a misnomer, i.e. not defensibly a victory (winning)? I consider there to be a difference between having a victory and having that victory be worthwhile. Although it could also be, as you said, a matter of short-term vs. long-term. That is, you can defeat your enemy in every way you consider important, but spend so much doing so that another enemy will overtake you.
  10. I think "winning" should be defined by a given side's completion of its own goals, and must therefore considered subjective. Victory could be considered proportional, though, to the number or relative importance of goals achieved, rather than an all-or-nothing proposition. Taking the topic of superpower wars in the thread this spun out of: it is my personal belief that a shooting war between nuclear-armed states carries a high risk of escalating to the use of those nuclear arms. Both sides are capable of fulfilling a goal of inflicting massive damage to the other, but not of fulfilling the
  11. One thing I question is the psychological effectiveness of missiles as a deterrent. War is already expensive and wasteful, and the people who go looking for it aren't always concerned about preserving their pixels. If they were, they wouldn't be looking for a fight in the first place. It might occasionally factor into a long-term calculation about which target to select, but only in situations where the aggressor is thinking "yeah, I hate that guy, but I don't hate him enough to take that much damage in order to roll him..." Generally, if there's a beef or a CB, I'd expect to see a war
  12. I would support a simpler version of this, in which the player may trade off a higher crime rate for a higher population defensive bonus.
  13. I find Descartes' "I think therefore I am" to be pretty compelling. But if, somehow, we don't actually exist, why would that preclude God from existing?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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