Majima Goro

Can we make it so that stagnation causes cities to "rot"? Like if stagnation gets past a certain limit, say 100, then the city just gets destroyed?

This is just sheepy trying to make the game active. Don't fall for the lies people!

I agree.

The option only works when you've already lost a war and are in beige. Usually, if you've lost a war, your military is almost completely totalled. To add to this, you need to also have losing wars. If you have close wars, then this won't help you.

Yes, I would be more in favor of a system which helps you while at war rather than when you are off war. The idea is that if you have already lost all your wars, you have enough time to rebuild as is. A faster rate of recruitment just means you get out faster. And if people were to just cycle you, then such an advantage has no significance. Rather, my proposal helps to "bait beige" or at best, turn the tides with a higher recruitment ratio. For example, a 50% faster recruitment rate would mean a c20 would have the same buying power as a c30, helping them buy and smack around harder, esp if they are fighting people at their city count or lower.

Is it possible to scale the % military buff with the number of losing wars one has while beiged. If one has say 5 people sitting on them while beiged, a +25% buff isn't going to help. Instead, if the buff was scaled with wars to a +100% cap, that would let one at least fight back harder, forcing either more beiges or winning some wars. Scaling could work as a flat +20% modifier per defensive war and a +10% per offensive war, capped at +100%(including PB buff). Note that the percentages are used for example only and can be varied as needed. Losing war = Where you have 30 less resistance than your opponent, irrespective of whether it is a defensive or offensive war.

Oh okay, then don't change it

Only if you can buy more than 1 missile a day. Unless there has been a change in the mechanics and by default you can buy 2 missiles per day with the MLP alone

I think missiles are severly nerfed from the point of view of their MAP usage. Currently, if you have NRF, you can beige someone with 4 nukes. But if you only have MLP, you cannot beige someone with missiles only. I would like to see the cost of missiles go down to 6 MAPs or their resistance shredder go up to 20 resistance.

I am willing to act as arbitrator. Pls send me the rss till we can decide the validity of your claims

How is it an Arrghiversary if you aren't mass-raiding Rose or smth!!!!

I disagree with all of these projects

The only improvement in TCM seems to be their newfound ability to use punctuations

Step 1: Get Bank Access Step 2: Send Bank to BABAI WHALE FUNDS STEP 3: ???? STEP 4: PROFIT

Me like this. It help Black Market Trading, i.e, people selling via proxies.

I am of the view that all cities above 20 should mandatorily need credits to be built. 21 needs 5 credits, 22 needs 7 and so on with increments of 2 credits. Ofc, you'll also need to spend 4 credits to reset the timer.

If dTC pretends to a kawaii girl, maybe he'll have more success getting spy ops done

How does it matter? It is all public anyway!

Since spies can be pulled with the API, might also want to show those ig

Yes, ET would volunteer for this

Expressing hateful ideologies and propagating hateful ideologies are a different thing though. In one, you are just telling why you hate a certain group while the latter is about you trying to get others to follow along with your ideologies and hate certain groups. My question really is: Is having prejudices against certain communities and expressing them against the rules? We will a hundred percent assume the person is just telling they don't like a certain community and believe the right way for things to be done is some other way while in no way harassing members of that community or trying to turn others to harassing them. As an example(please treat this as an example only), if I were to say I don't agree with the lifestyle of gay people and believe homosexuality to be unnatural, is this against the rules? I am not trying to turn anyone away from living their life as homosexuals but I also refuse to affirm to their lifestyles basically in this statement. I truly believe being able to express opinions is a human right as long as said person is not actively trying to transform others' opinions through coercion and harassment.

I know this is a no-discussion forum but I want a clarification of this rule. Am I to believe that showing a dislike for a certain group of people, even if it is personal and in no way being enforced by me on others, a violation of rules. For example, if I say I am not very comfortable around group X or that I do not support group Y, would that be consider as rule-breaking? I truly believe some of the rules are very vaguely defined and the moderators use their own discretion and bias when deciding cases. At times, this leads to people inadvertently breaking rules and getting banned when the rule was never defined in the first place. The greater reason a more codified rule system is needed is because people come from different walks of life and regions with different belief systems. While I am not against moral policing enforced by the liberal west, at least I would like to know the rules I shouldn't break before being banned because my regions' traditions didn't match the western values.

Just make it so that beige doesn't reduce till all wars have defensive wars have expired. No need to make any other changes other than this really.

We should remove superiorities completely. My reasoning is simple: The reason there are problems with superiorities is because superiorities are a thing. Removing them will automatically remove all other problems associated with them. Superiorities benefit the larger army. And removing superiorities makes it easier for smaller armies to deal more damage to larger armies.