Jump to content

Lord Tyrion

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Lord Tyrion last won the day on February 12

Lord Tyrion had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

509 Politician


About Lord Tyrion

  • Rank
    Active Member

Profile Information

  • Leader Name
    Lord Tyrion
  • Nation Name
  • Nation ID

Recent Profile Visitors

651 profile views
  1. Yeah, had I known there was an official vote, I'd have encouraged most of TI to vote no change and that'd have won easily I imagine. Most players don't check the forums, I don't think it's really representative of the entire game, hence why there was only 150 votes or whatever. And you said the people who vote on no change would unite in favour of reducing it by the smallest amount possible. YES. Why shouldn't they have a say in the change then? If you vote for a candidate who isn't a choice in a runoff election, those people get to still vote in the runoff. The option for t
  2. I'm guessing you mean loser and not looser. But anyway, almost all attacks to launch nukes and missiles are when you have no other military left and are defeated, so yes, they are loser weapons. I'm not saying it's not the right move either, if I was getting my ass handed to me in war, I'd be launching them too - but again, generally only if I'm losing. And just because one has pixels to be burned, doesn't make them a pixel hugger. Plenty of nations with pixels love war and are happy to enter war, the pixels can be replaced.
  3. The vote that got the most was no change. Not sure the outcome of the vote wasn't what I wanted, it's that the conclusion of the vote was interpreted pretty oddly. No change outnumbered 25%, 30% and 35% combined. Additionally, if folks had known this was a vote that would have an actual bearing on anything vs a "temperature check" there would have been a lot more votes. It would be like, hey should we elect a new mayor? 50 people vote yes, 49 people vote to keep the old mayor. But then the vote goes: John = 15 votes Steve = 20 votes Dave = 10 votes Mike
  4. Yeah when votes are this close, a poll like this shouldn't dictate anything. You can basically cherry pick whatever result you wanted anyway. First of all, 158 votes is hardly a statistical sample given the thousands of people who play. One AA could have told their members to vote a certain way to influence things pretty heavily. Secondly, the vote to change or not change was separated by SIX votes - hardly something that screams a problem needing to be addressed. Furthermore, only 71 people voted that the percentage should be 25%-35%, whereas 77 people voted no change. How does 30% win
  5. I think these are good changes overall. Some of this will help newer players catch up faster (shorter timer resets) which is good since more and more of the game is city 30+. The war mechanic changes look good too. My only critique would be the missiles and nukes getting stronger, even if they do less resistance damage (that just means you eat more sitting on somebody). I personally feel like they are already overpowered, if not for being able to block some of them.
  6. I'm in favor of nerfing all loser weapons (nukes/missles/soldier suicides).
  7. There's a big difference between asking for peace and offering peace. We're perfectly content continuing, just thought half a billion in damages per KT member was enough of a point and offered an out to ya. I don't know what getting completely zeroed does for you, but as you wish, carry on.
  8. Probably against my better judgement, I'll just say a couple notes here to keep the record straight since multiple people have contacted me about this thread. I still stand 100% behind everything stated in public on this situation and that there was no offensive coalition being formed that we were aware of or a part of. I went back and looked at the date we talked to Lefty since this was when these screenshots are from. That was the day TCW came to us asking to join Swamp and we reached out to Lefty that day to get his opinion around how that would be perceived around the game and the pros
  9. So your original raid wasn't a NAP violation but one late counter is? Nice logic. And if we'd tried to cycle the guy you'd count each of them as a new war and counter each of them and he'd keep coming back for more - he did come back for more, so here we are. We even offered to just peace all those previous wars and walk away but you wanted "a training exercise" for your members. You purposely refused to try to peace the raids today and tried to justify that you can attack any of our members if you deem them appropriate to do so. You wanted this war.
  10. I'll keep this short and sweet. Knights Templar had a member continue to attack Oasis members, their government was asked to peace the wars or boot the member. Last time this member hit us they countered our counters. This was not an isolated incident. The KT gov instead stands by the actions of this member to raid us continually and is in violation of the NAP. Oasis has sent a military response towards KT and recognizes their hostilities towards us.
  11. Cancer is terrible. I hope everything turns out okay for you irl and hopefully we'll see you here again before long, but you're doing the right thing. Take care Tarroc.
  12. All love Atlan, congrats on your retirement and great job on making this game a better place!
  • Create New...

Important Information

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