Ashland1 Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 38 minutes ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said: your nation link is broken. ok more war stats.... as of 11/1/18 Out of the top 57 nations with the highest amount of infra killed, only one of them is from the IQ/tS side (congrats Curufinwe of the Black Knights! you are 29!) 21 are from TKR 18 are from grumpy 10 are from guardian 6 are from TWC Given your side didn't counter anywhere, obviously you're going to have your damage less spread out than we did. Each of your nations is hitting three nations while each of our nations is hitting one nation that's getting hit by two other nations. Believe it or not, our war effort is still constrained by basic mathematics and common sense. Unless you'd like to beg for a rules change to that as well... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 6 minutes ago, Ashland1 said: Given your side didn't counter anywhere, obviously you're going to have your damage less spread out than we did. Each of your nations is hitting three nations while each of our nations is hitting one nation that's getting hit by two other nations. Believe it or not, our war effort is still constrained by basic mathematics and common sense. Unless you'd like to beg for a rules change to that as well... You sure are full of excuses, but no so full of war stats in the war stats thread, also your nation link is still broken. War stats! Grim of Guardian as of 11/1/18 has killed the most soldiers during this war, with 3.11 million soldiers killed. You have killed more soldiers than there are people living in Nevada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashland1 Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 1 minute ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said: You sure are full of excuses, but no so full of war stats in the war stats thread, also your nation link is still broken. War stats! Grim of Guardian as of 11/1/18 has killed the most soldiers during this war, with 3.11 million soldiers killed. You have killed more soldiers than there are people living in Nevada. I'm full of excuses? You're the one trying to convince anyone who will listen to look at war stats in literally any way but the way they actually matter or have any significance. You're like a Bernie supporter. "If you count caucus states as being worth twice their normal value, take California out of the equation, and double Vermont you can see that Bernie is actually winning the primary!" The thing is, Sweeeeeeetheart, Bernie lost in the only way that mattered: Reality. And... well... you're losing the same way ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 (edited) Lord you've become a buzz kill Ash, if you want to use math in this logic we honestly shouldnt even be able to fight anymore, even though we have an edge on city count per nation we are vastly outnumbered, you could have gotten 3 nations with 24 cities on me with 34 and if they coordinate properly they would be able to take me down and hold me down for a good bit. As of now my stats for this war aren't bad imo. I need more war though: Infra Soldiers Tanks Planes Ships Cash robbed 97,248.36 2,062,741.00 118,600.00 12,578.00 1,312.00 32,642,536.45 Edited November 3, 2018 by Sephiroth Spelling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefonteen Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 6 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said: your nation link is broken. ok more war stats.... as of 11/1/18 Out of the top 57 nations with the highest amount of infra killed, only one of them is from the IQ/tS side (congrats Curufinwe of the Black Knights! you are 29!) 21 are from TKR 18 are from grumpy 10 are from guardian 6 are from TWC I mean.. you are aware that our upper tier has been limiting its *infra* damage done and letting wars expire rather than beiging/going for max damage right? 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verlion Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 Random nobody's two cents (or three). Surprised to see comments about the joining fee. Any nation that would be able to join Grumpy can afford that by grabbing the loose change from the sofa. I say that as the smallest nation here too, pretty sure no one who realistically wants to and has a chance of joining Grumpy would be turned off by that. Beats the hell out of nonstop taxes. Also surprised to see Seeker of all people commenting on leaving VE and working together, seems a bit ironic given the 'The Viridian Entente' mess you had a giant hand in which ultimately killed off any VE in this game besides you fakes with a new paint job (it's ugly btw). And finally to stay on topic : Go Grumpy and let's keep giving SRD more warstats to brag about! They may drag us down eventually but pretty sure we'll kick their ass all the way. I feel like I should say something cheesy here.... For everyone you take down, we'll take down 10 with us! Seems cheesy enough ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
katashimon13 Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 7 hours ago, Verlion said: Random nobody's two cents (or three). Any nation that would be able to join Grumpy can afford that by grabbing the loose change from the sofa. rawr 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verlion Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 1 hour ago, katashimon13 said: rawr What can I say? I have a lovely Sugar momma. Also note that it was well before I was able to join Grumpy and makes no difference between my ability to afford the entrance fee =). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samwise Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, katashimon13 said: rawr Confirmed: I’m a rich b... :3 Edited November 3, 2018 by Samwise Mo monay, mo gif probs amirite? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowthrone Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 9 hours ago, Verlion said: Beats the hell out of nonstop taxes. Also surprised to see Seeker of all people commenting on leaving VE and working together, seems a bit ironic given the 'The Viridian Entente' mess you had a giant hand in which ultimately killed off any VE in this game besides you fakes with a new paint job (it's ugly btw). Quite certain Seeker's done more to keep that community running and going than one can shit on him for. Also lol, taxes aren't the enemy mate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted November 3, 2018 Share Posted November 3, 2018 34 minutes ago, Shadowthrone said: Quite certain Seeker's done more to keep that community running and going than one can shit on him for. Also lol, taxes aren't the enemy mate. You poor child, indoctrinated by NPO into not being able to make financial decisions about your nation or handle your own resources your entire existence. It's like you are a citizen from North Korea, who has only known a harsh regime and just assumes the rest of the world is the same. Cross that wall child! come out of the dark! It's beautiful outside! Now some more war stats! (guys this is a war stat thread, please post war stats!) Warhawk of Guardian as of 11/1/18 has destroyed the most Tanks, Planes and Ships out of everyone in this war. (damn I came in second on planes and ships...) And has done over 1.5 billion in military damage this war (does not include infra damage) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Roquentin Posted November 4, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted November 4, 2018 (edited) He knows what he signed up and he knows what it's like outside. At the end of the day, we could have easily concentrated resources in boosting people to upper tier if we gave a shit about having big nations for e-peen. The concept has been done to death and we know what's better for long-term sustainability and what isn't. It's not a single player game. If you want to focus on building your own stuff, there's plenty of single player games for that. The only reason your alliance can exist is because of Alex's design flaws as he never anticipated people hording cities to the level you've gotten, which he was going to change in his next game because he realize how flawed people getting as big as possible was. All you've done is boost your e-peen and people are finally sick of you. If everyone acted the way you do, this game would be long dead as no one would aid newer players ever or raise taxes to fund them ever and you would have no one to lord over. I can name more than a dozen micros with low taxes and even if everyone had optimal builds, they would never grow much on their own. It's without a doubt that Seeker has done more to keep the VE community going than 5-6 members who just hoard stuff for themselves and their clique. Edited November 4, 2018 by Roquentin 3 21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sans Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 Damn Roq, I like when you post. You should do it more. Quote “ Life before death. Strength before weakness. Journey before destination. †–The First Ideal of the Windrunners, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Mikey Posted November 4, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted November 4, 2018 (edited) I can't say I agree with the idea that Grumpy are somehow selfish for wanting to be an upper tier only alliance. PW is multiplayer, true, but similar dynamics between elitists/mass members, hard core fighters vs casuals, exists in every online game. Make what you want of it and have fun. For the record, I think NPO is well within its rights to demand whatever it wants from its members, and people who criticize them are misguided. But players are equally within their rights to want something different, and group together accordingly. I would call it selfish to grow in an AA then leave before contributing your part. Maybe SRD specifically did that, and deserved the personal attention. I'm not making judgement one way or another on personal histories I didn't experience. But this is a talking point that has been thrown around before, be it at TEst, Grumpy, Guardian, etc. Similar points get made about how awful people are for being raiders/neutrals/papered/paperless/high taxes/no taxes. War against people you disagree with all you want. Hell, do it often! But trying to convince people, OOC, of the "correct" way to play is never going to go anywhere, because the correct way to play is however the hell you want. Edited November 5, 2018 by Mikey 12 1 Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 42 minutes ago, Mikey said: I can't say I agree with the idea that Grumpy are somehow selfish for preferring to stick with high tier nations and not pay taxes. PW is multiplayer, true, but similar dynamics between elitists/mass members, hard core fighters vs casuals, exists in every online game. Make what you want of it and have fun. For the record, I think NPO is well within its rights to demand whatever it wants from its members, and people who criticize them are misguided. But players are equally within their rights to want something different, and group together accordingly. I would call it selfish to grow in an AA then leave before contributing your part. Maybe SRD specifically did that, and deserved the personal attention. I'm not making judgement one way or another on personal histories I didn't experience. But this is a talking point that has been thrown around before, be it at TEst, Grumpy, Guardian, etc. Similar points get made about how awful people are for being raiders/neutrals/papered/paperless/high taxes/no taxes. War against people you disagree with all you want. Hell, do it often! But trying to convince people, OOC, of the "correct" way to play is never going to go anywhere, because the correct way to play is however the hell you want. Nobody cares if you think it selfish or not. The point isn't simply that it is selfish, but that it is bad for the game in general, the point the creator of said game had started plans on a new one wherein such levels of pixel hoarding are either not possible or give such diminishing returns that it is pointless. The problem with consolidation is not merely the act being selfish, it's the act being harmful to the game and contributing to the same slow death others like it have suffered. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Akuryo said: Nobody cares if you think it selfish or not. The point isn't simply that it is selfish, but that it is bad for the game in general, the point the creator of said game had started plans on a new one wherein such levels of pixel hoarding are either not possible or give such diminishing returns that it is pointless. The problem with consolidation is not merely the act being selfish, it's the act being harmful to the game and contributing to the same slow death others like it have suffered. I don't disagree with you about consolidation in terms of allies, ducking wars, or any of the rest. There is a reason I agreed to join this war. But being opposed to mass consolidation among upper tier nations does not mean being opposed to the existence of upper tier exclusive alliances. You can think they are bad too for their own reason, though you're really in the wrong alliance if that's the case The requirements may be lower than Grumpy, but TEst still has a city requirement, doesn't mass recruit, and probably doesn't dish out a lot of aid to new players either. It may be that Alex wants every alliance to be mixed tier or low tier only. I don't know the mechanics of Statekraft. Though given the strong opposition to many of his mechanical changes over the years, I'm not sure "alex thinks it should be like this" is the be all, end all of game play discussions... Edited November 5, 2018 by Mikey Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeeeet Ronny D Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 As a founding member and officer in PnW VE, I more than paid my way and put way more of my fair share of time in. In case you were wondering. Also how mad did you guys get at WTF for filling my 2nd defensive slot with a 18 city nation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Storm Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 I need to stop getting excited for actual war stats when I see new posts in this thread. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Mikey said: I don't disagree with you about consolidation in terms of allies, ducking wars, or any of the rest. There is a reason I agreed to join this war. But being opposed to mass consolidation among upper tier nations does not mean being opposed to the existence of upper tier exclusive alliances. You can think they are bad too for their own reason, though you're really in the wrong alliance if that's the case The requirements may be lower than Grumpy, but TEst still has a city requirement, doesn't mass recruit, and probably doesn't dish out a lot of aid to new players either. It may be that Alex wants every alliance to be mixed tier or low tier only. I don't know the mechanics of Statekraft. Though given the strong opposition to many of his mechanical changes over the years, I'm not sure "alex thinks it should be like this" is the be all, end all of game play discussions... We built up 2 nations from nothing to 18ish cities. We aid people when we find the right people. 5 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said: As a founding member and officer in PnW VE, I more than paid my way and put way more of my fair share of time in. In case you were wondering. Also how mad did you guys get at WTF for filling my 2nd defensive slot with a 18 city nation? Not at all. He was ordered to hit you. You're not worth players time outside of WTF/FARK at the moment. Edited November 5, 2018 by Prefontaine 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Prefontaine said: We built up 2 nations from nothing to 18ish cities. We aid people when we find the right people. Fair enough, in that way you contribute more than Grumpy. But it doesn't change that TEst is still an upper tier oriented alliance which does many of the things prior posters were complaining about. And indeed, has been singled out for the same criticism by some of those same posters. I just don't agree that it is inherently bad for an alliance to be mostly, if not exclusively, upper tier. I brought you up because I found it funny someone in TEst disagreed, when you guys have been subject to the same unfounded criticism. Maybe it was just a misunderstanding of what I meant. The consolidation of so many upper tier nations allying together and avoiding challenges is a problem, not the choice of internal membership policy. Edited November 5, 2018 by Mikey Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, Mikey said: Fair enough, in that way you contribute more than Grumpy. But it doesn't change that TEst is still an upper tier oriented alliance which does many of the things prior posters were complaining about. And indeed, has been singled out for the same criticism by some of those same posters. I just don't agree that it is inherently bad for an alliance to be exclusively upper tier, and found it funny that someone in TEst disagreed, especially when in the past you guys have been subject to similar complaints. The consolidation among the sheer number of upper tier nations between Grumpy and its allies, yeah that is a problem. The lack of action and the goal of sitting atop and never being challenged. But I don't think the internal membership requirements are an issue. We have also built up multiple nations as well when we feel we want them to be part of our core, (Verlion is an example of this and he proudly showed it), we like the idea of being self autonomous because in Grumpy no one obligates you to do anything, you can invest in whatever you like, personally if I find people in the community that I like I teach them the ropes, if anyone asks me for advice I explain to them how things work, and I also like investing in smaller alliances that I find agreeable. just because we sit at the top doesn't mean we do nothing, we simply arent the type to want to take credit for every little thing we do. *Except SRD, he loves to take credit for his war stats every time a war comes around* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 (edited) Fine, you build people too I don't know the internals of all the alliances, which is why in the first post I specifically mentioned I wasn't saying anybody was or wasn't selfish, uncontributing, etc. Because I honestly don't and can't know. Unfortunately that got seized upon and my ignorance came out. Apologies. But I stand by the point that there is nothing inherently wrong with having an upper tier alliance or preferring to be apart of such an alliance vs being in a mass member AA with high taxes and heavy redistribution, a point which in often made and has been made here by certain individuals oriented that way. Edited November 5, 2018 by Mikey Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zei-Sakura Alsainn Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 1 hour ago, Mikey said: I don't disagree with you about consolidation in terms of allies, ducking wars, or any of the rest. There is a reason I agreed to join this war. But being opposed to mass consolidation among upper tier nations does not mean being opposed to the existence of upper tier exclusive alliances. You can think they are bad too for their own reason, though you're really in the wrong alliance if that's the case The requirements may be lower than Grumpy, but TEst still has a city requirement, doesn't mass recruit, and probably doesn't dish out a lot of aid to new players either. It may be that Alex wants every alliance to be mixed tier or low tier only. I don't know the mechanics of Statekraft. Though given the strong opposition to many of his mechanical changes over the years, I'm not sure "alex thinks it should be like this" is the be all, end all of game play discussions... Don't even try and compare the two. TEst is upper tier. Grumpy is whales. Being mostly upper tier or even whales is not inherently bad, unless you happen to be allied with people who are also mostly upper tier. Which is literally what has been being said this entire time and the only way to miss that to be denser than tungsten. TEst isn't as bad as GoB because TEst does not hide behind a majority of the game's upper tier in just a couple alliances. GoB does. It's called consolidation. Yanno, a fancy word said throughout the thread, that you seem to miss. So we'll say it again for you. The real problem people have is the consolidation. Okay? Does that make sense? I hope it does, because it's not hard and it's been said a thousand times. Please hold off acting like you're saying anything new or enlightening when you're not actually addressing the core complaint. Not that GoB's existence is particularly good anyway, they're just slowly building out of range of the rest of the game, which means they'll be irrelevant aside from funding whichever side they want soon enough. Most people don't seem to care for the idea of [insert spooky group of rich people conspiracy nuts talk about] actually existing ingame and actually controlling fare more power than just a few people should have. Again, can't see where the difficulty in understanding this is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey Posted November 5, 2018 Share Posted November 5, 2018 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Akuryo said: Don't even try and compare the two. TEst is upper tier. Grumpy is whales. Being mostly upper tier or even whales is not inherently bad, unless you happen to be allied with people who are also mostly upper tier. Which is literally what has been being said this entire time and the only way to miss that to be denser than tungsten. TEst isn't as bad as GoB because TEst does not hide behind a majority of the game's upper tier in just a couple alliances. GoB does. It's called consolidation. Yanno, a fancy word said throughout the thread, that you seem to miss. So we'll say it again for you. The real problem people have is the consolidation. Okay? Does that make sense? I hope it does, because it's not hard and it's been said a thousand times. Please hold off acting like you're saying anything new or enlightening when you're not actually addressing the core complaint. Not that GoB's existence is particularly good anyway, they're just slowly building out of range of the rest of the game, which means they'll be irrelevant aside from funding whichever side they want soon enough. Most people don't seem to care for the idea of [insert spooky group of rich people conspiracy nuts talk about] actually existing ingame and actually controlling fare more power than just a few people should have. Again, can't see where the difficulty in understanding this is. For somebody who clearly didn't read anything I wrote, you sure are angry about it The posts that precede mine are people (seeker/roq/sephiroth/srd) arguing about the legitimacy of upper tier alliances. It was claimed that the mere act of being an upper tier exclusive alliance is selfish and bad for the game. That it is wrong for large nations to want to avoid high taxes or redistribution to newer players. I disagreed. This exact same argument has been made against your alliance, which is why I found it funny you are supporting it. Consolidation is irreverent to that question, as it is an entirely separate issue. You can be upper tier and not try and consolidate the entire tier together to avoid war. You can be mid or lower tier and attempt to do exactly that. If you honestly feel I am the idiot you make me out to be, so be it. But maybe criticize what i actually say, rather than lecture me on a separate topic. Especially when I have already publicly taken your same position lol Edited November 5, 2018 by Mikey Quote Archduke Tyrell, Lord of Highgarden, Lord Paramount of the Reach, Warden of the South, Breaker of Forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Roquentin Posted November 5, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted November 5, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Mikey said: I can't say I agree with the idea that Grumpy are somehow selfish for wanting to be an upper tier only alliance. PW is multiplayer, true, but similar dynamics between elitists/mass members, hard core fighters vs casuals, exists in every online game. Make what you want of it and have fun. For the record, I think NPO is well within its rights to demand whatever it wants from its members, and people who criticize them are misguided. But players are equally within their rights to want something different, and group together accordingly. I would call it selfish to grow in an AA then leave before contributing your part. Maybe SRD specifically did that, and deserved the personal attention. I'm not making judgement one way or another on personal histories I didn't experience. But this is a talking point that has been thrown around before, be it at TEst, Grumpy, Guardian, etc. Similar points get made about how awful people are for being raiders/neutrals/papered/paperless/high taxes/no taxes. War against people you disagree with all you want. Hell, do it often! But trying to convince people, OOC, of the "correct" way to play is never going to go anywhere, because the correct way to play is however the hell you want. It's by definition selfish in the way GOB have always acted and advertised themselves. "This is for big nations who take care of themselves. "We don't care about your problems or your crap and we don't want to deal with small nations." was their alliance description several times. It was formed by people who were from recruiting alliances and didn't feel it was worth their time anymore. Most of the other upper tier oriented alliances started out as smaller organizations and aren't splinters. TEst never was a high membercount nor a splinter alliance. You're also missing how the discussion how started. Thatguy was used an example of an inefficiency/flaw in GoG for preferring to not let him to just grow endlessly. They were also criticized for taking chances on their own newer members and VE and later GoG have engaged in tiering where the bigger nations got nothing out of it multiple times. Seeker was also later excoriated for non-stop taxing people to spend on people who may or not work out well. The smaller membercount model where the emphasis is on growing a smaller number of people is the prevalent one in P&W so it'd be ridiculous to convince to sell people on an OOC argument when it's already a lost one, but what most of them don't do is pretend that it's the only show in town and nothing else is worth doing. Over the past few years, there has been an attitude shift as more people got into the upper echelons and consolidated together that the upper tier of the game is the real game and that the other people don't really have much of an impact so if you want to play for real, you need to whale up. That's certainly not a positive trend and it's up to the community to see that as it's inherently exclusionary and alienating for anyone who isn't upper tier and that's what will happen in any game where that becomes the prevalent ideal. I'm not trying to sell GOB on anything. Their model only works because other people are willing to shoulder the costs of newer players or else it'd be a pretty isolated setting where they'd have nothing to brag about and no one to be bigger except the other supertier and eventually enough of them would just go inactive in a daisy chain or get beaten down by other super tiers and quit. In order for an alliance to be "an elite upper tier" alliance, there have to be non-elite alliances. I'm not trying to sell anyone on our alliance model. It would be pretty boring if everyone did the same thing, but recruiting alliances and people who are willing to spend on people are overall helpful to the game. There are ways elite players can contribute and some have in the past by loaning to newer alliances, but then that means someone else is taxing high to enforce the loans on an alliance level. I've never said everyone should do the same but it's doing more to grow the community than an elite old boys club of people who were gov together in a previous alliance. 3 hours ago, Mikey said: I don't disagree with you about consolidation in terms of allies, ducking wars, or any of the rest. There is a reason I agreed to join this war. But being opposed to mass consolidation among upper tier nations does not mean being opposed to the existence of upper tier exclusive alliances. You can think they are bad too for their own reason, though you're really in the wrong alliance if that's the case The requirements may be lower than Grumpy, but TEst still has a city requirement, doesn't mass recruit, and probably doesn't dish out a lot of aid to new players either. It may be that Alex wants every alliance to be mixed tier or low tier only. I don't know the mechanics of Statekraft. Though given the strong opposition to many of his mechanical changes over the years, I'm not sure "alex thinks it should be like this" is the be all, end all of game play discussions... It follows from the specific alliance model that the goal will be to limit damage as much as possible to avoid growth being encumbered and that you'll always succeed. If you're selling people on always succeeding and do well all the time, then you can't avoid mass consolidation. There are definitely lower membercount alliances where this is not the goal, but their growth will be significantly depressed. Pretty sure TEst was called out for not being a "real upper tier alliance" and being only upper-mid since it no longer had the edge in the upper tier it previously had. Any "upper tier" alliance that has more of a fighting emphasis will no longer have that advantage in the future. There's a difference between just not recruiting and actively touting your system as the best and attracting all the people who just want to grow and not do much else. It's ultimately if you want a game where there are more than a handful people around, someone is going to have to bite the bullet on newer players. In P&W there is no way for someone to grow endlessly if they're heavily subsidizing someone else. Otherwise, it's just a sandbox for a select group and that's not really any different than a single player individual game as opposed to a team game. The conclusion of GOB principles being universalized is a sub-500 player browser game where everyone is statsmaxing as much as possible is good. Edited November 5, 2018 by Roquentin 8 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.