Isjaki Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 Recently, there has been a huge influx of new nations into the game, and while this should generally be considered a positive news, most of these nations are inactive nations that are being used as tax farms by various alliances. Alex himself makes three great points against having inactives in alliances (linked at the end if this post). I would like to add further arguments over this, and while removing inactives seems a bit harsh, we certainly can agree upon modifications in taxation. 1. We all dislike inactives. And alliances keeping them around for taxes. There is also a precedence for this principle in game, in making it impossible for gray nations to be taxed. 2. No community interaction. Most if not all of these tax farm nations are inactive and contribute no value to the community in any tangible way. 3. It's unethical. Major alliances like TKR and NPO have the communities and resources large enough to bring in nations that serve as tax farms. This is unfair to micro alliances. 'Winning' the game, per se, should be based on how skilled one is, and not how many tax farms can one pull in. There is a precedence in game for 'fair' behaviour too, as treasure bonuses were nerfed once Treasure Island was formed. While Alex already deletes nations for inactivity, after a certain point of time, in keeping with the principles espoused in point 1 and point 2, it doesn't quite solve the issue raised in point 3. Thus, I would like to propose a modification that would ensure that purple nations (nations inactive for 7+ days in game) cannot be taxed by alliances. I belive this will have the added advantage of incentizing raiding, and solve most issues raised here. This is the post by Alex btw- 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isjaki Posted November 20, 2019 Author Share Posted November 20, 2019 It would appear that this issue was already resolved in nations automatically moving to gray after 2 weeks of inactivity. My bad, I wasn't aware of that. Can this topic be closed please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted November 20, 2019 Administrators Share Posted November 20, 2019 7 hours ago, Isjaki said: It would appear that this issue was already resolved in nations automatically moving to gray after 2 weeks of inactivity. My bad, I wasn't aware of that. Can this topic be closed please? I think it's still worth discussion. While it's true that nations do get moved to gray after going inactive, which removes the ability for them to be taxed, there is an ongoing issue wherein some alliances are having their inactive members intentionally attacked and beiged, allowing them to be taxed again. I think this should end for the same reasons you outlined in your original post. 1 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isjaki Posted November 20, 2019 Author Share Posted November 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, Alex said: I think it's still worth discussion. While it's true that nations do get moved to gray after going inactive, which removes the ability for them to be taxed, there is an ongoing issue wherein some alliances are having their inactive members intentionally attacked and beiged, allowing them to be taxed again. I think this should end for the same reasons you outlined in your original post. Indeed so. A ban on inactivity in general (preventing purple nations from being taxed) would be a better way to end this practice than just being not able to tax gray nations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arawra Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 Perhaps you could classify such instances as slot filling in the future? Quote Look up to the sky above~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted November 20, 2019 Administrators Share Posted November 20, 2019 24 minutes ago, Isjaki said: Indeed so. A ban on inactivity in general (preventing purple nations from being taxed) would be a better way to end this practice than just being not able to tax gray nations. One option is just to remove "beige" as a color, and just add a different way of displaying protection, i.e. "Protected Status" or something. 1 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teaspoon Posted November 20, 2019 Share Posted November 20, 2019 35 minutes ago, Alex said: One option is just to remove "beige" as a color, and just add a different way of displaying protection, i.e. "Protected Status" or something. This would be a good change overall, imo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isjaki Posted November 21, 2019 Author Share Posted November 21, 2019 7 hours ago, Alex said: One option is just to remove "beige" as a color, and just add a different way of displaying protection, i.e. "Protected Status" or something. Yes I think that would be a good change too. 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.