From the desk of Prefontaine

[Shellhound]

What happens if you're paperless and !@#$ happens?  Sounds messy.

Unbelievably so

[Tenages]

What happens if you're paperless and !@#$ happens?  Sounds messy.

 

We use Cody's pants to clean it up.

[Cody K]

We use Cody's pants to clean it up.

 

There isn't a mess big enough that my pants can't clean up. 

 

 

What's especially troubling with the current two spheres in the game is that they're operating in such a subpar manner. A Cold War scenario between two spheres with several smaller, satellite groups wouldn't be that terrible if we had the leadership that could effectively run their alliances while politicking. Right now we're stuck with groups that couldn't put together a decent casus belli if it was shoved down their throats or elect to tell everybody and their brothers about their spying habits.   

[Saru]

You're all acting as if EoS/VoC/UPN signed when we were all at the top. That isn't the case. EoS was tiny when we first signed with them, and UPN was fairly small aswell, and got involved into several wars with bigger opponents. VoC was the only out and out "superpower" that we signed with. We worked together towards Alpha, with all the stuff that went down in the VoC war, and built a strong relationship, and saw no reason to not carry it over into this phase too. We were cautious when signing our treaties in the early stages too, to make sure that we don't just ally everyone.

 

Also the growth of the game is going to be determined primarily by how it's advertised, and how many players we can bring in. Growth hasn't been great recently, and that's the issue, not the sphere's.

[Phiney]

Please can we get a consistent story at least. One second its ppc never existed in the delta, the next is it was carried over. Nothing that happened before delta should influence delta, so no, you were not small when anything was signed.

[ooohu]

At the very least, both of you should be tapping into your other-game alliance bases and advertising that there is a major war going on and new bodies are needed. It'll hopefully entice them to join in and once they see how good this game is compared to (That terrible game that is totally irrelevant and I shouldn't be bringing it up anyways) and how much potential it could have they'll probably stay.

 

Everyone's gotta do their part to see this place grow, or we'll see it die out like every other nation sim startup.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Thulium

[Saru]

Please can we get a consistent story at least. One second its ppc never existed in the delta, the next is it was carried over. Nothing that happened before delta should influence delta, so no, you were not small when anything was signed.

 

I can only talk for UPN, and we have been consistent with our "story" throughout.

 

You do not get to determine how we play the game. Just as we built our alliances in those phases and grew our membership, we also developed relationships. It is your prerogative to decide what approach TEst took in regards to carrying over any possible relationships over from alpha, but you do not get to dictate our foreign policy... 

[ooohu]

I can only talk for UPN, and we have been consistent with our "story" throughout.

 

You do not get to determine how we play the game. Just as we built our alliances in those phases and grew our membership, we also developed relationships. It is your prerogative to decide what approach TEst took in regards to carrying over any possible relationships over from alpha, but you do not get to dictate our foreign policy... 

I don't think anyone's dictating anything... they're simply criticizing actions taken to the detriment of the rest of the world. You're well within your right to do as you please with your alliance affairs but expecting people not to be critical of blatant power-mongering is either incredibly naive or entirely disingenuous. Seeing as your alliance and allies represent a sizable force in this world it's only natural you get picked at by the rest of us... it simply comes with the territory you and yours occupy.

[Shellhound]

I think the main issue was that you'd get different answers from different PPC alliances, and sometimes different answers from the same alliance depending on who you asked.

[Saru]

I don't think anyone's dictating anything... they're simply criticizing actions taken to the detriment of the rest of the world. You're well within your right to do as you please with your alliance affairs but expecting people not to be critical of blatant power-mongering is either incredibly naive or entirely disingenuous. Seeing as your alliance and allies represent a sizable force in this world it's only natural you get picked at by the rest of us... it simply comes with the territory you and yours occupy.

 

How can you call it power mongering when those relationships were formed when we were fairly small (with the exception of VoC who were always a sizable force.) The truth is that we played together in alpha, discovered that we cooperate effectively together, built up trust between ourselves, and most importantly had lots of fun warring/working alongside each other. It just happened that the three of us were competent and grew to become some of the largest alliances. Noone is denying that this wasn't an extra incentive to stick together, but to say that it was our only consideration would be wrong... we actually have formed a strong bond -- that goes beyond purely practical considerations.

[Ayayay]

Please can we get a consistent story at least. One second its ppc never existed in the delta, the next is it was carried over. Nothing that happened before delta should influence delta, so no, you were not small when anything was signed.

 

I think the main issue was that you'd get different answers from different PPC alliances, and sometimes different answers from the same alliance depending on who you asked.

Because it's funny.

 

Sheesh, lighten up or something. People might start thinking we don't joke around and everything we do is totes legit 100% srs.

[Shellhound]

Because it's funny.

 

Sheesh, lighten up or something. People might start thinking we don't joke around and everything we do is totes legit 100% srs.

What are you talking about? There's been plenty of jokes the last few days. Like TC not knowing how to pull off a 3v1.

[Ayayay]

What are you talking about? There's been plenty of jokes the last few days. Like TC not knowing how to pull off a 3v1.

And TAC is unable to pull off a 3v3 

[Phiney]

Under, no matter how hard you try you won't discredit people that didn't come into a war they were asked specifically not to come in to

[Ayayay]

Under, no matter how hard you try you won't discredit people that didn't come into a war they were asked specifically not to come in to

They shouldn't be signing treaties they have no intention of upholding.

 

 

ARTICLE II

 

    Should either Signatory, or their included nations, become embroiled in an offensive with a third party that they did not instigate, it will be the responsibility and duty for the other Signatory to come to their aid, either through military action, finances, or resources. Should any signatory fail to fulfill their duty, this pact becomes void.

 

I suppose it doesn't matter anymore as they, according to the wording of the treaty, are no longer allied. If they want a situation where they can choose to call an alliance they should write that instead. The treaty makes it clear that TSG had no choice, regardless of what TAC wants, to join the war. And nothing is worse in this game than treaty breakers. Unless, of course, they canceled the treaty before EoS declared war.

 

I can't speak for TEst's treaty with TAC as the content was never released. However, as far as I can tell TSG broke their treaty with TAC by not declaring war upon EoS.

Edited October 26, 2014 by underlordgc

[Ollysho]

"Either through military action, finances or resources."

You can't tell anyone TSG isn't financing part of the war on TAC's side.

 

 

Rhetoric is a beautiful thing.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Ollysho

[Ayayay]

"Either through military action, finances or resources."

You can't tell anyone TSG isn't financing part of the war on TAC's side.

 

 

Rhetoric is a beautiful thing.

Sending war resources is a pretty aggressive action. Many wars have been fought over someone aiding an enemy. 

[Phiney]

Sending war resources is a pretty aggressive action. Many wars have been fought over someone aiding an enemy. 

 

Then declare on them. He just proved the treaty is being upheld, and you're now trying to be coy about them being involved in the war. Actions speak louder than words. Or you could y'know, just admit you were wrong about the treaty not being upheld, like an adult.

[Saru]

Then declare on them. He just proved the treaty is being upheld, and you're now trying to be coy about them being involved in the war. Actions speak louder than words. Or you could y'know, just admit you were wrong about the treaty not being upheld, like an adult.

 

I think you take Under way too seriously. 

[Ayayay]

Then declare on them. He just proved the treaty is being upheld, and you're now trying to be coy about them being involved in the war. Actions speak louder than words. Or you could y'know, just admit you were wrong about the treaty not being upheld, like an adult.

I don't have any proof that TSG is aiding TAC. (inb4 log dump) Therefore declaring war would be unjust.

 

 

I think you take Under way too seriously.  

Quiet, I'm having fun.

Edited October 26, 2014 by underlordgc

[Toxxikation]

You must really not care about aiding the enemy. One look at TAC's market sharing screen would let you know who is offering exclusive trades to TAC members.

[Prefontaine]

Saru mentioned the standings about the signings of PPC prior. That's fine. You three, okay. But you've now added another front page alliance, and a second page alliance in BoC. That's my main point. You've continued added allies, even after being in a spot with having the #2 3 4 alliances.

[Aisha Greyjoy]

Winning always takes priority over "the good of the game...", whatever that expression means anyway.

[Vincent]

This is an excellent discussion you guys are having. I'm glad someone is actively working towards finding a solution to the issues we've seen so far in the social aspect of the game.

 

Many great points have been made already, but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents as well.

 

I think that if we had more alliances, more alliance leaders, and more ideas for how to manage alliances, etc. things would be fresher. Obviously, I can't force anyone to break off and create their own alliances, but its something that I think might help things. The other trouble is that we just don't really have enough players for there to be 30 different large alliances. Getting more players is a top priority for me, and hopefully you guys (the players) will also agree that more players will make for a funner game, and encourage new players to come and try out P&W. Don't immediately raid them all out of the game, help them learn and encourage them to take advantage of the bonuses available to grow their nations.

Sheepy what about further extending the Beige protection period for those new nations from what we have currently? Maybe extend it to one or two months before they are automatically kicked out of beige.  That might solved the problem of the new nations being raided out of the game.

[Vincent]

Saru mentioned the standings about the signings of PPC prior. That's fine. You three, okay. But you've now added another front page alliance, and a second page alliance in BoC. That's my main point. You've continued added allies, even after being in a spot with having the #2 3 4 alliances.

That means each bloc are limited to only 3 alliances? On what grounds must they be limited.? I just cant see why is there a problem to others when we add BOC to our BLOC? I feel the number of alliance that decided to bond together and form a bloc should not be limited. If the alliances felt the "Chemistry" and felt that have common ground for them to form a bloc, so be it. There is absolutely no reason for anyoner to feel threatend by alliances forming a bloc. And By the way why are most players so obsessed with the rankings stuff? Is being ranked 1 or ranked last really affects you that much? Do your nation actually gain more income or get a bonus city because you are ranked first or do you actually got penalised if you are ranked last? If not why  place so much importance on the rankings?

Edited October 27, 2014 by vincentsum8