Freek

I for one prefer the time at which this update was posted. Thanks, Azaghul

My CN nation's ruler and nation name are currently being used in CN:TE, even though I have not registered for this round. I can imagine this sort of thing will often happen to better-known players than myself. Enforcing rules to counter this practice, however, could be very difficult. Is there, or will there be, any policy regarding usage of other people's CN nations in CN:TE? Links: My nation in CN, imposter's nation in CN:TE Thanks.

The playing field should change according to players' behaviour, not someone's personal preference. It makes little sense to demand a certain membercount when an alliance like TOP is superior to others in NS and score.

Why should there be any incentives to merge?

This man speaketh the truth.

We were eligible for a sanction only because GPA, NADC and GATO got their $@! handed to them. It would've been different if we'd been growing tremendously for some time; we're not. Other than that, I am certain RoK is not doing this to taunt us. They want to grow stronger, just like everybody else, and obviously saw a great opportunity in absorbing (merging also means: "to become combined, united, swallowed up, or absorbed; lose identity by uniting or blending") two alliances into their own. A sanction is nothing more than a by-product of that growth. Anyway, mergers never lead to 'letting go' an alliance's culture, especially when two relatively evenly matched alliances like RoK and ASC are combined. This is what makes it hard to sustain, as I pointed out when VE suddenly gained incredible score after Atlantis' disbandment. Deciding to merge is easy, keeping everyone happy in a new environment is what makes it so hard. So congrats on the impressive gain, RoK, and good luck.

Check again. You'd better utilize your member count advantage to the fullest extent if you intend to remain ahead of FOK.

We be coming to get you, GGA. Lets see if we can make up the shortage of members in NS.

Great stuff Fark, VE and GGA. All doing very well. Would anyone be so kind as to point me towards a Dutch-speaking alliance FOK can annex?

Indeed. Alliances enforcing a high degree of economic efficiency are generally below the 70% activity barrier, while they might be the most active group in the game. I doubt the rule was implemented for that purpose. edit: responding several hours after pressing "reply" rendered the point made above unimportant. :lol:

Getting people to join is half the battle, making sure they are content in their new homes is just as important. This type of commendable growth is bound to create some issues, similar to a merger. I hope you can prove to be just as effective at maintaining members as you are at gaining them, VE. Keep up the good work!

FOK's about to lose another bunch of score due to our recruitment spree backlash. No worries though. It matters not whether we get sanctioned at the upcoming audit or the next, FOK will be in the top 10 within 3 months. Mark my words, for I will be referring to them later. Also, nice growth VE

Their alliance disbanded, and they will be looking for a different alliance shortly (most have found one already, going from their score in the race). Of course alliances looking for new, experienced and decent-NS nations will PM them. How is recruiting within a short period of time disrespectful? A PM won't change their experience and memories of Atlantis, nor will it change anything about the fact that they decided to disband. Enlighten me, what is dishonorable about this?

Big who cares. Individual nations can decide whether or not they wish to join; people seeing a target group in disbanded alliances see high-quality members waiting to be recruited. There's nothing wrong with contacting them.

Cheers for the update. FOK in 12th place! Hope we can endure during the upcoming recruitment backlash.