Samwise

We do. They want to attack us after we've warred all round while they quietly wait for the "opportune" moment. We let them attack us on their own terms every round. We're so nice. :blush:

I do not negotiate with terrorists :gun: EDIT: Also, to your comment on nobody having enough senate votes to do anything as senator. War Doves has 2 senators this round. If you add up all our votes, we'd have the necessary 25 for green team messages already. You may then question why to use 2 senators, and my answer to you would be that we'll get the votes necessary before the next election reset, and we're not in a hurry to harass the green team with cheesy jokes. 2nd EDIT: Also, looks like TEPD is going for 2 senators as well.

You need to register a separate account. Everybody is allowed one SE nation and one TE nation, and your ruler/nation names do not need to match.

This made me laugh. :3

I can't be bothered to read all this. 1. I don't see anything wrong with the current situation for senate. It's less useful in TE due to the different political atmosphere, but is functional in the scenario that I mentioned in this thread before. However, if we were to make any changes to the current senate, then I'd support getting rid of 1/3 of the colors to force alliances to share color spheres. I'd also change this rule to jive more with TE: 2. Lowering the required votes for senators to be functional would be reckless since it would create instability, and therefore take power from alliances. All you really need is 10-15 nations voting regularly for a senator. If this were implemented, I'd feel obligated to roll any nations on green that tried to run for senate if I felt they were a threat to my alliance's security. For instance, NLoN for the past couple rounds has always had at least 1 nation that tries to run for green team senate. They are constantly coming after us, so it would be in our best interest to force their nations from the sphere that choose to be on green. It creates unnecessary drama IMO.

1. So do what we do in TE. Kill him with fire. Sanctioning him on yellow will just make him switch colors, and really, that's not a bad thing for him considering yellow is no longer one of the more stable colors since SUN disbanded. Green isn't doing so hot either since NAO and Rat Basterds are no longer around. 2. From in game: ^That means that this election cycle everybody will be able to vote twice in the initial election, since you have to be 5 days old to vote. The next election cycle, people will be able to vote 3 times granted they created nations on time, and they're voting on time. 4. Yes, santions do happen, and it's on a case by case basis whether they actually "work" for their intended purpose. I'm not sure you fully understand the functionality of the senate. In SE, yes, you have more people and the ability to get the 25 votes needed is much easier. However, what's also different in SE are the politics. If someone is going nuke rogue in SE, you can petition the other colors to get him sanctioned until he has no choice but to switch to grey. Forcing people to switch to grey in TE would actually mean something in TE, since there are so few nations there. However, it is very unlikely that anyone in TE is going to sanction someone for being a nuke rogue, since the whole reason for TE is to war. And then there's that update admin made where you can change your resources. You don't need to run to other colors for a uranium trade, and there is no foreign aid in TE. You missed my point of why I brought up the sanction in R22. There is a time limit before sanctions can be removed. Warriors had a senator, but since it was the last day, the Warriors flagrunner had no choice but to move to Orange for trades since they didn't have however many days it takes to remove a sanction. Also, if you've voted in the senate race, you can't switch colors until 5 days after you last voted. Had the Warriors flagrunner voted recently in the senate race, s/he would have been screwed. This isn't really a problem for alliances that rule a sphere. War Doves has green. NDO owns yellow. CItadel is on white. However, RE, TPC and Skaro all share black. It is an Auctor said: 3. That's an example of what happens when alliances make a bad decision of who to trust as their senator. It's the same when you make a bad decision on who to make an admin on your forums, but we don't rectify it by making a bunch more people admin of your forums. Giving more people senator power doesn't empower alliances, it takes power away from them by causing instability.

I have a few points to make, so I'll start with the above. Say NDO decides they do want to see what kind of water War Doves is drinking and spies on us. So? If I sanction your entire alliance on green what does it matter to you? You're on yellow and all your trades are yellow. It would literally mean nothing. 2. Every person can vote three times in the sanction race, so getting 25 or even 30 votes is not hard. NDO has more than enough for that mark. 3. As hart is saying, the requirements are in place to keep people from abusing the sanction system. Last round, NLoN's senator sanctioned over half of NLoN's members when he knew they were going to boot him from the alliance. The election reset, and there wasn't a blue senator to remove the sanctions until someone got enough votes. NLoN moved to Brown to get around it, since it takes ~couple days to remove the sanction even if you have a senator in place. 4. What TBRaiders said. Why sanction someone for "rogue" behavior in TE? The last time I effectively saw a sanction in TE work was when Warriors were flagrunning, so TFK sanctioned Warrior's flagrunner on the last day of the round. That was in R22.

Thanks for the apology, HDSup. I'm sure no one would think that you actually sanctioned the mass message, but confirmation that you did not is appreciated. Good to see it got dealt with quickly.

Spell your name correctly and they might unban you.

Welcome back OP. Welcome back Roman thread hijackers <3

My vote was all 3. Can I be a police officer?

I'm going to continue to restate this obvious injustice in this DoE thread to distract from people welcoming you back!! Take that NDO!! lololol I'm just kidding. I love you NDO. Welcome back.

Haha You should know better than to think we'd forcibly remove Kurdanak. He has the same commitments that he had last summer. We expect him back for R32. EDIT: I just saw your comment in the Citadel DoE. You don't have to recognize me. Other people do. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-L6rEm0rnY]Memory[/url] lane, eh KJ?

They just don't know good quality when they see it. They deny my app every round. <_<

That's what you said 2 years ago! >:|

Will it still be the same 60 day round/startup funds?

Taking out the MP is a great idea. It widens the already huge gap between alliances that can work together and one's that can't be bothered. People without nukes will struggle in war against nations with nukes, but the same rules apply as normal rounds - Nukes harm your income, and buying to top 5% means you'll be left with less cash whereas decent nation builders will have the money saved to rebuild post war. Most people aren't decent nation builders though. Then you consider the small member base in TE, being in the top 5% of nations means there are only 26 nuke nation slots if you go by the membership count the last round ended with. Basically this change will help the elite nations, and harm the masses. So it's a great idea in that it forces players to use strategy, but most will not, and it will only discourage them to play, and likely further shrink our member count. As for the EMP, I'm not really sold on it. If we keep the MP in, then perhaps, but otherwise you're overpowering nations with nukes when they already have a huge advantage. Casualties mean nothing. Casualties do not go to nations that war the hardest, or even the most often. Infra yields casualties so long as you don't turtle. It's an award that's important to the players of tournament edition, and people with top casualties should win something, but it should never be a main award. I don't agree with caps on alliance size. If you decide to cap them, at least do 12, and not 10 members. Enough for 2 trade circles or 4 3-man strike teams. If you up the number to 12, I'd be okay with this. This will be ridiculously exploited - No matter what restrictions you put on it. Then again, as Donnerjack was made aware, cheating such as warslot filling/spy slot filling/multies/collusion/etc... is rampant in TE. At least we can check nations exploiting the FA system on our own, ...so iSupport?? iSupport. Crime index is too confusing to new players to be honest. Most people play TE because they want to blow stuff up, and while crime index gives the econ nerds a toy to enjoy and play with, most aren't econ nerds. It'll just turn people off, and not a necessary addition to TE. Airports can't hurt. I'd recommend upping their aircraft cost reduction for TE, since aircraft are one of the only items where prices aren't reduced for TE and as a result usually the biggest drain on a warchest.

Finally someone focuses on why this is funny. They're frenchies. In TE! lololol

Your problem is that everything is about you. You trigger most of your negative attention. You've been self destructing for a long time now and you blame everyone else for it. NDO has had the short end of the stick numerous times. They were downdeclared twice just last round. Both times they were vastly outnumbered in nukes. Figures you wouldn't take time from your busy schedule to take a look at someone's elses war and just assume it's only happening to you. You have a bone to pick with everyone? I couldn't care less, but you'll want to consider the other people in your AA who trust you to represent them. I'm not sure them or your allies will appreciate you committing them to a 3 round crusade because you can't control your anger.

Congratulations for War Doves' most successful round ever. Not because we took first in NS, but because we fought in 2 very difficult wars. Thanks to Citadel and Warriors for being great opponents, and thanks to my fellow doves for being awesome. It's a damn good day to be a dove.

congratulations hart! I was really hoping to pull off a top finish in casualties this round. I promise to give you better competition next round. :war:

What do you consider "winning" in TE?

CVTWayne did take your mother out for a nice seafood dinner, then never called her again. :ph34r:

I disagree with defensive slots. 3's enough to thoroughly roll someone if your team is coordinating for max damage. But if you're a beast, why not have a wonder that allows 2 extra offensive warslots. You're already taking a gamble that 8 people might coordinate against you. No need for defensive slots.