Obiwan

some people just wear their underwear too tight, similar to that whole BTA & TAB thing, except this is even more of an outrageous claim. lol

@Emperor Stranger: why in the world would you want to sanction someone on your own AA? if they are rogue, they are rogue. Nothing else needs to be done except fill their warslots. And there is really no need to ghost bust in TE. Every nation whether active or inactive gives you more war slots in a defensive war. I do not see this as a problem, but if you do, then it would be a problem for SE also. However, I'd like to keep this thread about teams. You are welcome to start your own thread to discuss alliance control. you already have to check to see if someone is in your attack range. and checking their team is just as easy since it is on any search feature you use. Like I already said, it would require adjustment, just like any game mechanic update. But if the amount of adjustment is too much of an inconvenience to fix the problem, then I agree solution 1 might be better. I somewhat agree on your assessment. the largest alliances do contribute to the reason why certain teams are larger than others. But that alone does not make the teams broken. for the largest team to be twice the size of the second largest team and to hold over a third of the cybervers when there are 12 different teams, make it broken.I'd like to consider the evolution of the phenomenon. Back when I played in round three, there were way more than a handful of nations on the 6 smallest spheres. And the largest two teams, blue and black were very close, with blue slightly larger at about 600 total nations. eventually a sort of survival of the fittest took place, because the following round the largest blue alliance disbanded IIRC, not a huge TE history buff, and black slowly began its dominance in TE. Major alliances have come and gone here in TE, but do you think black would have become so big without all of the other smaller alliances that flocked toward it as each round restarted because the major alliances continue to exist from round to round and stay on the same color? The smaller alliances have no reason to stay on a smaller sphere. Having a senate seat does not even come close to comparing to the advantage of being on a larger sphere with more nations to trade with. My third suggestion attempts to give more emphasis on team dominance which would encourage smaller alliances to stick it out on the smaller spheres, while providing an interesting addition to the game mechanics. The only other thing I can think of to encourage alliances to be on a smaller sphere is to give collection bonuses(income/hap/pop) that are inversely proportional to the size of the team to the alliances with senators on that sphere. But I don't like that idea because it rewards the larger alliances and creates an uneven playing field. The only way to truly solve the problem is if there were more small/medium sized alliances and the large alliances weren't such powerhouses. But it is the nature of the game to gravitate toward larger alliances and treaty blocs for safety. Which is nobody's fault and is really irreversible. But if everything truly did reset every round, such as alliances not carrying over from round to round, then there would be no gravitation between rounds to certain color sphere creating a fairly random spread for every round. but let's face it, that'd never happen either. Well, to sum up my feelings before this thread goes totally inactive like the rest of the threads in this area, I feel this to be a real issue that needs to be dealt with. I feel Solution 1 to be a good temporary solution to the problem, that would be easiest for both the game developers as well as the players to adjust. I feel Solution 2 eliminates a potentially useful game mechanic that the mods would probably not approve of, but by the general opinion of TE it has already truly fallen by the wayside. Solution 3 is obviously my favorite, which could definitely use some fine tuning, but I think it might be too much adapting in order save the game mechanic once known as teams in TE. I really would like to see the concept of teams improve, but I'm not going to hold my breath since I'm probably the only one here who feels this way. oh, BTW, thanks for the feedback, I appreciate it. I enjoy finding out how the rest of TE feels about this issue.

nope, yellow is where all the cool kids are going.

sure. we all know your just attention whoring!

nice graphics there. now, where's mine?

hey, I know all of these peoplez! good stuff mates. I have high hopes for this alliance. May the Force be with you.

As in all games, I seriously though, it is all about having fun. If you have fun always being beat up in a 6v1 war, have at it. All you have to do is wear a none AA. If you enjoy diplomacy, found an alliance and work with other alliances trying to get treaties. If you have fun just growing your nation, join a large AA and just collect infra. If you have more fun working with others to achieve a common goal, join a random midsized alliance and get involved. You'll meet new people, possibly some from the other side of the polarized fence of SE. In any case, it takes all of these types of people to make the world go round. How boring would it be if everyone was always in anarchy and didn't have enough money to actually do anything? How boring would it be if everyone formed their own alliance and there was this massive treaty web that prevented any action from ever happening? How boring would it be if everyone just sat there and grew their nation, not interacting with anyone else? How boring would it be if everyone were in the same alliance? The thing that makes TE special is that one can have a lulz war here and not ruin what someone has worked on for years. Everyone starts off on an even footing every round so no one can complain about never catching up to the epically huge nations in SE. This is a game, and everyone knows it is a game. There is nothing immoral about using the the built in war feature. Is it immoral to make another player go bankrupt when they land on you in monopoly just because they have little money? Is it immoral to eliminate another player in Risk just because they are smaller? What's immoral is cheating, just like in any other game. And the mods crack down on that very well IMO. My only point, is be open minded. There are a variety of ways to play this game to reach the end goal, which varies from person to person. So quit whining, and play the game!

I agree teams are pointless. But removing them would remove another dynamic of the game. my suggestion is to improve the teams. I believe that is what admin would prefer, but my third idea is a bit radical and I think they will decide to just pick the first idea. @Emperor Stranger: I do not know if you are being sarcastic in your last statement, but you aren't making any sense to me. Alliances are already in control of their alliance. Teams only dictate who you can or cannot trade with.

Happy Belated B-day. I always thought it was cool that my RL b-day was just a few days after my alliance's Bday. I will also have a special place in my heart for my first home. No one can forget one's first 20 months in CN, and I have Rok to thank for making my experience here so great. I look forward to you guys having a better third year. they say three is the charm.

Problem Teams in TE are horribly skewed. just about everyone is on black. it is by far the largest team. the only thing teams are used for is to limit who you can trade with and the senator spots. Soon, everyone will be on black just because it has the most people and will be the easiest to find trades there. I see several different ways to prevent this from happening, and I encourage anyone that has any other ideas on this to present them here. Possible Solutions: Decrease the number of teams- I suggest having no more than 8 teams. that would average about 350 nations per team, high enough to keep it interesting to find trades. However, there are 2 ways I can think of doing so. Either eliminate the most popular 3-4 teams from the previous round, requiring the majority of people on TE to choose another color hopefully ending up in a more random and even spread. Or randomize which teams will be available each round, also hoping this will result in a random and even spread. Currently there is about a tenth of the people in TE that are in SE. Are the same number of teams necessary? Eliminate teams- most people argue that teams in TE are useless. And the way it currently is, I fully agree. With a majority of the teams virtually empty, finding trades is impossible and holding a senate seat is absolutely useless. Everyone is already moving to black. Who is to stop them, or even blame them? What would be the difference of having everyone on black and not having teams all together? Give more meaning to teams- This isn't a simple quick fix, and would require more adjustment from the SE players to have to know another rule change. However, I think this would seriously improve game play. I propose that Teams reflect geographical locations, such as continents. So instead of teams being named after a color, teams are named based off of the continents plus one for the Ocean, which could be equivalent to no team since it isn't a continent, for a total of 8 teams. Then, teams are chosen indirectly based off of placement of capital. And the color chosen to represent each location could change from round to round to prevent anyone from still being dedicated to the color that represents their continent. Now once we have location based teams, there could be further enhancements to increase strategy and improve gameplay. For example, have your location (aka team) restrict who you could attack. Say you could only ground attack on your own continent, unless you had such and such improvement/wonder to increase its range first to surrounding continents and then another one for global reach. Say your airforce's attack range could reach to surrounding continents (including your own), unless you had such and such improvement/wonder/navy that increased their range to the entire globe. And say your navy could reach the entire globe. This would add a whole new dimension to the game and make it more interesting, IMO. Yes, it might take a bit of work and shouldn't be implemented immediately. I feel this should come a round or two after teams represent continents to help ease players into thinking about location. If you are curious as to what would be considered a surrounding continent, just have it predetermined like the lines on a risk board. The only thing is each team should have the same number of teams that it can attack, and if one team can attack another, that other team should be able to attack back. For example, assuming each team can attack on their own continent, they would only need 3 other continents in order for them to be able to attack half of the world. And I picture it looking something like this: Continents 1= Antarctica 2= Australia 3= Asia 4= N. America 5= S. America 6= Africa 7= Europe 8= Ocean/Atlantic/NONE Surrounding Continents/Attack Range 1-2,5,8 2-1,3,6 3-2,4,7 4-3,5,8 5-1,4,6 6-2,5,7 7-3,6,8 8-1,4,7 just some food for thought. please chew and digest. Then tell me what you think. thanks

something about different timezones... and archer, are to blame

Simba, he juuuust caaaan't waaaait to be kiiiiiiiiiiiing!!!!!!!!

you mention YYM and not me?!?!?! At least I'm not the only one left out.

Glee!!!!!! I miss you bud.

I've got a new adage... Not being on yellow is immoral. eh? amirit or amirite?

Congrats to both parties. very interesting read, treaty was.

congrats to all of my former brothers. I wish you all the best of luck in this term.

Color: yellow [url="http://cn-corporation.com"]The Corporation[/url] (Corp) - #corporation

change you say? so being on yellow, one of the smallest spheres in the game, isn't good enough for you? that in and of itself presents a welcoming challenge. including new friends that weren't part of ACV also isn't good enough for you? what about the theme change and the epic flags? also not good enough for you? meh, you can't please everyone. now quit ruining my good night.

well this decision saved him 9M, though he could have saved more complying.

glad to see good RP from everyone's favorite yellow alliance, sorry ROCK, your a close second though

11/10 expected ...and the Sith deceive even more.

oh NOES!!!! o7 SF

also having tech increases its cost despite subtracting twice your tech lvl. I think having a multiplier of tech reduction at least 5 preferably 6 to make the wonder more worth its cost while also promoting having more tech instead of taxing those buying the wonder for their tech.

It really is sad to see allies part ways even if it is mutual. and very interesting posts from pacifica.