[How the war changes Cybernations]

5. Prices do not have set values. In fact they very nature of the game contradicts this. Infra prices rise as you go along and losing 100 out of 1000 infra may be seem like a lot but a 3 million boost from a large nation easily covers it while losing 100 out of 8000 infra cost much much more to replace. More money means people have more stuff but it also means the stuff is harder to replace because you need more money to replace it which is why wars go on the numerical amount asked in reps will increase simply to cover a faction of the cost done in battle.

We are coming from different perspectives here. If your sitting at 4k infra buying 100 more will always cost the same amount (disregarding improvements and other modifiers). This doesn't change, what you are talking about is how price scales as you buy more, price increase is a set value depending on what infra level you are currently at. What I was trying to get at, is its not like IRL where a multitude of variables could change prices over night.

[How the war changes Cybernations]

The problem with your argument is you are making too many assumptions and leave to many things unclear.

1. TOP and Co. attacked CnG. Not the other way around. (This is fact and everyone can agree on this)

2. I have fought at least 4 TOP members and at least 3 of them had warchest above 1 billion. and you can't tell me those were exceptions. (Irrelevant and your making assumptions that the majority are like this)

3. Think about what TOP would do if they would win. yes indeed ask for reps. (Another assumption and the fact that they have asked for reps in the past may increas the likely hood but does not dictate that there will be reps, that is flawed argument)

4. Another reason why they are getting such high reps: there are a lot of Alliance's involved. TOP well done, only you have lost and everybody wants a bit of you. (Only aggressive action was against CnG, the fact that others joined in to help them makes them good allies and should be supported by those they helped, the fact that they stood in the crossfire is their own issue not Top and Companies.)

5. there has never been so much money on planet bob. a average nation now has at least 150m where that was 50m 2 years ago. (Again, irrelevant. Its a game and as such the prices have a set value, its not RL where market values rise and fall, to ask for more simply because you can is nonsense)

6. know the risk of attacking. if you gamble big, prepare to lose big. (These alliances don't make 'gambles' like this, they felt their support of their allies would result in a direct attack from CnG so preemptively attacked to better secure the future for their allies, while this obviously failed I would hardly call it a 'gamble')

[Beer Reviews? YOU MONSTER!]

Few things:

1) I personally have no problem with the beer reviews or any of the other "Fun Terms" so long as both parties don't mind

2) Perspective is everything and some people may find it an offensive kick in the balls no matter how cute the bow tie you wrap it in is. Just the way things are. Disrespect is an individual interpretation, there is no such thing as a set 'good or evil' and some people will always react differently, that's just life.

3) Technically speaking, a term stating someone must drink, or do anything for that matter, outside of the game should only ever be put into effect if both parties have absolutely NO problems with it/them and are absolutely willing as they are OOC and should really have no place in the game unless all partaking parties are in 100% agreement of said terms. If anyone is at all objective to an OOC term then it is perfectly fine and within their rite to refuse without having to suffer any sort of in game consequences for such.

TL;DR: 1)If both parties are completely fine with it, I see no problem. 2)Perspective changes everything