bcortell

This gov announcement brought me great entertainment. Thank you.

Agreed. It beats the abortion of a topic for which this thread was originally intended.

I don't know, it's pretty funny.

You seemed fine enough to declare a war. It certainly isn't much more work to collect right before then.

Nice job not collecting at 17 days inactive before getting nuked. For as much talk from people that TDO are incompetent in war, you seem to be giving them a chance.

Not the sharpest tool in the shed, huh? The NEW screen showed a Sengoku nation nuking a NEW nation. This report should also show up on the Sengoku side.

When I go to see the nuclear attacks for my AA, I get nothing: However, I can go here: http://www.cybernations.net/stats_news.asp?Search=Nusantara%20Elite%20Warriors&SearchBy=Nation_Alliance And see nukes from my AA...

Just want to say I agree with this. End of round should be adjusted (if the round starts late) to end before the holidays (20-22nd at the latest), and then a new round should begin after the new year.

Glad you're done with this silly idea.

My case has crushed your suggestion. You can be denial about it, but it doesn't stop what has been said. We weren't going for the flag then. One of our guys just happened to be in position, but our purpose was to get some guys who haven't played TE before acclimated to it. That was us NOT trying. This is like debating with a kid. Here's a quote from your OP, "single-war destruction awards or casualty crowns." Who was the first to mention a "crown"? You have yet to disprove anything I've said. So, to make it simple, I've laid it out for you in easy to read bullet points. -...the majority of TE players don't play for the NS crown. They play for war. Straight damage or value of damage done over the whole round seem to be a better way to go about the first place prize for TE. -Giving an award, let alone the top award, to something based on something other than NS building opens up competition to more than just the top players (I assume you mean top NS builders, since top players can be taken in different ways). This give the ability for the majority of players, who we both agree don't play TE for NS, a chance to be rewarded at the end of the round. More incentive to the masses could mean more players (or at least, better retention rates). -There's no need for NS to remain the top prize. A prize? Sure, but why make the top prize something that not the majority of players go for? It doesn't make sense. But war? Absolutely. Now, we both said something based on the whole round (and not just one war would make sense), but the prizes last round is a great start to giving more people a chance at the top prize. Proof for the previous comment: - I think a lot more people enjoyed the war prizes over the NS prizes. We saw people buy up to tech levels never seen before and absolutely dismantle their nations because of it. ...It's also important to note that nearly no one cared about flag runners last round. Hell, the top TPC nations barely got hit at the end of the round (bibliotech, the last squirrel, etc). No one cared. It was more fun going for the damage than for the NS. You have yet to show why any of these aren't true.

Then why are you suggesting it? Oh, because you're trying to change it? And now we're saying no, it's good. Bro, I haven't gone for a flag since like round 18 or something. Yes, they do not go for it because they don't want to go for NS. They like to war. Reward them for playing TE. That's exactly what admin has rightfully done. I have already dismissed your suggestions as bad and given reasons. Re-read my posts if you don't understand. You used the crown. I was merely repeating it.

I'm not debating that. I am debating what should be the biggest prize, which is also something you suggested in this thread. I already have two flags from NS. If I wanted another, I would get it. (I don't want another because it's not worth my time.) I didn't mean myself at all. You are correct, but that doesn't stop them from having a chance at the most destructive prize. Again, you can argue what you want, but that still doesn't make you right. Like I said before, NS is just easiest to keep track of. It doesn't make it the crown.

You sure about that? If so, can you let me know when I had max economic generals? I know you're just making this up now.. you really need to take a break, man. Are you really just trying to argue to argue? You really can't disprove anything I've said while I've shown you exactly why you're suggestion would be mad. Good luck with this when I'm guessing nearly no one agrees with you.

Yes

This is just a terrible excuse and does several things- it would mean fewer wars, people not picking harder wars, and more turtling when losing a war. As someone else said, generals were to reward war. That's exactly what they have done. Because you choose not to war, don't try to lower those that do war to your level.

There was never a war prize before this round. I think a lot more people enjoyed the war prizes over the NS prizes. We saw people buy up to tech levels never seen before and absolutely dismantle their nations because of it. It was glorious. You are right that a lot of it comes down to money. But, there are other things like what wars to get in, what wonders to choose, etc that influence it. Now, guys can pick wonders they want (WRC, etc) and still have fun warring (instead of sitting around building NS) AND have a chance for a prize. We already saw the effects at the end of last round (tech, who to war, etc), and if the prize was damage from the whole round, I think we'd see the competition heat up even more. It's also important to note that nearly no one cared about flag runners last round. Hell, the top TPC nations barely got hit at the end of the round (bibliotech, the last squirrel, etc). No one cared. It was more fun going for the damage than for the NS. You're making a large, and frankly wrong, assumption by trying to call us losing flagrunners. Not one person on my AA was going for any flag. You'll also nations in OP and other AA's that could build instead of war, but it's not as fun for the masses. Even if the average player doesn't have a chance, MORE players do have a chance. And, that makes a difference. Again, just wrong. NS isn't the crown. We've already covered this. You seem quite passionate about something when you don't even know if you'll play next round.

I think you're stuck in the past. Giving an award, let alone the top award, to something based on something other than NS building opens up competition to more than just the top players (I assume you mean top NS builders, since top players can be taken in different ways). This give the ability for the majority of players, who we both agree don't play TE for NS, a chance to be rewarded at the end of the round. More incentive to the masses could mean more players (or at least, better retention rates). There's no need for NS to remain the top prize. A prize? Sure, but why make the top prize something that not the majority of players go for? It doesn't make sense. But war? Absolutely. Now, we both said something based on the whole round (and not just one war would make sense), but the prizes last round is a great start to giving more people a chance at the top prize. Re the easiest and understandable thing of success- sure, that is true. NS is easy to measure. I don't know if I would call it the biggest success though. Just because something is harder to measure doesn't mean it isn't a bigger success. Why take the easy way out and say because something is easy to measure that it is the biggest success (which is what you are implying with trying to make top NS the top prize)? If you agree that most people don't play TE for NS, then you should agree that the top prize shouldn't go to something that the majority of people don't play for. How to implement the top prize should be the question (most destruction over the round, value of destruction over the round, etc), not which prize (NS, war, casualties) should be the top prize.

Just like one can see who had the highest NS for past rounds in the World Statistics area, make casualties and destruction (particularly if you go with a single person getting the destruction award) shown also.

While generals giving economic benefits relates to RL, TE isn't made to just replicate RL. In SE, generals offer less economic value. In TE, they help those warring nations rebuild quicker from wars and get more action. Their XP could be upped and/or XP removed when a general is bought, but otherwise, they are fine. No big change needed with the generals (besides removing the XP of the cost of the general), IMO.

I think you'd find the majority of TE disagreeing with you here. I'd say the majority of TE players don't play for the NS crown. They play for war. Your imagination thinking otherwise seems to have clouded where you think the prizes should go. Straight damage or value of damage done over the whole round seem to be a better way to go about the first place prize for TE.

You sure about that? SO has grown since you've declared despite still fighting SUN and Mume, while you guys have lost NS (as of right now on the AA pages). I have a feeling you'll be just another notch on the belt after this.

Maybe this becomes a normal thing in future rounds (perhaps with a tech bet?), but for now, let's just do it for some bragging rights. Here's mine: Army XP Level: 227 Navy XP Level: 85 Air Force XP Level: 511 Intelligence XP Level: 88 What do you have?

When you get a war of nearly 40k of damage, you can talk.

You? No. HL would have to fight to be able to win.

Even without House Lannister doing anything, Inst has failed... again.