Icewolf

So it appears that we have some new wonders introduced into this game. Federal Reserve - $100,000,000 + (Nation Strength * 1,000) - Increases the number of banks that can be purchased +3. Requires Stock Market So the first of them, the Federal Reserve. Now what I find interesting here is the price scale. It would cost me 120 million. A nation at 600 thousand NS would have to pay 700 million. I suspect this is some attempt to counter the fact that this wonder is massively massively powerful. Three banks is 21% of base income. That is quite a long way above what any other wonder effectively does. Even the Great Monument with 5 additional happiness doesn't quite cut that. For my nation it is 7x the effect at 4x the cost than a stock market. In terms of game improvement, I don't think it will help that much. Money is not an issue in this game in my opinion, beyond the slight possibility that some people have too much of it.Most nations in the top 40% can afford this without draining a warchest though. Those it will really help are those knocked down and yet to rebuild but still with plenty of cash. I will definitely purchase this wonder as soon as the current cycle in my nation ends. Interceptor Missile System (IMS) - $50,000,000 - Thwarts Cruise Missile Attacks, 50% of the time (removes 1 attackers CM strike chance for that day). Requires 5,000 technology and a Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) Interesting one. For a nation with 5000 tech 50 million to stop 50% of CMs is definitely worthwhile. I am concerned however that this does detract from gameplay. One nice thing about CMs is that a dogpiled nation unable to launch GAs, unable to lauch air attacks, with depleted nuclear stocks can still do something to return fire. It ensures that the attacker will take some cost. Reducing that is not in my opinion a good thing. I will not buy this as I do not have that much tech. Superior Logistical Support - $80,000,000 - Provides supplies more efficiently to your nation's military. Reduces Aircraft and Naval Maintenance Cost by -10% and Tank Maintenance Cost by -5%. Increases attacking and defending ground battle strength +10%. Requires Pentagon For a lot of nations I suspect that the tank maintenance and aircraft costs are not their primary concern in warfare. It might make the warchest last a bit longer, but when you have a daily nuking this really doesn't matter. And at the lower levels spies are the main warchest factor, not upkeep. Overall the wonder seems to be a bit of "a little bit extra" as in opposite tone to the Federal Reserve, it is three times the cost and half the impact of the Pentagon. Probably not high on the purchase list as we are not even out of this war. Foreign Naval Base - $200,000,000 - Allows +2 naval vessels to be purchased per day (+1 in Peace Mode) and also allows +1 naval deployment per day. Requires 20,000 infrastructure. Even more so than the IMS, this is a big boys only wonder. Top 200 nations only. ~1/8th of the number that can buy the IMS. However it does seem to give a fairly heavy boost to that nation. Only issue might be if those nations get knocked down (as some have as little as 5000 tech) they go down with a fairly heavy naval firepower boost. But otherwise I don't see this having a massive impact as so few nations will have it. Overall...I feel fairly meh about them. None of them I really feel is bringing anything that feels new, and in 120 days time (or 60 days and $60 time) nations will run out of them again. EDIT: For clarification, this was written before the final version of the wonders, which are not identical to the descriptions above.

Right.....cause those ten nations are 50% of our NS? Right. No.

IRON, like every other alliance on planet bob, keeps a strategic set of nations in peace mode. In our case those being highlighted are a merest fraction of the AA. The phrase those in glass houses and kettles calling pots black applies to every peace mode debate on planet bob and this is no exception. The peace mode debate only exists because; 1) If the lower tier of an alliance is being ground whilst the upper tier hides, it is a way to break their moral and; 2) There is some kind of hope that you can shame people out of peace mode to weaken them whilst you have the upper hand. Neither really works, but everyone goes along with it anyway. In this war there is a new element in it, partly in trying to justify extremely harsh peace terms, but mostly I suspect an element of acting like the bully in the pool changing rooms shouting "look at that nerd" in the hope that no one looks at him when he is getting changed.

So the war status of what...3.3% of our nations matters that much to you? I mean I get PM complaints leveled at those who keep 50%+ in peace mode whilst on the winning side (no names...just a statement) but this is just silly.

So normally when I see a thread this long I flick to the last few pages to get an idea of how discussion is going. Now I am very tired and have a lot of things to do....would someone care to explain to me how a comment about some NPO person going rogue on some HB person led to random bitching about the price of bread? Or do I just not want to know. Anyway TLR, have fun with your non-warness. You guys broke my one million casualty mark so congrats I guess?

I think actually more people targeted honesty towards you than lies. Its just you ignored the honesty and fell for the liars.

The Network apologised and we are friends now.

Rule 2. Don't use public aid labelled as "upfront bounty financials"

Well it is perhaps abundantly apparent to anyone with even the slightest hint of cognitive ability that neither Buckaroo or "The Boss" truly has a grasp of the fundamental operations of this universe in which our nations reside. Furthermore there is the slight fact that neither Buckaroo nor this mysterious but oh so easy to identify Boss has the first clue how to go about clandestine operation.

Come find me on IRC. #IRON and ask for Icewolf.

The comment was aimed at TOP, the great warriors who like always, park a very high proportion of nations in PM, let others do the fighting and then strut around as though they are a competent warrior alliance rather than a pack of whiny tits. I don't think either Sengoku or IRON has anything to answer regarding the war on TLR given that TLR has relatively few nations and relatively little NS left to offer resistance with. The mass of war declarations on turtling nuke turrets (and the damage that can actually be done to a nation that has only 1000 infa and 75 tech is limited) are hardly going to change the outcome of this war.

Once again, periphery vs central. We could destroy TLR down to 0NS and still not reach the top of damage statistics. As someone above said, stop cherry picking. Because TOP wasn't involved in the selection of the negotiator, and have no influence at all in negotiations. Given the coalition has a central negotiator the absence of TOP specifically in the talks asking anything doesn't mean you guys are completely out of the loop and innocent. But nice attempt at spinning your way out of implication.

IRON is a peripheral alliance in this war, whilst TOP is at the centre. Comparing to IRON is not valid. However despite demanding terms with the basis of "overuse" of PM, TOP has 50% vs 20% in PM. (when compared to NPO)

Well I suppose an entire fifty percent of TOP is out of peace mode in the closing stages of a war they are on the winning side of so they are really throwing their weight in for once.

What if we want unconditional peace for all? I don't see an option for that

Talking about fighting is Peace Mode? Really? If TOP ever fought its own battles outside of Peace Mode I would have a heart attack, I really would.

Given how some of the alliances at the head of the coalition spoke about "abolishing reps" it is very disappointing to see such terms bandied about. They may not be officially reparations, but the purpose is the same. To weaken the opponent at the benefit of yourself. We all know that warfare is not about the numerical number you have on yourside. It is about the number you have in comparison to the other side. So gaining whilst your opponent stands still has the same impact as gaining as your opponent moves backwards, you still end up ahead. Given the inefficiencies of reparation gathering the difference between the two is really not at all great, if in existence at all. I am greatly saddened that this means that I, like many others in this coalition, are now fighting for such a bullying and disgraceful tactic, whether we would want to or not, bound by our honour to fight for those that are so dishonourable. It sickens me and is a black mark against my name to be a part of this.

Gold is valuable in terms of the fact that it is used in electronics. It is also valuable in that people will pay for things that look pretty, and it is shiny. Its value as a currency though is just that, a medium of exchange. Its price actually fluctuates as much as most other currencies do against each other, so it is not even an especially good currency. Particularly as most currencies have at least nominal interest rates rather than charging you to hold them.

Time was when there was an attempt to form a buyers union to lower tech prices back to 3 million per 100.

I got some money for Christmas, and there is a simple way to ensure you spend it on something. I was given money by my Grandmother who likes to know what her Grandchildren are up to. As she has given me money, I will now find something to spend it on and write her an email or letter (probably an email but she is not the best with technology) and say what I spent it on, and a general update on life. As I know I am doing that it gives me an incentive to have spent it on something worthwhile. There is a difference between gift giving and consumerism. Gift giving is a way to enrich others lives in your friends and family. I do this by trying to find things they would not normally buy themselves, such as books by authors I know they haven't read, or topics they don't know, or types of sweets they haven't eaten etc etc. I know others who have given paintings they have made for the occasion as gifts, or other handmade items. Alternatively, if you want a really interesting challenge invite those you exchange gifts with to shop on a budget of £3 and you will do the same and see what you can get each other.

"Here, as your gift I am giving you my rights to reclaim an interest free unsecured loan I gave to a multinational corporation."

1. People are far more likely to be involved in something and believe in something if the rest of the alliance is working properly. People don't give a 2nd thought to philosophy if their tech trades are messing up, if trade circles don't happen, if newbies are not being trained or the military co-ordination doesn't exist. In IRON we are far more active because all that stuff is so efficiently running along in the background that we do not even have to remotely consider it, giving time to consider CN.

Drive, ambition are philosophy all take second place to a far far more basic tenant of alliance leadership. Basic administrative competence is a the core of any successful alliance, not some starry eyed dream.

My duck is bigger than your duck.

The point I am making is not to do with the specific policies that people pursue. It is to do with a general attitude of people becoming excessively rule bound to ensure that when they lose they do not lose too hard, rather than actually trying to win.