Johnny Apocalypse
-
Posts
3,131 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Johnny Apocalypse
-
-
- "Non-playing banks" will not be a thing if the aid mechanic ceases to be part of TE after this round, nor would they be a thing if a reasonable cap was in place when the round started. The current cap is what it is because it is the average amount of cash/tech AW started flinging back and forth early on in the round.
- The incentive to turtle is a result of heavy-handed downdeclares (You know like when someone gets sent 10,000 tech to beat down on someone much smaller than them). If people punched at their weight instead of attacking and buying up to a ridiculous advantage, people would not need to turtle. So preventing people from buying up after they have declared war would prevent turtling. A better idea in my opinion would be to restrict infra purchases from the moment you declare. From that point onward you can only rebuy infra to the peak level you were at when you declared the war and you can only exceed that peak when the initial offensive war expires.
- Massively disparate wars are again something that AW perpetuate. AW initiated an attack on 3 alliances and act as though the consequences of making enemies with every other alliance in the game isn't a problem they have made themselves with their actions and attitude (save for a handful of members who are quite content to just fight, have fun and not complain about everything)
- Dirty ops are used at the discretion of the alliance in question. OP claim to not dirty op but when dirty ops are done on some of their nations, it is understandable they might reciprocate despite being given orders to tell them otherwise. Afterall, why fight with one hand behind your back if the opponent clearly will do you dirty anyway? I know that BC members dropped dirty ops as soon as they caught them, at that point the horse had bolted so while I urged people to avoid it unless it was done to them first? It was understood that AW would likely not have any scruples about dropping dirty ops on people first. I think OP would be wise to drop the stance of not dirty op'ing other alliances unless it is done to them first- at the very least acknowledge it is pointless to try and maintain that policy when fighting AW because the chances are you guys will do them whether you are hit by them first or not.
- Keeping foreign aid to some extent would be nice but with the very large amount that has been permitted for this round it would only really be viable to retain for the purpose of rebuilds with a much larger cap on the amount sent compared to what we have now (which again is only as high as it is because it's the average amount of tech and money AW were sending back at forth at the beginning of the round- another self-made problem biting you in the ass)
- You can prevent selling infra below 1000 but if your infra is blown up beyond 1000 that doesn't stop someone from turtling. Preventing people selling infra past 1000 only addresses the "non-playing bank" issue, one which will cease to be a problem if aid is no longer a mechanic in TE/nerfed to the point where maintaining such things is too inefficient and not worth the time or effort. Also selling below 1000 infra may be necessary for a nation in dire straits financially who is looking to cut their daily bills right down in order to recover with a back-collection to get back in the ring again.
- As for "mules"? Again, only an issue because of the amount of aid that is permitted. This is why it was a problem to allow to be uncapped and why it remains problematic because admin did not want to nerf the maximum aid limit early on in the game to a level where no other alliance could catch up to the amounts AW were sending each other. You wanted it uncapped and you got it, then you demonstrated why leaving in uncapped was going to be bad for the game and admin wound up setting the bar as high as it currently is because it actually would have been unfair to everyone else if he were to nerf it well below the amounts you were sending each other.
If you want the aid mechanic to remain? Instead of outlining the numerous ways people are besting you with the mechanic with the parameters as they currently stand for the use of it? Instead you might be better off presenting a well thought out proposal for how the aid mechanic might be better implemented in TE for future rounds and how much of a cap should be in place for "non-playing banks" to be inefficent to utilise and ultimately too time-consuming to bother using, but for the aid mechanic to still be a helpful enough for rebuilds or for smaller alliances with 10 or less member (like mine) to be able to stand their ground long enough against larger alliances of 20-30 people by either receiving some support from a member of their own alliance or externally from a non-hostile alliance.
All I'm seeing here are a list of things your strategy fails to address and the ways in which you have been bested. It isn't always a faulty mechanic that is utilised unfairly against you, sometimes it actually is a skill issue.
-
2 minutes ago, firingline said:
And if you hadn't insisted on playing games, it WOULD have wrapped up earlier.
The resources needed are pretty irrelevant. OP has banks, we don't. OP is 60 people, we're 30. OP's had breaks from war, we haven't. While everyone would agree the players in AW are more skilled, this is a game where skill can't make up for that sort of deficit.
OP is 26 people. You have simply made enemies of Knights and Boognish Cult by considering us such. You have made no effort to try and pitch things another way, no diplomatic approaches or anything like that. Just paranoid belligerence toward both Knights and Boognish Cult which culminated in you attacking us both along with OP.
You are decrying a problem that your alliance created, one which you still refuse to try and address and insult both Knights and Boognish Cult by denying our existence as sovereign entities. Much like Alex being stuck in Nuke Anarchy unable to hit OP when they attacked? It is a self-made problem, yet you act like it is everyone else's fault.
-
28 minutes ago, firingline said:
You're not the victim here, Johnny, and it's super weird that you're trying to portray the situation as something different than it is.
gestures wildly at your previous posts
Yeah I'm playing the victim, smh. I'm merely pointing out that your continued war against him was unnecessary and could have been wrapped up easier. Then he wouldn't be taking up your war slots and using up resources seeing as you currently have bigger fish to fry
-
19 hours ago, firingline said:
The only one confused about whether attacks were allowed after update is you.
Your supervisor immediately admitted it and said your actions went against his direct instructions.
What a weird hill to die on.
Yeah and if I considered him to be a 'rogue' he would no longer be on the AA. Your supervisor was suspiciously absent when I asked to quantify how long was consdiered fair game for spying after the agreed time for peace and continued to pile on him for what is now the 3rd round of war, so if he received assistance from another alliance who provided tech to fight back against your downdeclaring? I have no qualms with it and it seems fair enough to me, along with further attacks on your alliance he may choose to launch.
Perhaps your supervisor should have clarified this matter when I asked him 🤷♂️
-
fairness? lmao are you for real?
you guys fattened alex up with 10,000 tech to sit on one of our guys after he had alerady been in the ringer against you and you want to talk about what is fair and "detrimental to the game as a whole"
christ almighty this is rich. your guys asked for pandoras box to be opened and now you don't like it. be careful what you wish for next time admin listens.
-
3 hours ago, firingline said:
I'm not convinced it should completely disappear. Aid is genuinely helpful in TE and my gut feeling is that it's an overall net positive to the game is dialed in properly.
I think we still need to address fundamental flaws in gameplay. Some of this may be through rules, some through mechanics.
-OP's use of essentially fake nations to serve as tech or trade farms (this should simply be a rule.)
-The use of turtling to avoid any possibility of functionally losing a war (this should be addressed through mechanics - though it might not be super easy.)
Aid is definitely exploitable and powerful in TE. Perhaps a lower cap on aid, and a limit to 2 aid slots instead of 5?
Aid has been useful for those of us in a smaller alliance, the cap as it is is basically just an average of the amounts being thrown around by AW when aid began being sent. Presumably so the cap nerfed everyone across the board and didn't leave anyone in a positionth eould never able to keep up. I agree that if aid is continued within TE? The cap should be in the ballpark of 20m/tech as the limit.
As for the pracice of turtling? That's only something we can do as the players. I only ever consider turtling as a viable response to a heavy handed offensive where it wouldn't make a diifference if I burnt my money trying to fight, back Keep in mind it is just as boring and frustrating being a turtle. So if you want to see less turtling? Cut out the excessive dogpiles and downward punching. Punch at your weight andyou'll likely find people more likely to punch back for the duration of the war.
3 hours ago, firingline said:I don't think it's intentionally playing favorites. But clearly he came down quite harshly on AW over perceived 'gaming the system'. OP's actions in the last week are an even more aggressive form of gaming the system, so I'm guessing AA's argument is that by not treating this situation the same way he's effectively playing favorites.
I suppose I can see this logic, but it's worth keeping in mind that admin 'came down harslhy on AW' with regards to the aid cap being implemented (which you now recognise is something we do actually need) because you were the onlly alliance spinning ever-growing aid packets to each other. I'm sure admin would have addressed it with them were they doing it at the same time as you.
Admin 'came down harshly' by imposing a cap and preventing the opportunity for unapped aid to spiral out of control. You both seem to be ask guilty as the other with your famrinmg mehods and tech trees, the key difference being that your farms aren't just buying up for their collections and then selling off all the infra to avoid being hit- however it doesn't change the fact your members are farmning it all th same. OP are just minaaxing the method by reducing overheads and potential risks of their farms being burnted in between collecitons by keeping them well out of range but something like 23k troops at ZI.
So like I said; if you self-nerf infras lower than the 2k needed to buy it? You have to rebuy the FAC to regain the ability to send/receuve aid. It's enough of a nerf it wouldn't be considered unfair and woul d mae people think tefwie
-
18 hours ago, Admiral Alexander said:
@admin-- I hate agreeing with FL. But given that you've passed judgement on nations engaging in similar activities early in the round, it can only be seen as favoritism if the rules are applied in such a one-sided manner. Especially when in neither case the rules were explicitly broke, but rather it was just not within the "intent" of the rule.
I'd like to second FL's request -- hopefully, it'll mean more if more than one person asks.Why would admin be playing favourites? I'm curious why you see it this way and what admin's motive would be tto act in favour of OP/against AW.
I would agree that if there is a requirement to buy the FAC then that requirement should be maintained really. If people are selling off their infra to overclock their max troops/reduce bill count and stay out of range of any would be attackers then I'd agree that's cheesing the system (Much like porting tech around to people to prevent it being destroyed is cheesing the system) So perhaps a way to address this would be preventing nations selling infra below the requirement for building it in the first place without sacrificing the wonder first/making it deactivate.
The wonder could still work if you went below the required amount of infra but only as a result of it being destroyed in a war, to me this seems a reasonable way to address the issue.
-
9 hours ago, firingline said:
That's because it's not an addition for this round. This is the... third round for it?
Ah fair enough, I've not played TE for about two years so wasn't aware. So consider it belated kudos, it's a good addition to the TE mechanic that has been added.
-
17 hours ago, GradyTheGreat said:
After three years of carefully guarding WS from various plots and the occasional attempted coup d'état by individuals that I associate with (you know who you are); I have decided to declare that the mission has been accomplished. Since my purpose as leader has been fulfilled, I am now handing over the keys to WileyXero. May his reign be long (if he so chooses) and may WS never be taken over by you know who (Alex).
I've yet to decide what my next role on Bob will be, but I'll certainly still be here.
Carry on my wayward sons,
Grady
You were a fun opponent when we clashed a few years ago, so best of luck to you and Wayward Sons whatever it is you guys choose to do going forward.
And I hope you enjoy the peace of not having to do anything!
-
On 1/30/2024 at 6:38 PM, Smitty256 said:
NATO shall replace NPO as the #1 alliance in the game. It's only a matter of time.
They'll need to re-close the gap between us again first. Seems there's been a shift.
On 2/6/2024 at 2:36 AM, Smitty256 said:pfft, that would be good for Bob.
Careful what you wish for Smitty. Without the planet's traditional big bad around to rally against; who would remain and replace them as the new power to rage against? It could be you or one of your friends, it could be one of ours.
I like uncertainties, not everyone does though.
-
17 minutes ago, lilweirdward said:
It’s just not the same, Johnny.
We know and we do apologise for this. We've got a recording for the weather forecast but it's been Rated R as it's primarily footage of the large birds defecating on your ally and it's therefore not suitable to broadcast on this medium. If you could clear some of them from the skies we might be able to resume broadcasting, the geiger counters our reporters are equipped with are pretty basic models which aren't any good in that environment and we've found that the shows ratings take a dip if a reporter's skin is visibly sloughing off during a segment as a result of acute radiation sickness.
As much as we are committed to the pursuit of facts to create news, we aren't going to be risking the safety of reporters working for The Day Today if you're unwilling to address the climate disaster which we are sure you are more than capable of doing.
-
1 minute ago, lilweirdward said:
Dang, no diatribe? That’s a shame, I always read those, every last word. I’ll try harder next time.
A picture says a thousand words, or in this case roughly 300,000.
-
1 hour ago, lilweirdward said:
RIP UCR?
Congrats to Bundy and the rest of The Wolves!
woops wrong chart
-
1 hour ago, DeathAdder said:
Good to get this out finally.
o/ Wolves
Oh you were actually serious! Well damn, fair play to you both.
I've butted heads with Bundy plenty of times but as the saying goes; don't hate the player, hate the game.
Congrats to you both!
-
1 hour ago, Rebel Virginia said:
If it's brown, flush it down.
Nah get down with the Brown. It's pretty neat over here and I think FAIL might actually enjoy our company. We get to see Bundy thump his chest in our direction which is always a hoot. Also we have the added benefit of there being no 'Imperial German' cosplayers going rogue (just every other sphere that isn't Maroon) because their allies didn't want to see their own hard-earned pixels getting melted if they actually tried to defend them. Can't say I blame them for taking matters into their own hands if that's the case. We just have the inverse on Brown where we have a Soviet-themed alliance instead of one that adopts an 'Imperial Geman' aesthetic.
I've wondered if/when that elephant in the room will be addressed, it's been awful quiet around here lately what with the flock of Doombirds flying over the Reich artilleries which are firing what volleys they can muster alone. The allies of the Reich opted for putting sanctions on teams which have no consequence, instead of putting any boots on the ground. The one team it would be detrimental to the Doombirds in question for a sanction costed Senator Al Bundy his seat for voting against the wishes of his electorate because there were "multiple requests" made to him to place it. (It seems I just looked at the elephant in question. So does anyone else want to take a look? I could always take this to the presses as there's not much going on in the OWF, it'd be just great to hear people's thoughts on the scenario)
Anyway I digress. As you were Mr Blue-Text Virginia; the wise and well travelled leader of the fearsome FAIL alliance. FAIL is an exceptional example to us of the raw power of the individual- game respects seeing game. o7
-
-
going great so far; shoutout to bundy and AO for helping two of us to gain the biggest nothing:
QuoteTop 7 Day Smallest Nation Gains
- -11,933 Strength Change - Probably Mochi of Imagination - Brown Team
- -11,001 Strength Change - Gladiator2 of Shamrock2 - Blue Team
- -9,744 Strength Change - Thanatos of Underworld - Blue Team
- -9,350 Strength Change - Pandy Fackler of Pollos Asado - Brown Team
- -8,625 Strength Change - Caspase of Magistar Corporation - Blue Team
you sure showed us the need for an aid mechanic when you're being punched down on by someone with such an odd tenacity! (did we piss in your cereal? sorry the sewage pipes at the compound are quite rudimentary at best, our engineers would sort it out but are unfortunately pre-occupied)
oh wait, it is cool to be able to receive or send aid after a heavy smashing and maybe that was the purpose admin had in mind for it to be used when he conisdered how it'd help the game; not a mechanic to see who can send the biggest ball of resources to one another. maybe boognish told me to attack your alliance to demonstrate this!
our missionaries are travelling far and wide inside of your borders with ease. your people will be tamed, submit to boognish.
-
2 hours ago, HiredGun said:
Haha good to see you old friend and not too long ago I was trying to track you down.
The round just started and Bundy already has 3k tech so with a wrc he can ZI with a single nuke. lol
He's chewed through close to 400 infra and 1.7k of my NS like I'm some overboiled pasta already with conventional means and he's only done his first blitz. So yeah, if there's anyone even in range to be hit by such a nuke at that point it probably would! Though I suppose he can always send the tech to someone else to hold to drop his strength back into fighting range, then have it shipped back to him. Not complaining by any means about the very obvious reality that his stats vs my stats = lots of dead guys and lost infra/tech/land/military and I wouldn't have marched us into a fight with them if I wanted to avoid this- but there's only one way worth taking swing at someone and it has to be upward, otherwise there's no challenge to it.
I always thought one of the things about TE was your ability to build your nation without outside help other than guidance from your alliance-mates on how to build and what resources you would get from your trade partners. If you were taken down then that meant you were basically out- which is what makes it a tournament. The idea wasn't to allow players to use their whole alliance as an irrigation system to flood one or two members with all of the money, so they could exceed well beyond the kind of growth achieved on their own and become unbeatable. Unless of course everyone else in other alliances did the exact same thing if they had enough people to feed off, it's quite parasitic and doesn't really allow for individual nations to be judged on their skill at growing and fighting if that growth is determined by how much outside help they can get early on for a considerably large headstart. It's been argued that this was necessary to overcome some issue in the game mechanics that AW kept running into when fighting Ordo Paradoxia, but I don't see how that's a credible argument for needing this much of an advantage. It only demonstrates how good people think they are vs. how good they actually must be without being able to have a good +100m warchest, 3k tech and 4k infra by day 20 of the round. All of it having nothing to do with being well-versed in how to build a nation on your own but thanks to being allowed to send aid without a limit at first but still a massive amount even with the cap on (presumably so admin didn't nerf everyone who didn't take full advantage of it before AW) For alliances without the amount of members that AW have? There's no way of competing with that on an individual level if it doesn't matter how well you build, this round it's been about how many people you can get to help you build more than you would typically be able to on your own.
That being said; one of the additions which hasn't been given much notice or credit to admin for has been the addition of a 2nd set of resources which you can't trade with anyone else. Essentially they're secondary supplement resources and you decide what they can be, whatever you choose has no impact on your trade circle if you decide you want a resource that isn't included in that setup, or if you lose a trade partner you have a backup option where you can change your supplementals to the resources you temporarily have lost a trade partner for. It's a nice modifier that doesn't have the same potential to grossly imbalance the playing field.
-
1 hour ago, HiredGun said:
Defcon 1 are drinking ale in the halls of Valhalla.
Oh hey there you are! I had a feeling if someone whispered your name you'd appear
1 hour ago, HiredGun said:I'm assuming its like SE and there are 6 aid slots? So 300m every 15 days you could potentially pump into a single nation. Even if there were only one round of aid slots that'd give them a huge advantage.
Now whoever can pump the most aid into someone wins the game making most of the games tactics and team play redundant. This is what made this game truly fun for those of us who played this game like a chess game.
Rerollling can be an vital part of the game especially for newbies who bill lock. You're trying to solve one problem and inadvertently creating another.
That's about the size of it yeah, whoever got the headstart on rapidly pumping aid upwards has (to the surprise of no one) now managed to gain a handful of nations flush with cash and tech who can only declare downward because they did it first. But hey-ho, it is what it is and we Cultists are back for a bit of roughhousing regardless of what form that takes as war isn't something I'd inherently consider a thing that is fair anyway. It is much less impressive if you're waging one you know you'll win because you've nowhere to punch but downwards and you win but then you could argue everyone else should've been quicker off the mark with making full use of the aid mechanic if they didn't want that to happen.
They're just 'taking full advantage of the game mechanics' (mechanics which seem to have been requested by them for the most part) and did it better only insofar as they did it before anyone else. Doesn't make much difference to a ragtag bunch of misfits who knew we weren't going to compete with the well-established players with more people than us- with or without aid being a mechanic, I didn't even know it'd be a thing for this round until I'd already made my nation so it was something of a funny coincidence for me. I'm sure you remember the Cult from over a year or so ago, our victory is determined by our own criteria and the first of which is that we should be having some fun with it- which we are!
Also speaking of other victory criteria; have you seen that sheep around anywhere lately? I'd like a......friendly word
-
What up?
We haven't found that sheep we came back here for yet so we prayed to our stupidfaced god and he didn't say anything for a while. I guess he was disappointed in us.
Then the other day, I found this scrap of paper while packing the compound walls with more explosives (someone tried to just walk in the other day; it's a compound for a cult my guy, do you not see everyone eating only rice and happens to be heavily armed? some people...am I right?) So yeah Boognish left this message for me and I didn't know what the hell he meant at first:
Classic mumbo-jumbo cult nonsense I know but hey I decided to just go with it and the rest of the cultists have decided the same, which is great news.
So Bundy, let's bounce! Boognish Cult wants to throw down and make everything nice and brown. What else is there to do here until we find that damned sheep?
For the time being Boognish Cult will dance with Alpha Wolves! We hope you like our Kool-aid and suspicious looking vests (we're just fat okay don't go there)
Lot of love; from Pandy Fackler and The Idiots
-
so anyway; how's the round going for everyone else so far? whatever happened to that defcon alliance that whipped the wolves around instead of paradoxia? OP were relatively dormant the last time I was here with maybe less than 10 members keeping the old banner alive, so it's nice to see that people do still just come and go for a few rounds here and there.
stops it getting too repetitive I suppose.
-
22 hours ago, firingline said:
This is a lot of text that is irrelevant.
The aid amounts in question do not break the back end of CN. Full stop. The limits were implemented because the existing alliances in TE wanted to continue manipulating game mechanics in the way they knew best and did not like that others could compete with them.
okay buddy. the creator of the world says otherwise whereas you don't know squat about coding software. i'm erring towards him being right on this.
get good or get lost. you couldn't beat OP before without admin adding uncapped aid, now you're on a level playing field and everyone plays by the same rules which is apparently unfair to you and you alone. sounds more like you're simply a sore loser at best and at worse just someone who wanted to cheat the system in order to win. of course you fail to see the irony of your own claim about existing alliances 'manipulating game mechanics' in the way they knew best despite literally wanting to see a mechanic added to specifically manipulate it to 'compete with them' - that's not competing that's seeking to give yourself an unfair edge because you are literally incapable of thinking of another way to compete effectively on a level-playing field, even when you have a superiority in the number of nations in your alliance working to your favour it's still somehow unfair? you should read some of the stuff you say out loud before you post it, it's cognitive dissonance at it's finest.
there's still the aid mechanic in place, perfectly viable to use to re-strategise if your previous efforts have failed (which if was just you guys using the same strat over and over expecting a different result? that is the definiition of insanity so i'm told and is why i'm gonna just stop engaging with you at this point)
-
32 minutes ago, firingline said:
The first reason given was that it would break the fairness of the game.
Only later did admin claim it would somehow break the game. Which is weird, because transactions totaling billions of dollars regularly hit the database.
Both are capable of being the case tbh. First of all; Al posted a thread in Report a Bug two days prior to this thread being made about only being able to send 100 tech to another nation, which is how it is in SE. From this it would seem that the code for sending aid in SE was copied to TE and left unchanged, this explains why Al ran into an aid cap that mirrored SE. This would also mean that an aid cap has been in place since the beginning, only when someone tried to send it nearly two weeks into the round did it get found. Meaning the cap not only got hastily removed from the copy of SE code- it also hadn't been tested at all prior to the round to make sure it wasn't going to be giving any given nation too much of an upper-hand; or tested to make sure that it wouldn't have a detrimental effect on the actual code of the game in ways that would be far worse than just giving the people who utilised it first the upper-hand too freely.
Thats why even a re-issue of a game with slight tweaks will always be debugged before it goes on sale. These things need testing and finding where the breaking points might be, then ensuring that breaking point isn't something that can be reached before you hand it over to the user. Otherwise the user is going to be pretty angry with a broken product eventually. This is especially true when it comes to games we play online. What do we need to do to play most online games? Make an account. What does that need? Your email address and a password and you get the picture. If there's a vulnerability in the code of the game? That data we use to sign up is also potentially vulnerable if the new elements of the game code are not thoroughly debugged to ensure that not only the game architecture is stable but that user details which are given to make accounts are secure from a wouldbe hackerman. As to the nature of the code vulnerability? I don't know what it is exactly and I doubt admin is going to declare what it was in case any passerby gets any funny ideas. Yes billions of dollars are shifted daily, that's already been coded and accounted for happening it's why it hasn't been a concern. Has 10000 tech ever been moved in one go before? Make that 10000.99 to be precise. What if it was the case that a 7-digit input on the Tech you send our via foreign aid would've been all it took to sink everything? Knowing us left unchecked, we'd probably have made a game of how big we could make a ball of aid before the end of the round as a little side-game to have fun with while totally unaware of the underlying issue. We already have this thread celebrating the largest amount of money sent in history, what would have stopped us pushing it further for seemingly harmlesss laugh?
I went from thinking "Jesus that's a bit excessive, so whoever does that first wins then?" but I'm more concerned about the fact this was discovered to be a risk so late without any testing being done, not about if it's fair on other players at this point.
-
3 minutes ago, firingline said:
What are you going on about?
We sent 2,500 tech to one nation using a bunch of other nations. Roughly the equivalent of 4-5 people sending 500 tech each to a specific nation. How was that not the intent of unlimited aid? How is it a bug or breaking the game in any way?
An example of what I'm going on about which might be related to why the cap needed to be put on would be this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_overflow
Brief summary for you as well.
QuoteIn programming and information security, a buffer overflow or buffer overrun is an anomaly whereby a program writes data to a buffer beyond the buffer's allocated memory, overwriting adjacent memory location
[...]
Exploiting the behavior of a buffer overflow is a well-known security exploit. On many systems, the memory layout of a program, or the system as a whole, is well defined. By sending in data designed to cause a buffer overflow, it is possible to write into areas known to hold executable code and replace it with malicious code, or to selectively overwrite data pertaining to the program's state, therefore causing behavior that was not intended by the original programmer.
To be crystal clear with you here; I am not in any way saying that anyone was doing anything along the lines of trying to exploit the coding (you especially as you don't know what I'm talking about, so how would you know what to even do to exploit it in the first place) However; if there was an instance where a large enough sequence was entered into area you type out how much aid you want to send that exceeded the buffer- or let's call it "the cap" of the memory in the program's code? The example above is what might happen, that may be why there is a need for a secondary cap on the front-end/player interface to prevent a buffer overflow disrupting things across the game.
I'm no expert on this kinda thing, just have a bit of rudimentary knowledge that I've picked up from other programmers and other computer magicians over the years. I could be way off and the need for a cap is for some other reason. What I'm trying to communicate to you by pointing this one example out is this: The aid cap was not added to spite you, it was done for the stability of the very game you enjoy playing. But yes, I'm sure you feel it isn't fair that you can't send as much aid as you want anymore, you asked for uncapped aid which has been taken away. Admin should remove the cap for you again, buffer overflows be damned!
Disable Foreign Aid altogether
in Tournament Edition Suggestions
Posted · Edited by Johnny Apocalypse
The chaos is primarily you lot losing your god damn minds.
Which yes, it is entertaining to watch but it's still the same old TE but with bigger numbers involved. Wow very excite.
If this were true, they wouldn't still be wiping the floor with you using foreign aid. An introduction of "Anti-turtling mechanics" isn't going to happen because;
a) it'd require admin to overhaul a lot of the code and math he's on record saying he's forgotten a lot of how it works nearly 20 years later
b) if someone were to ask for the same "anti-turtling mechanics" in SE? Something tells me you wouldn't be as adamantly in favour of them.
But you're right; overhauling the game code to your liking is indeed the only real threat to them at this time, because evidently you aren't one. Don't worry though, I'm sure someone competent enough will come along to challenge them.
It's still the same game, you just have more tech and
farm nations you recruited from your SE allies to make thebigger numbers. The charm of this will wear off soon enough.In summary; git gud or stfu