*scratches head*

So your entire economy will exist on selling potatoes, and 82% of US GDP will still be situated on the coasts. The coasts will still be able to import food, and middle America will no longer be able to be reliant on federal taxes other than on their potatoes.

The coasts will be able to support our current budget for military spending, whereas the middle would essentially have to cut all funding to military just to have enough money to build a road let alone a tank.

I'm liking this idea more by the minute. It's honestly been kind of a pain in the ass that 55% of us make up over 80% of the gdp. We're sick of you freeloaders anyways. Bye felicia lol

You guys gonna sell sheep wool for your economy? No offense but the tech companies that make up most of the US exported economy resides on the coasts.

Not only that but texas is flipping blue while ohio and florida are flipping firmly red. If you give us texas with the coasts, you won't even have that oil money...

Y'all gonna be the next Mexico.

I usually contact FR people of war clans before i take retals. Even in cases where I am pacted. Anyone who knows me knows i do every single hit on a case by case basis (sin. Every hit is different and you know it. The problem is people stringently think one type of retal policy is appropriate when in reality every hit is different, and should be treated as such. One can easily show that off by hitting a 30k acre country with a 2k acre country and demanding their aggressor tag take 1:1 as we did. I don't really give a damn what is customary). Imo, most leaders probably wouldn't have killed hellrush in this scenario, however, most warclans would.

The reason why contacting warclans is typically the way to handle things, as I've done for GNV just today, is because they're less predictable and often looking for fluff to kill. But again, that's that going by feel sorta FA work that I believe is appropriate now that such disparities can make up such differences.

For the most part everyone is correct, but the breakdown, as it often is, was communication imo.

I'm a never trumper for different reasons. Voted for McCain -> Jill Stein -> hillary but did it begrudgingly. Not married to one side or the other so i guess i don't qualify as a leftist technically even tho I'm opposed as hell to Trump for a variety of reasons, and will be casting my vote again for any alternative even if that means scum like hillary. I regret nothing.

I'm probably a bit left of most here i suppose. That said, own 2 pistols, 6 shotguns, a rifle, a muzzleloader, a compound bow, 3 recurve bows, 3 throwing knives and 4 throwing axes.

I wouldn't mind having to get a license to have them. In fact I'd probably prefer that was the case. But I'm with y'all if someone ever tries to take them away from me. I think hawk is right. Most people are, that's not just local to Texas. Haha

Something like that would be intriguing because we'd realize how similar we all actually are... When the caravans were coming I'd hoped it'd expose our issues with asylum law in America. Somehow we managed to just throw them in camps and talk about a wall instead of the tangible problem of our broken immigration system. I was disappointed because i thought it would expose how ideologically close we are to each other, but the media seems pretty keen on keeping us divided.

Divide and conquer I suppose....

I truly believe we want the same things when it comes to immigration, equal rights, guns....even marriage. There's a couple things like abortion that we fundamentally disagree on but for the most part we're actually EXTREMELY ideologically similar. That's why the most recent immigration reform fail had bipartisan support....

Yeahhh leg and arm scars are cool and his money maker appears to keep cheesing. Those battle wounds just look badass. I like all my scars haha

I will only modify my subjective parameters to only see what i want to see. I'm a millennial afterall.

You can take my pride and my dignity but you'll never take my cocaine!

Where's your team talk at?

Mob is the best player from Houston. Prove me wrong. Lol

BRUTAL!!! That's a pretty solid gash dude. Sounds like it was well earned. Great job. Bet you was laughing hard as hell until you saw it too. Haha. Awesome. Congrats on the battle scars.

I played a wedding on the nc/virginia border this weekend. Worked 12 hours Thursday, busted for Virginia at 4am for a 10 hour drive, was a groomsman, played for two hours, got drunk, slept it off for 4 hours, drove home saturday and worked another 14 hours on Sunday. Looks like you had more fun than me hahaha

https://imgur.com/qnAmQk1

I actually love things like the CPAC speech from last year.

"Darling is the wind blowing, I'd like to watch television"
"The government was shut down, Melania was in Florida, and i was in the white house alone and I was lonely. I said, "LETS GO TO IRAQ!""
"I met this general I said what's your name, he said "Raisin'". I said "Raisin? Like the fruit?" He said "sir yes sir." I said "whats your last name general raisin?" He said Cane. I said "Raisin Cane? Get outta here"

Just as i can see the fun parts of trump as enjoyable, i can see the hypocrisy as well.

If you really feel like liberal news networks constantly attack Trump, then what would you say the conservative news networks did to Obama or other leading dems?

The real unfortunate thing that i believe rupert Murdoch was on the bleeding edge of, is that hit pieces in the news SELL. You guys love tuning in to listen to some conspiracy about Hillary, and libs love themselves a good conspiracy about Trump. The whole things sells itself extremely well. We're so far gone from the media having any integrity, and both sides seem to try to have unbridled influence, and do something that the people keep tuning in for.

As long as we continue to devour the divisiveness that is their product, we will continue to move further apart idealogically. As long as networks like Fox and NBC affiliates keep doing 60/60/24/7/52/365 hit pieces on politicians across the aisle, i think people will be more apt to realize how close the two parties are on a much larger political spectrum.

I own guns, but I also support needing a license to get them, same as driving.
I believe we have an immigration problem, but i believe our visa program and seemingly completely ridiculous asylum laws are largely to blame for illegal immigration. (FUN FACT: In order to apply for asylum in america, you have to already be in the country. If you claim asylum at a standard port of entry, you're just denied, but if you come in illegally, you get a chance to qualify. That's complete nonsense and clearly promotes illegal entry.)

The fact is, the right and left are at the end of the day, similar in America. Both centre right, but one just a bit further than the other.

We just love to hate each other. We love the divisiveness. We chew on our easy mac and drip ketchup on our white shirts all the same, while we watch our respective extremely biased news do hit pieces on the people we love to hate most.

Trash, it seems, knows no side but television ratings and cash flow.

Yo but i think we all know who should be the real center of attention here.

Michael Dukakis.

One of my favorite facebook trolls right now is to post 4 year old articles about hillary announcing her campaign. People on both sides absolutely freak. Its hilaaaaarious.

Yeah. I was wondering what the hell a cappuccino machine was myself. Usually you get an espresso machine with a milk steamer to make cappuccinos...

Does a cappuccino machine do the foam art for you?

I mean I'm probably ee's most vocal never trumper. Throw me on the hit list too.

Word

Where'd the hessman thread go.....

My dude is missing because of something that happened here and I'd like very much to know....

He's honestly easier to get ahold of via ingame message. Just saying. He was sol FA for a long time and forum messages were legit the only way i ever got a response.

For stocks war thats about right. It's arguable whether getting 100 spal on 40k acres and then dropping to 20k or actually building 200 spal on 40k acres is more effective. But most active dogs do one or the other. Wallers tend to drop down, non-wallers shouldn't unless they burn stock fast to break early.

I'm playing a wedding tomorrow so I'm road dogging in rn.

Some is on spotify titled The Mallory Project. It's a band here in philly playing some stuffs i wrote. It's some softcore baby makers tho.

There's also some drunk bedroom recordings i made on slamdunkins.bandcamp.com
They aren't good tho. I clearly sound drunk af, I'm recording to outdated tech and my playing is sloppy.

Everything else I'd have to look for and I'm driving to play a wedding in Virginia mañana atm.

Like riiiiiiiiiight there. Maybe less effective than all x.

Lol a tech website posts an article about how to remove the U2 album lol

Which ever one came with an un-deletable U2 album.

This but i also play guitar and sing to increase the volume and financial viability of both.

I'm going to get an ipod.

Yeah most of the proposed changes will actually keep spies as powerful (aside from a small reduction to CD power) but just reduce their effect on countries carrying small amounts on small acres vs large amounts on large acres. Otherwise making them cheaper the more you have if anything makes spies even more powerful because the biggest countries will be able to hold them efficiently in war.

But, if people like you and me ever unknot our panties, this game will lose a good amount of its entertainment value I figure. Go hard or go outside haha

Hahahaha. Nailed it. +1

I've messaged dragon for him to have an opinion on the ui forum, and mentioned directly here that I'd like to know his opinion....

If he gave some good ideas in a rando conversation that are more effective than the formulas listed here, I'd be absolutely into discussing them with people here.

The problem is, because none of those are listed in the appropriate thread discussing it, they aren't taken as seriously and the community doesn't get a chance to discuss it on the whole.

If you can remember some of his suggestions, I'm still very intrigued for his input.

yep.

Not only that but if cd was narfed all the way to 2%, were still only talking about under 2m troops per 10. Should be peanuts to a well stocked country. They'll have no trouble rebuying whatsoever.

To put things in terms of oil rigs, and a sell price around $150, were talking about less than 7k acres in buildings. Meaning i can replace 2m troops per day with just owning 7k labs/rigs/farms. It's not significant enough to effect what a country over 10k acres can replace even at 2%....

A country taking 35 CDs per day would need only about $80m per day less to replace troops back to 10m if it were 3% instead of 4%. I hear your point I suppose, I just don't think it is significant enough to give a fluff....seems like a small issue caused by solving a larger issue.

If dropping CDs to 3% is a hard pass tho, I think changing the way spy power is calculated and spy expenses to the above formulas would only serve to make wars both less endless and more in the spirit of the old rules where building a good war country used to matter. Since anyone can hit anyone endlessly now, good building in wars has a lessened point, and activity and number of GS attacks are the main determinant of victory. That's dumb, and good building should return to having more of a factor as it did in the old days.

I'm asking for anyone, literally anyone, to back up what they're saying using the actual formulas. You've still not done that.

Use the ACTUAL FORMULAS to explain why they should or shouldn't change. Just once. For me. One real in game description of what you believe is flawed about it. Something in particular that will change. I can speculate the Maki's hot wife defense too, but it isn't helpful. It seems like currently you're just speculating based on a lack of understanding of the formulas. I'm asking you to provide a real example of something that would change that you don't like. Not a blind guess based on nothing.

The hell are you trying to say?

Youd still need spies to war and would still be held accountable to your lack thereof. That doesn't change. Again. Actually look at sins post, or at least attempt to try the math for what you think is going to happen and see if it's true (which it isnt). Good lord.

Use the damn formula to explain what you mean. How does that change at all?

Your hypotheticals and speculations are still not at all related to the actual math. It's a total Maki's hot wife defense.

The most viable of these are as follows Getafix. Punch them into a calculator:

Spy Expenses = 1/(1 + Networth/200000000)
Current formula = (1 + Networth/200000000)

This would essentially lower the expenses of spies as you get more. The price at low volume will be about the same, but as you get a pile of spies, rather than having the cost of them basically double every 5m, they will be reduced by 1/3. This doesn't affect netters as they will still be the most expensive unit and likely not taken. When you run around 30 spal geta, we're talking about a reduction of perhaps $1m per turn in expenses. Its not nearly enough to make them a commodity for netters.

Spy Power: spies*acres^(-1/2)
Current formula: spies/acres

As you can see from sin's grid, it just allows a person with 50k acres to be on a level playing field expense per acre with a person with 5k acres. Currently its easier to run high spal on low acres. Balancing the ability to run high spal on high acres will make people go for big countries rather than 5k uber restarts, but will not affect netters as its unlikely they will have 100+ spal ever anyways. And as has been pointed out, this is more close to Mehul's e2025 formula than what we have now.

A reduction of CD from 4% to 3% of troops

20 CDs & 7 demos current break: 32%
20 CDs & 7 demos suggested formula break: 38%

Fighting over a 6% reduction in break seems silly to me, but I'll bite. There isn't really a good reason for CD to be more powerful than any other ops. While its subtle, that 600k troops for every ten million could make a pretty big difference in outgrowing your enemies, but again does not make it easy for netters to have them, nor does it make them safer in the least bit.

It seriously annoys me that the opposition to these are plainly hypotheticals based on old terminology and who is in LaF. I've yet to hear one reason why these are bad, aside from people saying "it will be easy for laf" and not providing a single instance of how it benefits them whatsoever. Use the fluffing formulas to describe how the formulas should be changed or unchanged. Not some old descriptions of war and your opinion of LaF. Imo its unfortunate Gerdler is supporting the ideas of the more personally invested, intelligent war players. Because if he'd just say sof is right they'd probably actually test the fluff and give them a chance.

In fact, I hereby change the reasons I support these changes. From now on, the only reason I support these changes is because Makinso must have a hot wife for his ugly ass to make such cute children. While this may appear to have no relevance whatsoever to the formulas, I'm thinking it's more topical and palatable for the community.

You won't sin because it's all theoretical. People arent sittimg down with the proposed formulas and actually doing math, just as many wardogs rarely do while stocking.

The opposition of said formulas represents a complete lack of understanding of them, and a lack of desire to test them as you and I have.

It's blatantly obvious that these formulas will not effect netters in the most remote sense. They'll be just as easy to suicide and it will take no risk out of it. Therefore the ONLY effect is IMPROVING WAR.

These will improve war because it will no longer be viable to be a 5k acre country with 550k spies to take down a 50k acre country with 5m. The 5k acre country will still be able to take down even a player like getafix who runs around 20 or 30 spal on 80k or 100k acres. He's still not safe. As you can see from Sins list, a 100k acre country would need almost 4m spies to prevent grief. So the risk is not even a factor. The risk for netters will be exactly identical.

What the changes will do, is make it more effective to build a big strong war country, rather than being able to nerf your acres and take down anyone in the game. There will be incentives for war players to keep building in war and try to escape over the top of their enemies while running a country with balanced expenses and that is it.

I think in some ways, people just don't like the suggestions coming from gerdler, when in reality he enjoys war greatly and wants to see it improved for the same reasons I do.