I've thought about this for a while. I think it would be fun however I don't know that we have the players right now to support another server... maybe people would expand to fill space though... anyways...

Wasteland server:
Remove NW/building/unit dependence from attack returns, so things are just a straight percent.
Multiply special attack/missile/spy effectiveness by 1.5

the goal would be a giant landtrading server?

or a server like limited used to be with no humanitarians and people landkilled for 20 acres a hit for netgaining from memory

Basically a battle royale where destroying your enemies is equally effective to growing yourself to get on top.

Why not make a server where resets last for a year or so?

How is that related to this suggestion?

I do think that might be a good idea to keep people playing the game...

It has to do with a potential new server.

If it's a clan-based server, it offers the possibility of evolving the game's political structure, due to the fact that it will force alliances to consider options they wouldn't normally consider in a 2-month reset--that is, assuming the rate of turn gain remains the same as in Alliance. If the total turns available remains the same, it'll seriously slow down gameplay to the point of stagnation and boredom. Maybe keep the same total turns on hand, but increase available stored turns?

I was making this thread for the purpose of the server I suggested, not a new server in general. I encourage your line of discussion to take place in a new thread and to not hijack this one.

I think we should talk more about Nuk's idea:

fluff THAT IDEA

It is hard enough to net and not get suicided in like 2-3 months let alone a year :-p

would be kinda interesting tho I guess

well a never/slow resetting server would raise some interesting questions

usually that sort of thing is combined with periodic new servers

im not sure if this game can support that but it wouldnt be the end of the world to have the previous ones archived in some way, stilll playable but less prominent

im assuming a server where only 20 people bother to still play is fine on the servers since tourney used to have 25 games or however many it was

you could end up with a situation of certain groups winning certain servers, then either keeping building or stopping playing, and the losers moving on sooner perhaps

the alternative to making new servers every so often is some kind of catch up like one of those car games where the person behind always goes faster or just general changes to make being small less problematic

i find the idea more intriguing than the first one though which i imagine as a return to very efficient bottomfeeding as hitting someone small could give you 5% of their land no matter what their networth was

And then that person bombs structures you back to reality. I think this is an idea more geared towards people who want to attack freely and recognize that they might be destroyed in turn.

so even though they were small spy ops would do max damage and not depend on how many buildings/cash/troops they had

same for missiles as well i assume

i understand why bottom feeding is terrible
i understand why a small country that special attacks or missiles a large country has minimal success
but i do not understand why a tech heavy attacker who hits a large nw low defense country can not get a decent return

Yes. Spy ops would clearly have to have a reasonable limit like 20 or 25/day.