You make the worst posts on AT, seriously.

Someone is complaining about EVO farming untagged jetters and suiciders? Do you believe that these are new players? Are you confused about their goals?

What is EVO supposed to do, not hit them and let them build up more resources so they can do more damage to us or our allies?

Last I talked to him he told me that he was too busy to play 1a. A week later I saw him whining on the boards about ffa.

What a guy!

Can I come to #sof and trashtalk?

The same price as always, 0.8 * 32.

I actually couldn't remember what Dibs did, so I lifted his ban.

Look at all of these fake war decs! If you guys want to fight so badly I'm sure I could arrange something.

four of them plus llaar? THERE'S A SECRET FIFTH LaEx LEADER

if only gregg was around to get to the bottom of this

ice, jager, and DM play in LaEx I bet.

CI has won team (before the CI boosts), tourney, and express, and primary.

All military sold in earth's market is used!

Is this LaE or LaEx?

Military tech now raises private market sell prices instead of lowering them. The effect of Military Tech on Private market purchase prices is not changed. The theo bonus and military bases still work in the same way.

We are applying the inverse of mil tech. So if a country had 90% military tech, private market sell prices would be increased by 100/90 ~= 11% instead of 10%.

Players always had to choose between getting or not getting military tech. Military tech was the only tech that had negative side effects in some cases. In some ways, this was good. For example, this caused a split in demo destocking strategies. In some ways, this was bad. Just ask a tyranny farmer at war.

Reversing the effect of mil tech should strengthen farmers, especially those at war, slightly strengthen CI destocks, increase demand of mil tech towards the end of the set, and depress military prices around the end of the set. Effects will vary depending on the server length, obviously.

It's impossible to predict how everything will end up, but we'll change things around (or even reverse this change entirely) it if imbalances the game too much. Specifically, we want to be sure that farmers won't be too strong or that mil prices won't be depressed too much near the end of the set.

This change will go into effect as each server restarts.

Here's some evidence:

http://primary.www.earthempires.com/topplayers?round=4

full, thanks guys

I can out WCL mrford in his sleep

Why is it 15 instead of 16 anyway?

There's basically an hour period where everything needs to be caught up on. I suppose that it's theoretically possible that if you made your tourney country during that hour period that you'd get screwed like this.

We'll look into this and try to get it fixed.

It basically runs through a list of possible error messages and returns the first one that applies. You technically have a point in that the 20 hour rule should have higher precedence over the other error messages, so I changed it around but the code isn't live yet.

Yeah I think I fixed it.

Sorry for missing your post ivan.

If you make another comment like "I hope you die soon" you're going to find yourself banned forever.

Did you keep the same country name?

Probably soon, don't have an exact day yet.

I appreciate you taking the time to post your ideas, but if you refuse to admit that you're sometimes wrong then they will always be tainted.

Top indy took 40 missiles and other attacks and lost ~7500 A from nukes. Second indy got ABed for no reason.

Anyone teching next set? Looking for two allies, PM me if you're interested. No suiciders please.

Cashers and indies both benefit. Farmers could benefit in theory, but it's basically a big gamble. Techers get screwed. Oilers don't matter.

You can't roll over and lose all of your cash anymore. If you had 2B on a server with the 2B limit you simply wouldn't receive any cash.

Pang deserves all of the credit for this feature (I think). Thanks Pang!

I'm fairly sure that CI is overpowered right now.

Thank you gregg, this was a very interesting piece of fiction.

Last round there was four cashers, three indies, two techers, and one farmer in the top ten.

that's only because your LaEx buddies were FAing you NOW3P

I would have beaten them all if I didn't get suicided on

slagpit was right

I bet that de1i guy is responsible for this outrage

de1i's alias is Mr Meat Brown, duh

Smaller countries are set up to do less damage to larger countries, unless you mean situations where a smaller country will spend 250 turns getting tanks and the next 200 turns ABing someone, or buying warfare and running 450 turns launching missiles as he gets them. The NW and size advantage still works in favor of the large country, but it's very difficult to defend against.

I don't know if there's that much player demand for a server that demands so much of your time. I think I like changing the time to market from 15-45 and allowing players to specify the time on the market for each packages of goods.

death by deli sandwich

...

Why not accept a single landgrab? It used to be part of the etiquette that we used to teach everyone, but these days people act like landgrabbing is some kind of crime.

If retaliation is not proportional then the best strategy for grabbers is to pick out one poor guy and farm him and AB him so hard that he can't possibly retaliate. Sound like fun to you?

I believe someone messaged him and he said he wasn't the old asdf.

Do you honestly believes that losing 302 A warrants 23 missiles?

The idea behind the market changes isn't necessarily to hurt cashers. What I'd like to do is even out the public market somewhat and make it easier for indies and techers to play their turns. As it stands, standing orders are vastly underused on this server and turret demand can go from 3500k per hour to 600k per hour to to 350k per hour. There are probably even more extreme examples than that. Having a 0-30 min time to market encourages gambling and undercutting and does not help in situations where there are is just no demand.

I'm also not sure if a drop in time on market to four hours is good. What if you want to put your goods on at a relatively high price while you sleep? What if literally no one buys the good you're trying to sell for four hours?

As for DR, if a country grabs then it will take itself out of DR. We could do something like having a country's DR reduced to 0 if it makes a single grab?

I also don't really understand what you mean by a smaller country harming a large one.

The issue with team server is finding a standard of conduct that is both enforceable and fair. I cannot think of any standard that satisfies both criteria.

An example of a standard that is enforceable but not fair would be deleting any two tags who both war the same tag. However, would this be fair? What if tag A instigated the aggression towards both tags B and C? What if tag A has 5 five members, tag B has 2 members, and tag C has 3 members?

An example of a standard is that fair but not enforceable would be to not allow groups of tags to enforce any policy that is harmful to the server. After all, why does it matter if two tags are named pang1 and pang2 if they aren't hurting anyone else? However, this policy is not enforceable. The game moderators for each server do not play on those servers because we want them to be as impartial as possible when dealing with deletions and player issues. How would someone who doesn't play be able to keep track of all of the teams, especially when many of them exist only for a set or have no presence on the boards at all? How would moderators decide what is good or bad for the server? What if someone claims to be a representative of a tag on the boards but doesn't actually play there? What do we do when one member of a tag violates the spirit of the rules, should we delete the whole tag or just him?

Besides practical concerns, there are also philosophical concerns. Team is a clan server. The admins would like to see mature clans that have meaningful (both positive and negative) relationships with other clans. We don't want to see one group of players teaming up to gain an unfair advantage, but it has to be up to the players to prevent that. When MKR, RAG, and BEER were teaming up and killing other countries, I Fsed them with half of their numbers and won. The next set they changed most of their policies. Why can't you guys do that?

As many RD members have pointed out, other clans were doing this long before they appeared on the server. Many posters on the boards have been warning the community about what would eventually happen if players continued to use numerical advantages to enforce bad policies, but for the most part no one listened. If I had deleted the clans who were teaming up to do bad things, I would have been roasted on these boards for being biased and tons of players would throw a fit. However, now that RD basically has control of the server and RD are the Bad Guys, a lot more people want to see the game moderators get involved and delete them. Is it really so hard to recruit people to fight RD?

It's also worth realizing that if a strict interpretation of the rules means that half of the players on the server would be subject to deletion, maybe the rules or the server itself need to be changed.

The primary server is different because diplomacy is not a major part of gameplay. Ideally, diplomacy is handled country to country. Players teaming up for the most part are easy to spot. The situation isn't ideal and some guilty players escape without being deleted, but it's easy for honest players to avoid getting deleted for spirit of the rules violations.

By the way, the reason I got so pissed off before was because I find it to be very rude to post someone's emails on the boards without permission. I apologize for letting my temper get the better of me.

redacted