Vote

Vote yes or no for the following suggestion.

I Crazy would like the GM's to change back the war game to its 2009 rules. I think this would cause alot more interaction within the game community. Plus it would probably bring back alot of the really good vets who loved the war part of the game. As it sits now the war game is greatly reduced. I do still like the econ part of the game and if that is all a person is interested in, they could just click the button to remain only in that part of the game. I have just noticed a general decline in the community after all of the changes to the war game and it makes me sad.

i vote yes..... maybe we can implement reforms to the security council and update the forums to allow for better communication and interaction in order to keep peace and to keep newbs from being killed instead of just cutting everyone off from eachother.... i mean honestly i cant hardly see war as even occuring let alone being a problem with such responsible vets and tight knit community

i vote yes

I doubt it will be taken into slight consideration... but I vote yes regardless.

I also vote yes

edit

The war game is only reduced in two ways.
1) Thieves are limited to robbing those who can fight back.
2) Pests are limited to who they can pest.
There might be another.....can low level fed members join a war with a high level enemy?


Mother Natures Dying

I vote yes

I vote yes.

I vote yes........but like Wolfker I think they won't even listen.

What were the 2009 rules?

I vote yes...or atleast try it out on Fearless Blue.

I agree Jacktastic. That is what FB is for The War World. Could the GM's please look at returning the war game to normal on Fearless Blue.

and wg

I vote yes....... But I highly doubt the GMs will listen.

I dout the GM will listen either we have tried for to long... The GM really donest seem to care in my honest opinion.

Personal i vote that FB should be 1-11 warring. If you wanna play econ on FB you stay @ war level 0. Otherwise once you take your first nation your fair game. It would force people to communicate and work together. Ive also stated that Fearless Blue should have double weapons/triple ammo production to make them super cheap to allow fast growth military.

Thats my 2cents worth

Message to all:- Compare what was good and what was bad about the 2009 rules to what is good and bad with the current rules regarding the benefits of both, would you really be in a better position with the rules being changed back to how they were?

well everyone above has voted yes so I suppose you have your answer

Here is a vote, one asked like no other, our vote...........NO.......the game is developing quite nicely why roll back the dice, like life everything has to evolve without it everything stagnates and becomes stale!
OUR ONE GRIPE.....One can agree with one player though, playing on most worlds, fearless blue for instance which should be the WAR WORLD OF SIMCOUNTRY there is/has too many new/existing players setting up shop with a war level lower than 3 and wanting to stay there hiding and not really doing anything, the economic side of the game on fearless should always be secondary on this world, me thinks if players want to set up shop on fearless they should automatically be given a war level of 3 minimum, no level 0, 1 or 2

but noone is on fb its a dead world so maybe war should be reintroduced to players who actually want to play on an active world aswell..... there is secured mode idk why we need war levels

the who, you should change your name to "the why".

lol

i vote yes

i also vote yes ;)

Fearless blue SHOULD be the war world PERIOD. Once you hit war level 1 you fair game, 1-11 no expections. If you wanna play econ on FB you can @ war level 0, but the moment you take your first C3 your fair game