The 3 Point Plan

I propose a simple and easy to implement 3 point plan to fix war levels. Although this plan may seem too moderate to some players who want war levels to be removed completely I just think we need to realize that it just won't happen. The GM's simply won't remove war levels. Therefore I want to propose a reasonable plan which would still guarantee protection for econ only players but would fix many of the problems created by war levels.

Therefore I truly hope all players reading this thread can consider these suggestions including the GM's. Even for the players who don't care about the war game I can guarantee them that this won't affect them at all while it would still improve the war game. I believe this is probably the only chance we have to do something about the problems with war levels and I hope there can be some unity around this issue even though many of us have very different opinions.

The 3 Point Plan:


1. Players inactive for more than 30 days loose secured mode in all their countries and are increased to war level3.

2. All players at or above war level 3 can fight all other players at or above war level 3.

3. Players receive 75 gold coins when they reach war level 3, get doubled military spending space, and get a bonus to their welfare index.

Let's review why these suggestions should not be implemented:

1. Forcing inactive countries to lose secure mode and arbitrarily increasing their war level to level 3 will provide more fake wars. The game needs more active-player v. active-player wars, not more fake wars.

2. Less than 10% of countries are above war level 2. Almost all countries above war level 2 are below war level 6. That means almost everyone above war level 2 already can fight each other. Therefore, the proposed change to war levels would be insignificant.


3. The war levels already have enough incentives, and are useful as war training.

What better plan do you propose then? I'm guessing it's removing war levels, which will never happen anyway.

Also when you say less than 10% of countries are above war level 2, do you have any plan to get more players to increase their war level?? The only way it seems is providing incentives, you simply can't do much more unless you force them up to war level 3 which the GM's don't want anyway.

It's seems that you harshly criticize my plan but you yourself can't provide any other solution that the GM's might actually implement. We all know there isn't any perfect solution to the problems created by war levels but If I were you I would come up with a better plan before I would start criticizing someone's solution. It's pretty obvious my plan isn't going to solve everything completely but it would certainly improve and partially fix some of the problems created by war levels. Your just simply pointing out the obvious and if you have any better suggestion I would be happy to hear it.

It's quite clear you don't get it. You are still asking for rule changes that FORCE players to play one way. I'm at WL 2 on GR and LU...know when I am going to increase my WL? When I feel like it. That shouldn't change.

FB was supposed to be the answer for the warring player. It is still an opportunity if those wishing for war, move to FB and let the fun begin.

besides, in the end of it all regardless of what changes you should just deal with it, or atleast suggest stuff a little less selfishly. "The Inactive Farming Act" its pretty well written also lol

Heisenberg I think you don't understand the difference between my plan and removing war levels. I've made it pretty clear players under war level 3 would be protected. So I have no idea why you even would think of making such a ridiculous and stupid claim, I bet you didn't even care to read my plan.

Also Sheepman if you have any ideas I would be happy to hear them because you still haven't explained why inactive raiding would be bad at all and you haven't even proposed any plan yourself, BTW would you rather people just farm C3's because that's probably what will happen if the War Game continues to decline.

Finally Sheepman if you have a plan to fix the war game you really need to speak up, maybe it could be better than mine, but you still haven't proposed it.

Additionally no one else has even proposed a better plan, let alone ANY plan at all.

Nobody has proposed a plan because nobody but you is having a coronary about this.

Yeah because it's so hard to read three points that don't matter. Don't talk down to me loser, you have said time and again in other arenas that "war levels need eradication". So this facetious facade that you put up that you didn't mention this in this particular session of word barf you call logic means you never said it. GTFOH.

Besides, we all know that when crappy players want rule changes, it's usually because they can't master the current ones.

Stay crappy, inventard.

If no one cared about this issue why are there hundreds of posts asking to remove war levels or at least do something to fix the problems created by war levels in the first place. I already know your stance on this issues and it seems you've just confirmed it, you "hate the war game". We all know how much hatred you try to contain but in reality you want a ban on the war game or simply to make war impossible by reverting back to when players only at the same war level could fight. Additionally I would assume you would want to prevent wars against inactive and poorly defended active players. If all these opinions you have were to be implemented the war game would be nonexistent equivalent to a complete removal of the war game all together. You are the facade trying to hide your stance "the removal of the war game".


As EC said most players want a war game not simply to just set around and worry about a major dumping of electric power. That's pretty much what you want the action to be. To me that seems mostly pointless and would ruin simcountry.

Hundreds of posts. From a vast minority of players. To a GM that is not interested in your posts. Sounds like you like to flap your gums with no point and nobody even listening.

I have no interest in getting rid of any war game. Quote me where I said it, or shut your mouth. Period.

You, however, have stated multiple times on this forum your want to remove all points of protection for econ players while saying that you don't care about their gameplay and think it shouldn't be a component of this game. Nice try flipping it, amatuer.

Seems to me you just talk to listen to yourself talk. Nothing of merit ever spills out of your genitalia holster. You need to choose another person to talk down to....I hear kindercare is graduating their best and brightest this week. I'm sure that is more your speed.

I'll give you some quotes if you want. Seems you've contradicted yourself multiple times and it's obvious you've lied probably more than once.

First you've said
"You claim I don't like war. Yet I have participated in war in this game and have never said once that I don't like it."

So you claim you've participated in the war game multiple times but then you say your at war level 2?

"I'm at WL 2 on GR and LU"


Really how do you participate when your at war level 2?
Let me guess you attacked C3, LOL

Is declaring on any country, regardless of C3 or player, participating in the war game? Yes it is.

It's hard to argue with someone who has the IQ of a doorknob. Could you please get educated so this becomes an actual conversation? Speaking to you is like speaking to a dog with downs syndrome. Sure it's funny in the beginning, but then you just feel bad because y'know....the subject is still retarded.

You want war levels changed? Fair enough. Change the war levels, but only if they require an IQ test before you start playing. Enough dumbasses like you get through, we don't need any more.

lol i do have a plan to fix the war game, stop proposing useless personal ideas for yourself and stop pretending it will benefit others for your own sake, acting as if you are some kind of church of inactivity and you want to spread the gospel of the steal inactive countrys around the world, really just to fill your own pockets fat lol. I never said inactive were bad haha i have probably taken more inactives then you will ever see in the times you quit and rejoin this game. Hahaha taking off there secured mode lol i mean what the fuck that shit doesent mean anything but takeing there country once they havent been on, even the incentive to war level 3, like lol incentive to get farmed faster then 30 days hahahaa as soon as the president was active in the last month.


I mean at this point some people are just trolling, like you inventor you can keep pushing lies like they are the savior of humanity. Really man i dont have a plan and i never will oh wait i do i have a plan here it is its telling you and people to fuck off becuase its been the same shit around here for years if you cant read this in my "plan" then stop reading it and just mind your own buisness because quite frankly your plans more of a joke then war levels could ever be, i mean you must be trolling, people always got the answers to the game, but really gotta get real if you want to suggest something suggest less selfishly then just removing secured mode for the sake on inactive farming.

"BTW would you rather people just farm C3's because that's probably what will happen if the War Game continues to decline." So what are you saying, C3 farming is inadequate and isent worth as much as farming inactives, but yet then how would the countrys that went inactive grow? just by its econ? thats shitty, as if theres an endless supplie of inactives out there just full of cash we can all feed on all day, instead of generate new assets into the game, and yet you see war levels as a problem? besides higher level c3 atleast do offer challenge. Besides if we really wanted to save the games players we would be doing anything that stops those countrys from becoming inactive, haha not trying to harvest them like vampires.

Theres always stuff around here to be fixed as there always making new stuff, and quite frankly i dont like suggesting shit all the time, becuase alot of the time it is wrong and i really wouldent know what im talking about because its more to my own standards then others. I dont really think at the end of the day its my obligation to make a worthless plan that will probably just contradict itself in the longterm, but i will still make fourm messages sharing how i feel about peoples plans to fix older more complex problems to something that has been declining for years. Lol i like that though, coming at me for not making a plan i got a plan, here it is.