Trial TIE + Other Signatories Policy

Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement (non excessive). Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.

Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.

Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.

Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 250million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:

3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

You guys keep doing this to yourselfs
every time
you all keep saying % this and that
At my current size of 6.5m I can have 392k supers, which is a 10b def, thats a nice "fortress" account.

Best of luck.

Incase anyone is wondering:

Profit = hitters loses * (UU cost + Training cost + weapon cost) = repairs minus that from the hit = profit.

This sounds already better

You all need to state what uu value you use as well. We have had problems with this in the past. I want a definite value and if it changes and send the updated value to the alliance leaders please.

isn't the WTS rate of units used? (the right one)
anyways i like this policy but how do we calculate / find out what the target's kuwal per day is? i find it hard enough to watch out for the 8.5% and 25/35% rules
also... 400 minimum profit?? wow :O won't that slow the game too much? just wondering.

Whats all this gibberish.

As far as I can see it's nothing more that a complex load of mumbo jumbo designed so that TIE can hold on to excessive income rather that building sufficient defense to protect it.

come up with something simpler as I know I'm not interested in doing a whole lot of maths and I'm sure that there's a lot of others around like me who are more interested in having fun rather that being bored to death by all of these complex policies.

Also if your looking for signatories then it's not a policy, it's a Treaty.

SovietMan wrote:isn't the WTS rate of units used? (the right one)
anyways i like this policy but how do we calculate / find out what the target's kuwal per day is? i find it hard enough to watch out for the 8.5% and 25/35% rules
also... 400 minimum profit?? wow :O won't that slow the game too much? just wondering.

That isn't a good idea. As there is no UU rate tracking, so you don't know what the UU value is at any given time. I spent kuwal I had the other day and got the market up to the 2m priced ones. You telling me if it was there you would pay the UU cost of the market at 2m?

Capt_Blood wrote:Whats all this gibberish.

As far as I can see it's nothing more that a complex load of mumbo jumbo designed so that TIE can hold on to excessive income rather that building sufficient defense to protect it.

come up with something simpler as I know I'm not interested in doing a whole lot of maths and I'm sure that there's a lot of others around like me who are more interested in having fun rather that being bored to death by all of these complex policies.

Also if your looking for signatories then it's not a policy, it's a Treaty.

I had the "pleasure" of being in these talks and it wasn't TIE that wanted to protect incomes, it was WR that wanted to protect the income of players who login twice a day.

ian wrote:Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement. Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.
so your limiting it to the farmers on the account, thats not cool. As I only have 816,192 farmers which is 139m Profit.
Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.
12 days... Lets see total up of 63,626 * 12 = 763,512, hmmm I am sure you all talked about a max of 6% or something. But hey I will go with a 20b def since you allow it.
Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.
sweet So I can have a 20b strike(12%), a 20b def(12%), 10b covert(6%), and 10b assn(6%)
Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 400million profit.
Oh are we getting away from the 250m min?
This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:
This is a good one. With the activity of players in some alliances I for see the after 7 days thing being an issue. Looks at stuck broker to Muj member.
3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

I know TM won't follow it, we have our policy that we use. None of this bull crap of % this or that. Its simple and very easy to follow.

seaborgium wrote:I had the "pleasure" of being in these talks and it wasn't TIE that wanted to protect incomes, it was WR that wanted to protect the income of players who login twice a day.

Well aren't you a lucky fellow.
My comments were not aimed toward TIE, they were aimed toward this so called policy

seaborgium wrote:
I know TM won't follow it, we have our policy that we use. None of this bull crap of % this or that. Its simple and very easy to follow.

TM's policy is a little simpler, I'll give you that but it's still using an inflated rate for UU and it still based on the profit made, so there's still a hell of a lot of maths that's required.

There's a simple answer to all of this crap. Build a defense that will match the amount of income you want to protect.
I know TIE wont like this but tough, it is after all a war game so really the only time you have excessive military is when you can't pay the upkeep.

You say you didn't direct it at TIE, however you named them, so ....

You may feel that its an inflated rate, however when it was set the market was keeping up at 190-200k per UU. I have seen the UU rate hit that again this week, and its slowly getting back up to 200k rate.

Sea buddy, if your going to criticise someone elses policy, I d suggest you at least do it properly via actually understanding it.

I ll give you a example. Currently Reets has a 25,000 Total Unit Production and lets say a income of 230million (he's actually lower than that).

25,000 x 175,000 = 3,500,000,000 kuwal.
230 x 48 = 11,040,000,000 kuwal

Total Daily Production: 14,540,000,000 kuwal x 12 = 174,480,000,000 kuwal's worth of resources he can have in defence before its classed as excessive.

Currently he has 568,543 defence supers armed with MBT

568,543 x 150,000 = 85,281,450,000 kuwal in value to train the supers
568,543 x 175,000 = 99,495,025,000 kuwal in the value of the UU
568.543 x 308,000 = 175,111,244,000 kuwal in the value of the weapons.

Thus... thats 359,887,719,000 kuwal he has in defence - about 24.9 days of economic generation alone in his defence (not even looking at spies, assassins & attack troops).

Under The Marauders policy - he has a army size of 13,084,100 x 150 = 1,962,615,000 kuwal profit required.

Under The Imperium policy - 400million profit required due to an excessive defence/military.

If we assume he makes 230million a turn, and a attacker looses 4800 supers with MBT's hitting him - thats 3,062,400,00 kuwal needed to be taken to cover losses - so TIE would need to take about 3.5billion under our policy - about 15 turns worth.

The Marauders would need to take 5.1billion - about 22 turns worth.

We then need to factor in he actually has a 9billion defence, and 4800 supers dead is if you happen to be attacking him with a 5.3billion strike while he was at 7.2billion defence. The losses will be even heavier now, and remember - unless your strike beats the defence, you only get a fraction of the kuwal out.

I.e. (100/7.2) x 5.3 = you d get about 73% of the kuwal out with the above. So that means in reality, for him to be farmable:

TIE Policy = 3.5billion x 1.27 = 4,450,000,000 kuwal out - about 10hours.
Current TM/Old TIE army size x 150 policy = 5.1 x 1.27 = 6.477billion out - about 28 turns worth.

Reets is a perfect example of exactly whats wrong with a large chunk of The Order of Chaos - virtually unfarmable, even under the new "Much harsher" TIE policy, its still very difficult to farm TOC's less active members.

Incidentally, your daily economic generation is about 22billion give or take... so you could have about 264billion kuwal invested in defence under this policy.

175,000 + 522,000 (MA) + 150,000 = 847,000 kuwal per super. 264,000,000,000 / 847,000 = 311,688 defence supers - so a 7.97billion defence at your current defence power per super. - not the 20billlion defence you seem to think lol.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do actually agree with you though - this policy is too complex. Then again, what alternative is there? The Order of Chaos love farming, but hate being farmed. Any policy like TM's will make it virtually impossible to farm them - and unless TIE decides to make itself unfarmable (which would result in war with TOC), then we d always be at a disadvantage...

I will, however, be looking at whether it would be realistic for The Imperium to simply abandon a farming policy and go for profit = need just 250million kuwal.

Such a policy would require a significant expansion in Imperium defences, and also an expansion in the technologies of the supporting arms (i.e. spies/assassins) - since if we do opt for larger defences, it means more support units... which in turn would leave us with more to loose in the next inevitable war.

So... its something which needs serious thought.

Capt_Blood wrote:Whats all this gibberish.

As far as I can see it's nothing more that a complex load of mumbo jumbo designed so that TIE can hold on to excessive income rather that building sufficient defense to protect it.

come up with something simpler as I know I'm not interested in doing a whole lot of maths and I'm sure that there's a lot of others around like me who are more interested in having fun rather that being bored to death by all of these complex policies.

Also if your looking for signatories then it's not a policy, it's a Treaty.

Actually... before the policy was army size x 150 = profit requirement with no upper-max limit on the profit.

I.e. a 22million army size player = 22,000,000 x 150 = 3.3billion profit requirement. Now there is a max limit on profit requirement of 2.720billion. So... the affect of that is that The Imperium is MORE farmable/ needs better defences.

Secondly, take a player with 7million army size - old policy is 1billion & 50million profit required.
Now.. lets say that player has 5million farmers (the other 2million made of military units and workers/miners). 5,000,000 x 170 = 850million profit requirement. Thus Imperium AND TOC members are MORE farmable/ need better defences.

Its TIE who ve forced this policy through literally at the point of a bunch of guns. Not only have we lowered the profit requirement on ALL accounts, we ve lowered the profit requirement on larger accounts via imposing a max-profit requirement, and also extended protection to smaller/new accounts via increasing the required profit from 250million to 400million.

So... to criticize TIE wanting to "protect" our incomes and not even mention T.O.C - when its TIE who ve literally forced through this policy at the point of a bunch of guns (gunboat-diplomacy) - namely via ignoring T.O.C threats our members will get massed if we ignore the previous TIE-TOC policy, and simply telling them if that happens it ll result in war - is a little unfair given the affects of the policy are to make everyone more farmable... except the smaller new players, which get granted additional protection....

As for why not just basing the policy on defence I.e. have a set profit (say 250million) per hit and then nothing else. Its an interesting point... and has many pro's and con's. We ll look into it.

Hey buddy.

TIE made it farmers x 170 for a reason.

I.e. a lot of TOC players have upwards of 15% army size trained as military, and not as income units. The army size automatically therefore adds 15% or so onto the profit margin vs. income.
.
Military Units don't generate income... yet under the army size proposal, will still determine the profitability margin....

We also certainly would never ever remotely consider army size x 170 when it was 150 before. Thats a *increase* in the protection offered by about 13% or 14%..... which is insane when we are trying to decrease the protection and bring the focus more back on people deserving to be protected - namely those active.

Farmers is easy enough... you just spy someone and see their farmers. It also has the added bonus of allowing covert to afford some level of protection from being farmed. Namely the better the covert, the harder it is to find out number of farmers.... potentially acting as a deterrent to farmers

We re trying to reduce the protection offered. Thats one of the reasons we agreed to the 2.720billion limitation, when its mainly going to be TIE who's hurt by that change (due to increased TOC farming). You can't seriously expect us to make ourselves even more vulnerable and then push for EXTRA protection (army size x 170) for T.O.C can you? Bare in mind we also extended the profitability margin to 400million from the previous 250million... and only 1 or 2 TIE members will benefit from that, while well over 80 TOC members will benefit.

Farmers x 170 = acceptable. We ve reduced TIE's larger-members protection, extended TOC's smaller members protection, and for the rest - the middle players in both sides, we ll have reduced the protection slightly by farmers x 170.. but for those accounts on the border-line very close to having excessive large military's, by not including military units into the equation (i.e. by basing it only on farmers), we ll have dramatically reduced their protection as well.

Thats the price to be paid in exchange for TIE reducing our larger members protection (limit: 2.720billion), and extending TOC's smaller members protection (profit from 250million to 400million) - the increased vulnerability of border-line accounts, and the much higher vulnerability for excessive accounts.

do workers and miners count as farmers?

Nomad wrote:do workers and miners count as farmers?

No. Minimum profit is 400million though - so equivalent to them having 2.3million farmers. So even a player with 0 farmers and say... 1.5million miners will get "protection" equivalent to them having 2.3million farmers lol.

Edit: Opening topic-post edited to reflect excessive profit-margin requirement change which a couple of TIE members argued for.

ian wrote:

Nomad wrote:do workers and miners count as farmers?

No. Minimum profit is 400million though - so equivalent to them having 2.3million farmers. So even a player with 0 farmers and say... 1.5million miners will get "protection" equivalent to them having 2.3million farmers lol.

Edit: Opening topic-post edited to reflect excessive profit-margin requirement change which a couple of TIE members argued for.

Lol minimum profit not agreeing thank god TM policy has no minimum profit its pure and simple Army * 150

ian wrote:Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement (non excessive). Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.

Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.

Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.

Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 250million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:

3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

what is this, why do you keep changing the policy? you edited the minimum profit required among other things, before it said 400 million, now you changed it to 250 million.

Your proposal was:





Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin.

Those under 3million army size = 400million profit requirement.

Excessive Military Clause:

Under 3million army size = 20% Military.
4million = 19% Military.
5million = 18%
6million = 17%.
7million = 16%.
8million = 15%.
9million = 14%.
10million = 13%
11million = 12%
12million = 11%
13million+ = 10%

Max 6% Defence Regardless.

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 400million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.




END

This is a policy WR and Mujengan could agree to. If you keep changing the policy, does it mean you don't want a policy at all and keep dragging this on purpose?

If you want to find an agreement then change the proposal to what we have discussed in our MSN convo, namely this policy.

Kenzu wrote:

ian wrote:Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement (non excessive). Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.

Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.

Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.

Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 250million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:

3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

what is this, why do you keep changing the policy? you edited the minimum profit required among other things, before it said 400 million, now you changed it to 250 million.

Your proposal was:





Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin.

Those under 3million army size = 400million profit requirement.

Excessive Military Clause:

Under 3million army size = 20% Military.
4million = 19% Military.
5million = 18%
6million = 17%.
7million = 16%.
8million = 15%.
9million = 14%.
10million = 13%
11million = 12%
12million = 11%
13million+ = 10%

Max 6% Defence Regardless.

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 400million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.




END

This is a policy WR and Mujengan could agree to. If you keep changing the policy, does it mean you don't want a policy at all and keep dragging this on purpose?

If you want to find an agreement then change the proposal to what we have discussed in our MSN convo, namely this policy.

Gee, What a surprise . Your back-peddling again and attempting to make The Imperium look bad - all in the effort of attempting to get out of something which you yourself originally supported.

@ World Republic in general. You guys need to find yourselves a new leader. This one just keeps falling back on his old manipulative habits.

@ Mujengen. You guys need to actually inform Kenzu that he has no right to speak on your behalf without actually consulting with you what YOU want, as oppossed to speaking on your behalf based on what he wants.

@ Kenzu. I m sorry. I really am. I have no idea why you do it, just that you seem to get kicks out of doing it. Almost every time when something you originally agree to becomes inconvenient - you retreat back on it. Whether that be the recently abandoned mass-raid policy, the first WR-TIE treaty, or this treaty. You always do it.

23/09/2010 21:42:33 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Ishurue are you happy with the changes?
23/09/2010 21:42:49 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Lol
23/09/2010 21:42:56 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) yeah.. about that
23/09/2010 21:43:03 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) we kinda changed it while you were all arguiing
23/09/2010 21:43:05 October13 (WR) Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue and perferably just the involved partys at that
23/09/2010 21:43:42 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) lol
23/09/2010 21:44:06 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) don't you just love it when diplomacy functions so effectively?
23/09/2010 21:44:06 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Ian what it changed to now?
23/09/2010 21:44:14 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) https://aderanwars.forumotion.com/empire-wars-treaties-f3/trial-tie-other-signatories-policy-t1934.htm#23538
23/09/2010 21:44:35 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) time to kill the whole "fortress" account argument for good
23/09/2010 21:44:36 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Well i am used to it function far better but then again i do remember some of the diplomatic talks with ceatain FUALL people in another game lol so meh
23/09/2010 21:44:41 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) which we just did - hopefully
23/09/2010 21:45:10 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) % of army size will never work... for no matter the % you do for one size, it won't fit another
23/09/2010 21:45:11 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Ian how do you calc the profit?
23/09/2010 21:45:11 October13 (WR) Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue ian add me if you havent yet
23/09/2010 21:45:13 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) its inherently flawed
23/09/2010 21:45:18 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) I have buddy
23/09/2010 21:45:23 October13 (WR) Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue thank you
23/09/2010 21:45:24 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) farmers x 170
23/09/2010 21:45:29 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Ahh NO
23/09/2010 21:45:30 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) minimum profit = 400million
23/09/2010 21:45:36 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) HOW do you calc the profit?
23/09/2010 21:45:39 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) oh
23/09/2010 21:45:43 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats just the profit you should get
23/09/2010 21:45:51 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) but HOW do you calc if someone breaches or not that hit?
23/09/2010 21:46:06 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Attack Super Losses value?
23/09/2010 21:46:18 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) take for TM. We do hitters loses * (UU cost + Training cost + weapon cost) = repairs deduct that from the hit and you have it all
23/09/2010 21:46:27 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) yeah
23/09/2010 21:46:28 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) i say count farmers + workers
23/09/2010 21:46:29 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats it
23/09/2010 21:46:30 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) all times 170
23/09/2010 21:46:34 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Lol... kenzu
23/09/2010 21:46:39 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats why its minimum 400million profit
23/09/2010 21:46:40 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) why should workers not count?
23/09/2010 21:46:44 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) lol let me give and examble
23/09/2010 21:46:49 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) we can lower minimum profit
23/09/2010 21:46:54 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) 350 minimum profit
23/09/2010 21:46:59 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) you wont have many workers anyway
23/09/2010 21:47:05 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) but
23/09/2010 21:47:11 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) I.e. 400,000,000 / 170 = 2.352 income units
23/09/2010 21:47:12 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) some people might have 1 million of them
23/09/2010 21:47:20 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) so.. most player's don't have more than 1million workers or miners
23/09/2010 21:47:23 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) which will influence the minimumn profit a lot
23/09/2010 21:47:24 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) so by the time they even hit that
23/09/2010 21:47:27 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) The one farming loss 2596 units hence the rep becomes = 2596 * 857.000 = 2.224.772.000 now thats REP
23/09/2010 21:47:32 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats how we do it
23/09/2010 21:47:34 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) you can have 250k miners
23/09/2010 21:47:38 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) or 1 million workers
23/09/2010 21:47:40 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats 1millionworkers or miners + another 1.3farmers
23/09/2010 21:47:47 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) so.. much easier to just have 400million profit
23/09/2010 21:47:47 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) lol
23/09/2010 21:47:49 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) if the hit then minus that doese not add up to the army size * 170 = 400mill or above you have a problem
23/09/2010 21:48:11 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) let me check something
23/09/2010 21:48:31 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) hmm
23/09/2010 21:48:35 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Lets say someone hit for 3 bill and the 2.224.772.000 is the rep cost then the hitter actually had a 770mill profit
23/09/2010 21:48:42 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) maybe I can agree on it
23/09/2010 21:48:45 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) let's see
23/09/2010 21:48:52 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats what it would be according to TM farmin policy thats how we calc the proft and see if its withing our policy
23/09/2010 21:49:01 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) if ishurue agrees on it, I agree too
23/09/2010 21:49:02 Lord Ishurue Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, October13 (WR) if anything happens a test run must happen
23/09/2010 21:49:07 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) thats why i wanna know HOW do TIE and ToC calc if they made a profit or not
23/09/2010 21:49:14 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) but after 1 week we sit together again
23/09/2010 21:49:15 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Lol
23/09/2010 21:49:30 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) i know the amount to be above that number but what calcs are you using to find out
23/09/2010 21:49:41 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Nimras... you do know TM's policy originates from the TIE-TOC policy... except you guys just removed the excessive military clauses and modified the breach clauses?
23/09/2010 21:49:47 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) so thats already how we work it out...
23/09/2010 21:50:02 October13 (WR) Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue to all who added me here today mesage me ingame with your msn and such
23/09/2010 21:50:04 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) hehe yes i knew but i wanted to hear it
23/09/2010 21:50:23 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) Beside Muj and WR didn't respond lol
23/09/2010 21:51:04 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) lol
23/09/2010 21:54:54 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) god night
23/09/2010 21:54:56 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) so.... by basing it on economic generation
23/09/2010 21:55:05 ian Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) hopefully no arguments about fortress accounts ]
23/09/2010 21:55:07 October13 (WR) Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue im off aswell
23/09/2010 21:55:32 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue, October13 (WR) hehe if you didn't know facebook is down i hope it stays down for ever lol anyway have fun those who are leaving
23/09/2010 21:55:33 October13 (WR) has left the conversation.
23/09/2010 21:55:37 Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting seaborgium, ian, Lanya, kenzu, Lord Ishurue kenzu sleep tight
23/09/2010 21:55:51 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue keep me posted
23/09/2010 21:55:51 kenzu Nimras AKA Wipeout [Queen of Yggdrasil] Yggdrasil is recruiting, seaborgium, ian, Lanya, Lord Ishurue cya
23/09/2010 21:55:55 kenzu has left the conversation

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Don't try pulling your stunts on me Kenzu. You should know by now it won't work. As the above conversation which YOU were part of shows, the policy you quoted above was already changed and edited by 9.55pm (the point when you left the conversation) - with the excessive clauses being modified to be 12 days economic generation for defence, and 36 days economic generation for military. The link was even sent to everyone in that conversation, as the above convo shows.

Now, lets just quote your own post at 10.00pm shall we?

Kenzu wrote:This sounds already better

Nimras, Seaborgium, October 12 & Lord Ishurue were all in that conversation Kenzu. They all recieved the link - just like you. Anyone else checking this thread will not remember what you ve quoted above as existing after 9.42pm - as the original policy was changed at 9.42pm to what it is now** - AFTER which you yourself and everyone else in the above conversation received a link to this topic at 9.44pm. you then posted at 10pm on this topic saying "sounds already better"

23/09/2010 21:36:43 XXX Curumo, ian id rather see 10 days of eco in defense
23/09/2010 21:36:50 XXX Curumo, ian very simple
23/09/2010 21:36:58 ian Curumo, XXX Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
23/09/2010 21:36:59 ian Curumo, XXX LOL
23/09/2010 21:37:02 ian Curumo, XXX gonna change that now
23/09/2010 21:37:14 XXX Curumo, ian post it and see the results
23/09/2010 21:37:38 XXX Curumo, ian maybe add in a lil extra throw raiding with 100 ATs per day ?
23/09/2010 21:37:58 XXXX Curumo, ian or go with 12 days to factor in raiding and inactive farming
23/09/2010 21:38:18 LurantMaximus (FIRE) has been added to the conversation.
23/09/2010 21:38:21 LurantMaximus (FIRE) has left the conversation.
23/09/2010 21:38:28 ian Curumo, XXX how about we then just use a "economic generation" for actual non defence stats?
23/09/2010 21:38:35 ian Curumo, XXX I.e. max 30 days generation for all military
23/09/2010 21:38:37 ian Curumo, XXX or 36 even
23/09/2010 21:38:42 ian Curumo, XXX max 12 for defence?
23/09/2010 21:39:21 ian Curumo, XXX Or just stick with it for defence?
23/09/2010 21:42:08 ian Curumo, XXX you here?
23/09/2010 21:42:12 ian Curumo, XXX hows that look?
23/09/2010 21:42:17 ian Curumo, XXX https://aderanwars.forumotion.com/empire-wars-treaties-f3/trial-tie-other-signatories-policy-t1934.htm#23538
23/09/2010 21:42:38 ian Curumo, XXX its actually easier than continously arguiing over fortress accounts lol
23/09/2010 21:43:05 XXX Curumo, ian Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin.
23/09/2010 21:43:33 ian Curumo, XXX edited
23/09/2010 21:43:43 ian Curumo, XXX Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement.
23/09/2010 21:46:52 XXX Curumo, ian u forgot the cut off point in profit
23/09/2010 21:47:06 XXX Curumo, ian other wise the very very large accounts can farm but cant be farmed
23/09/2010 21:47:58 ian Curumo, XXX 2.720billion?
23/09/2010 21:48:06 ian Curumo, XXX i.e. 16million income unit's worth
23/09/2010 21:51:14 ian Curumo, XXX added it in
23/09/2010 21:52:27 ian Curumo, XXX so
23/09/2010 21:52:31 ian Curumo, XXX look good?
23/09/2010 21:54:16 XXX Curumo, ian hmm real quick .
23/09/2010 21:55:19 XXX Curumo, ian 25 STs = 12.5 raids. ( 12.5 x 1200 )x .8 = 12k per hit for invasion
23/09/2010 21:55:33 XXX Curumo, ian = 4million workers
23/09/2010 21:55:38 ian Curumo, XXX LOL
23/09/2010 21:55:40 ian Curumo, XXX yeah
23/09/2010 21:55:41 XXX Curumo, ian if using that theory
23/09/2010 21:55:51 ian Curumo, XXX we worked out something similar before the TIE-TOC war
23/09/2010 21:55:53 XXX Curumo, ian i have 1mil workers
23/09/2010 21:55:56 ian Curumo, XXX yet WR still attacked
23/09/2010 21:56:04 XXX Curumo, ian so some can have the 4mil
23/09/2010 21:56:06 ian Curumo, XXX so.. i d rather we now allow that many workers
23/09/2010 21:56:06 ian Curumo, XXX lol
23/09/2010 21:56:09 ian Curumo, XXX *not*
23/09/2010 21:56:10 XXX Curumo, ian we did to
23/09/2010 21:56:20 ian Curumo, XXX or rather
23/09/2010 21:56:27 ian Curumo, XXX not factor that many workers into the equatiopn
23/09/2010 21:56:33 XXX Curumo, ian we stopped at 3k per hit so noobs could get war exp
23/09/2010 21:56:42 XXX Curumo, ian u guys stopped at 5 or 7k per hit
23/09/2010 21:56:48 ian Curumo, XXX yeah
23/09/2010 21:57:23 XXX Curumo, ian what about defense x 0.4 ? with the cut of of 2.5bil profit for now ?
23/09/2010 21:58:02 XXX Curumo, ian this gives players with defense bonuses and techs some real use with their power. a lot of covert/ defense guys in TOC and TIE
23/09/2010 21:58:38 ian Curumo, XXX I d rather it not be based on defence to be honest

I m not going to reveal who XXX is as XXX does not like msn conversations being posted in public. XXX, however, is a very high ranking Mujengen member with the authority to negotiate on Mujengen & TOC's behalf. It was XXX's suggestion that we adopt economic generation for excessive clauses - one which I fully support (and hadn't suggested before because in the past its always been argued to be "too complicated).

The above conversation verifies that the original topic post was edited at 9.42pm to include excessive clauses based on economic generation - not the 6% defence you claim.

The first conversation above verifies that you were given a link to these new changes, and that you were a active member of a conversation discussing the changed policy. Your post at 10.00pm on this topic, confirms that you visited this forum AFTER being notified of the changes, and your posting

Your post of "This sounds already better" confirms you didn't have a problem with it, and more importantly, you know full well that your lieing through your teeth by trying to make ME look like i changed the damn post & policy without telling anyone - since you READ the damn policy AFTER it was changed, as did Nimras, Seaborgium, Lord Ishurue and anyone else who's visited this forum.

The ONLY thing which has been changed since you posted is changing the excessive profit requirement to 250million... which if you haven't noticed, I included in my post informing everyone in my response to Nomad - allowing WR/Mujengen to make known if they have any objections via ensuring the change was highlighted.

Non Excessive Members = minimum profit of 400million still.
Excessive Members = Minimum profit of 250million still.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kenzu - I m done with you and World Republic. I ve no intention now of reaching a agreed policy with WR, and will be advising the Imperium HC of this view and my belief that we can spit further than we can trust you. What you ve just tried pulling is complete BS, and you ll suffer as a result. I ve had it up to my neck and beyond with your crap of trying to make me & TIE look like a bunch of back-stabbing deceivers when its actually you who's the deceiver and manipulator.

We ll farm WR how the hell we please for now on. We ll honour any agreed policy with Mujengen... but, well, your stunt above has made WR's stance towards The Imperium clear.

i would be interested to read your msn convos if you clean up the mess, and i guess im not the only one

As Buhcore said, 'spoiler' and 'too long: didn't read' is a good way for points.

Ultimately, I don't have a problem with the majority of this, only with one point.

The current rules basically treat accounts as tomatos, as in, one account looks ripe enough, regardless of their defense and provided they look RIPE enough, they are going to be plucked.

I suspect that alot of player's don't attack enough because its too much goddamn effort given the rules the higher alliances have laid down.

As a compromise, I would offer that attack targets be considered in terms, not only of their defense, but also their offense, so that those with tons of defense but not much offense (And econ) aren't lumped into the same catagory as those with tons of attack power with minimal defense (And econ)

... I'll explain better later.

Now what a surprise, there have been long treaty talks with Ian and Kenzu and Ian tells us he's fed up with talking to Kenzu.
I would have thought that you'd like other players outside your alliance to have as much income per turn as possible, so I'd have thought that you'd actively promote miners and workers, rather than promote retraining them as farmers. Puzzling this is.

Jiro wrote:Now what a surprise, there have been long treaty talks with Ian and Kenzu and Ian tells us he's fed up with talking to Kenzu.
I would have thought that you'd like other players outside your alliance to have as much income per turn as possible, so I'd have thought that you'd actively promote miners and workers, rather than promote retraining them as farmers. Puzzling this is.

nope. I m not fed up with the treaty talks with kenzu. I m fed up that when one thing is agreed, and kenzu KNOWS its agreed, he then changes his mind and tries to make it look like it never happened. That's why I m fed up of talking to kenzu. Incidentally, does none else find it suspicious that the moment kenzu tries pulling a fast one, it happens to be about 1 hour after he gets farmed for 8.5 billion out, and probably realised he's classes as a excessive defence based on economy, urgo... he then wants it changed and tries to pretend the one policy wasn't agreed and that nasty TIE completely changed it without talking to anyone....

TIMELINE:

Time = gametime
3 pm represents midnight in central europe.

[23 Sep] 12:41 ___ New farming policy proposal
Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:04 pm ___ Forum farming policy proposal
Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:55 pm ___ MSN convo
Thu Sep 23, 2010 2:00 pm ___ I post that this farming policy looks much better
Friday ___ TOC decides to sign the policy
Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:20 am ___ last edit by ian on the farming policy (i have not been informed of any change since MSN convo)
Sat Sep 25, 2010 11:52 am ___ I realize policy has changed when I quoted ian's policy to sign it.

This timeline is clear if you change your profile settings for forumtime to the same time as gametime.
it is 26 Sep 03:24:50 gametime

now lets compare the times of everything.

here the evidence:

Ian, do you want to say that you havent sent me the following proposal at 23 september 12:41 gametime?

__________________________________________________________________________________

ian New policy [23 Sep] 12:41

Subject: New policy

Message text:

Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin.

Those under 3million army size = 400million profit requirement.

Excessive Military Clause:

Under 3million army size = 20% Military.
4million = 19% Military.
5million = 18%
6million = 17%.
7million = 16%.
8million = 15%.
9million = 14%.
10million = 13%
11million = 12%
12million = 11%
13million+ = 10%

Max 6% Defence Regardless.

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 400million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

_______________________________________________________

it says clearly 400 million profit for those with excessive defense. You proposed this on 23 September 12:41

_______________________________________________________
Now I am currently on a different computer so I can't open my MSN convos, but I assume that yours are saved at GMT time because you live in UK. your convos show 21:55, -8 hours is 13:55
read the convos again, they mention 400 million minimum profit, and never mention 250 million at all!
_______________________________________________________
When did you post your proposal:
Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:04 pm
this was before our discussion, so obviously you edited it, so that it is same as discussion, later the economic also economic power has been added there too.

Thu Sep 23, 2010 2:00 pm
After our discussion ended, I checked the forum and posted that it looks better, and I was willing to sign it in the shape it was.

On friday I discussed the new proposal with Ishurue and we agreed that we will both sign it. On saturday, I received a message from Ishurue that he will sign it for both of us, but when I checked the forums it wasn't signed yet. I quoted your proposal, prepared to sign it and before I submitted the post, I took the time to read the proposal again. And what do I see? Ian changed his farming proposal without informing me about it.

Let's see what the forum says when was the last edit:
Last edited by ian on Sat Sep 25, 2010 10:20 am; edited 9 times in total (Reason for editing : to add in the sentence"Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:")

______________________________________________________________________________________________

ian, you have NEVER informed me of a change of minimum profit from 400 million to 250 million.
and you have also NEVER informed me of changing the farming policy after our MSN conversation.

Ian, you know well that frequent changes in farming policies proposals always drag out negotiations. This is not your first day as a leader of an alliance. We talked on MSN, decided what the policy should be and it was pretty clear that this case is solved and will be signed soon. Why the hell did you edit it again?

You call me a liar, saying that I supported the proposal and then changed my mind, but the facts are saying something else, namely that I supported the proposal, and then you changed it, trying to make me look like a liar, while it is clear who the liar is.

Can you please stop playing these games and agree to sign the policy we have agreed to on the MSN?
Me and Lord Ishurue have agreed to sign the policy that we have talked about in our MSN conversation
Go over the thursdays MSN convo, and if you also agree with what he have negotiated on MSN on thursday, TOC and TIE can have the farming policy signed today.