Ok. So I had an idea for the Europe 10 player map.
3 maps of 10. Top 3 from each map go to the final map with the 10th being a non placing player with the highest score.
These 10 would fight for number 1.
Same 30 we hope for on a 31 player and a little more intimate.
Let me know if there is any interest.
We would have a no GM/booster use clause in place.
81814838
Savebees89
please add
FRESH MEAT!
My experience has been the total opposite.
Sign me up please
To all: Challenge yourselves. Be true to the anonymity. Enjoy it. Feel like you just joined the game 10 minutes ago and you dropped into this ultra competitive game with no resources like discord or your alliance. You have it all and nothing all at once. Be the kid who joins for the first time again. Don't discuss it with friends in discord or in your alliance. Don't feel the need for the crutch of your history. Remember what it was like having to be diplomatic with your neighbor and realize that in this game that neighbor is active and at least able to type as they are your friendly neighborhood chatter.
GIVE YOURSELF A SURPRISE!!!!! We know everything in life....everything!. We celebrate the birth and sex of a child before its even born now. We have no surprises in life. Give yourself one and do it for your fellow chatter as well. Heck do it for ME you selfish animals lmao.
This game will be Epic. You will talk about it so much that we will need to give it a name. Or it will just be known as the "anonymity round". I haven't been this excited about a game except maybe my first alliance tournament round.
Go Team Chat!!!
Oh and SP you better join 
If you become somewhat heated and switch to hating the premium currency from pointing out your opinions on where it may not be used properly, in your opinion, the game creators and owners have asked their staff of paid workers and volunteers to enforce rules around denouncing it to the letter and with no latitude.
The idea has been brought before. At one time the game offered a premium currency free alliance tournament. It was the reason for the large amount of players at the time. The last year of it bought the organizers a lot of issue trying to field so many games in contrary of the game code. It resulted in a number of complaints and an ultimate reset of the the original tournament. Alliances were randomized again and many did not have as nice a drop as the previous. The complaints didn't stop and the game creators took notice that a tournament that didn't make them any currency from a group of players who didn't pay created so much issue in the same year their individual tournament brought in its largest haul to date. There was rumor someone spent 100K USD. I question that but it must've been enough to start a rumor. From there the game creators have completely backed away from anything that does the task for you. Only allowing volunteer staff the right to monitor select tournaments and closed games by request.
One of the reoccurring themes in this has been a suggestion to attach the chance for a GM'free game creation by people who are members of the High Command and making joining the game exclusive to people who buy high command. Recently the model seems to have changed to try and create more long term accounts with premium command. If they offer x number of games for 3 months 6 months and 12 months they may get even more people to buy high command. I know a number of people who would watch videos to get it for free. Now they pay for it. They bought the cheap one first and just bought the long term the next time. I am sure they would get a huge surge of people in alliances buying high command to assure challenges are fair. Low level alliances and top 20 alike.
In the end its an economic model. If they se the possible profit in it they will probably try it out. But offering a gm free games will be pandoras box. You can't put the genie back in the bottle.
Label us darnit
Zug Zug
Numa muna 41
Moomentar
Hike
Because we aren't going to team up and skew the game nah uh no way not a chance we won't even tell each other our locations. Serious. No foolin'
I'm serious. Haters.
EDIT: LaloKURD these aren't real names of members trying to join. lol
This comment comes from a player not a staff member. What I am about to say is from my experience not my membership on staff.
there seems to have been a fix recently that causes merging troops to attack before falling into ranks. Sometimes there is enough HP to survive and the remaining fall in but most times the single or small group can't handle the initial battle and just dies.
What Hannibal said worked in may 2023 when he commented
Again me commenting on what I think.
I am signing them up because they don't have a forum account and they want to participate. They read the rules and they are active players. If nothing goes wrong, they'll join
thats was exactly how I was when I first wished to join the chatters match. FMD himself said I needed to join the forums. HE wouldn't sign me up. So yeah a little burned by it all.
Use to be you had to sign yourself up for these matches.
Needs to be Quackiest Quackers lol and can it start later or not as vacant as the last. Please. The vacancies allowed for dissimilar experiences.
I may sign up later as it develops
Maybe share what you found with the community then?
Anonymous. The match should be anonymous. People are defeatists. If a newer player who may have the skill and opportunity to take down the veteran next to them hesitates because of the name they see it puts a bias on the game. As well as veterans being able to check the service records of their neighbors and salad bar their choices by ease of use. Third you will have non affiliated groups wok tirelessly to remove someone who seems a threat purely because of their name or service record and in reverse veterans leaving other veterans alone for fear of too much loss. Its the whole reason the last game ended in retirement with nothing clear. No one who knew the names wanted to venture further. IMO
Enter the game like its day one in a new arena. Your opponents look like anyone else. You will need to be alert, you will not be forewarned.
will the date be moved forward a bit?
Malachij12
changed name
I would like to throw my hat in the ring.
Please make the map anonymous.
If space available
Maastricht
Plus in old mechanics capital distance penalty was -40 and happened at an smaller distance, now it is -35 max and at a larger distance.
Changing how distance penalty and expansion penalty interact with eachother is more complicated and likely won't be done, but we can think about making simple balancing changes to either one of the formulas. We will discuss your proposals.
I don't think you need to change these. I had a game collapse not because of the expansion or distance penalties but their mingle with the neighbor penalty and increased build times. As much as you don't want people blitzing you have to understand that allies are going to support theirs and if doing so sends them into an unrecoverable morale nose dive then the mechanic is flawed. As the neighbor+expansion+distance compound the buid time for the fort goes to 2 1/2 days. In that two and a half days I could have three adverse day changes. So three morale hits to one fort and now my fort 2 is trying to build on a province with 15% target.
If the forts built normally I would still have a terrible morale but I could start to mitigate at least the neighbor penalty and allow the province a chance to get above 35% so I don't go from 1st with 750 points to 315 points and no resource production in 5 days. My troop morale went crashing too as each province required more and more troops and day after day lost morale. So I was using 10% hp troops in the teens to hold provinces and i had 30 of them like that.
I don't believe it was the intent of the game to penalize an active ally helping his teammates by crushing their game to the extent it is unrecoverable and all they can do is watch as their game crumbles no matter what they do. I even tried to get the provinces to revolt. If you think what I have said can't happen the game number is 6737622
Wish to be countered in
