Hello everyone.

I want to share my personal thoughts, along with some from my friends. I am a newcomer to this genre of games and have less experience than all of you.

In summary, there are two main factors that positively influence this type of game:

1. An active admin and management team
2. Mature players(leaders)



Regarding the first point, we have all experienced a lack of activity from management teams in other games and understand how difficult it can be to continue playing without an active admin. Additionally, players expect the admin to stay neutral and not interfere in the game's progression, while also listening to player suggestions and implementing necessary updates. Currently, this game has an active admin and is making good updates; however, I completely disagree with the update concerning the RW system, as I believe it contradicts the principle of admin neutrality in the game.



Now, moving on to the second point, which is the most crucial: mature players. The absence of mature players can lead a game toward its demise because the admin should not involve themselves in the game's affairs—the des of these games lies in the hands of the players. I will elaborate further.

In this type of game, due to the small population, two sides are formed. However, even if, for example, three sides were to be created, the common interests and a shared enemy would lead the two sides to unite against one. Imagine if the leaders of a side are not mature and behave like children—this would spell disaster for the game, as when they lose a campaign, they refuse to acknowledge their defeat. Instead, for instance, they might say, "We’re going on vacation and withdrawing from the war." These leaders, to maintain their prestige, might lie to their nations or their people about the opposing side, claiming they negotiated a nap and that the other side refused.

When senior leaders of half the population of a game embody childish traits, it detracts from the enjoyment of the game for both their people and the opposing side. When the joy of competition and the thrill of battling are lost, it simultaneously causes economic issues for the game and leads players to leave.



I point out all of this to reach the conclusion that the absence of mature leaders and players in any game creates these kinds of problems. For instance, if you were to transfer all the players of this game to a similar one with a new admin and management team, it would once again decline in the same way.

When you lose, you should engage in negotiations, approve the nap, and plan for the future to come back stronger. However, we observe that senior leaders of half the game’s population start hurling insults and making racist remarks after a loss, never accepting their defeat. They attempt to achieve their goals through petulance, exerting pressure, and psychological warfare against the management team and the populace, which detracts from the enjoyment of the game for their own nations and the opposition, consequently leading players to leave and causing economic issues for the game.




It is natural that over time, as the game progresses, the number of factories and productions increases, leading to a decrease in prices. However, events and wars can cause price fluctuations, yet unfortunately, some players with childish characteristics try to interpret this economic trend to their advantage.

---

Moreover, if you wish to participate in other upcoming games, please do not attempt to disrupt this game or indirectly or directly invite people into games that have not yet started. Personally, I would never join a new game if the leaders of certain countries are the same players...