just have one server would fix a lot of crap

To put it nicely, there's been a sharp decrease in my alliance's membership as a result of changes 2 thru 7, the only way some of my members were able to accomplish getting the high as hell networths they did, was from foreign aiding one country with the rest of theirs.

I played through the set without foreign aiding any of my countries and my sixteen finished around 556,862,023 Total Networth... when the previous set, my sixteen finished with $1,839,487,826 Total Networth.

I got used to playing Dictatorship Farmer, and this set am going to be trying things a little differently, but the point is... getting brutally raped with the building costs last set was NOT fun, sure I invested my bonus points into Resource Decay not knowing just how bad this would fluff me and my strategy later. But my alliance had also had some ass-hat attempt to suicide us mid-set so, taking valuable turns to combat that threat also ate into very valuable resources and by the time we all got back to business we'd lost valuable time that could have been spent getting built and stockpiling... and of course my loyalty to my own members in protecting them kind of hurt my finishes.

Max possible NWs were expected to go down with the change (it's REALLY expensive to build beyond 100k acres), did you actually expect it not to?

Forget about beating the old NW records, you won't be beating them. Instead, focus on setting new NW records since the formula change. For example, the NW finishing record on Alliance is 436m NW before the change. It won't be beaten until other changes come along. Why are you so fixated in trying to achieve the old networths with the new formulas? It isn't doable.

Lets also not forget, unless bushels are constantly selling above $50 for the entire set, the Dict GA nerfing really stunts the growth of a Dict Farmer.

Before these changes were made, one of my countries, a 72,237 acre Dict Farmer, was producing 963,409 bushels per turn, with 183.2% Agri tech.

Here's the link for that country:
http://www.earthempires.com/ffa/20/ranks/416

Now, here's one of my countries from last set, roughly half the size at 39,543 acres... producing 400,782 bushels per turn on 194.7% Agri tech.

Here's the link for that country:
http://www.earthempires.com/ffa/21/ranks/157

A country with little more than half the land of the other, possessing more Agri tech... even if slightly more, should have produced more than half of the bushels the previous country did, above 480k at least. However, you will also notice my tech levels are alarmingly smaller than that of my previous country, which is where the escalating construction costs come into play, and how badly that stunted the networths of my countries. While mentioning in my previous post the whole business of some asshole's attempt to suicide us, the bastard went on a grabbing spree before beginning his attempt to kill countries, which suffice to say hurt even more considering he mainly stuck to missiles, and ABs, which destroyed more land, which had to be recouped... as well as destroyed buildings, which had to be rebuilt. Taking valuable turns and cash needed to max techs (you'll note the absence of Military tech, as well as a significantly smaller amount of Agricultural tech).

When playing a strategy that relies heavily on the money it makes from selling bushels, having the amount of bushels you can produce hindered as a result of not having the land needed, on top of being penalized for needing the land in the first place because most of the cash you've made from selling the bushels is lost to construction costs, you're not going to have much left over to finance the purchase of technology, which in turn further stunts the growth of your country. Sure, you may have wanted these changes Xinhuan, but simply because the changes were meant more for Alliance Server, where everyone's cried their eyes red over landtrading there, shouldn't mean the changes should (or would) be welcomed elsewhere.

Essentially, with the changes made, I have to ask: why fix what isn't broken? These changes seem to favor underachievers more than those who worked their asses off all set to achieve their best. I refuse to believe $40,507,694 Networth (my highest country networth from last set) something to be proud of. I can however say $157,226,494 Networth (my highest country networth from the set previous to that) was my All Time best. Who knows how long it will be before I can achieve THAT again.

You haven't seen the petitions where a number of people from Primary server were asking for the changes not to be applied to solo servers? I supported it myself.

http://forums.earthempires.com/...mary-solo-server-requests

Qzjul, iZercon and Slagpit had all posted in it. Everyone knew the changes were meant for Alliance, and that non-Alliance servers didn't really need fixes. Granted, the petition didn't include FFA.

Note the quote by Slagpit on a thread on Primary Talk forum:
"I probably shouldn't be posting this, but what many of you suspect is actually the truth: primary generally isn't considered when sweeping gameplay changes are made."

But even so, players need to constantly adapt to changes and move forward instead of trying to achieve what is currently no longer achievable.

Would you consider $40.5 million networth to be netgaining? IMHO, I believe these changes have been made to benefit the elitist few who believe netgaining shouldn't be as easy as picking a "cookie cutter" strategy. Also, I haven't netgained in Alliance Server since EE started, Free For All is the only place I'd been able to netgain in peace.

According to Warster, via conversation I'd had with him in IRC, "the changes basically wiped off 60-70 mil off a 60k farmer/casher". So, the only way I could console myself, is by more or less having to believe what would be previously considered fluffty for a netgaining attempt is actually pretty good. Should I compare my networths like economists would compare dollar amounts after inflation? If so, my Average Networth from last set of $34,803,876 after adjusting networth (I went with the median of 60M & 70M), would be worth approximately ~$99,803,876 and my Total Networth would be approximately ~$1,596,862,016.

I think if anything, this game should have a function which would show the difference in networth, before and after the changes. For example: by rate of comparison, a 41,636 acre country of mine from Set 17 can finish with $72,027,184 networth, but a country with 41,924 acres only finished at $34,329,824 networth the set previous.

what Stryke leaves out is, i also said that was for the first reset and that good players would adjust and the networth gap would get closer,

it will end up about a 20- 25 mil difference unless you use actually land trade with others then u may make up the difference.

Isn't this why we have rankings?

Absolute nw before/after changes won't be comparable.

But #1 is still #1 and #50 is still #50.

Ok, I forgot to add that part.