I think this is a completely useless rank that will never be implemented. These sort of suggestions have come and gone for over a year now.

 

I want a new rank, just not king and queen, it doesn't fit for me I still like Baron as the rank inbetweem

 

Er... Question: What happens to Presidents who already have 3+ towns? Do they automatically get this rank? If not, then would the rank cost 285k for them and get the town? In that case, someone like me could get Town #7 for 285k instead of 480k... That alone would be a problem.

 

I think this is the reason something like this might be too hard to implement, on one hand you have president plus who would ski
E the amount needed for the rank, and on the other hand mayors who need to pay to have it, I assume this is why Andrew decided for ranks above EcoLeader, that way no one has the ranks and it it even. Just my two cents, not sure how accurate this is.

 

That seems ridiculously unfair. They already paid 220k for their 3rd town and now you want them to pay another 285k??? What if they don't have that amount on them atm? Do they lose all 7+ extra towns? I do not think this rank is logical or will be implemented.

 

Not exactly.

Personally, I can't get behind it. I don't see a need for more ranks at this time.

 

Nope.

 

I agree! I rather not reveal my true gender (Even though it is obvious)

 

Agreed.

 

Agreed

Wait Wait... Define agreed and then define every word in the definition of agreed and define every word in the definition of the definition of agreed.

 

That was unnecesary post with nonsense, I gave you a forum warning.

 

How does that deserve a warning? Just askin...

 

To be honest, I really do not want a new rank because there are lots of ranks to keep track of now. I am pretty satisfied with the ranks we have, and always will be. :D

 

It was just plain nonsense that's there for the sake of "being funny", a simple "agreed" would've sufficed if he was being serious.

 

[*Dictator*]

 

Not very aproppiate and same reason why I said King wasn't good either.

 

But is it really worth a warning? Couldn't you have just said that it's nonsense instead of giving him 1/3 warnings till his forum account gets temp banned? Before you say it i'll just do it. "I'll do my job as i'm supposed to, drop the subject."