PDA

View Full Version : To ALL Nation Leaders!!



Blackwater
08-22-2008, 00:45
I wrote this in the thread "LoR Politics"

"I see a problem with nations having multiple leaders. You talk to one and think you have a deal yet you don't because they have to run it pass the other leaders. People are assuming a deal has been made when one hasn't and now confusion is amongst us.

Another problem is people taking revenge a set later and not just having a clear slate. The LoR/DaK issue has been going on for at least 3 sets now and doesn't seem like it will end. One of the nations gets destroyed and then can't get back on its feet because the second a restart leaves protection it's killed. LoR experienced it last set and DaK is this set. This will drive players away and kill the game.

A solution for all these alliance/nap problems will simply be to post it in forums and sign off with the entire community to see. These will be formal agreements and not hear say. With this we will know if someone broke a treaty or not.

I suggest a conference should be done amongst all the nation leaders to discuss this and try and squash all the hatred amongst them. Put your pride aside and think of the game. At this rate, the game will die within a year in my estimate. I'm getting tired of the constant warring that is over nothing and the constant killing of restarts, makes the game unfun."




I am now making this thread for all the nation leaders to figure out a time that they can all talk and try to solve these problems. Start a group chat on MSN or mIRC and try to work it out. I would gladly moderate to keep things civil and on topic. Here is what I think needs to be discussed.

1. Treaties/Alliances
2. Wars carrying over to another set due to grudges.
3. Player base and ways to increase it, not decrease.

I bring this up because I really do enjoy this game but the way things have been going, it's taking the fun out of it. With such a small player base, if things continue as are, this game will collapse. Already veterans are getting annoyed and thinking of leaving the game while retaining new players is becoming increasingly difficult due to players conduct. This needs to be addressed while we can do something about it. I want to get this game back to the level of when WoW had over 2,000 players not 150!

MAGGIO
08-22-2008, 01:48
I wrote this in the thread "LoR Politics"

"I see a problem with nations having multiple leaders. You talk to one and think you have a deal yet you don't because they have to run it pass the other leaders. People are assuming a deal has been made when one hasn't and now confusion is amongst us.

Another problem is people taking revenge a set later and not just having a clear slate. The LoR/DaK issue has been going on for at least 3 sets now and doesn't seem like it will end. One of the nations gets destroyed and then can't get back on its feet because the second a restart leaves protection it's killed. LoR experienced it last set and DaK is this set. This will drive players away and kill the game.

A solution for all these alliance/nap problems will simply be to post it in forums and sign off with the entire community to see. These will be formal agreements and not hear say. With this we will know if someone broke a treaty or not.

I suggest a conference should be done amongst all the nation leaders to discuss this and try and squash all the hatred amongst them. Put your pride aside and think of the game. At this rate, the game will die within a year in my estimate. I'm getting tired of the constant warring that is over nothing and the constant killing of restarts, makes the game unfun."




I am now making this thread for all the nation leaders to figure out a time that they can all talk and try to solve these problems. Start a group chat on MSN or mIRC and try to work it out. I would gladly moderate to keep things civil and on topic. Here is what I think needs to be discussed.

1. Treaties/Alliances
2. Wars carrying over to another set due to grudges.
3. Player base and ways to increase it, not decrease.

I bring this up because I really do enjoy this game but the way things have been going, it's taking the fun out of it. With such a small player base, if things continue as are, this game will collapse. Already veterans are getting annoyed and thinking of leaving the game while retaining new players is becoming increasingly difficult due to players conduct. This needs to be addressed while we can do something about it. I want to get this game back to the level of when WoW had over 2,000 players not 150!

dont get upset if it does not work....

Mahdi
08-22-2008, 01:56
to further itterate on what Maggio is saying is its been tried before several times and gets shot down all to frequently

Blackwater
08-22-2008, 01:59
I could care less. I'll try and get some **** worked out or just stop playing.

Mahdi
08-22-2008, 02:00
there ya go! thats a real go getter attitude

MAGGIO
08-22-2008, 02:02
I could care less. I'll try and get some **** worked out or just stop playing.

or you could use your wonderful social skills to mount a set after set assult on your enemies and break up their nation?

Blackwater
08-22-2008, 02:29
or you could use your wonderful social skills to mount a set after set assult on your enemies and break up their nation?

which would make players leave. say something useful

Raul
08-22-2008, 02:38
no ill never accept, ill kill everyone and suicide as much persons i can each set for the rest of my life!!!!!:cursing:

just joking, i think this is the best way to increase base players, AF itself has around 8 new recruits next set so i really need time to train them, and as me i know others want to...

iam in just contact me raulcantu_86@hotmail.com

Dogma
08-22-2008, 03:35
Sorry but you have a certain group of ppl that think their fun is more important than anyone elses and they have no regard for anyone else but themselves. There are selfish ppl here who think that simply because they have the numbers to do as they please, no one else matters. It was that way in the old game and they have decidedd that their agenda trumps everyone else. So I don't see it changing till the entire community decides to ride their asses again just like was done in the old game. The Axis was beaten before and can be beat again, but until the entire comunity decides enough is enough, then it will continue and they don't give a **** about growing our game, they only care for themselves.

I have not mentioned any names, but you know who I am talking to.

Guy77
08-22-2008, 03:55
Sorry but you have a certain group of ppl that think their fun is more important than anyone elses and they have no regard for anyone else but themselves. There are selfish ppl here who think that simply because they have the numbers to do as they please, no one else matters. It was that way in the old game and they have decidedd that their agenda trumps everyone else. So I don't see it changing till the entire community decides to ride their asses again just like was done in the old game. The Axis was beaten before and can be beat again, but until the entire comunity decides enough is enough, then it will continue and they don't give a **** about growing our game, they only care for themselves.

I have not mentioned any names, but you know who I am talking to.

Pot calling the kettle black?

Anyway, here is what i think about the actual idea

Good, in theory, much like communism. Now, lets discuss ways to actually have this make sense. First, have the community vote on this issue. Should a " conference be held" type of poll question that must be answered before your first turn can be played. If Yes, we must have people vote on who is a leader of a nation, and who is not. I consider myself one, but alot of people do not consider me one at all. So we would have to have another mandatory vote on what constitutes a "leader" what is the max number of leaders per nation, etc..... Now i know this all sounds difficult and everyone is super lazy, i get it, but it would definitly add a new swing to this game. Which is what we may just need. Thirdly, we have the leader discuss every blackwater mentioned.

1. Treaties/Alliances
2. Wars carrying over to another set due to grudges.
3. Player base and ways to increase it, not decrease.

These are the ones originally posted. Now, there are people who should have a final say. Mr. President has done a great job and would have a major role in shaping this " conference" of the greats. He would appoint mods for the conference and also have a say of his own. He may appoint someone a leader if other wise that person had been voted not a leader. Bear with me, its like being able to pardon someone, but by making them a leader. IE: " Yo pres i have been a leader like 3 times d00d, can you say I'm legit" ( to kinda actually explaining what i am trying to say) He would probably say no, and why he is saying no. ( I know you like to have your long monologues Pres, don't worry, now its on a much more personal level and you can have like 1000 of them) Or Someone says " Hey, i have co-led for 7 sets behind DBoz i think i can help represent WLF" Pres could say " sure, and why.... etc.... bla bla bla" awesome.

So now that we have our participants and our rules, we move on. Is there a limit on each nation. For example 2 per nation. If under 10 people, one per nation. OR for under 5 people, only 1 leader. That way we can keep the same standards for what is considered a nation. Now everything would be discussed by all the leaders, and eventually vote on something to be done. we all agree, bla bla bla.

However, i do not think it will work as treaties have been made in the past. They don't really hold, or someone back stabs. Which would basically be what happens with the new treaties. However, if people actually take them semi-seriously then it could add bigger wars, and bigger netting opportunities. However, this does not help with any " suicide" problem we may be having.

I strongly believe that things like this should be argued and discussed, and we would probably have to have a community wide vote for if we should actually do this ****. Or it could be implemented, and BAM its over. *sigh* we should really take the design idea of allies / war targets to what the original nation wars was like. So it would make a nap basically, and things like that. Could just make the whole system alot easier. However not the exchange of units, its like donating, but worse.

Dogma
08-22-2008, 03:58
Pot calling the kettle black?

Anyway, here is what i think about the actual idea

Good, in theory, much like communism. Now, lets discuss ways to actually have this make sense. First, have the community vote on this issue. Should a " conference be held" type of poll question that must be answered before your first turn can be played. If Yes, we must have people vote on who is a leader of a nation, and who is not. I consider myself one, but alot of people do not consider me one at all. So we would have to have another mandatory vote on what constitutes a "leader" what is the max number of leaders per nation, etc..... Now i know this all sounds difficult and everyone is super lazy, i get it, but it would definitly add a new swing to this game. Which is what we may just need. Thirdly, we have the leader discuss every blackwater mentioned.

1. Treaties/Alliances
2. Wars carrying over to another set due to grudges.
3. Player base and ways to increase it, not decrease.

These are the ones originally posted. Now, there are people who should have a final say. Mr. President has done a great job and would have a major role in shaping this " conference" of the greats. He would appoint mods for the conference and also have a say of his own. He may appoint someone a leader if other wise that person had been voted not a leader. Bear with me, its like being able to pardon someone, but by making them a leader. IE: " Yo pres i have been a leader like 3 times d00d, can you say I'm legit" ( to kinda actually explaining what i am trying to say) He would probably say no, and why he is saying no. ( I know you like to have your long monologues Pres, don't worry, now its on a much more personal level and you can have like 1000 of them) Or Someone says " Hey, i have co-led for 7 sets behind DBoz i think i can help represent WLF" Pres could say " sure, and why.... etc.... bla bla bla" awesome.

So now that we have our participants and our rules, we move on. Is there a limit on each nation. For example 2 per nation. If under 10 people, one per nation. OR for under 5 people, only 1 leader. That way we can keep the same standards for what is considered a nation. Now everything would be discussed by all the leaders, and eventually vote on something to be done. we all agree, bla bla bla.

However, i do not think it will work as treaties have been made in the past. They don't really hold, or someone back stabs. Which would basically be what happens with the new treaties. However, if people actually take them semi-seriously then it could add bigger wars, and bigger netting opportunities. However, this does not help with any " suicide" problem we may be having.

I strongly believe that things like this should be argued and discussed, and we would probably have to have a community wide vote for if we should actually do this ****. Or it could be implemented, and BAM its over. *sigh* we should really take the design idea of allies / war targets to what the original nation wars was like. So it would make a nap basically, and things like that. Could just make the whole system alot easier. However not the exchange of units, its like donating, but worse.

One of the ppl I was referring to. Need I say more?

Guy77
08-22-2008, 04:03
Dogma i actually make a semi-serious post and thats all you have to say? of course memebers of our community are going to leave. When the so called " respected" community memebers go around and downtrod other memebers, if you will. It is a ridiculous anecdote that i think you have just taken on too far.

How is what your saying on topic? at least i had a post that was real on topic, but now, i am forced to spam this poor thread, and then the attention will go from " hey a reall good idea thats been beaten around the bush to" Dogma and Guy don't like each other. You know you don't want that, and to answer your question. If you delete and kill yourself you do "NOT" get the bounty =P lol

Dogma
08-22-2008, 04:06
The pot calling the kettle black?? WTF was that?

Yeah I disagree with your and Lor's tactics, so what you still gonna suicide me set after set after set? like you said 4 sets ago? I am only going by your and Lor's history.

pron
08-22-2008, 04:08
Sorry but you have a certain group of ppl that think their fun is more important than anyone elses and they have no regard for anyone else but themselves. There are selfish ppl here who think that simply because they have the numbers to do as they please, no one else matters. It was that way in the old game and they have decidedd that their agenda trumps everyone else. So I don't see it changing till the entire community decides to ride their asses again just like was done in the old game. The Axis was beaten before and can be beat again, but until the entire comunity decides enough is enough, then it will continue and they don't give a **** about growing our game, they only care for themselves.

I have not mentioned any names, but you know who I am talking to.

And it's selfish of others to say that people shouldn't war when they want to. We play the game one way, and we're selfish and people quit. We play it your way, and you're selfish and people quit.

There will be no magical number that the game will attain when people can start playing the game as intended. The game has to be played the way it is set up, or what's the point in playing?

Dogma
08-22-2008, 04:11
And it's selfish of others to say that people shouldn't war when they want to. We play the game one way, and we're selfish and people quit. We play it your way, and you're selfish and people quit.

There will be no magical number that the game will attain when people can start playing the game as intended. The game has to be played the way it is set up, or what's the point in playing?

So when you are the only nation playing, have fun with that

pron
08-22-2008, 04:12
So when you are the only nation playing, have fun with that

Maybe we need to change the game then. We're playing it within the bounds of the game that is made. If we don't play the way we like, we'll have members quit. Then you guys will be the only nation left...

Guy77
08-22-2008, 04:12
First of all, i have never suicided on anyone, and neither has lor. If a nation can even suicide someone.

So i am not sure what history your talking about, so lets get with it. I've always respected my treaties and alliances. I have never once turned agaisnt an ally in a battle. I never said i have always been fair. And i certainly don't think some things done to me were fair. So what, i move on. I said i would kill people because you are a coward. I never said i would suicide you. I killed those people, so the deed was done, i'm over it.

Dogma
08-22-2008, 04:15
First of all, i have never suicided on anyone, and neither has lor. If a nation can even suicide someone.

So i am not sure what history your talking about, so lets get with it. I've always respected my treaties and alliances. I have never once turned agaisnt an ally in a battle. I never said i have always been fair. And i certainly don't think some things done to me were fair. So what, i move on. I said i would kill people because you are a coward. I never said i would suicide you. I killed those people, so the deed was done, i'm over it.

I'm a coward???


Dogma(#142)
Everlasting Gobstopper

Come get me big boy.

Guy77
08-22-2008, 04:20
First of all, that was like 4 sets ago, like you said.


Secondly, i gave you more gb, your welcome

=) Now can we get back on topic?

pron
08-22-2008, 04:26
What?!?!?1

You can't un-hijack this thread Guy!

Dogma
08-22-2008, 04:28
First of all, i have never suicided on anyone, and neither has lor. If a nation can even suicide someone.

Are you going to tell me that Lor didn't suicide Ee the first set of this new game? Are you also going to tell me that LOR members didn't suicide Tnova on the last day of the first set? Go ahead and let me hear your excuses. Don't tell me that Lor hasn't suicided, you will be lying out your *** if you do. LoR is playing to their own agenda just as it always has, **** anyone else. So, in your own words, you think that Lor has the only right to play this game? What is up with hitting a 5 man nation with 28, what do you call that? A 5 man nation was that big a threat to the almighty Lor? Bull**** it was a **** suicide as lor knew they couldn't win the set with a 5 man nation member up top. DOn't give me that ****, I am not hearing it neither is anyone else in the game, you are only belittling yourself by trying to justify your actions.

pron
08-22-2008, 04:31
Are you going to tell me that Lor didn't suicide Ee the first set of this new game? Are you also going to tell me that LOR members didn't suicide Tnova on the last day of the first set? Go ahead and let me hear your excuses. Don't tell me that Lor hasn't suicided, you will be lying out your *** if you do. LoR is playing to their own agenda just as it always has, **** anyone else. So, in your own words, you think that Lor has the only right to play this game? What is up with hitting a 5 man nation with 28, what do you call that? A 5 man nation was that big a threat to the almighty Lor? Bull**** it was a **** suicide as lor knew they couldn't win the set with a 5 man nation member up top. DOn't give me that ****, I am not hearing it neither is anyone else in the game, you are only belittling yourself by trying to justify your actions.

I think Guy was saying LOR the nation didn't suicide. But yes, we had members that did suicide. Can't deny that at all, but I think Guy was saying the Nation as a whole didn't, nor do we condone it.

LOR has a right to play the game the way they want. But we're not all suiciders, and we're not all war mongerers. We tried netting before, but we're always dragged into wars on the sets that we do want to net. /shrug Name of the game I suppose.

Guy77
08-22-2008, 04:33
Are you going to tell me that Lor didn't suicide Ee the first set of this new game? Are you also going to tell me that LOR members didn't suicide Tnova on the last day of the first set? Go ahead and let me hear your excuses. Don't tell me that Lor hasn't suicided, you will be lying out your *** if you do. LoR is playing to their own agenda just as it always has, **** anyone else. So, in your own words, you think that Lor has the only right to play this game? What is up with hitting a 5 man nation with 28, what do you call that? A 5 man nation was that big a threat to the almighty Lor? Bull**** it was a **** suicide as lor knew they couldn't win the set with a 5 man nation member up top. DOn't give me that ****, I am not hearing it neither is anyone else in the game, you are only belittling yourself by trying to justify your actions.

Now this reminds me of a time when i had to negotiate with the FA of USA. At the time, i had to deal with Dogma. See, one of their current memebers, and cabinet memeber? ( can't remember) Ooga Booga and i ran a small nation. This nation warred a nation of similar size. AT THE SAME TIME! A nation of an incredibly larger size, warred the same nation. We were attacked in a 28 on 5 nation. Now, when it comes to the first set of nw, i did not play w/ LoR go back and check the logs, if its possible. And if i did, then maybe i am mistaken. I am sure that most won't agree with me, maybe your right. I don't really know, and i don't really care. There are a few people on these forums who respect what i have to say. I appriciate that, and i appriciate those who have criticisms, even if yours are a little more hostile.

Guy77
08-22-2008, 04:34
I think Guy was saying LOR the nation didn't suicide. But yes, we had members that did suicide. Can't deny that at all, but I think Guy was saying the Nation as a whole didn't, nor do we condone it.

LOR has a right to play the game the way they want. But we're not all suiciders, and we're not all war mongerers. We tried netting before, but we're always dragged into wars on the sets that we do want to net. /shrug Name of the game I suppose.

That is also a correct statement, thanks pron

Dogma
08-22-2008, 04:40
All I am saying is, Lor's politics are less than desirable, not only to me, but to most in the game. I have always handled FA duties for whatever nation I have been in, and I have, for the last 6 years, had to deal with the same crap that is going on right now. in another thread, Lor is no longer honoring a NAP that was signed by the leader of Lor, ok, he had to step away, but the nation still had an NAP and now, it means nothing. That is what I am referring to, Everyone, except Raul, realizes you cannot make a deal with Lor as it will probably not be honored.Sorry if that hurts or makes you mad, but ask the community, all will say the same thing

Guy77
08-22-2008, 04:46
I never said it wasn't desireable, i just said, we don't, as a nation, suicide people. Sure, we **** people's days up. That is a given. Fields of death lay in our wake, check the sig. This is a war game, and we war, pretty much every set. So uhhhhhhhhhhhh. yeah........... go figure

pron
08-22-2008, 04:50
All I am saying is, Lor's politics are less than desirable, not only to me, but to most in the game. I have always handled FA duties for whatever nation I have been in, and I have, for the last 6 years, had to deal with the same crap that is going on right now. in another thread, Lor is no longer honoring a NAP that was signed by the leader of Lor, ok, he had to step away, but the nation still had an NAP and now, it means nothing. That is what I am referring to, Everyone, except Raul, realizes you cannot make a deal with Lor as it will probably not be honored.Sorry if that hurts or makes you mad, but ask the community, all will say the same thing

I get that overriding sense from the community lol.

However, I can't really speak for the other LOR leaders, they'll have to do that themselves.

I always tried to be fair when I did FA. I never used LOR's size to make other nations afraid, and I tried to run a respectable FA.

However, I'm not leading this set, which means that what I have to say about FA and policies of LOR is just my opinion. It also means that the leaders of LOR can make or break the policies I had in past sets, and all I can do is play my state and hope that I don't restart too many times lol.

MAGGIO
08-22-2008, 10:21
i guess what you all are saying is that if LOR disbanded and was no more than no one would quit right?

I think most of you dont understand the mathematics of the situation. No matter what people are going to quit for various reasons. They are going to get bored, they are going to get a life, they are going to get a new girlfriend, a new job....anything. These are the most common reasons for quitting IMO. I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that the reasons that I listed cover about 80-90% of inactive accounts.

Here is one for you. You go to the store and buy a new game. You play it for a while and then it just sits on the shelf. You guys are expecting the same people to play the same game for years. A mulit billion dollar gaming industry have proven for a fact that IT DOES NOT HAPPEN.

Now I can go on and on, but let me just get to my point.

You want more people to play with then find a way to get more new people to play, and stop worrying so much about getting people to stay.

Let me throw some stupid numbers out of my arse.

1000 members
50 quit (5%)
100 create new accounts (10%)

Total players for the next set 1050 (a 5% increase)

Sometimes the level of retardism here amazes me.

I would bet the bank that if we asked someone from Wizard (world of warcraft) about it he would say that its 90% trying to get new members, and 10% adding new features or changing game play.

One more stupid idea.... Make a flyer for NW, and put it on the cork board at your local grocery store. Sounds pretty lame huh. well it would get more people playing than most of you constantly ***** ing about the game and who is playing it. You will never win trying to cherry pick from the existing membership.

Recca
08-22-2008, 11:11
One more stupid idea.... Make a flyer for NW, and put it on the cork board at your local grocery store. Sounds pretty lame huh. well it would get more people playing than most of you constantly ***** ing about the game and who is playing it. You will never win trying to cherry pick from the existing membership.


I think this is a great idea. If we really want to get more players to try this game, this is the way to go. It would be great if we had someone put together a flyer that we could all just print at home. A lot of people are in college right now and could put it up around campus and everyone else could try to get one put up at their local game store like an electronic boutique or grocery store. If everyone put up at least one we would get a ton more players then we knew what to do with.

If someone puts together the flyer also put some info in there on how to send a message to a nation leader so they can get trained or some fyi stuff like that.

Guy77
08-22-2008, 11:48
I would love to print up nation war flyers and put it at my local grocery store

however i can't do that without the permission from Mr. P. As it is a copyrighted name

=) But good thinking maggio

Recca
08-22-2008, 13:07
I would love to print up nation war flyers and put it at my local grocery store

however i can't do that without the permission from Mr. P. As it is a copyrighted name

=) But good thinking maggio

Im sure hes gona say yes because that means more players

z75
08-22-2008, 13:31
i guess what you all are saying is that if LOR disbanded and was no more than no one would quit right?

I think most of you dont understand the mathematics of the situation. No matter what people are going to quit for various reasons. They are going to get bored, they are going to get a life, they are going to get a new girlfriend, a new job....anything. These are the most common reasons for quitting IMO. I would be willing to go out on a limb and say that the reasons that I listed cover about 80-90% of inactive accounts.

Here is one for you. You go to the store and buy a new game. You play it for a while and then it just sits on the shelf. You guys are expecting the same people to play the same game for years. A mulit billion dollar gaming industry have proven for a fact that IT DOES NOT HAPPEN.

Now I can go on and on, but let me just get to my point.

You want more people to play with then find a way to get more new people to play, and stop worrying so much about getting people to stay.

Let me throw some stupid numbers out of my arse.

1000 members
50 quit (5%)
100 create new accounts (10%)

Total players for the next set 1050 (a 5% increase)

Sometimes the level of retardism here amazes me. *-1

I would bet the bank that if we asked someone from Wizard (world of warcraft) about it he would say that its 90% trying to get new members, and 10% adding new features or changing game play.

One more stupid idea.... Make a flyer for NW, and put it on the cork board at your local grocery store. Sounds pretty lame huh. well it would get more people playing than most of you constantly ***** ing about the game and who is playing it. You will never win trying to cherry pick from the existing membership. *-2



*-1 Good math work, true $hite!

*-2 Hahaha I'm doing it on my local's too bad only 30% of mexican population can understand/write/talk english as raul & me.


This guys owns and mostly he's right, we are playing a Nation Wars game, i'm not too smart but i guess its about ... War? killing, being killed.

You should open a new server called. Netting Nations or something like that for those people that cant stand restarting.

In fact, I got a RL friend into game, In the middle of AF vs WLF & SC war I showed him how to play and he found just exciting to help killing WLF states and was like Hey!!! I got killed i'll restart fast, so... War doesnt scares new players. As Mr. Maggio says there are 99999999999999999 more reasons of the people here quits.

A better way to get new players in and make them stay is adding banners in other websites gaming pages and so I think.

PS. This does not means I support LOR's FA in fact I dont like it at all, not a bit.

Will
08-22-2008, 15:55
This guys owns and mostly he's right, we are playing a Nation Wars game, i'm not too smart but i guess its about ... War? killing, being killed.

You should open a new server called. Netting Nations or something like that for those people that cant stand restarting.

This has never really been the case. In the history of this game only a tiny portion of the nations have been pure warring nations. Most nations play the game to net. The key change in this game has occurred in the last 3 years or so, being the idea of total set long wars. Such wars in the old days were very rare, and restart killing wasn't anywhere near as common as it is nowadays. Dak-LOR is a perfect example of this total war mentality, with the nation on the losing end never being given the chance to recover. In the old days wars might last a week or so, with not much more than two or three seperate strikes from each nation. The first couple of years I played this game I only saw one instance of "total" war, that being waged between BG and several other nations (notably TE, Royals, Euro, OBS and variants of it) Every other war rarely lasted more than half a set, and most were over in a week. Set on Set feuds were nowhere near the level they are now. A more moderated form of warring needs to be established if the game is to retain players.

z75
08-22-2008, 16:45
This has never really been the case. In the history of this game only a tiny portion of the nations have been pure warring nations. Most nations play the game to net. The key change in this game has occurred in the last 3 years or so, being the idea of total set long wars. Such wars in the old days were very rare, and restart killing wasn't anywhere near as common as it is nowadays. Dak-LOR is a perfect example of this total war mentality, with the nation on the losing end never being given the chance to recover. In the old days wars might last a week or so, with not much more than two or three seperate strikes from each nation. The first couple of years I played this game I only saw one instance of "total" war, that being waged between BG and several other nations (notably TE, Royals, Euro, OBS and variants of it) Every other war rarely lasted more than half a set, and most were over in a week. Set on Set feuds were nowhere near the level they are now. A more moderated form of warring needs to be established if the game is to retain players.

If most of you guys dont really like LOR's warring style then why you allow it? I mean not banning them but uniting against them should be enough to make them stop.

Dogma
08-22-2008, 16:47
We did that last set, but I can see thatone set won't do it. Has been done before, I guess it can happen again.

Raul
08-22-2008, 17:33
Look, i have nothing against a peace pact, but saying that wars ruin the game, iam not so sure, my new recruits get more excited if we war thatn if we net, so this is just a lame thread of a netting state that wants to live in peace and harmony, if u want to play a peace loving game enter this

www.garfieldgames.com

KLL
08-22-2008, 18:20
This guys owns and mostly he's right, we are playing a Nation Wars game, i'm not too smart but i guess its about ... War? killing, being killed.


I'm really gettign tired of this argument. If it was about war, why are the scores sorted by NW?
Warrign is a tool in the game, not the point of it.


If most of you guys dont really like LOR's warring style then why you allow it? I mean not banning them but uniting against them should be enough to make them stop.
We did show em what we thought of it last set, they apparantly didn't get the message. And i tried realyl hard to write this without questioning anybodys intelligence.

z75
08-22-2008, 18:25
I'm really gettign tired of this argument. If it was about war, why are the scores sorted by NW?
Warrign is a tool in the game, not the point of it.

We should ask the creator of the game what is the main point of playing and if the name he chose "Nation Wars" is just marketing.

That being Svenne or his sucessor Mr Pres

KLL
08-22-2008, 18:26
We should ask the creator of the game what is the main point of playing and if the name he chose "Nation Wars" is just marketing.

That being Svenne or his sucessor Mr Pres

I can tell you that Svenne modeled this game after Earth2025 or whatever it was called, where the main principle was also getting the highest NW.

z75
08-22-2008, 18:34
I can tell you that Svenne modeled this game after Earth2025 or whatever it was called, where the main principle was also getting the highest NW.

Nation-Wars is a free, multiplayer, turn based strategy game where you will compete with hundreds of other players to achieve world dominance. Team up with other members to form a nation and become an unstoppable force. Whether you become a peaceful farming community or an industrial WAR machine the choice is yours, but remember that dominance always comes with a price... are you ready to start your journey?

Thats the HOME PAGE statement when you are about to sign in or sign up,
my subconscious gets the WAR WAR WAR message more than a couple of times, should that be changed? Unstoppable Force of what? of netting? How can you stop someone netting? Warring him. Everything is related to war so I think thats the main purpose of the game.

Now if you look into Earth 2025 Home Page's statement is less agressive and war supporting than ours (Nation-Wars)

KLL
08-22-2008, 18:42
Nation-Wars is a free, multiplayer, turn based strategy game where you will compete with hundreds of other players to achieve world dominance. Team up with other members to form a nation and become an unstoppable force. Whether you become a peaceful farming community or an industrial WAR machine the choice is yours, but remember that dominance always comes with a price... are you ready to start your journey?yea, we call that marketing.
Its not suppsoed to be taken literaly, or do you think all farming nations are peacefull? And withe industrial war machine, its likely to be a reference to the indy strate which does in fact consits of building weaponry.
And i'm pretty sure noone ever achived dominance throuhg war.


Thats the HOME PAGE statement when you are about to sign in or sign up,
my subconscious gets the WAR WAR WAR message more than a couple of times, should that be changed? Unstoppable Force of what? of netting? How can you stop someone netting? Warring him. Everything is related to war so I think thats the main purpose of the game.what you quoted says war only once... so youR'E a fool for marketing.

and yes, you can stop someone from netting by warring, as i said its a TOOL.

And if warrign was really theh prupose of the game, why is it that the ones that played the game fro mthe beginning on pretty much all insist that its not about war?
Saying the game is about war is jsut some jsutification by some people who want to ruin other peoples set. I don'T think anyone seriuosly put this as an argument untill 4 years or so after the game was created...

But if you think you know the game better than those who created it and those who have been around for over 6 years...

KLL
08-22-2008, 18:44
Now if you look into Earth 2025 Home Page's statement is less agressive and war supporting than ours (Nation-Wars)

That jsut makes my point doesn't it?

z75
08-22-2008, 18:47
yea, we call that marketing.
Its not suppsoed to be taken literaly, or do you think all farming nations are peacefull? And withe industrial war machine, its likely to be a reference to the indy strate which does in fact consits of building weaponry.
And i'm pretty sure noone ever achived dominance throuhg war.

what you quoted says war only once... so youR'E a fool for marketing.

and yes, you can stop someone from netting by warring, as i said its a TOOL.

And if warrign was really theh prupose of the game, why is it that the ones that played the game fro mthe beginning on pretty much all insist that its not about war?
Saying the game is about war is jsut some jsutification by some people who want to ruin other peoples set. I don'T think anyone seriuosly put this as an argument untill 4 years or so after the game was created...

But if you think you know the game better than those who created it and those who have been around for over 6 years...



LOL you went agressive! I never said that or anything that could be taken that way, I just wanted to make clear for me if its about warring or about netting because I really buy everything that is well marketed and this got me so marketing is right.

MAGGIO
08-22-2008, 20:04
what a shame the same argument we have had since 2004.

The ultimate goal is the get the highest networth sillies. BY ANY MEANS NEEDED! now if you dont gain better NW then I guess you hvae no business warring then do you.

or if you are in second place and need to get first place I guess you better war first place, NOT TENTH!

KLL
08-22-2008, 20:17
what a shame the same argument we have had since 2004.

The ultimate goal is the get the highest networth sillies. BY ANY MEANS NEEDED! now if you dont gain better NW then I guess you hvae no business warring then do you.

or if you are in second place and need to get first place I guess you better war first place, NOT TENTH!

:dblthumbup:

Raul
08-22-2008, 23:17
KLL if u want to war, its ok, we war lovers ahve nothing againts you netting, but we can war whenever we want or die trying it, its as stupid as we warrers telling others you need to war all the time, then we will have no netters to kill =(

KLL
08-23-2008, 05:21
KLL if u want to war, its ok, we war lovers ahve nothing againts you netting, but we can war whenever we want or die trying it, its as stupid as we warrers telling others you need to war all the time, then we will have no netters to kill =(

well some people around here *cough*LOR*cough* or *cough*AF*cough* think they need some prey to pick upon set after set....

Guy77
08-23-2008, 05:35
does that mean your voulenteering KLL?

Recca
08-23-2008, 10:24
We did that last set, but I can see thatone set won't do it. Has been done before, I guess it can happen again.



....... and still waiting for someone to step in and stop lor.............

Dogma
08-23-2008, 10:25
Kill the head, the body will die..maybe if the head keeps getting killed things would change

Guy77
08-23-2008, 11:33
Kill the head, the body will die..maybe if the head keeps getting killed things would change

Yeah the operative word being maybe..................

Devil
08-23-2008, 15:03
Kill the head, the body will die..maybe if the head keeps getting killed things would change

its been tested before and im still here :)

KLL
08-23-2008, 15:48
its been tested before and im still here :)

yea, Dogma should have said kill the brains, rather than the head... Killing the head apparantly sin't enuogh.

Raul
08-23-2008, 16:30
Saying the game is about war is jsut some jsutification by some people who want to ruin other peoples set.



Well some nations if didnt warred, will get their set ruin, so its just a different point of view, ;), so the real soultion is, everyone do whatever they want to, and those against it do something about it, like it has been done since ever, but crying that everyone must net its stupid, believe the day that happens, the game will actually die...




But if you think you know the game better than those who created it and those who have been around for over 6 years...

man, this isnt about years, this is about what each of us want, if Rafael likes this game for the warring, its ok, and if you are a netting sheep its ok too, everyone can play this game as they want to, if your not ok with warring, then go to another text base game where instead of infantry you build lawyers, intead of tanks you build buses, instead of jets you build commercial airplanes and isntead of spies you build soccer players, and create a good standing community of capitalism and how you can build a good looking netting nation with farms and ports =)...to make it easier you can play Sim City, you have aliens visits there too =)

Raul
08-23-2008, 16:32
btw this section is Wars and Relations, please start posting in Netting and Relations thread =P

Guy77
08-23-2008, 16:33
yes, killing the head is not enough KLL =) first right thing you've said this whole thread

and let me just say Raul i freaking love you for that post and that post too

KLL
08-24-2008, 13:09
yes, killing the head is not enough KLL =) first right thing you've said this whole thread

and let me just say Raul i freaking love you for that post and that post too

well killign LoR brains isn'T possible either, so we're in a bit of a dilema.


Well some nations if didnt warred, will get their set ruin, so its just a different point of view,war antoher warrign nation then. but for some reason warring nations never end up warring eachother.


man, this isnt about years, this is about what each of us want, if Rafael likes this game for the warring, its ok, and if you are a netting sheep its ok too, everyone can play this game as they want to, if your not ok with warring, then go to another text base game where instead of infantry you build lawyers, intead of tanks you build buses, instead of jets you build commercial airplanes and isntead of spies you build soccer players, and create a good standing community of capitalism and how you can build a good looking netting nation with farms and ports =)...to make it easier you can play Sim City, you have aliens visits there too =)you'Re not gettign my point are you?

MAGGIO
08-24-2008, 13:55
once again some are missing the point. That the game is based on a score called Net Worth. The higher the better. Win by any means needed. If you want to advance higher than a nation above you and you cant out net them then war them.

Its not really about who wants to net or who wants to war, its about getting the best score. This is acheived many many ways that is why the game is a good one, there are lots of options.

simply picking a nation out of a hat and warring them because you think you can win is not favorable and I think it does hurt the game. now if you were in second place and wanted to get in first well by all means war away. If your in second place you have no business what so ever warring lower ranking nation such as 10th place, unless you absolutely feel they are a threat to you and you need to defend.

certainly it is not warring that gets people all upset...its the "reasons for war" that is just driving more players away, and/or pissing players off.

This is a good game, and warring is certainly an option when your trying to WIN, but jsut random BS wars simply suck. Now if you found two nations that want to war earch other well have at it.

When you war a nation that you out rank, and they are just minding their business dont give me that crap about hey this is a war game deal with it BS. Your a bully and unfavorable by all standards. You suck and I hope you stub your toe bastards!

Blackwater
08-24-2008, 18:26
failed to kill my restart =P

-Z-
08-24-2008, 18:44
Well some nations if didnt warred, will get their set ruin, so its just a different point of view, ;), so the real soultion is, everyone do whatever they want to, and those against it do something about it, like it has been done since ever, but crying that everyone must net its stupid, believe the day that happens, the game will actually die...



man, this isnt about years, this is about what each of us want, if Rafael likes this game for the warring, its ok, and if you are a netting sheep its ok too, everyone can play this game as they want to, if your not ok with warring, then go to another text base game where instead of infantry you build lawyers, intead of tanks you build buses, instead of jets you build commercial airplanes and isntead of spies you build soccer players, and create a good standing community of capitalism and how you can build a good looking netting nation with farms and ports =)...to make it easier you can play Sim City, you have aliens visits there too =)



this is very well said.


Nation wars is not a game of war, as world of war was a game of war.


some nations can net, only because they are good enuf that opponents know if they war, it will be hard.

U have to know how to war well, before u can attempt to become a dominant net nation.

U have to be at all times prepared for war.

thats why the game is hard and exciteing.


Z

z75
08-25-2008, 01:17
Well some nations if didnt warred, will get their set ruin, so its just a different point of view, ;), so the real soultion is, everyone do whatever they want to, and those against it do something about it, like it has been done since ever, but crying that everyone must net its stupid, believe the day that happens, the game will actually die...



man, this isnt about years, this is about what each of us want, if Rafael likes this game for the warring, its ok, and if you are a netting sheep its ok too, everyone can play this game as they want to, if your not ok with warring, then go to another text base game where instead of infantry you build lawyers, intead of tanks you build buses, instead of jets you build commercial airplanes and isntead of spies you build soccer players, and create a good standing community of capitalism and how you can build a good looking netting nation with farms and ports =)...to make it easier you can play Sim City, you have aliens visits there too =)


I learned this game warring, I dont know how the fcuk to net High as Kanny and those guys, I really find exciting warring, When AF warred, we were Lower than DAK and we wanted a try to them, is that ok? we wanted to get Higher than them, we cant net, we kill... as you stated... But when WLF & SC hit, what? they wanted to get over us? Gangbanging US? Thats just not even a bit fair. So... I havent sit and talked with vets to talk and explain me what is the game about, I just see that SC and WLF raped us because of the FUN of it and I learn in that school, KILL FOR FUN, now how can I learn the Politics and Diplomacy most of you prophetize but never put in practice. Its like seeing a sick doctor, or a fat nutritionist. The only guys that can be exception to this rule is Mr. Pres standing for USA, Dboz for WLF, sometimes Raul standing for AF (at least from my point of view).


I hate The SIMs because its too boring and I hate Age of Empires because they always kill me fast, thats why I play Nation Wars.


So we must stop |3itching and do whatever we want, so that game is likeable and enyojing for all.



PS. Raul I love you.:wub:
PS2 Tell Gemini He's gay for not restarting
PS3 If someone does not agree with me just fcuk off i dont care.

Cemetary
08-25-2008, 01:28
when sc and wlf hit you they had like 2 more members than you... woudlnt consider THAT much of a gangbang... i mean them getting FS automatically messes u up no matter what size your nation unless you have multiple times their number

Raul
08-25-2008, 02:40
when sc and wlf hit you they had like 2 more members than you... woudlnt consider THAT much of a gangbang... i mean them getting FS automatically messes u up no matter what size your nation unless you have multiple times their number

then everyone stop doing weak individual tags that cant war alone and just create one united =)

Dogma
08-25-2008, 10:16
Some of us do "weak" Individual tags just t o be left alone and try and play our own way, and not bother anyone, but that isn't possible as there is always someone that has to tyr and invoke thier own fun on others. So don't even try that one.

Mahdi
08-25-2008, 10:48
this is very well said.


Nation wars is not a game of war, as world of war was a game of war.


some nations can net, only because they are good enuf that opponents know if they war, it will be hard.

U have to know how to war well, before u can attempt to become a dominant net nation.

U have to be at all times prepared for war.

thats why the game is hard and exciteing.


Z

Z i really wish i could give you rep for this post but i gave you rep a few hours ago for your avatar so would someone please give this man a bit of rep for this fine explanation :clap:

MAGGIO
08-25-2008, 11:06
then everyone stop doing weak individual tags that cant war alone and just create one united =)

And this months winner is.......drum roll plz...........RAUL

for being absolutely ignorant in his statments and unthoughtful in the growth of the community.....

Raul
08-25-2008, 11:51
Some of us do "weak" Individual tags just t o be left alone and try and play our own way, and not bother anyone, but that isn't possible as there is always someone that has to tyr and invoke thier own fun on others. So don't even try that one.

yeah like SC and WLF did on us ;)

Raul
08-25-2008, 11:53
And this months winner is.......drum roll plz...........RAUL

for being absolutely ignorant in his statments and unthoughtful in the growth of the community.....

=). well, about weak tags, AF is weak, lol, but iam not crying when they war me, i just war, and peacefull small tags are good as well, my meaning of weak tags are those tags that provoke, war, and then start crying when they cant win....

AF is not strong at all, and yet we counterstrike a much stronger SC-WLF alliance and killed who we can, and we ended the war when we decided to...I did came to forums. but mainly because chris betrayed me, but that wont stop me from doing a stand, and from AF stands, you can tell me better ;), I never step back..Death and Glory =)

MAGGIO
08-25-2008, 12:51
=). well, about weak tags, AF is weak, lol, but iam not crying when they war me, i just war, and peacefull small tags are good as well, my meaning of weak tags are those tags that provoke, war, and then start crying when they cant win....

AF is not strong at all, and yet we counterstrike a much stronger SC-WLF alliance and killed who we can, and we ended the war when we decided to...I did came to forums. but mainly because chris betrayed me, but that wont stop me from doing a stand, and from AF stands, you can tell me better ;), I never step back..Death and Glory =)

are you not F'ing getting it? DO NOT WAR unless it advances you in the nation scores page. That is the only real reason to war. If you war any other nation for any other reason that does not want to war you are being a jerkoff!

When I warred you in WOW it was wrong, and I should not have done it because it did not advance me any further. Remember how pissed you were for days? Yah you came around, but you know what, not everyone would come around. I warred you for no good reason, and you were pissed. Alot of people would have quit. I am glad you didnt, and fought back, but not everyone would do that.

Hoebawt
08-25-2008, 13:26
yeah like SC and WLF did on us ;)

You have some nerve dont you.... AF is **** AF is the RAF of NW.... ur nation is crap u get a few viets and some states from LOR and u think ur nation is worht the **** on ur shoe? are u serious..... you know wat i take back my statement about RAF ur not even on their lvl.....

Hoebawt
08-25-2008, 13:28
=). well, about weak tags, AF is weak, lol, but iam not crying when they war me, i just war, and peacefull small tags are good as well, my meaning of weak tags are those tags that provoke, war, and then start crying when they cant win....

AF is not strong at all, and yet we counterstrike a much stronger SC-WLF alliance and killed who we can, and we ended the war when we decided to...I did came to forums. but mainly because chris betrayed me, but that wont stop me from doing a stand, and from AF stands, you can tell me better ;), I never step back..Death and Glory =)

WTF are u smoking... u didnt end the war we wanted to move on to another target so we offered u peace.... Dude once u got FS u said u quit... that counts as crying and beign a ***** in my book

Hoebawt
08-25-2008, 13:32
I learned this game warring, I dont know how the fcuk to net High as Kanny and those guys, I really find exciting warring, When AF warred, we were Lower than DAK and we wanted a try to them, is that ok? we wanted to get Higher than them, we cant net, we kill... as you stated... But when WLF & SC hit, what? they wanted to get over us? Gangbanging US? Thats just not even a bit fair. So... I havent sit and talked with vets to talk and explain me what is the game about, I just see that SC and WLF raped us because of the FUN of it and I learn in that school, KILL FOR FUN, now how can I learn the Politics and Diplomacy most of you prophetize but never put in practice. Its like seeing a sick doctor, or a fat nutritionist. The only guys that can be exception to this rule is Mr. Pres standing for USA, Dboz for WLF, sometimes Raul standing for AF (at least from my point of view).


I hate The SIMs because its too boring and I hate Age of Empires because they always kill me fast, thats why I play Nation Wars.


So we must stop |3itching and do whatever we want, so that game is likeable and enyojing for all.



PS. Raul I love you.:wub:
PS2 Tell Gemini He's gay for not restarting
PS3 If someone does not agree with me just fcuk off i dont care.

We raped u coz RAUl is a **** for brains and thinks he can go around and threaten the integrity of other nations

::LD::GrimReapr
08-25-2008, 14:08
First let me say i didnt agree with warring AF but as far as the gangbang theory are you ****ing kidding me.
member count and networth of SC and WLF combined was just about the same as AF.
Second I wasnt overly fond of the fact of us trying to war LOR as i stated in a previous post i stand by chris's decision 100% not to let LOR have the DAK restarts and would have gone to war over that had they come and killed em while they were in SC.
I am dead now and you know what itll be what 6 days till the new set i cant wait.
start over fresh and new and hopefully just net peacefully unless provoked which i hope doesnt happen but who knows in this game.

Last and certainly not least Nice kill on me fellas took you over an hour tho wish i could have logged on from work when i normally do you gave me ample time to stop you but alas i could not fine kill.

Have a nice day all.

Raul
08-25-2008, 16:09
WTF are u smoking... u didnt end the war we wanted to move on to another target so we offered u peace.... Dude once u got FS u said u quit... that counts as crying and beign a ***** in my book

that was a joke =(. just wanted everyone going please dont leave, or ur a *****! =P, and well about ending the war, we both agreed on it, i told them to either get peace before 12 pm or ill be a pain in the *** restarting all set =D. That will ruin both nations plans xD

whatever i did smoke weed yesterday =P

Raul
08-25-2008, 16:10
are you not F'ing getting it? DO NOT WAR unless it advances you in the nation scores page. That is the only real reason to war. If you war any other nation for any other reason that does not want to war you are being a jerkoff!

When I warred you in WOW it was wrong, and I should not have done it because it did not advance me any further. Remember how pissed you were for days? Yah you came around, but you know what, not everyone would come around. I warred you for no good reason, and you were pissed. Alot of people would have quit. I am glad you didnt, and fought back, but not everyone would do that.

i agree with this =)

Raul
08-25-2008, 16:11
You have some nerve dont you.... AF is **** AF is the RAF of NW.... ur nation is crap u get a few viets and some states from LOR and u think ur nation is worht the **** on ur shoe? are u serious..... you know wat i take back my statement about RAF ur not even on their lvl.....

well, all the dead WLF states we achieved were pure AF with the exception of Hien... And well few vets? thats the point of recruiting lol =P

Hoebawt
08-25-2008, 16:51
yea coz thats all that was left..... dont worry Raul Restarting is fun

z75
08-25-2008, 17:43
We raped u coz RAUl is a **** for brains and thinks he can go around and threaten the integrity of other nations

I never cryied about getting killed in fact i enjoy it.

z75
08-25-2008, 17:44
yea coz thats all that was left..... dont worry Raul Restarting is fun

Hell yeah!

ooga booga
08-25-2008, 18:08
I never cryied about getting killed in fact i enjoy it.

*note to self, kill 6th inferno to make him happy.*

z75
08-25-2008, 18:09
*note to self, kill 6th inferno to make him happy.*

at least claim a bounty :P