PDA

View Full Version : Next Set Changes..



Mr President
06-24-2010, 20:27
All of this will be in the official announcement when the round ends but I figured I would give you all an idea of the changes next set.

Retaliation feature will be gone. All nations must now go back to actually declaring war to retaliate.

The surrender feature will be removed. It will come back but I would like to tweak it a little more. I do like that feature though.

War Prep will be removed. All time frames on war is 2 hrs. It will no longer go by the size of the enemy nation. So no matter how big or small you are, you have to wait 2 hrs before war takes place.

War attacks can only be made when War has been declared. This does not include aggressive spy ops. States need to protect themselves in that area. ( but there is a new op being added that will be nice.. See below)

The foreign relations page has been reworked. It's a little easier on the eyes now.

Three new spy ops will be added.

Sabotage Naval Bases- Spies can now sneak in and blow up ships just as they do jets and bombers.

EMP Attack- if successful you will make it so your enemy cannot view the Global Events page for 10min. Attacks do not add up meaning if you do 3 attack it will not make make it 30 min to view an attack. Each time one is done it sets for 10 min after the attack. When the target is trying to view the Global Events he will see a message saying Communication Error and when his/her systems will work again.

Obtain Spy Info- If successful you can view all the spy ops the enemy has made all set. Very handy in seeing who has been naughty or nice :)

Suiciding will be against the rules. If your caught suiciding your states will be highlighted in pink on the scores pages for the remainder of your career in Nation-Wars. You will lose any chance at ever being placed into the Hall of Fame and any medal you have or gain will be removed. If you are a member of the Hall of Fame then you will be removed from that as well.

I could go on a long drawn out speech of what suiciding is and how we will decide if it is or not but frankly you all know what it is. I'm tired of those who tend to do it trying to find loopholes and different ways to define it. You know what it is so don't do it. PERIOD!

With war attacks only being made when war is declared that will help with the new people not being able to make the mistake. If your a 2 man nation and known to suicide and you declare war and drop 10 AA's on the top state that is clearly a suicide.

Warring is a part of this game but war is used to advance your nation to a higher rank or to help out and ally. Having a small 1-3 man nation and warring someone cause they messed up your plans 500 sets ago is suiciding. Anyway we all know what it is and i'm not going to waste any more time on it. It's very simple, follow the rules and you'll never have a problem. Oh I would like to add one thing though, I clearly understand that things carry over to the next set. Revenge is a bitter sweet thing and I have no problem with that. Carrying if beyond that is where I have issues with it.

A lot of these changes will hopefully someday go back to normal. I'm not fond of the war attacks only being made when war is declared and i'm not fond of marking states in pink and stripping them of rewards, but as long as we have members that have no respect for the game or anyone else, then we have to enforce things like this.


Profiles - Users can now hide the Misc Information shown on the users profile page. To remove it simple go preferences and then the profile tab and uncheck the box and click update profile. To show the Misc information, simply keep the box check and update. by default the Misc information will appear.

Cemetary
06-24-2010, 21:52
This does not include aggressive spy ops. States need to protect themselves in that area.
.



Suiciding will be against the rules. If your caught suiciding your states will be highlighted in pink on the scores pages for the remainder of your career in Nation-Wars. You will lose any chance at ever being placed into the Hall of Fame and any medal you have or gain will be removed. If you are a member of the Hall of Fame then you will be removed from that as well.
.


so.. suiciding is against the rules, but you can still do aggressive spy ops outside of war...

please explain

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:01
pretty much if their dumb enough not to have spies on them and get messed up thats on them...but if they have spies and u fail theyll know who u r and theyll kill ure state lol thats wut i take it as

Cemetary
06-24-2010, 22:02
pretty much if their dumb enough not to have spies on them and get messed up thats on them...but if they have spies and u fail theyll know who u r and theyll kill ure state lol thats wut i take it as

so if u fail on them and they kill you, that isnt suiciding?

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:03
nope...kinda wierd but thats wut i read in another thread i believe lol

Cemetary
06-24-2010, 22:05
ok then.. makes complete sense

and now i cant wait for next set, im going 5% spies and 95% infantry, since if anyone does an aa on me it would be considered suiciding

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:06
haha they cant even do an AA on u because they have to be in a nation and declare war

-Z-
06-24-2010, 22:08
Seems fair to me.

I suppose if u are trying to make the game more realistic and not as fun to play for new players, the rules against single states attacking make sense.

Old vets ate the core of this game and always will be, it makes sense to act upon their wishes.

The new Naval base destructive op has some good potential.

Seems like some good changes overall.

Z

Cemetary
06-24-2010, 22:10
haha they cant even do an AA on u because they have to be in a nation and declare war

ok, i can accept that

now, one last question...

What repercussions are there if a 10+ man nation declares on a 1 or 2 man nation just bc they are high net states?

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:11
very good question cem...seems to be unfair if a big nation can destroy a little nation if they did nothing wrong

Cemetary
06-24-2010, 22:13
very good question cem...seems to be unfair if a big nation can destroy a little nation if they did nothing wrong

actually it makes sense.. why protect the minority when the majority r in bigger nations??

there doesnt need to be any protection for them since 90% of the game is ok if that happens

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:14
lol point made

-Z-
06-24-2010, 22:15
so if u fail on them and they kill you, that isnt suiciding?

Suicide attacks have no definition at the present time, and there seems to be a deliberate attempt to keep the rules ambiguous.

We can assume these efforts at vaguery by the controlling members of this game are effectually in place to allow the admins (and or other members with influence) to impose their will without reason at any given point. Should something happen that they do not approve of, these new rules will allow them to take action without just cause.

Patriot Act #2 for NW/WoW.

I saw this coming after the original patriot act was essentially revoked. I knew they would not allow control to be out of their hands for too long.

I am interested as to what this will bring.

Z

-Z-
06-24-2010, 22:17
actually it makes sense.. why protect the minority when the majority r in bigger nations??

there doesnt need to be any protection for them since 90% of the game is ok if that happens

indeed.

it only makes sense for the admins to follow the will of the old vets,

New players and individual states are not as important as the core group.

Z

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:18
to bad they dont have a medal for best suicide in a set lol we could def have a competition with that hahah

Calvin74
06-24-2010, 22:21
indeed.

it only makes sense for the admins to follow the wills of the old vets,

New players and individual states are not as important as the core group.

Z

please take your whining and hypocritical posts somewhere else. this thread and this post are solely meant to announce the changes for next set. it isn't for you three to whine about how you are being mistreated and how everyone is out to get you. if you look at it you three were the suiciders hitting innocent people. you don't get to take the high road after those actions.

Cemetary
06-24-2010, 22:24
please take your whining and hypocritical posts somewhere else. this thread and this post are solely meant to announce the changes for next set. it isn't for you three to whine about how you are being mistreated and how everyone is out to get you. if you look at it you three were the suiciders hitting innocent people. you don't get to take the high road after those actions.

hey **** face, im sorry if i asked for clarification on these new changes

you tell me not to suicide, then u make aggressive spy ops legal.. makes no sense

----------------
edit*

also, i have another question, ive AAd before in order to allow an ally to take a top position/nation take a top position, thats suiciding under these conditions right?

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:37
according to wut Mr P. said as long as ure helping an ally its fine

-Z-
06-24-2010, 22:38
please take your whining and hypocritical posts somewhere else. this thread and this post are solely meant to announce the changes for next set. it isn't for you three to whine about how you are being mistreated and how everyone is out to get you. if you look at it you three were the suiciders hitting innocent people. you don't get to take the high road after those actions.

I am not whining. (You will see this if u read my posts... did u read them?)

I agree with the changes for the most part, I am confused about adding a new aggressive spy opp, while disallowing single man attacks.

It seems to be taking steps in two different directions.

It will be interesting anyway.

I do not think it is wise to change the entire scheme of the game due to the actions of a few people.

But it is good to make small changes.

single man attacking has been a part of this games ever since I started playing almost a decade ago, some people call them suicide attacks.

they are part of the game, always have been, and if they were not part of the game, this game would not be the game it is today (which I still think is a fine game)

Everyone is hung up on these "Suicide attacks" and the term, or idea of it.

I fought with a nation for dozens of sets, I was in different nations, I might one day again go back to leading, or just playing in a nation.

But as I have said many times now. I feel that if a man wants to fight alone for a time, there is nothing wrong with that.

Z

Calvin74
06-24-2010, 22:41
hey **** face, im sorry if i asked for clarification on these new changes

you tell me not to suicide, then u make aggressive spy ops legal.. makes no sense

----------------
edit*

also, i have another question, ive AAd before in order to allow an ally to take a top position/nation take a top position, thats suiciding under these conditions right?


yeah i guess if you dec war then you also have to worry about the other side killing your guy:P

also calling me names isn't really helping things. I personally don't have a problem with you cem. Still kinda like you and enjoyed talking on msn it is mostly Z and marine with their self pitying comments. You did join in and it brought nothing constructive to the table.

MarineRecon
06-24-2010, 22:41
agree wit u on that -Z-...the changes are good for the most part, def wierd wit the destructive spy ops but time will tell wit these changes as usual lol

Calvin74
06-24-2010, 23:05
I am not whining. (You will see this if u read my posts... did u read them?)

I agree with the changes for the most part, I am confused about adding a new aggressive spy opp, while disallowing single man attacks.

It seems to be taking steps in two different directions.

It will be interesting anyway.

I do not think it is wise to change the entire scheme of the game due to the actions of a few people.

But it is good to make small changes.

single man attacking has been a part of this games ever since I started playing almost a decade ago, some people call them suicide attacks.

they are part of the game, always have been, and if they were not part of the game, this game would not be the game it is today (which I still think is a fine game)

Everyone is hung up on these "Suicide attacks" and the term, or idea of it.

I fought with a nation for dozens of sets, I was in different nations, I might one day again go back to leading, or just playing in a nation.

But as I have said many times now. I feel that if a man wants to fight alone for a time, there is nothing wrong with that.

Z


I think Mr P always trys to balance but at the end of the day he has to do what he thinks is right for the game.

as one of the 5 people that came up with this way of attacking i can also tell you it has become perverted. it was designed so that small nations could fight back but if they had a reason. it is and always has been massively overpowered and there is no way to fight against it. we just never thought it would be used for petty means. i guess we were idealists:P

Xavior
06-25-2010, 00:59
So I take it that you are allowed to do aggressive spy ops outside of war only if you don't get caught. If you do get caught, you're branded as a suicider.

Which basically means, only do them during war.

Cemetary
06-25-2010, 01:27
So I take it that you are allowed to do aggressive spy ops outside of war only if you don't get caught. If you do get caught, you're branded as a suicider.

Which basically means, only do them during war.

would be almost impossible to NOT find out who destructive opped you

just get a member to waste 100 turns intelling every active state

Cemetary
06-25-2010, 01:29
You will lose any chance at ever being placed into the Hall of Fame and any medal you have or gain will be removed. If you are a member of the Hall of Fame then you will be removed from that as well.


i liked this too btw, i wonder who this is geared towards...

Max Logan
06-25-2010, 04:00
i liked this too btw, i wonder who this is geared towards...

you

MarineRecon
06-25-2010, 05:12
well at least we all noe max is sumwut smart now lol good job on figuring that out pal haha

Xavior
06-25-2010, 05:51
would be almost impossible to NOT find out who destructive opped you

just get a member to waste 100 turns intelling every active state

I'm not sure I like this part actually. The whole point of spies is that they are secret and no one can find out anything about them unless you fail an op. Now anyone can potentially see what your spies have been up to. If this isn't geared towards sniffing out guys who have done aggressive ops then I don't know what is. You might as well only make aggressive ops available during war as well if thats the case. :thumbdown:

Max Logan
06-25-2010, 06:00
well at least we all noe max is sumwut smart now lol good job on figuring that out pal haha

ey, sumwat smart pal...eva hurd of sarcasm?

Cemetary
06-25-2010, 09:31
I'm not sure I like this part actually. The whole point of spies is that they are secret and no one can find out anything about them unless you fail an op. Now anyone can potentially see what your spies have been up to. If this isn't geared towards sniffing out guys who have done aggressive ops then I don't know what is. You might as well only make aggressive ops available during war as well if thats the case. :thumbdown:

yea, with implementing destructive spy ops out of war, pres is saying "keep up your defenses here", but what doesnt make sense is WHY you are allowed to do those to hurt a state, but someone can run with 0 jets and 0 ships half the set and not have defenses, but they are protected by pres

that's why i said I guess every state will go 5% spies 95% infantry now for a few weeks of set.. you wont be suicided for not having jets/ships, so as long as you carry a few spies no1 can mess with u either

Max Logan
06-25-2010, 09:48
all of you suiciders can form a nation (Mr, Cem, Z, nhn and friend, ali) and war them

-Z-
06-25-2010, 12:31
I think Mr P always trys to balance but at the end of the day he has to do what he thinks is right for the game.

as one of the 5 people that came up with this way of attacking i can also tell you it has become perverted. it was designed so that small nations could fight back but if they had a reason. it is and always has been massively overpowered and there is no way to fight against it. we just never thought it would be used for petty means. i guess we were idealists:P

Which "way of attacking" do u speak Calvin?

I feel that a single state should be allowed the same avenues of attack as a collection of states.

The collection of states has more power to begin with, because they are a group, usually larger than an individual state... (more turns, more NW, more land, etc.)

I agree with doing what is ring for the game.

The game is similar to the game I started playing so long ago. We have always had single states making attacking on other single states in or out of a large nation.

Just because one or two people are becoming effective at attacking as individuals does not (in my opinion) mean that we should change the game, essentially making the game into a different game, something other than what it is.

Nothing is broken, things are operating much as they were before, we simply have less players now.

Some of the Vets who seem to be calling the shots with Mr. P have been blaming "suiciders" for our loss of members.

Mr. P is not a foolish man, I have always respected him even when I often disagree with him, and I think he can see through these lies.

Its obvious that the game has lost members because of the change in global culture and technology.

How many people are still playing Pong these days?

Or Pac Man?

Even Quake2?

some yes. but back when I began PC gaming Quake 2 had 100+ times more players than it has on its servers today.

Its obvious why we have lost members, but some people try to pin it on other reasons SIMPLY TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN AGENDA.

Its human nature I suppose.

Z

Z

Max Logan
06-25-2010, 13:15
If you get suicided set after set, you leave...

Mr President
06-25-2010, 14:51
so.. suiciding is against the rules, but you can still do aggressive spy ops outside of war...
please explain

I am trying to start smaller and work our way up. Changing the attacks to war only bothered me a lot. So i'm leaving the spy ops open for now to see what happens. If needed then I'll have to close that as well.



Suicide attacks have no definition at the present time, and there seems to be a deliberate attempt to keep the rules ambiguous.

We can assume these efforts at vaguery by the controlling members of this game are effectually in place to allow the admins (and or other members with influence) to impose their will without reason at any given point. Should something happen that they do not approve of, these new rules will allow them to take action without just cause.

Patriot Act #2 for NW/WoW.

I saw this coming after the original patriot act was essentially revoked. I knew they would not allow control to be out of their hands for too long.

I am interested as to what this will bring.

Z

There is one person who calls the shots in this game and that is myself. I talk to a lot of people asking opinions and that helps me make the decision. Normally if the majority of people are complaining about something I tend to listen and work a solution. I'm sorry if the majority in this game are not suiciders and asking for things to stay the same.

But even if the majority is bugging me about something and I feel strongly against them, I would stand my ground for my own reasons.


indeed.

it only makes sense for the admins to follow the will of the old vets,

New players and individual states are not as important as the core group.

Z

New players are not important? Are you kidding me? Invite friends page, Missions page, Updated manual, advertising campaigns, money out of my own pocket advertising, easier join nation page, better messaging system, constant welcome emails and posts in forums, working on idea's late at night trying to attract more members and not to mention ENDLESS amounts of posts talking to vets about how they work with new members and how we need them trained better.. If you sat back and said I neglected the vets then I would be more apt to agree with you.. I definetly pay more attention to the new members then the vets. You almost have too.. Even though I wish I could have more time for everyone.


i liked this too btw, i wonder who this is geared towards...

What is with the ego's with some people? No Cem this was not geared towards you. This was geared towards fairness. Why should someone be in the HOF when they hurt the game? This was already decided on BEFORE you made your attacks this set..


I'm not sure I like this part actually. The whole point of spies is that they are secret and no one can find out anything about them unless you fail an op. Now anyone can potentially see what your spies have been up to. If this isn't geared towards sniffing out guys who have done aggressive ops then I don't know what is. You might as well only make aggressive ops available during war as well if thats the case. :thumbdown:

The main point of this is to make it so suiciders can't hide all the time. But also you can see everything about a state so why not be able to see this part too? I actually like the new op.



Some of the Vets who seem to be calling the shots with Mr. P have been blaming "suiciders" for our loss of members.

Its obvious why we have lost members, but some people try to pin it on other reasons SIMPLY TO ADVANCE THEIR OWN AGENDA.

Its human nature I suppose.

Z

Z

If you are implying that Calvin or anyone else has been pushing there own agenda on me your wrong. Calvin can tell you that I listen to his comments and idea's but don't always use them. And the same goes for everyone. If I listened to all of Calvins idea's then the game would be much different.. :) no offense cal lol..

And suiciding is a huge problem and a huge contributer as to why we lose members. Look at the HOF and read what Svenne said in his comments. It's been a problem in this game and has always hurt the game.


If you get suicided set after set, you leave...

This is exactly it.

This past set we have had 3 suiciders. 1 of the 3 has been doing it for sets now on the SAME nation. Why would anyone stay when they keep getting hit like this? Most people can handle getting warred. They may not like it at first, but normally get past it fairly quickly. But getting suicided set after set just mkes people say why bother.. Then they say I'm not playing anymore till it's taken care of and they look at me... How many times should I say "hey it's always been part of the game" and look the other way? How many times should I ignore EVERYONE just so a couple of people should have the freedom to ruin others states?

It's normally pretty easy to pull out the suiciders.. Simply change up the rules and see who complains..

The changes being made right now are directly tied to the suicides that have been happening for the past few sets. Something had to be done. This is not my way of controlling.. Honestly seeing this is my game how much more control do I really have to absorb? So please let that go.. I am trying to make this as fair for everyone. Does this now help protect infantry horders? Yep I'm sure it does.. Did your suicides help curb that? Nope not at all. So instead of working on it and trying to come up with a mechanical change you just go off and do things yourself.. Which result in what we see now.

But the last 3 suiciders can't use the Inf hording excuse cause none of them did it for that reason.

The game is what it is.. If you can't care about it or respect it then don't play it. Don't ruin things for everyone else cause you have no cares for this game.

Once a solution has been made to help eliminate the suicides then all of this will be removed and go back to normal. I'm sorry it has to be this way cause it really bothers me.

-Z-
06-25-2010, 19:46
I am trying to start smaller and work our way up. Changing the attacks to war only bothered me a lot. So i'm leaving the spy ops open for now to see what happens. If needed then I'll have to close that as well.




There is one person who calls the shots in this game and that is myself. I talk to a lot of people asking opinions and that helps me make the decision. Normally if the majority of people are complaining about something I tend to listen and work a solution. I'm sorry if the majority in this game are not suiciders and asking for things to stay the same.

But even if the majority is bugging me about something and I feel strongly against them, I would stand my ground for my own reasons.



New players are not important? Are you kidding me? Invite friends page, Missions page, Updated manual, advertising campaigns, money out of my own pocket advertising, easier join nation page, better messaging system, constant welcome emails and posts in forums, working on idea's late at night trying to attract more members and not to mention ENDLESS amounts of posts talking to vets about how they work with new members and how we need them trained better.. If you sat back and said I neglected the vets then I would be more apt to agree with you.. I definetly pay more attention to the new members then the vets. You almost have too.. Even though I wish I could have more time for everyone.



What is with the ego's with some people? No Cem this was not geared towards you. This was geared towards fairness. Why should someone be in the HOF when they hurt the game? This was already decided on BEFORE you made your attacks this set..



The main point of this is to make it so suiciders can't hide all the time. But also you can see everything about a state so why not be able to see this part too? I actually like the new op.



If you are implying that Calvin or anyone else has been pushing there own agenda on me your wrong. Calvin can tell you that I listen to his comments and idea's but don't always use them. And the same goes for everyone. If I listened to all of Calvins idea's then the game would be much different.. :) no offense cal lol..

And suiciding is a huge problem and a huge contributer as to why we lose members. Look at the HOF and read what Svenne said in his comments. It's been a problem in this game and has always hurt the game.



This is exactly it.

This past set we have had 3 suiciders. 1 of the 3 has been doing it for sets now on the SAME nation. Why would anyone stay when they keep getting hit like this? Most people can handle getting warred. They may not like it at first, but normally get past it fairly quickly. But getting suicided set after set just mkes people say why bother.. Then they say I'm not playing anymore till it's taken care of and they look at me... How many times should I say "hey it's always been part of the game" and look the other way? How many times should I ignore EVERYONE just so a couple of people should have the freedom to ruin others states?

It's normally pretty easy to pull out the suiciders.. Simply change up the rules and see who complains..

The changes being made right now are directly tied to the suicides that have been happening for the past few sets. Something had to be done. This is not my way of controlling.. Honestly seeing this is my game how much more control do I really have to absorb? So please let that go.. I am trying to make this as fair for everyone. Does this now help protect infantry horders? Yep I'm sure it does.. Did your suicides help curb that? Nope not at all. So instead of working on it and trying to come up with a mechanical change you just go off and do things yourself.. Which result in what we see now.

But the last 3 suiciders can't use the Inf hording excuse cause none of them did it for that reason.

The game is what it is.. If you can't care about it or respect it then don't play it. Don't ruin things for everyone else cause you have no cares for this game.

Once a solution has been made to help eliminate the suicides then all of this will be removed and go back to normal. I'm sorry it has to be this way cause it really bothers me.

I do not think you have anything to be sorry for.

The changes that you are making seem fair enough.

one thing you mentioned to me seems odd...

You said that a nation can handle being at war for sets on end, but if it is only a single man attacking them, they can not handel that and are likely to quit.

Why is it easier to take an attack from a group of people than 1 person alone?

I resent being called a "suicider" first of because it is not an real word.

Secondly because my intention is not suicide.

I intend to attack an enemy for a reason.

It is unfortunate that I do not usually have enough turns to make a kill on my own, but I will not drag friends into a gang bang with me anymore.

Z

Max Logan
06-25-2010, 20:15
I do not think you have anything to be sorry for.

The changes that you are making seem fair enough.

one thing you mentioned to me seems odd...

You said that a nation can handle being at war for sets on end, but if it is only a single man attacking them, they can not handel that and are likely to quit.

Why is it easier to take an attack from a group of people than 1 person alone?

I resent being called a "suicider" first of because it is not an real word.

Secondly because my intention is not suicide.

I intend to attack an enemy for a reason.

It is unfortunate that I do not usually have enough turns to make a kill on my own, but I will not drag friends into a gang bang with me anymore.

Z

Then when next time you suicide/attack someone, expect to be killed over and over again for the rest of your NW career

suicider is not a word, it`s an WoW/NW term.

Urban Dictionary
2. suicider 11 up, 12 down

(n) one that suicides, is currently in the process of suiciding, or has suicided in the past

you`re a suicider

you attack and enemy because you`re afraid to war him. you hide and suicide just to ruin his set. you have no more 'friends' to gangbang with. you lost 'the glory'. it`s over. LoR doesn`t need an angry pug-dog anymore, so the only thing you have left to do, to exact your immature revenge is to ruin the game for everyone suiciding.

I`m sorry, but Mr P has every right to protect the game he has put so much in to. If it doesn`t fit 3 players, whos actions are ruining the game...fine by me and by most NW

Tnova
06-25-2010, 21:34
I intend to attack an enemy for a reason.

Z

If this is the case, would you mind telling me why last January(2009) and April you bombed my buildings? I've never initiated an attack on you or gang banged your nation. I've only been in wars where WLF warred my 5 man nation with your 14 man nation.

Please keep in mind that I don't realistically expect you to remember what you were thinking at the time. Only to point out that you aren't as squeaky clean as you are presenting yourself to be here.

-Z-
06-25-2010, 22:30
Then when next time you suicide/attack someone, expect to be killed over and over again for the rest of your NW career

suicider is not a word, it`s an WoW/NW term.

Urban Dictionary
2. suicider 11 up, 12 down

(n) one that suicides, is currently in the process of suiciding, or has suicided in the past

you`re a suicider

you attack and enemy because you`re afraid to war him. you hide and suicide just to ruin his set. you have no more 'friends' to gangbang with. you lost 'the glory'. it`s over. LoR doesn`t need an angry pug-dog anymore, so the only thing you have left to do, to exact your immature revenge is to ruin the game for everyone suiciding.

I`m sorry, but Mr P has every right to protect the game he has put so much in to. If it doesn`t fit 3 players, whos actions are ruining the game...fine by me and by most NW

Your Personal attacks are childish and incoherent.

You will learn in your life soon enough that there is little to gain from personal attacks other than to feed a weak ego.

Until you do learn this, I advise you to avoid such public displays that make you appear nonplussed.


http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=suicider

1. Suicider 12 up, 3 down

buy suicider mugs, tshirts and magnets
Very, very strong rough cider, sometimes as much as 10% alcohol by volume - 8% is not uncommon. Can range in taste from innocuously fruity and bland to eye-wateringly sharp.
"What do you want ?"

"I'll have a pint of Bideford Brainblaster".

"Are you mad ? That stuff's suicider !"

Why are we quoting the Urban dictionary? This is a sad, sad day.

LOL

Z

Mr President
06-25-2010, 22:33
one thing you mentioned to me seems odd...

You said that a nation can handle being at war for sets on end, but if it is only a single man attacking them, they can not handel that and are likely to quit.

Why is it easier to take an attack from a group of people than 1 person alone?
Z

That's not what I said. I said
Most people can handle getting warred. They may not like it at first, but normally get past it fairly quickly. But getting suicided set after set just mkes people say why bother..Z look how upset you got just cause one nation entered a war you started and help an ally.. That was one set they did that to you.. Now that we are sets away from that and your still hitting them so how do you think they feel? How would you feel if every set I sought you out and killed you over and over and over.. Eventually you would just quit. You can say you wouldn't or it wouldn't bother you but again, look how mad you are at over one war.

All I am trying to get you to understand is that carrying that much revenge around set after set will not bring any good to anything.

We have all had our moments where we didn't think. We have made dumb choices and we all have warred people we shouldn't have. This community is the most forgiving community I have ever seen. It's very odd how people will let things go.. You yourself have made bad decisions but people still let it go and accept you. And that is always good for the game.

-Z-
06-25-2010, 22:48
If this is the case, would you mind telling me why last January(2009) and April you bombed my buildings? I've never initiated an attack on you or gang banged your nation. I've only been in wars where WLF warred my 5 man nation with your 14 man nation.

Please keep in mind that I don't realistically expect you to remember what you were thinking at the time. Only to point out that you aren't as squeaky clean as you are presenting yourself to be here.

You are correct that I do not recall these exact attacks...

However I am willing to concede the fact that I did do them, and yes you are correct, I am far from squeaky clean.

As to why I did them... I can also not remember exactly, but I imagine I was angry with your state for some reason or another, I can not remember you having done anything wrong to me ever Tnova, so perhaps I was simply jealous and reckless, perhaps It was my desire.

I ask then, for what reason destructive spy ops are in the game?

If u want a game without any drama (which NW/WOW never has been)

They take measures to stop dramatic actions.

(remove all destructive ops, Min 4 or 5 players in a nation to declare war, no war attacks outside war, delete the accounts immediately of any offenders, without warning)


I could compare this to the United States and Mexico Border / Illegal immigrants issue in Reality.


USA could easily build a massive fence with a dry moat, landmines and automated guns to seal the border. But due to the fact that the southern US economy is reliant upon illegal immigrant cheap labor to continue processes as normal, the Feds built a dinky little fence with breaks in it all over the place, mostly unguarded, so as to appear to be attempting to keep out the Illegals, while still providing enough leeway for the passage of the required amount.

Z

-Z-
06-25-2010, 22:57
That's not what I said. I said Z look how upset you got just cause one nation entered a war you started and help an ally.. That was one set they did that to you.. Now that we are sets away from that and your still hitting them so how do you think they feel? How would you feel if every set I sought you out and killed you over and over and over.. Eventually you would just quit. You can say you wouldn't or it wouldn't bother you but again, look how mad you are at over one war.

All I am trying to get you to understand is that carrying that much revenge around set after set will not bring any good to anything.

We have all had our moments where we didn't think. We have made dumb choices and we all have warred people we shouldn't have. This community is the most forgiving community I have ever seen. It's very odd how people will let things go.. You yourself have made bad decisions but people still let it go and accept you. And that is always good for the game.


Thank you for your understanding, and you are right in most of your words here...

I am far from perfect, but I have found in life that it is healthy to follow through on promises that you make to yourself, and I made a promise to myself to take some action without getting my friends killed.



Z

Tnova
06-26-2010, 00:09
Z. Personally, I don't have a problem with Suiciding. I view it as a side effect when you play a multi player based game.

You seem to be a person capable of reflecting and moving forward. I find it interesting that you set out on this crusade in order to protect your friends. You strip yourself nationless and perform acts you view justified so you don't hurt your "friends". But you punish a nation, most of which did nothing but follow orders of a leader. A quality I'm sure you can admire when a nation works for the better of the whole. I certainly wish there was never a gang bang, it's completely pointless and it proves nothing. I'd rather die fighting it even then call in the calvary to an unbalanced war. Because if you do ....what did you accomplish. Wooptido...you accomplished what you were suppose too. Where is the challenge in that!

Kind of flip it around, hasn't there been situations where you and your nation joined in and finished someone off quickly? How would you feel if someone set after set hide undetectable, and didn't take you as a leader, rose only to take out who ever were the highest "friends" in that nation.

You want drama? Where is the drama in doing the same thing set after set with a promise of doing it from now on. Sounds pretty constant and anti dramatic:P

Max Logan
06-26-2010, 06:10
Your Personal attacks are childish and incoherent.

You will learn in your life soon enough that there is little to gain from personal attacks other than to feed a weak ego.

Until you do learn this, I advise you to avoid such public displays that make you appear nonplussed.

Then why do you attack Sky? Calvin? Set after set? I bet those are not personal attacks. You don`t attack any Inf hoarders as you call them, you attack 1 nation specifically!

I`m not personally targeting you. I`m targeting all you suiciders.

About quoting urban dictionary - what should`ve I quoted? Suicider is not a scientific term nor political. It`s a term used by press and people. It`s a pop cultural term, both in NW and outside.

But I guess an intellectual person, such as yourself, that enacts personal vendetta on a nation for something that happened half a year ago and keeps harming the game over immature reasons to satisfy his own weak ego, doesn`t need advice from people that have no understanding of life and causality.


You`re like Burch, you need a chill pill or exit door

Bright
06-26-2010, 15:24
I enjoy seeing the new changes, I was wondering when the new ops were gonna finally arrive, haha.

As far as the whole spy ops and suiciding issue, now you're really asking for it if you run zero spies. If states want to go infantry or bust, that's their business, but if a bunch of 'suiciders' want to get together and form a legit nation and find a reason to war these states to prove a point that they're not completely protected from having no defense, I'm all for that too. Hell, I'd honestly even join them and have some fun too.

I guess I see it as things being a bit more defined from that standpoint- if you get warred and its because you got your pants around your knees and get slaughtered, I feel that there should be no whining or complaining about 'suicide'- ultimately it was your decision to run your state that way, let alone your other teammates.

These changes, albeit weird, could encourage more open warring down the line once we're all used to it.

Max Logan
06-26-2010, 15:26
Exactly the whole point! Making warring count!

Dogma
06-26-2010, 19:36
I have top agree with Bright, I don't think that warring someone just because you don't like they'rethier way of running is not that bad. What I am against though is the way that Z has targetted Sky states ever since he got his *** handed to him in the last war. If a nation is going to war a nation, war them, but this crap of having one or two states doing it to the same people over and over again because of a past issue, with no real hope of actually having a chance to win the war, that is suiciding.

pron
06-26-2010, 23:35
Suiciding will be against the rules. If your caught suiciding your states will be highlighted in pink on the scores pages for the remainder of your career in Nation-Wars. You will lose any chance at ever being placed into the Hall of Fame and any medal you have or gain will be removed. If you are a member of the Hall of Fame then you will be removed from that as well.

I could go on a long drawn out speech of what suiciding is and how we will decide if it is or not but frankly you all know what it is. I'm tired of those who tend to do it trying to find loopholes and different ways to define it. You know what it is so don't do it. PERIOD!

With war attacks only being made when war is declared that will help with the new people not being able to make the mistake. If your a 2 man nation and known to suicide and you declare war and drop 10 AA's on the top state that is clearly a suicide.

I would say this is too ambiguous and far too strict. Suiciding is subjective, but I would say that only someone who does it multiple sets in a short time should be labeled a suicider. Not someone who does revenge later in a set with some AA's, or someone who wants to hit one other person one set and be done with it. You should allow people to AA top states if that person simply doesn't want that person to get 1st place for a set. You should only enforce this rule if someone is doing it set after set.

You tell us we should change things in the game and to play how we think the game should be run (See "If you don't like people warring you, war them first). I think AA's are a perfect way to tell people that we don't like INF hoarding through the game mechanics. Someone won't learn to not INF hoard, unless they get AA'ed out of first place multiple times. Then they might learn to not INF hoard.

Max Logan
06-27-2010, 05:40
I would say this is too ambiguous and far too strict. Suiciding is subjective, but I would say that only someone who does it multiple sets in a short time should be labeled a suicider. Not someone who does revenge later in a set with some AA's, or someone who wants to hit one other person one set and be done with it. You should allow people to AA top states if that person simply doesn't want that person to get 1st place for a set. You should only enforce this rule if someone is doing it set after set.

You tell us we should change things in the game and to play how we think the game should be run (See "If you don't like people warring you, war them first). I think AA's are a perfect way to tell people that we don't like INF hoarding through the game mechanics. Someone won't learn to not INF hoard, unless they get AA'ed out of first place multiple times. Then they might learn to not INF hoard.

Or leave, what has happened way to often

Calvin74
06-27-2010, 09:14
I would say this is too ambiguous and far too strict. Suiciding is subjective, but I would say that only someone who does it multiple sets in a short time should be labeled a suicider. Not someone who does revenge later in a set with some AA's, or someone who wants to hit one other person one set and be done with it. You should allow people to AA top states if that person simply doesn't want that person to get 1st place for a set. You should only enforce this rule if someone is doing it set after set.

You tell us we should change things in the game and to play how we think the game should be run (See "If you don't like people warring you, war them first). I think AA's are a perfect way to tell people that we don't like INF hoarding through the game mechanics. Someone won't learn to not INF hoard, unless they get AA'ed out of first place multiple times. Then they might learn to not INF hoard.


Can someone please explain to me just what is so bad about infantry hoarding? Really how does it hurt anyone?

Mr President
06-27-2010, 12:41
Can someone please explain to me just what is so bad about infantry hoarding? Really how does it hurt anyone?

This is kinda the point of have been trying to get across. People are upset cause there are regulations on attacking. They don't like being forced to play a certain way so they are fighting it.. But yet they attack a top state for playing a certain way..

If you really think about it all the change does is require you to declare war before attacking. A one man nation can still hit a 20 man nation if they so desire. We have added in a couple new ways to make it harder for suiciders to hide.. Really that is all we have done.

Max Logan
06-27-2010, 13:12
Can someone please explain to me just what is so bad about infantry hoarding? Really how does it hurt anyone?

It hurts Z`s pride

pron
06-27-2010, 22:47
This is kinda the point of have been trying to get across. People are upset cause there are regulations on attacking. They don't like being forced to play a certain way so they are fighting it.. But yet they attack a top state for playing a certain way..

If you really think about it all the change does is require you to declare war before attacking. A one man nation can still hit a 20 man nation if they so desire. We have added in a couple new ways to make it harder for suiciders to hide.. Really that is all we have done.

Except you'll pinklist and strip medals for a one man nation hitting a 20 man nation. As you said, its now against the rules.

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 02:28
Except you'll pinklist and strip medals for a one man nation hitting a 20 man nation. As you said, its now against the rules.

Yes
suicide is suicide

I`d like to see your reaction to the change, if it had happened to you set after set

pron
06-28-2010, 11:30
Yes
suicide is suicide

I`d like to see your reaction to the change, if it had happened to you set after set

Max, read my posts before you post. I've already said I'm against people suiciding set after set.

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 13:05
Max, read my posts before you post. I've already said I'm against people suiciding set after set.

I`m talking about you generally being against the change and one man state attacking a nation. it can`t be labeled other then suicide, as all the state wants is cause damage and hurt other states. for reason no other then old grudges, pure pleasure or friend near top

Mhaphew
06-28-2010, 15:05
Suiciding will be against the rules.

....

I want a clear and straight forward definition of "suiciding".

Can you also give me some examples of suiciding and how far i can attack someone before being declared a "cheater"

pron
06-28-2010, 15:06
I`m talking about you generally being against the change and one man state attacking a nation. it can`t be labeled other then suicide, as all the state wants is cause damage and hurt other states. for reason no other then old grudges, pure pleasure or friend near top

Little difference between your definition and war.

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 15:17
Little difference between your definition and war.

Because you use war attacks to perform suicide?
We can always play around with words and options, but the bottom line is clear - war attacks are abused by certain individuals to ruin other people sets for their pleasure, forcing them to leave and the game losing members.

in a choice between individual and community, later always wins.

it`s sad to see that people are defending possibilities to suicide. I guess it always leaves an option for some to just make fun at other people expense.

Let`s be honest, a single state will never wage war against a 10 man nations, all he will do is declare, drop a few AAs on their top states just to take away their chance to finish 1st and then sit back and die. It doesn`t get more clear than that. And for that exact reason, it has to be stopped

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 15:23
....

I want a clear and straight forward definition of "suiciding".

Can you also give me some examples of suiciding and how far i can attack someone before being declared a "cheater"

you declare - drop a few AA - die

suicide

Mhaphew
06-28-2010, 15:27
you declare - drop a few AA - die

suicide

So, I declare war? then perform war attacks? then I die, I am going to be labeled as a cheater?

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 16:50
So, I declare war? then perform war attacks? then I die, I am going to be labeled as a cheater?

not a cheater...suicider

Mhaphew
06-28-2010, 17:18
not a cheater...suicider

hmmmm, I don't like it, I think we should just leave everything as is.

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 17:33
hmmmm, I don't like it, I think we should just leave everything as is.

let suicides continue? let the same nations again and again be stripped on their chances to play the game, cuz someone has decided to make it personal?

it`s more fair to come to the aid of that nation then suicider

Mhaphew
06-28-2010, 18:04
let suicides continue? let the same nations again and again be stripped on their chances to play the game, cuz someone has decided to make it personal?

it`s more fair to come to the aid of that nation then suicider

Who care if someone suicides.

Unfortunately if you are on the recieving end of a suicide run, it is going to suck, and that person is going to cry, but who is to say that all suicide runs are unprovoked?

Personally, I think this game has grown too far away from its original roots.

I remember a game where nations were at war, the forums were rich with chatter and every now and then someone would submit a complaint or a bug report about the game.

Now as it stands, there is a complaint posted every day (sometimes several times a day) about some aspect of the game that is not to their liking.

Nation X is gonna cry and piss and moan because they declared on Nation Y and now members of nation Y are suiciding on Nation X because of last sets actions.

So now Nation X comes to the forums and screams "Help me, our members are getting taken out for no reason!" and the forum members put their heads together and say "Aw, poor babies! Here let me get the head honcho over there to roll back your state and let me slap a big pink sticker on that suicider and forever label him as a Cheater"


Now, some of you may say that "well suiciders don't necessarily need a reason suicide".

You are wrong, if you got suicided, then you obviously pissed someone off, I have been on the giving and the recieving, and I have watched many of the suicide runs and have seen that in most cases (75% +/-) the state on the recieving end pissed off another state/nation and now hes sitting pretty in the bottom of the scores bin.

Now yes, I do understand that some states will use suiciders to knock out that top state and then jump up to the top after that number 1 guy has been knocked out. This is called strategy people, you can do it too.

Look, stop changing the game, stop letting the whiners win, and stop blowing Mr. P....

(Mr. P, put your **** away, and stop letting everyone blow it for you, you are part of the problem too)

Max Logan
06-28-2010, 18:31
Guess whom we have to say thanks for the game being where it is? Wanna take a wild, wild guess?

Mhaphew
06-28-2010, 19:14
Guess whom we have to say thanks for the game being where it is? Wanna take a wild, wild guess?

Max Logan?

Calvin74
06-28-2010, 19:54
Who care if someone suicides.

Unfortunately if you are on the recieving end of a suicide run, it is going to suck, and that person is going to cry, but who is to say that all suicide runs are unprovoked?

Personally, I think this game has grown too far away from its original roots.

I remember a game where nations were at war, the forums were rich with chatter and every now and then someone would submit a complaint or a bug report about the game.

Now as it stands, there is a complaint posted every day (sometimes several times a day) about some aspect of the game that is not to their liking.

Nation X is gonna cry and piss and moan because they declared on Nation Y and now members of nation Y are suiciding on Nation X because of last sets actions.

So now Nation X comes to the forums and screams "Help me, our members are getting taken out for no reason!" and the forum members put their heads together and say "Aw, poor babies! Here let me get the head honcho over there to roll back your state and let me slap a big pink sticker on that suicider and forever label him as a Cheater"


Now, some of you may say that "well suiciders don't necessarily need a reason suicide".

You are wrong, if you got suicided, then you obviously pissed someone off, I have been on the giving and the recieving, and I have watched many of the suicide runs and have seen that in most cases (75% +/-) the state on the recieving end pissed off another state/nation and now hes sitting pretty in the bottom of the scores bin.

Now yes, I do understand that some states will use suiciders to knock out that top state and then jump up to the top after that number 1 guy has been knocked out. This is called strategy people, you can do it too.

Look, stop changing the game, stop letting the whiners win, and stop blowing Mr. P....

(Mr. P, put your **** away, and stop letting everyone blow it for you, you are part of the problem too)


I do love how you say this game has gone to far away from its roots when you have no actual idea what the roots of this game are. The roots were mostly netting and warring only when provoked. The talent level was much higher and the member base was much larger. Several unfortunate things happened w/ server problems and cheaters and suiciders to push away the majority of the member base.
I just wanted to throw out that the roots of this game were playing your state with honor and skill. There were disagreements and wars (much much better wars than there ever are now) but people left it be after it was settled. They didn't whine and carry on and ruin it for people.

Mr President
06-28-2010, 20:03
Except you'll pinklist and strip medals for a one man nation hitting a 20 man nation. As you said, its now against the rules.

No.. your not getting the point of any of this, or your just trying to make me work harder... but I'll take it as your not understanding it. :) I have no problems if a 1 man nation wars a 20 man nation. As I have stated several times I am fully aware that things carry over to the next set. If someone gets mad and seeks revenge the following set I'm not going to do much about it cause it's expected. BUT if you carry things over set after set after set and have no intentions other than ruining someone's state then I'm going to mark you a suicider. I'm not out to stop the "next set revenge".. I'm out to stop the constant revenge with no end in site.. which is suiciding.


So, I declare war? then perform war attacks? then I die, I am going to be labeled as a cheater?

Read above!


Who care if someone suicides.

Unfortunately if you are on the recieving end of a suicide run, it is going to suck, and that person is going to cry, but who is to say that all suicide runs are unprovoked?

Personally, I think this game has grown too far away from its original roots.

I remember a game where nations were at war, the forums were rich with chatter and every now and then someone would submit a complaint or a bug report about the game.

Now as it stands, there is a complaint posted every day (sometimes several times a day) about some aspect of the game that is not to their liking.

Nation X is gonna cry and piss and moan because they declared on Nation Y and now members of nation Y are suiciding on Nation X because of last sets actions.

So now Nation X comes to the forums and screams "Help me, our members are getting taken out for no reason!" and the forum members put their heads together and say "Aw, poor babies! Here let me get the head honcho over there to roll back your state and let me slap a big pink sticker on that suicider and forever label him as a Cheater"


Now, some of you may say that "well suiciders don't necessarily need a reason suicide".

You are wrong, if you got suicided, then you obviously pissed someone off, I have been on the giving and the recieving, and I have watched many of the suicide runs and have seen that in most cases (75% +/-) the state on the recieving end pissed off another state/nation and now hes sitting pretty in the bottom of the scores bin.

Now yes, I do understand that some states will use suiciders to knock out that top state and then jump up to the top after that number 1 guy has been knocked out. This is called strategy people, you can do it too.

Look, stop changing the game, stop letting the whiners win, and stop blowing Mr. P....

(Mr. P, put your **** away, and stop letting everyone blow it for you, you are part of the problem too)

Mhaphew I agree with some of what you said.. I Definitely think this is a little uncalled for and inappropriate


Look, stop changing the game, stop letting the whiners win, and stop blowing Mr. P....

(Mr. P, put your **** away, and stop letting everyone blow it for you, you are part of the problem too)

and i'm not fully sure what memories you have of this glamorous game where wars were happening and things were great cause I remember a game with lots of members and suiciding being a huge problem.. Some of you act like this is a new problem.. It's not, it has been around since the game started and SEVERAL attempts have been made to fix it.. None of them really seemed to have worked, although I do feel the patriot act worked the best out of everything we had tried.. I do feel that this will work as well and be even less invasive as the Patriot Act was.

This encourages wars, makes it so someone can't just make a state and then instantly ruin someone else state cause now there is a 2hr wait before the war takes place, makes it so if you want to to do war attacks then create a nation and declare war, allows us a little more right to start marking a state who clearly has no respect for the game or anyone in it and also adds in some new spy missions.

So let me be clear one last time.......................

If you get warred and the following set you seek some revenge, nothing is going to happen to you. If you get warred and you go on some 6 set mission of destroying someone else state for no other reason then you will be marked a suicider.. When you go on some witch hunt it's clear that you have no respect for the game or anyone in it so why should I have respect for you? Why should I allow you to just come in and run people off in with suicides when it takes months to get new members?

It's not that I'm catering to the netters and whiners... It's I'm not catering to the suiciders anymore by allowing them to destroy progress.

BeeNo
06-29-2010, 09:19
now mr. p, i know you may be fed up with this topic at this point, but there is 1 more area i haven't read about.

the states who are in 1st place and get jumped who get upset and AA whoever jumped them. does that count as a suicide or is this change simply to stop players intent on long term set after set revenge?

we do appreciate all the time you've spent on this, i just want to be sure.

Mr President
06-29-2010, 11:23
now mr. p, i know you may be fed up with this topic at this point, but there is 1 more area i haven't read about.

the states who are in 1st place and get jumped who get upset and AA whoever jumped them. does that count as a suicide or is this change simply to stop players intent on long term set after set revenge?

we do appreciate all the time you've spent on this, i just want to be sure.

This change is simply to stop players intent on long term set after set revenge.

Disorder
06-29-2010, 11:30
I look forward to the changes.. Enough of the set after set ruining peoples game... Nice work Mr. P! :thumbup:

MAGGIO
06-29-2010, 15:24
why is everyone so technically trying to prove their point? If you think your bending or breaking or even close to disregarding the rules then you are prepared to suffer consquences right? If not then proceed as you wish. Either that or hire a lawyer and take Mr. P to court over it.

Mhaphew
06-29-2010, 19:04
why is everyone so technically trying to prove their point? If you think your bending or breaking or even close to disregarding the rules then you are prepared to suffer consquences right? If not then proceed as you wish. Either that or hire a lawyer and take Mr. P to court over it.

You have Larry H. Parkers phone number?

Mr President
06-29-2010, 21:45
I added another change to the first post..

Profiles - Users can now hide the Misc Information shown on the users profile page. To remove it simple go preferences and then the profile tab and uncheck the box and click update profile. To show the Misc information, simply keep the box check and update profile. by default the Misc information will appear.

Mr President
06-29-2010, 21:46
hire a lawyer and take Mr. P to court over it.

well now that wouldn't be very nice :(

Dogma
06-29-2010, 23:02
well now that wouldn't be very nice :(

That's what I was thinking. :cursing:

kenshin44
07-03-2010, 02:28
No.. your not getting the point of any of this, or your just trying to make me work harder... but I'll take it as your not understanding it. :) I have no problems if a 1 man nation wars a 20 man nation. As I have stated several times I am fully aware that things carry over to the next set. If someone gets mad and seeks revenge the following set I'm not going to do much about it cause it's expected. BUT if you carry things over set after set after set and have no intentions other than ruining someone's state then I'm going to mark you a suicider. I'm not out to stop the "next set revenge".. I'm out to stop the constant revenge with no end in site.. which is suiciding.



Read above!



Mhaphew I agree with some of what you said.. I Definitely think this is a little uncalled for and inappropriate


and i'm not fully sure what memories you have of this glamorous game where wars were happening and things were great cause I remember a game with lots of members and suiciding being a huge problem.. Some of you act like this is a new problem.. It's not, it has been around since the game started and SEVERAL attempts have been made to fix it.. None of them really seemed to have worked, although I do feel the patriot act worked the best out of everything we had tried.. I do feel that this will work as well and be even less invasive as the Patriot Act was.

This encourages wars, makes it so someone can't just make a state and then instantly ruin someone else state cause now there is a 2hr wait before the war takes place, makes it so if you want to to do war attacks then create a nation and declare war, allows us a little more right to start marking a state who clearly has no respect for the game or anyone in it and also adds in some new spy missions.

So let me be clear one last time.......................

If you get warred and the following set you seek some revenge, nothing is going to happen to you. If you get warred and you go on some 6 set mission of destroying someone else state for no other reason then you will be marked a suicider.. When you go on some witch hunt it's clear that you have no respect for the game or anyone in it so why should I have respect for you? Why should I allow you to just come in and run people off in with suicides when it takes months to get new members?

It's not that I'm catering to the netters and whiners... It's I'm not catering to the suiciders anymore by allowing them to destroy progress.

Prez i respect your decision, but I think you really need to put this out in straight terms. This one set revenge being okay but carrying it multiple sets not being okay? I would like you to specify the details put down a exact time frame.

To be honest I feel that this rule is bull**** cause i don't think admin has any business in saying that one set revenge or 3 sets revenge or 6 sets revenge scale warring is too much. BUT if you are to implement and tell us what the rules are atleast be clear and straight with the rules.

Saying things like one set revenge is fine but multitude of sets is not okay and you will be labelled suicides what does this mean? Just put it straight down, i know its not a black and white situation but if you want to put in a rule like this you got to draw a straight line so everyone here knows okay you pass this its over.

If you want to put in one set revenge for a nation size 3 or less a set after is fine but after that if the same team of a extremely small size does it again they are labelled suicider, then just say it so.

I think your confusing people, and making room for loopholes. Fair or not just put down your foot and say what you want done and thats that. Don't give the oh going on for sets and sets is suicide, and doing one set is fine. TELL ME, TELL US what is too many sets.

My argument for this whole thing is you can't really accurately weigh what is a good enough revenge spree, and I don't think admin should have power to judge that in the first place. BUT this game is small and your trying what you can to appease the masses so thats fine BUT ATLEAST MAKE A FINE LINE so everyone knows exactly what is up. You keep stating loose interpretation of the suicider policy, saying we all know what it is and so forth. All I'm saying is don't assume we know anything just draw a line straight down, if people like it or not they have to follow by that rule break it and you see the consequences. PLEASE don't make it as you have it a loose interpretation left to peoples imagination and free for people to misinterpret.

Max Logan
07-03-2010, 14:00
So AAing whomever you don`t like should be OK?
Ok...

Mr President
07-06-2010, 15:29
Prez i respect your decision, but I think you really need to put this out in straight terms. This one set revenge being okay but carrying it multiple sets not being okay? I would like you to specify the details put down a exact time frame.

To be honest I feel that this rule is bull**** cause i don't think admin has any business in saying that one set revenge or 3 sets revenge or 6 sets revenge scale warring is too much. BUT if you are to implement and tell us what the rules are atleast be clear and straight with the rules.

Saying things like one set revenge is fine but multitude of sets is not okay and you will be labelled suicides what does this mean? Just put it straight down, i know its not a black and white situation but if you want to put in a rule like this you got to draw a straight line so everyone here knows okay you pass this its over.

If you want to put in one set revenge for a nation size 3 or less a set after is fine but after that if the same team of a extremely small size does it again they are labelled suicider, then just say it so.

I think your confusing people, and making room for loopholes. Fair or not just put down your foot and say what you want done and thats that. Don't give the oh going on for sets and sets is suicide, and doing one set is fine. TELL ME, TELL US what is too many sets.

My argument for this whole thing is you can't really accurately weigh what is a good enough revenge spree, and I don't think admin should have power to judge that in the first place. BUT this game is small and your trying what you can to appease the masses so thats fine BUT ATLEAST MAKE A FINE LINE so everyone knows exactly what is up. You keep stating loose interpretation of the suicider policy, saying we all know what it is and so forth. All I'm saying is don't assume we know anything just draw a line straight down, if people like it or not they have to follow by that rule break it and you see the consequences. PLEASE don't make it as you have it a loose interpretation left to peoples imagination and free for people to misinterpret.

Your missing the point of this whole thing. First there is no way to draw a line and say that's the rule. There are loopholes with everything and there isn't enough time in the day to cover each and everything in this game.

The main point of this new rule was to allow admins the right to label a suicider. Prior to this there was no rules allowing anything to be done to people like this in the game, so we had to sit there and watch as good peoples states are ruined.

Some say this is "control" and we are forcing people to play a certain way. They think now inf horders have freedom. So why is it ok for you all to make up rules saying that inf horders should be hit to teach them a lesson.. Isn't that controlling the way people play?

Listen, 99% of you have nothing to fear with this new rule. It won't effect anything about your playing style or anything. We already know who the suiciders are in the game. We already know what wars are going on and who we can expect warring the following set. If someone gets a little revenge the next set nobody cares.. But when you continue to seek the same revenge set after set after set after set then now your hindering the function of the game and that's when we step in.

I am not going to set one straight line in the sand and say don't cross it. If you think there are loopholes this way then wait till i did that.

I know you don't like this new rule but until I we can figure out an ingame fix for suiciding it's the way it has to be. But honestly Ali, most of you will not see any difference in your style of play.. Unless you decide to go on some suiciding spree for sets on end :)