MAGGIO
05-17-2012, 22:44
Look as far as I can see, no one is saying you cant do this and cant do that and you must play this way or that way. what I see people saying is that they dont like certain things and if they feel that you or your nation is doing some of these things then you may or may not get warred for it. I certainly see them as reasons for war.
- one farmer nation is undercutting another farmer nation then they should war if they cant come to an agreement
- one nation sees another nation feeding the NA so certain members can be on top. well if that nation wants its members on top there is only one thing to do, War
- one nation gets pissed because another nation's top states are on top unprotected SA'ing their "balanced" states, well there is only so many things you can do about that, WAR!
To say that any of this is against the TOS is ridiculous, but to say that these are NOT good reasons to compete harder and go to war is EVEN MORE ridiculous.
Everyone is talking about this stuff out in the open so its no secret that if you do some of this stuff other nations will be pissed.
There is so many ways to play, and so many strats to try to get your states and nation to the top, that is why we all love this game so much.
The community, nations and states have been imposing playing methods onto other members, nations, and states since the beginning of the game. To say that it is wrong for a group of members to attempt to impose a method of playing is just like saying its wrong for a nation to have a retal policy or its wrong for the community to impose a triple tap policy.
I think its amazing and very healthy for these larger segmented groups of players to break from the mold together and instate these new policies and game play strategies.
I find it extremely progressive and think that it is good for the health of the game.
there are other factors at play, but the community has gone from 45-55 active to 95-100 active in the last few months and maintained it.
- one farmer nation is undercutting another farmer nation then they should war if they cant come to an agreement
- one nation sees another nation feeding the NA so certain members can be on top. well if that nation wants its members on top there is only one thing to do, War
- one nation gets pissed because another nation's top states are on top unprotected SA'ing their "balanced" states, well there is only so many things you can do about that, WAR!
To say that any of this is against the TOS is ridiculous, but to say that these are NOT good reasons to compete harder and go to war is EVEN MORE ridiculous.
Everyone is talking about this stuff out in the open so its no secret that if you do some of this stuff other nations will be pissed.
There is so many ways to play, and so many strats to try to get your states and nation to the top, that is why we all love this game so much.
The community, nations and states have been imposing playing methods onto other members, nations, and states since the beginning of the game. To say that it is wrong for a group of members to attempt to impose a method of playing is just like saying its wrong for a nation to have a retal policy or its wrong for the community to impose a triple tap policy.
I think its amazing and very healthy for these larger segmented groups of players to break from the mold together and instate these new policies and game play strategies.
I find it extremely progressive and think that it is good for the health of the game.
there are other factors at play, but the community has gone from 45-55 active to 95-100 active in the last few months and maintained it.