Some thoughts to those next set maniacs

[Rassputtin]

Next set I will kill every bottom player that goes 90% inf because that will be my personal rule.Stockers too because they go 90% inf..ohh no I will kill every top 100-200 that expands..ohh no..better I'll GA warring states with my 90% inf because they aren't producing enough inf and not getting a good balanced state.

See Rass I can have rules too but that would affect others and would be pointless just like yours.
But it's your rule and if you think it's OK then nobody can say anything and you should do what you have to do.

P.S:not talking seriously..I won't

you don't need to take me seriously. None of you do.

[Dezonus]

this is a war game if i am not mistaken. if getting killed drives them away, they do not need to be playing a war game

Thank you at last somebody agrees...

if you haven`t noticed, its been 6 years since this game IS NOT a war game!

It migh not be yet, but I'm sure one of those lunatics who are obsessed with war could make it so

[Missionary]

you don't need to take me seriously. None of you do.

oh how daft they are

[::LD::GrimReapr]

Hey bro it's not that they can't understand its the fact your talking to fast.
you must speak slow to some of these people so it can sink in.
Silver your beginning to sound like Cemetary you open your mouth and s*** rolls out.

You bring the rifles ill be bringing the napalm.

[Calvin74]

i don't usually agree with silver but this time what he is saying has some good points

this isn't a war game
no offense even though the name says war in it everything in this game is measured by netting standards

that said no one should ever go 90% inf
i would say people are inf heavy at the start b/c that is the smartest way to play a true netting state (something that doesn't get to happen much) however once your rank is secure then you have to switch to making jets/agms and ships



also in 2002 and 2003 people quit for a variety of reasons
the suiciding was one of them
the game was somewhat stagnant and the ideas that were implemented were done so to make it easier to the everday person and dumbed down the game
also the game wasn't on a dedicated server and went down from time to time
add that to the fact that this game doesn't exactly have the most stimulating forum (no offense but most players here were under 16 at the time)


rass i do think you should think about what you say you are going to do
it is your state but i think if you just hit states solely b/c they are heavy on troops (or in your opinion aren't playing smart) doesn't mean they deserve to be hit
in my opinion what you are doing is no better then what lor/wlf did when they would gang up on random nations for no reason


just rambling from an old man

[Guy77]

another dumb idiot with this war game stuff.
if you haven`t noticed, its been 6 years since this game IS NOT a war game!

would some quit becouse he was killed? I guess you weren`t around 2002 and 2003... some...1500 people quit. But I guess its just a drop in the pond for you great quitters.

Rass, you`re a suicider, ok. Face it! If you could run heavy inf and win, you`d do it to, now you just want an excuse to hit top states, but I congratulate you, you atleast try to find a reason
The part about killing someone so they don`t win just proves my point You can`t hide the truth very well eh?
If you want to ruin the game, go ahead. Join the LoR/WLF bunch that does nothing but run for fun. You`ll be another laughstock in a year, thats all

Rass, all your post are the same whining about how you can`t compete and what ******** all the netter are becoue they grab you and your 50% ships won`t take you anywhere. Atleast don`t lie like a little girl, pfft!


And tnova, , you`re playing out of fear thats all, to not get suicided, but when there are 20 people playing to reach the one state thats running away, a balanced state won`t get you anywhere..(rass will make a sarcastic quote)


Basiclly, there is no ballanced state. You can have those 20/30/50, but if someone takes more then that on one of the fields, he can kill you. So all you`ll prove next set is you can add some more % to your production then someone else, like a true suicider

i didn't really read much of this thread, and frankly, much of this post, cause silver never really says anything that sounds important

If it wasnt' a war game, then wars shoudl be removed, war attacks should be removed, and we should just have inf, there? everyone happy

i know i am

I am proudly a part of the group supporting the genocide of inf heavy states!


Also, i read calvins post above me and figured i should comment on it, cause i <3 cal

Calvin, you know i usually agree with you, but this time i don't

Not a war game? i'm going to "war" people who are inf heavy........... gee........... guess that would make it a war game

nuff said i can't comment on the 02-03 topic, i only played 4 or so sets, and i was 13 at the time :-\

and now i have read the whole thread, as it was only 2 pages long, and figured i should

Tnova, i love you! =) ............. thats pretty much all i had to say

Also, if it is not a war game, we should just remove the wars and relations forum, if is a netting game, whats the point?

Silver, does anyone like you btw? cause your just straight up stupid

[Raul]

this is a war game if i am not mistaken. if getting killed drives them away, they do not need to be playing a war game

this is the best post i have ever seen =D

[Raul]

another dumb idiot with this war game stuff.
if you haven`t noticed, its been 6 years since this game IS NOT a war game!

would some quit becouse he was killed? I guess you weren`t around 2002 and 2003... some...1500 people quit. But I guess its just a drop in the pond for you great quitters.

Rass, you`re a suicider, ok. Face it! If you could run heavy inf and win, you`d do it to, now you just want an excuse to hit top states, but I congratulate you, you atleast try to find a reason
The part about killing someone so they don`t win just proves my point You can`t hide the truth very well eh?
If you want to ruin the game, go ahead. Join the LoR/WLF bunch that does nothing but run for fun. You`ll be another laughstock in a year, thats all

Rass, all your post are the same whining about how you can`t compete and what ******** all the netter are becoue they grab you and your 50% ships won`t take you anywhere. Atleast don`t lie like a little girl, pfft!


And tnova, , you`re playing out of fear thats all, to not get suicided, but when there are 20 people playing to reach the one state thats running away, a balanced state won`t get you anywhere..(rass will make a sarcastic quote)


Basiclly, there is no ballanced state. You can have those 20/30/50, but if someone takes more then that on one of the fields, he can kill you. So all you`ll prove next set is you can add some more % to your production then someone else, like a true suicider

i dont understand whats ur problem with hitting top states, the hell with it, u play ur netting full infantry strats and let the other play whatever they want to, this game isnt only war, is also net i agree, but not because someone disagrees with netting all set they are wrong, this threads are useless, they have no point, everyone should only do whatever they want to and stop crying, just play ur game and if u get killed well what the hell! and pls dont respond this with suiciders ruining other's sets, i repeat, this is completely wrong because if suiciders cant suicide because u want to net peacefully, then ur ruining the suiciders set, and of people running away, well if theyy cant tolerate all the variables of this game they arent up for the challenge and as for me they can all go to play Earth 2025 or other "#$%#$

[Rassputtin]

rass i do think you should think about what you say you are going to do
it is your state but i think if you just hit states solely b/c they are heavy on troops (or in your opinion aren't playing smart) doesn't mean they deserve to be hit
in my opinion what you are doing is no better then what lor/wlf did when they would gang up on random nations for no reason
just rambling from an old man

It really boils down to a matter of opinion. Me saying I'm going to hit someone for being infantry only is basically me saying I'm going to hit someone because I don't like something they're doing, or lets face it the way they are playing the game.

But me saying that is no different then anyone else saying it. When the leader of Horde says I'm going to kill your nation because you killed noobs. That equals I don't like the way you played the game.

When a war is declared for a triple or quadruple. Its because the victem nation of that act didnt like the way it was played.

9 times out of 10 in this game when someone is hit...... it is because someone else didnt like the way the game was being played. In my case it is a matter of principle.

Has an infantry only state done anything to me. No, but I find it insulting that they don't respect the community enough to have a proper defense in a war game. Which brings me to my second point.

The winner is determined by networth, yet the game is called nation wars. So much like real life it contains both. In the cold war, the USSR didnt lose a military war, they lost an economical war. In that fine real life example, the united states won that "cold war" by netting. Being capatilists proliferated a better economy that built more weapons faster. The USSR economy could not keep up, to the point that it broke the nation.

So that is an example of netting in RL. I don't need to point out any military examples because there are so many to choose from you all know that a military victory is also attainable in RL.

But in both examples, do you think a nation with only infantry would win either type of engagement. I mean soldiers on the ground are nice an necessary. But take china for example. 1/4 of the worlds entire population. Thats alot of potential infantry. If thats all they had would any nation fear them, or respect them. If they had 400 million infantry, 3 jets, 4 tanks and a battleship do you think they would have the influence on the world that they have............ probably not.

Now this game is not RL. However it is a bit of a simulator. This isn't an arcade game where the entertainment is graphics and a B rate plot line to follow. It is a sim, and as any gamer knows the fun in a sim is the mimicry of real life and your control over it.

I guess I'm just sick of seeing my favorite sim treated like an arcade game.


Which brings me to my final point that I will reiterate further in suggestions. YOu can not win this game with military conflict. It is my understanding that Networth destroyed is not added towards a nations NW...... if I am wrong please correct. But I think there needs to be a balance brought to the game so that a thorough and very good warring nation can win the set. I'm off to the suggestion forums......................................

[Divine Intervention]

tbf a lot of this arguing would be settled if we actually understood what is meant by infantry *****s? do you mean those with 100mill inf and less than 1mill ar and aa defence? or 50mill with 2mill each and say 4mill when they get to 120mill inf...or both?