Single states attacking

[Soviet Russia]

if you read further I said whom I directed it at. no where I said about you

Oh sorry.. you know i love you

[Max Logan]

did you just lick my ear?????? uh.....

anyway yes it may seem I am catering to the netters but i'm really not. They are just the some who are benefiting from the change.

At no time have I ever thought nor will I ever think that we need to do things to protect the top netters in the game. But I always think of how to to protect the game itself.

This is not a control issue. This is not a "hey i'm bored let's shake things up" issue. This is not a "hey look some of the GBer's are back so lets do all we can to please them" issue. This is not a "man I can't stand Z so let's ruin all his fun issue" This is not a "hey I don't like anyone in this game so let's ruin all the fun" This is a GAME issue and must be handled. Personally I can't stand adding more rules to a game. I would love to have left things alone but things must be done that helps keep the game fun for everyone in some way or another.

Everything comes down to what people really think of the game and it's success. Carrying things over for sets on end does nothing more than give gratification to the attacker. It proves no point and actually just makes people give up. Most of us have the privilege to sit back and say why change things cause it's really not a big deal.. But there are those who get hit all the time, Set after set.. how do you think they feel? If we all just got off our high horses once in awhile and had a little respect then issues like this would not be issues...

Every change you make they see as personal attack on them. You should stop defending and just let them rattle. No way you`ll ever get them see past their egocentric attitude.

[pron]

did you just lick my ear?????? uh.....

That's $5 extra

anyway yes it may seem I am catering to the netters but i'm really not. They are just the some who are benefiting from the change.

At no time have I ever thought nor will I ever think that we need to do things to protect the top netters in the game. But I always think of how to to protect the game itself.

Except the way you view the game has you biased towards the netters and not the warrers. What you think is protecting the game is, in the view of warrers, hurting the game. You can't make everyone happy, I understand that, but don't hide behind the "protecting the game" argument. Just say, I want to end one or two man wars.

This is not a control issue. This is not a "hey i'm bored let's shake things up" issue. This is not a "hey look some of the GBer's are back so lets do all we can to please them" issue. This is not a "man I can't stand Z so let's ruin all his fun issue" This is not a "hey I don't like anyone in this game so let's ruin all the fun" This is a GAME issue and must be handled. Personally I can't stand adding more rules to a game. I would love to have left things alone but things must be done that helps keep the game fun for everyone in some way or another.

When you make it so INF hoarding is the standard, the game instantly becomes less fun for me. Again, I know you can't please everyone, but don't assume you're making the game fun for everyone.

Everything comes down to what people really think of the game and it's success. Carrying things over for sets on end does nothing more than give gratification to the attacker. It proves no point and actually just makes people give up. Most of us have the privilege to sit back and say why change things cause it's really not a big deal.. But there are those who get hit all the time, Set after set.. how do you think they feel? If we all just got off our high horses once in awhile and had a little respect then issues like this would not be issues...

I actually laughed out loud at this part! Yes, I do know how it feels to get hit set after set--I'm pretty sure LOR hasn't had a peaceful set, even when we say we're netting. And yea yea, "LOR earned it" or w/e the arguments are, but I do know how it feels to be suicided/warred endlessly, and GB'ed by people set after set.

With these new rule changes, you're catering to the netters. I know you like war in the game too--but I guess we'll see how the new changes come out and if it improves the game or not.

[Calvin74]

That's $5 extra



Except the way you view the game has you biased towards the netters and not the warrers. What you think is protecting the game is, in the view of warrers, hurting the game. You can't make everyone happy, I understand that, but don't hide behind the "protecting the game" argument. Just say, I want to end one or two man wars.



When you make it so INF hoarding is the standard, the game instantly becomes less fun for me. Again, I know you can't please everyone, but don't assume you're making the game fun for everyone.



I actually laughed out loud at this part! Yes, I do know how it feels to get hit set after set--I'm pretty sure LOR hasn't had a peaceful set, even when we say we're netting. And yea yea, "LOR earned it" or w/e the arguments are, but I do know how it feels to be suicided/warred endlessly, and GB'ed by people set after set.

With these new rule changes, you're catering to the netters. I know you like war in the game too--but I guess we'll see how the new changes come out and if it improves the game or not.

Come to think of it I can't remember a time that LoR has been suicided on like Sky for the past few sets or even like CTU this set getting suicided on time after time.

[Mr President]

Every change you make they see as personal attack on them. You should stop defending and just let them rattle. No way you`ll ever get them see past their egocentric attitude.

True I just like to make sure my point is always heard. I don't like admins who just post a change and say deal with it and then never speak about it again. I like people to know where i'm coming from.

but I guess we'll see how the new changes come out and if it improves the game or not.

Exactly! We will won't know what this will do till we try it. I would rather try it and it fail then sit here and try nothing at all..

[ooga booga]

Pron the new rules doesn't hurt warring, it hurts suiciding. If LoR still wants to do their blood thirsty warring like always that goes unaffected. In fact he made it even better for you guys that you only have to wait 2 hours to declare instead of 3 (considering you are usually one of the largest nations). Warring is still the same. What hurts warring is 3 turn attacks, etc. That is a restriction to warring.

[kanman]

Come to think of it I can't remember a time that LoR has been suicided on like Sky for the past few sets or even like CTU this set getting suicided on time after time.

I remember being suicided on by capcom (comcap?) and sa'd by z. Then the next round they made a little nation and suicided on us again. Might have been the start of Z's suiciding ways.

[pron]

Pron the new rules doesn't hurt warring, it hurts suiciding. If LoR still wants to do their blood thirsty warring like always that goes unaffected. In fact he made it even better for you guys that you only have to wait 2 hours to declare instead of 3 (considering you are usually one of the largest nations). Warring is still the same. What hurts warring is 3 turn attacks, etc. That is a restriction to warring.

But you're taking away the aspects of small nations warring larger nations--now anyone that is deemed too small to be considered gaining something from the war will be considered a suicider.

And yes, Z and Capcom were suiciding on LOR long before they were suiciding on SKY.

[ooga booga]

But you're taking away the aspects of small nations warring larger nations--now anyone that is deemed too small to be considered gaining something from the war will be considered a suicider.

And yes, Z and Capcom were suiciding on LOR long before they were suiciding on SKY.

I don't necessarily think this is the case. I think the suiciding is determined on the motive. If it's a small nation that is 1-2 people and they are actually gaining something I don't think Mr P has a problem with that. If those 1-2 people however keep hitting the same nation for 4 sets in a row then it's deemed it's a suicide. Basically I believe it has to have more than just one occurrence. That's the way I looked at it anyway. If it's one set of maliciousness people can live with it, but if it's continuing on and on it becomes a problem. (sort of like when Lor wars every set it becomes a problem. )

[pron]

I don't necessarily think this is the case. I think the suiciding is determined on the motive. If it's a small nation that is 1-2 people and they are actually gaining something I don't think Mr P has a problem with that. If those 1-2 people however keep hitting the same nation for 4 sets in a row then it's deemed it's a suicide. Basically I believe it has to have more than just one occurrence. That's the way I looked at it anyway. If it's one set of maliciousness people can live with it, but if it's continuing on and on it becomes a problem. (sort of like when Lor wars every set it becomes a problem. )

Except Mr. P hasn't outlined that in the forum posts and hasn't stated that to be the case.