Next Set Changes..

[-Z-]

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]

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

[Max Logan]

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]

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]

Exactly the whole point! Making warring count!

[Dogma]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.