ICN, GRIM/DEAD Leaders!

[bigstink]

If the leaders of ICN wish to contact me to discuss peace in future sets they can. I have no beef with either blaa or blade. I will make no guarentees though. I will only act as a "middle man/foreign relation guy" I guess you could say. All GRIM final decisions are made by our leader LD.

[Mr President]

Like your going to side with anyone else, especially me.



I would merge it just to spite you if I was still a mod. Retire already dammit

You want me to retire? Who's going to run the game then?

[ccsports77]

At this point I feel like any reasons people throw out there for these wars is BS. By now a lot of it has to do with revenge and pride. Everyone wants to have the "last word" by being the initiating nation per round, so of course the nation getting initiated on won't agree to peace.

The game has been pretty much the same over the years, except for the decline of members. Administration has been trying to tweak the game for the better, so you guys should stop complaining about the "loopholes" etc, pay some respect, and give them some credit for trying. If anything, try to help fix it through measures other than war.

In the past too, there has always been states/nations that were better than others at netting, but there weren't as many wars as there are now, most likely because of the larger member base. Today's warring nation should stop taking advantage of the smaller member base in general to, as many others have said, take into consideration the future of the game as a whole. Could you honestly say that seeing states get killed off for netting well will motivate more people to play?

[Blacken]

I haven't seen States getting killed for netting well this round.

[MAGGIO]

You want me to retire? Who's going to run the game then?

Retire as the leader of the USA, not stop owning/running the game. I mean you can have your cake and eat it too because you pay for that privilege, but is kinda corny

[blaa]

Mr. P, don't mind maggio, you're doing an awesome job. This thread was a nice surprise, although we (and dead) will probably skip the peace negotiations, I think it is becoming more probable that we can bury the hatchet for the next sets .

And blacken, could u please stop creating posts where you claim to be ICN foreign relations officer or whatever. Thanks. Could some mod delete those threads? Don't have anything against the forum-wars, but imo we have a lot of newbies playing nowadays (in icn, in bt, hna, everywhere) and they might not get your sense of humor.

[Margus]

At this point I feel like any reasons people throw out there for these wars is BS. By now a lot of it has to do with revenge and pride. Everyone wants to have the "last word" by being the initiating nation per round, so of course the nation getting initiated on won't agree to peace.

The game has been pretty much the same over the years, except for the decline of members. Administration has been trying to tweak the game for the better, so you guys should stop complaining about the "loopholes" etc, pay some respect, and give them some credit for trying. If anything, try to help fix it through measures other than war.

In the past too, there has always been states/nations that were better than others at netting, but there weren't as many wars as there are now, most likely because of the larger member base. Today's warring nation should stop taking advantage of the smaller member base in general to, as many others have said, take into consideration the future of the game as a whole. Could you honestly say that seeing states get killed off for netting well will motivate more people to play?

Very good post : )

[Will]

At this point I feel like any reasons people throw out there for these wars is BS. By now a lot of it has to do with revenge and pride. Everyone wants to have the "last word" by being the initiating nation per round, so of course the nation getting initiated on won't agree to peace.

The game has been pretty much the same over the years, except for the decline of members. Administration has been trying to tweak the game for the better, so you guys should stop complaining about the "loopholes" etc, pay some respect, and give them some credit for trying. If anything, try to help fix it through measures other than war.

In the past too, there has always been states/nations that were better than others at netting, but there weren't as many wars as there are now, most likely because of the larger member base. Today's warring nation should stop taking advantage of the smaller member base in general to, as many others have said, take into consideration the future of the game as a whole. Could you honestly say that seeing states get killed off for netting well will motivate more people to play?

While continuous warring may well damage the playerbase, excessive focus on netting (particularly the infantry hording kind) will cause as least as much damage if not more so. I don't play this game to crunch numbers every set, and without the threat of warring the top 5 or so are usually untouchable by anyone below them (with the possible exception of a very good stocker)

We badly need a unit rebalance (I'd opt for making infantry cheaper, but a lot weaker relative to tanks/ships/jets/bombers. 1 tank should equal 100 inf or so, and ideally jets and bombers would have a huge bonus in SA. People will no doubt complain about this, but the status quo is simple, whoever has the most infantry wins the set. Another idea is to have two new attacks: Blitzkrieg (tanks vs tanks + agm) and takes land, and something along the lines of "Aerial Assault" Jets and bombers vs Jets and sams, but kills infantry and tanks if successful (basically an alternate form of AA)

[DBozMen]

The only reason WLF went to war is because of the leadership of ICN. BladeEWG has no clue how to handle a nation and run a foreign policy. I have had several run-ins with him in the past and none of them he handled correctly. 8 Sets ago or something like that I allready went to war ICN for the exact same reason.

If i was a member of ICN, i would question the leaders about all these wars. Because they don't start out of nothing.

[Max Logan]

At this point I feel like any reasons people throw out there for these wars is BS. By now a lot of it has to do with revenge and pride. Everyone wants to have the "last word" by being the initiating nation per round, so of course the nation getting initiated on won't agree to peace.

The game has been pretty much the same over the years, except for the decline of members. Administration has been trying to tweak the game for the better, so you guys should stop complaining about the "loopholes" etc, pay some respect, and give them some credit for trying. If anything, try to help fix it through measures other than war.

In the past too, there has always been states/nations that were better than others at netting, but there weren't as many wars as there are now, most likely because of the larger member base. Today's warring nation should stop taking advantage of the smaller member base in general to, as many others have said, take into consideration the future of the game as a whole. Could you honestly say that seeing states get killed off for netting well will motivate more people to play?

Netting has done as much damage to the game as all the 'BS' wars. Equal amount of players have left because of being warred or because they got bored of doing the same things every round. Grab, stock, jump, grab, grab, go 100% ships, win! Exciting! Hence people have left to join other games where you need at least basic sense of strategy, not just hoard one unit and hope you get the grab before the other guys do it.