Suicide on nhn

[Bright]

You're right on that its a choice, but everything in this game is about choices anyways. You can hoard because you want to be at max strength/D for landgrabbing, but now its necessary to be prepared for the possibility of AA or whatever because everything else is wide open. DEAD decides they want to use the backdoor on said weaknesses, but are prepared for the consequence of war because of what they did. In my opinion, that's how it should be. If you were someone who was hit, be mad if you were the one who got hit (its a choice after all too!), but also have the spine to accept that part of that reason was because of the lack of difficulty there was in softening up the state.

Even if you go inf or bust, other things have to go right if you want to be up top anyways (GB racing comes to mind). No one is stopping a group from being anti-war. Heck, its what a majority of the 'bean counters' are since they don't like the AAs and want to retaliate because of it. But then what do you have to do in order to retal? What would you have to do to prevent the war state hoarders from breaking you? War. Pot, meet kettle.

Its too easy to spin either side of the argument to fit individual tastes. For me, its all about having fun, the rest of you be ****ed. >:B

One thing that rubs me the wrong way about this thread is how loosely suicider is tossed around. Sure, you'll die in war, but its not certain death of 1vs a nation like in a true suicide where one state dumps 300/100 (if he's lucky) turns on a target that's exposed, knowing he's dust afterwards. The war last set certainly cut the head off on that perspective.

[Achilles]

True its just about having fun, its just getting a litle bit weird if one nation enforces their rules upon the community. This will never be good for the community as a whole. And no i wasnt hit, i only hit people .

[Bright]

Yeah, that part of the post was directed more at the ones who demand justice for DEAD without getting their hands dirty.

At times this game feels like being a 86 year old in a home with other elderly folks, only they ALL want to watch the same old MacGuyver re-runs over and over again with no one wanting to change the channel. One of the usually quiet folks gets up and tries to do it, only to be moaned and groaned at until a charge nurse or coordinator comes to change it back.

That aside, I'll continue to have fun in my weird little world while I get nauseous whenever I happen to glance at the TV screen.

[Rassputtin]

First I'd like to point out that I'm sick of feeling compelled to, and henceforth responding to this idiocy.

[Today 08:50] ::LD::GrimReapr: Wasn't about the land and you know it. How about I continue to play the game the way I want with other units and def while you play how you want. If you don't know by know how we play I'm not gonna explain it to you again.
[Today 08:34] blaa: you used 70 turns on AAing to get a 1000 land SA. You could've gotten 2000 land if you had expanded. It looks like a suicide to me. Can we get a rollback?
[Today 08:32] blaa: so, do you LOOK for states that have 0 defence, just to take them down?
[Today 08:19] ::LD::GrimReapr: Choosing the target was easy top 10 no def no brainer
[Today 08:17] ::LD::GrimReapr: Same story what he had no ships none not a 1 zip zero zilch natta goose egg
[Today 08:14] blaa: i asked 4 questions and u replied with a totally new question
[Today 08:13] blaa: ah, see you later
[Today 08:12] blaa: im more intrigued to figure out how they choose their targets.
[Today 08:12] ::LD::GrimReapr: First question are they hoarding infantry?
[Today 08:11] Xavior: Same story every time. Next it'll be, "he only had 20k ships", then "only 50k ships" , then "only 200k ships" etc etc
[Today 08:07] blaa: how did u find out nhn was 0 defence anyway? he had way more nw than you, so what made you even check? because by your logic you must win SA if you have more nw.... and u guys never intel (unless its a war), right? so how did u get his intel?
[Today 08:00] blaa: is DEAD interested in more states that have something of the 4 attacks (spy, land, air, sea) with 0 defence? As I intel before every attack, I have seen quite a lot. Who do I send the 0 defence intels to?


Rollback for nhn is in order!

from TOS:
3. - You will not harass, threaten or abuse other people in the game and or the game forums.
19. - Suiciding another state is illegal. Suiciding is defined as one who deliberately seeks out a state set after set only to seek revenge for events in the past.

Someone get some wax paper for Blaa's Candy arse. Its not about the land, your good enough at math to know its not about the land. Using that amount of resources for 1000 acres is specifically ineffecient. I'd like a roll back on your birth. Thats an equally asinine request. Yes I look for states SPECIFICALLY in the top ten who are defenseless so that I can HOBBLE them. The player, the state, the nation, the ethnicity, the creed, the religion, the sexual preference, the gender and any other distinguising characterstic that you can think of is irrelvant to me. My only factor considered is do you respect me or are you calling me a bitc h? IF you respect me you'll carry defenses cause you respect my ability and resolve to use the other units and buttons in the game. If you don't respect me you'll horde infantry and be defenseless or carry a ridiculously small amount of defense just to be able to whimper "I had something".

Xavior you are exactly right. For me anyway. IF you bean counters think that simply because you press for a concrete definition and "defenseless" is hastily thrown out as the definition that, 0 is the breakign point then your are pathetically mistaken.

I havent been real active in these discussion but perhaps I should be considering I feel as though I am concievable part of the original spearhead of this movement from a few years ago.

Blaa, his intel was checked (along with every single other top ten state) to see if he was hoarding.... so that if he was he could be hobbled. Am I to assume that you are of the opinion that all players in the game should just watch as a defenseless state sits above them on the scoreboard simply because unwritten rules implimented by bean counters to protect bean counters say thats how it should be?

Because lets be real and honest here. If you want the truth I consider any grabs against me as an act of war. I personally consider land grabs against me as acts of war. Land is the hottest commodity, so you attacking me, killing my armies, food and every other resource in order to steal and go home with some of my land is the most hostile thing I can think of. But just like now in the begining it was marcus and his friends playing so they created a friendly atmosphere. THEY accepted land grabs as the norm and didnt consider it a greivenece against them.

Thats part of the problem with this game. Unwritten rules enforced by a small group of friends that incidentally becomes the norm and then people want to toss it around like its the rules, then manuals are written that say the most hostile attack (standard attack) is ok but the other attacks are war attacks....

Piss off, I disagree. And I'll bet you a large sum of money that if we took a group of players who NEVER played this game, never talked to any of us and never received any instruction from us on "how to play this game" and were not a group of school chums that they would not consider standard attack as a peaceful means of interactign with each other.

I digress and apologize as such.

For the sake of arguement blaa lets say that your right and really we just care about land and softening people up and not at all about infantry. Lets say that really I want to net, but I'm just so terrible at it and can't figure out what this 36 hour thing is and that GB thing and all those other mysteries. Lets say I can't comprehend them.

In that case Blaa my next few sentences should be enough to both stroke your ego, cater to your fallacy that your intellect far exceeds that of anyone else's atleast in DEAD and also provide you with all the reason and understanding you would need to just STFU and carry defenses already.

Blaa your intellect is superior to mine and everyone elses. You and your states, and nations ability to feed and organize feeding effeciently (not saying feeding is illegal or against TOS) and your sacrifice of real life towards game time to time and be online to get grabs at proper GB expiration, combined with the magic pixie dust you sprinkly that clouds my understanding of the game, mathematics and gameplay mechanics that prevents me from achieving or comprehending just how to net like a true L33T player would/does indeed make you a better netter.

I'll say it again seperated from the paragraph.

Blaa is a more l33t netter than me.

Surely you will not protest that, so with that in mind, since you are so much more astute than me and my cohorts why would you not want to defend yourself against us.

YOU SHOULD FEAR MY INABILITY TO FINISH FIRST

If your right and I'm just jamming round pegs into square holes why the hell would you not want to protect yourself from the big dumb retard carrying all those terribly inefficient but devestatingly effective units? Should the kickboxer not fear the ground game of the ju jitsu artist as much as the ju jitsu artist fears the stand up game of the kickboxer?

You seem to think that because alot of fighters around here have become accustomed to keeping the fight standing up and throwing blows that you no longer have to fear the fighter who will lunge a two handed take down slap you into a rear naked and choke your loud mouth out. Or in the case of hobbles as the metaphore applies, slap you into an arm bar and break your arm.

To make it even worse, your not even kickboxing. You dont' want to waste energy and time learnign how to snap an extending appendage to deliver maximum force, you just want to arm wrestle cause it uses less muscles and is the highly specialized skill your accustomed too and everyone else should either arm wrestle, or cage match each other but let you and yoru boys arm wrestle it out in the corner undisturbed by the heathens who have not refined thier fighting skills into the purified art of arm wrestling and having one strong arm.

In either scenario - mine ( hoarders are retards and should be punished), yours ( your way smarter than everyone and we cant compete with you), you being defenseless makes you a **** fool. You should respect the resolve of other players desire to finish as high as they can regardless of what rules you like.

I will disregard your suicide remarks because you knew they were unsubstantiated sobs when you set the tissue down to type them.

Let me be clear:
You have a 'rule' that if you have bigger nw than your enemy, then you're supposed to break SA. If you don't then they are probably infantry hoarding and you will take some action.
It's fine, a sort of 'unwritten' rule. Nothing wrong with that.
You also have a rule that you can't have 0 defence (after first week). Fine as well.

But there are tens of states around that break those rules (both), but you seem to 'select' your opponents.
Nhn had way more nw than you - therefore you wouldn't have grabbed him normally. You were waiting for the first week to be over, just to take some top states down.

If this isn't suiciding then...
On January set Max got outnetted by LoR again. You AA'd him down. Totally reasonable. But this set... you were no way near top5 and you decided to ruin a perfectly fun top2-5 battle.

My targets are selected. My criteria are: Who is the biggest state that is disrespecting me? HOBBLE him. Pretty simple process. I expect all infantry hoarding players to have higher networth than me. Thats the point of doing it genius. Being defenseless and carrying infantry allows for a state to grow more effeciently than those states wasting money on not being defenseless. My point is that being defenseless is no longer a method of growing more effeciently than those who are not cause .... you'll be hobbled.

1. I don't have a one week rule, My rule is, if nation wars has delivered me with enough turns to generate enough resources to upgrade a unit then every other player in the game has also received the same amount of turns. However, as a courtesy I usually do wait until the first week because by then you've had enough resources to upgrade every unit. But to be clear I don't have a "rule" that will be able to throw back at me later and say see... he said.......

In order for me to finish ahead of all you smart guys who understand the game I have to hobble all of you blaa. YOu should fear that and act accordingly. Use your paramount mathematical and reasoning calls to both be above me and be able to defend against me provided I do not stockpile one unit to break you. As that is my personal defniniton of suicide. Obviously you can not defend yourself against someone who is hell bent on ruining your set. A player will ALWAYS be able to stockpile more of whatever unit you have the least of to break you in that category.

Thats not what I'm talking about and not what we're doing. We are hitting defenseless states. There is a huge difference.

He wasn't way higher than me in net worth he was 500 k higher than me and defenseless being defenseless in a war game is suicide.

Being defensless in a war game is suicide!

why did u attack him, if it wasnt for the land?

suicide...

Because he had 0 ships and 100+ million infantry. Are you coherant?

Read your own definition Blaa.

Suiciding is defined as one who deliberately seeks out a state set after set only to seek revenge for events in the past

1. This is not "set after set" I'ts a single AA run.

2. This has nothing to do with past events or Dead would have simply FSed LOR and killed him outright.

Yeah exactly, I'm not sure what the hell he is talking about. The states that get hobbled are deciding to be hobbled cause we don't care who they are, or waht nation they are in, or what they had for dinner.......

as you can see, the guy was outnetted then sell his stuff, and until now hasn't log in.. you should have at least waited until he logs back in before clicking that button.. if you got his intel, you should have known that he is on his way on upgrading but you still did it, that i cannot accept..

Having 0 ships does not imply or make it so that we should have known he was on his way on upgrading. All hoarders no matter when in the set they are hobbled can say..... oh well, I was on my way upgrading..you should have waited just a bit longer before you attacked me.......

No other state in the top ten had 0 ships including the ones who outnetted him, as you put it.

So he hasn't logged in since, so he has been sitting defenseless for how many days now?

Uggh....here we go again. The QUEEN has spoken and we should all fall in line.

@ LD...Please tell me again why the **** we're not killing Blaa every a set??

because he is so good at being eloquent and diplomatic.

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS ^^^

there are a **** load of states that don't have defence...and you pick on LoR with 5 members.

The instigation that the tag next to the name had any bearing is moot. If they wanted to "pick" on LOR they would have declared and killed them all. They picked on a top ten state who had/has had 0 ships and defense for days. The fact that the tag next to that states name was [LOR] was nothing more than chance.
I think its been more than proven that, who the nation is or how big they are doesn't really matter.

Because that would actually be against the TOS and subject to deletion and banning. Sorry, but that is the rule.

In my opinion, you guys are really getting close to that now.

lmao, enough said.

come on how are they close? in the past we used to have random 1-2 man hidden hatchet jobs by anonymous states who'd ruin a state wit like 50 attacks or however much they could fit. Here its all out in the open....plus its not like people didn't know what LD & Dead is like about this issue.

Everyone acts surprised like, whoa, what happened why did they do that....... if you don't want to be treated like a defenseless fool, don't be a defenseless fool. There is no treachery here. We aren't secretely taking out USA's competition... take it at face value. If I see you and you are defenseless I will hobble you... there is not trickery involved.

LOL @ Blaa

TOS Violation BAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Don't laugh John, if Blaa says so, it must be.

same **** as last set when I was rocking in LoR they slammed my state with AA attacks. Plus I have been inteling DEAD states before my SA's this set and have found plenty of your guys that I could have crushed with AA and grabbed with very minimal ships.

Of course its the same thing idiot. You were hoarding infantry, defenseless and got AA'd. This set he was hoarding infantry had 0 ships and got AA'd. We've said a million times that this will happen, we've proven over and over that we will do it, what exactly is it that your confused about?

As I said before My personal definition of suiciding is stockpiling one type of unit that a top state is weak at to hobble them to ruin thier set for no reason. That to me is suicide. You can not have more of every unit than someone else. Thats how you break a top state in wartime, you have to stockpile one unit to try to break. So of course you may have more ships, and may be able to AA. Welcome to our perspective fool!

Devil Dog
Safety First
Guns4Hire
Phantom
Reaper

At the time that I intelled them within the last few days all of these dead states had low numbers of ships and high numbers of inf that would have been easy to break and crush their inf like they did to nhn. When they hit me last set I was running inf hording for the first time ever in an attempt to try out the strat and got AA'ed 70 times.

Did any of them have 0? Do you have any intels? First time huh, yeah go to your closest prison and take a poll, see how many of the prisoners inside say they are guilty. 70 AA's.....hmm could have sworn I hit you with more than that.

Actually, I think the issue has been with no defenses. Like not even an attempt to protect one's self.


10K ships at least shows an interest in showing that you are carrying SOME defense towards AA.


-- I have nothing to do with DEAD policies, their decisions, or really anything. I am merely a tourist there as I watch what has become of WoW/Nation-wars


I'm still surprised (almost) that this is even a discussion.

10k shows an interest but its a fake one if you have 150million infantry. people are amazing creatures. We keep doing the same thing but for some reason nothing changes........

If anyone has issue with what DEAD is doing don't come on the forums and cry about it.... GO TO WAR OVER IT!

+

Blaa is really running the risk of war for his nation by constantly coming on here and making issues of things IMO. For someone who wants to net blaa is not making good use of tactics.

Sure DEAD said they were not going to war ICN this set, but does that give Blaa a "free pass" to say and do what ever he wants to this set. DEAD already routed out an ICN spy with in their ranks and was warned by DEAD. Now with the continual calling out and arguing on the forums how thick do you think DEAD's patience is?

If anything DEAD is 100% with in their rights to continue to kill Blaa everytime he comes on here and slams them. and that would not be a suicide AT ALL!

Blaa is an idiot. he antagonizes and looks down his nose at everyone and then wonders....

I suggest you STFU before you say something you`ll regret...

Calvin was a cheating ***. He may not be now, I haven't spoken to him, at him or about him in quite a long time. But one can not expect violating trust and destroying the integrity of the fairness of the game to its fullest extent, to not stick around in a few memories..... That being said I have no hard feelings towards the cat at this time.

its a discussion because DEAD will not come out with a mapped out definition of what their policy is. Almost all of use with some COMMON SENSE know exactly what it is, but Blaa and Ang and a few others want to constantly try to poke holes in it.

Im not sure if not having a structured definition is a + or - at this point.

Thats why a structured definition does not exist, so that really smart (smarter than me) people don't get X+1 and say I'm ok now! Its a common sense thing. FEAR THE PLAYER WHO IS NOT AS GOOD AS YOU AT NETTING!

I just don't like the idea of them being to AA anyone. If you want to AA someone...war them. don't just do it randomly

Its not random its warranted, and quite frankly i wish you people would stop making me do it.

I can see both sides... I just don't like your side.

I agree with that statement 100%

Actually I did have a definition in the thread you told me to keep it simple stupid I said fine untill we need to worry about the fine line of whats balanced and whats not I said that we will keep it simple by doing states with no def.

Key word being until we need to worry about the fine line.

it makes it random that you do it OUTSIDE of war. War the **** nation then. Random AA's! thats RANDOM!

Why declare war and punish a hole nation for one states actions.... thats not fair and we are not unreasonable.

If i start playing by DEAD's rules you did not have enough defense, didn't say you had no ships but at the time of the Intel you did not have enough ships to stop me from AA'ing your inf down to where I could hit them.

I can't help but wonder if your parents had any children that lived? Cause your brain is dead. Deads rules are dont be defenseless. Even after you were AA'd for being absolutely defenseless still the concept somehow evades you!!!!! HOW?

if you cant afford the maint cost or upkeep cost of 1 turn with 5k ships till you actually go to hit the upgrade button not my issue i dont give a poop what you got on the market when i op you and you got nothing you get hit. I bm the few ships agm i have right before i hit the button to upgrade and make that units while im upgrading.

I didnt say he should have upgraded sooner. you failed to read the guy in the 4th spot above NHN didnt have his ships upgraded but he had 18k lvl 1 ships so i left him alone he had some def. NHN had NONE.

For the record I would hobble them both, because 18k level one with 100million + infantry is a slap in the face. Is it better than 0 sure, but no more better than a rapist talking nicely to you while your violated.

What I am saying is it started with you guys *****ing about people having no defense at all. Under your original no attempt at defending policy sure my state last set deserved to get hit. But now your policy has morphed when you attacked nhn who was simply upgrading ships that he had previously. You waited till they where on the market to strike or you would have done it earlier. Your policy was originally being used to get people to play with defense, now its being used for you to make power grabs. You say now that having 5k ships is enough to dissuade you from attacking. My point is whats stopping you from deciding thats not enough defense and keep upping the stakes every time you want to knock a top player down. What your now advocating is the use of war time attacks outside of a war any time it may benefit your nations interests.

edit: spelling

The policy has not morphed, he had 0 ships, you had 0 ships its the same thing. We didnt single him out and say wait for him to upgrade and we'll get him. Niether he nor you are that important to us. Your a fool if you think this was a grabbing strategy.

not necessarily true, they saw he member count in LoR as the best calculated risk to strike. The other states in the top 10 have more protection by having more members hence provoking one of these larger nations would lead to a long drawn out conflict like the last two sets.

Nation, state, member count, doesnt matter. The other states in the top ten werent defenseless. Do you speak english? Can you understand the world around you?

To be fair to the people who originally set up the "unwritten rules" I don't believe infantry hoarding was anywhere near as common as it is now, so they weren't abusing things as much. I don't ever remember seeing high ranked states back in the day with literally no AA/AR defense at all.

It was more than uncommon it was unheard of, there was a time when the players and units and functions of the game were respected. With any luck it will be so again. When I first started playing there was sense of urgency to become fundamentally war ready quickly becuase it could and would pop off. Now... its a joke. but its getting better.

"Attack Types

Standard Attack (SA)


This is the main attack. This pits all your offensive units against all your opponent's defensive units. The result is you steal a certain amount of land from whoever you attack based on (There land/Your land)*(There land*.13) Then 30% less for every hit in the last 36 hours. This is what we call land grabbing. The Standard Attack is very important in this game because the more land and buildings you have, the more income/military/food/technology you will produce depending on what strategy you have chosen to use. All other attacks are used during war ONLY.

WAR Attacks

Ground Attack (GA)


This attack uses Infantry and Tanks vs Infantry and Tanks. If you are victorious your opponent will lose a percentage of their population, food and SAM units. Using this attack repeatly can kill a state by reducing their population to 0.

Air Raid (AR)


This attack uses jets vs jets and SAMs and destroys a percentage of the enemies Missiles, Bombers and Jets.

Amphibious Assault (AA)


This attack uses ships vs ships. If you are victorious it destroys a portion of their tanks and infantry, and also lowers their readiness by a random amount, however it will not decrease past about 15%. This attack does not kill, but helps to reduce the amount of troops needed to be victorious in an AR or GA.

Bombing Run (BR)


This attack uses Bombers vs Jets & SAMs. If you succeed with this attack you will destroy a percentage of your enemy's land (1.4% average). BRs kill people by reducing their land to 0, there is a minimum amount of land destroyed each attack (roughly 25 acres).

Missile Strike (MS)


This attack uses Missiles vs SAMs. If the Strike is successful you will destroy a percentage of the enemies buildings and population while also lowering their readiness levels."

direct copy past from the game manual

If you'd like I can point out lots of quirks, instructions, and other tidbits that are outdated, do not apply and are written by volunteers based on the state of the conditions at the time of writing. Congrats, you prove that if its on tv then it must be true.

You can be sarcastic now that you where shown where it was written like you asked. It is not my fault you are ignorant and incapable of reading the manual of the game you play. I dont care if you follow the rules or not I play this game between work and school, is it fustrating sure, but is it the end of the world no.

You obviously knew he had ships before he put them on the market as can be seen by your responses to previous posts. And figuring out that he put them on the market would have not been difficult seeing as he probably was not selling them at minimum and they would sit for awhile so assuming you spy oped him once a day (seeing as how often your on to post that is a rational assumption) you would have easlily been able to tell. While I take you guys for *******s i dont think your completely incompetent ...well mabey pedro

Seriously I feel badly about my earlier comments because your probably just a kid and I shouldn't talk to you like that. I apologize. But you are the ignorant one, its a manual written by a volunteer player which is part of the problem, we teach and write manuals on "how to play" and simply perpetuate the same thing again adn again and again. The truth is, if it was a rule, then it would not be an outdated desire written in a useless manual but instead it would be a function of the game, such as these attacks would not be possible outside of war declaration. Now there was a time when you bean counters convinced the game owner to cater to your desire to have that.... as you can see it didnt work out.

we didnt' know he had ships on the market, nor did we care. What we cared about was that he didnt have any ships on hand. You need to stop reading into something that isnt there. We arent plotting against lor, we don't have a grudge against NHN, there is no sinister plot. FYI he is selling at minimum price and he had plenty of time to upgrade and have ships, the states above him did.....

Quite frankly its not our responsibility to monitor market activity to see if you've upgraded and what price etc etc etc. Its your responsibility to not be defenseless in a war game during the second quarter of the set.


START HERE FOR THE SHORT VERSION

There are players in the game that will hobble or kill you for being defenseless. This is a fact. Deal with it.
You demand a definition to how much defense you should have, you want the line drawn in the sand.
Although I should not have to explain common sense to you I am prepared to do so.

I will draw the line in the sand for you...... here it is.

THE GOLDEN RULE / THE LINE IN THE SAND!

If you do not feel reasonably safe with the amount of defense that you have then you should get more!

Wasn't that simple. Here are some examples to help you answer that question for yourself. If you can answer yes to any of these questions than you should probably consider getting more defenses.

1. Do I have 0 units to defend against, AA, AR, BR, GR or aggressive spy op?
2. Do I feel silly or sheepish when I look at the number of units I have to defend against AA, AR, BR, GR or aggresive ops compared to my number of infantry?
3. Can a state who has only used 500 turns use his next 300 to successfully attack me using any attack method in the game?
4. (My favorite) If war was declared right now, could I reasonably defend or help my nation attack before we are slaughtered like defenseless fools?
5. (My second favorite) Can a state of equal or lesser networth, who is not stockpiling a unit and could break any state, break my state and maim me without losing readiness or encountering any substantial difficulty whatsoever based on the amounts of units I have?

This list is not inclusive just my attempt to help out. If you can say yes to any of those questions and you do not remedy it, blame yourself not the state who hobbles you.

[Tank]

what's Ali doing these days? Ask him if he misses his best buddy Divine we used to have some good times wasnt it him who had all those brothers playing NW/WoW

that was evildeleter

[Rassputtin]

But still.....

If you want to run on top you make a choice, 100 effective (100% inf.) vs defence.
The moment of upgrading other units is a strategic point in time, when you feel safe/ or convenient to do it.
With the inf hoarding retard rule you take away the netting aspect of the game.
Might as well introduce a war state hoarding policy to put some balance in the game.

Not anymore. If you want to run up top you better not be defenseless. Not being defenseless is when you should feel safe. Not when you've stockpiled enough infantry to not be grabbed by the guy below you. That will never fly while I'm logged into the game. That doesnt take away the netting aspect, it takes away the plain, same rerun aspect of netting. Takes away the dry repetiveness of netting. A war state is not hoarding anything. A breaker may be more ship heavy than BR heavy, but he by no means can be broken by a state who has only used 300 turns like these bean counters now can.

True its just about having fun, its just getting a litle bit weird if one nation enforces their rules upon the community. This will never be good for the community as a whole. And no i wasnt hit, i only hit people .

You mean like one nation enforcing the rule that if you want to win you MUST hoard infantry because we are going to do that so to compete you must do the same.... is that what you mean?

Yeah, that part of the post was directed more at the ones who demand justice for DEAD without getting their hands dirty.

At times this game feels like being a 86 year old in a home with other elderly folks, only they ALL want to watch the same old MacGuyver re-runs over and over again with no one wanting to change the channel. One of the usually quiet folks gets up and tries to do it, only to be moaned and groaned at until a charge nurse or coordinator comes to change it back.

That aside, I'll continue to have fun in my weird little world while I get nauseous whenever I happen to glance at the TV screen.

So sick of this episode.

[Bright]

****, looks like now I'll have to start counting more than just pinto beans- what the heck are these weird kidney beans? Lentils? Chickpeas? Lima beans? I notice some are bigger than others, but I've never seen them until now...

[Rassputtin]

****, looks like now I'll have to start counting more than just pinto beans- what the heck are these weird kidney beans? Lentils? Chickpeas? Lima beans? I notice some are bigger than others, but I've never seen them until now...

GARBANZO BEANS!!

[Achilles]

Can someon explain to me what bean counting is about, is it a new farmer strategy?

To Rass:
With your hoarding rule you put a boundry for netters, and the net strategy.
One others nation can decide that they dont allow a state only to have inf, but also demand tanks.
Then a third nation wishes the ships to be upgraded first,........
You get where im going?
I guess its not, but according to me the hoarding rule should be against the TOS

[Will]

Can someon explain to me what bean counting is about, is it a new farmer strategy?

To Rass:
With your hoarding rule you put a boundry for netters, and the net strategy.
One others nation can decide that they dont allow a state only to have inf, but also demand tanks.
Then a third nation wishes the ships to be upgraded first,........
You get where im going?
I guess its not, but according to me the hoarding rule should be against the TOS

I wouldn't make it against the TOS. Also how would you define it exactly? what ratio of inf constitutes hoarding. I'd consider it ridiculous for someone to get deleted for having 100% inf and the next person gets away with 99% inf and a few ships.