Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/11/20 in Posts

  1. Dear fellow leaders, I have amassed a large amount of troubling evidence that suggest Alex is controlled by NPO In recent months, Telecommunication providers have increased 5g towers by 10fold, amid a global pandemic. Everything is shutting down, yet these towers are still going up. Now, you may ask, what does this have to do with Alex? As many of you may have noted, Alex has been more active lately, which leads me to question, what is the source of this newfound activity? I have many friends over at the Congressional Library, and the NSA, and their finds are startling: NPO has taken this time of absence to conspire with 5G tower manufactures to emit radioactive waves from these towers to influence Alex's decisions. I believe I have found the source of these waves. I have tracked the waves down to a sweatshop in Wuhan, China, the same one used for Manwha production by IQ Coincidence? I THINK NOT Has the coronavirus been used as a cover to convert all of Wuhan into a Manwha production site, a material known to emit the same waves used in the 5G towers? The gig is up. It is time Orbis confronts this menace to create a better future for our children. God Bless, -Q
    26 points
  2. You make some fair points, but I'm going to have to disagree on this one. There's at least one major difference between the things that you've mentioned, and that is the vulnerability of those things. Cities, projects and land are special in that they physically cannot be attacked nor destroyed by any means short of escalating and deliberate toxicity and a determination to undermine the enjoyability of the game for the target. The others can be looted, stolen, blown up etc., but nothing can and nothing should be able to destroy certain specific 'milestones' in a nations' development, those being the cities, projects and land. The only way to attack projects/cities/land is quite simply to be an unholy toxic !@#$, and choosing to attack by such means is therefore a clear-cut case of being enough of a dick to warrant moderation action. That's where the line is, as far as I understand it. Ask for billions in reps, fine. That can (in theory) be looted. Ask for infra to be sold down, fine. That can (very definitely) be blown up instead. Ask for the totality of an alliance bank... perhaps less fine, but looting is a thing and repeated lootings can get close to being as good as a full transfer. But ask for a city to be deleted? There's no way to achieve that outside of either A. hacking or B. psychologically assaulting the player sufficiently to convince them to do so of their own free will. That crosses the line into OOC territory, big time. Same with projects and land, for the same reasons: attacking those constitutes a psychological attack against a player as opposed to a nation. Is all this getting through?
    7 points
  3. Players of Orbis, With this latest update, Sheeps has now made it possible to delete nations. My first thought the second I heard this was... someone is going to try to force city deletions on a defeated enemy as punishment. We just ended the most contentious and damaging war this world has ever seen, I dont think its a stretch to say that if IQ had the ability to demand people delete cities, they would have. So in a show of unity, and a small attempt to avoid the crap we all went thru a few months ago, I would like to put forth a pledge that no matter how heated things get, or how much we may hate each other, demanding city deletions will never be part of a peace term. I have spoken to a few alliance leaders privately and they all agree, so if you are in a position to speak for your alliance and or bloc please post below that your alliance/bloc agrees to never use city deletion as requirement for peace. Below is a list of alliances/blocs that have agreed, I will update it accordingly. Bloc Alliances: -The Hedge (Grumpy, Guardian, TE, NP) -Rose, Camelot -Quacksphere TKR/TS/HS/CTO/COA/OWR/SK -TCW -Swamp Block: The Fighting Pacifists/Ampersand/The Immortals/The Lost Empire/The Federation/Fark/The Regiment/Deathly Hallows/United Socialist Nations/Spartan Union Alliances: -The Wei (TW)
    5 points
  4. welp So after I posted my last post in alliance affairs, 'Blitzers merging into Arrgh', I got several DMs regarding that post as well as my past, so I thought I should make a post so that I can link it next time someone bugs me. If you have never met me before, you may leave rn. Q. Did you sell your first alliance 'Avengers'? A. Nah, I didn't sell it. Avengers merged into GG&FU long back most of the grants were given out from my personal funds, so I just asked GG&FU to refund those as the members barely paid any taxes. (That was my first alliance and I had no econ experience). Q. What happened to the money invested in OrbisPay & Alpha Bank after they closed? A. I have ran several businesses in Orbis, here are the companies that were later shut down: BET365, a casino; OrbisPay, a transaction company; Alpha Bank, investment and resource trading company. I paid back each and every dollar invested in those companies to the investors. You may confirm this from the people who invested there. Q. Did I coup The Blitzers? A. No, The Blitzers actually disbanded and deposits were returned to the members. That forum post I posted was just a shit post, which went wrong :/ Q. Did Blitzers merge into Arrgh? A. Again no, that forum post was a shit post. Thanks!
    5 points
  5. Sorry to interject in the AA forum, but I would like to add to the discussion. First, I am very happy to see everyone on board. It seems that toxicity in the game has been reduced significantly in the past month or so, and I'm really happy to see that. Pledges like these to fair play are really great things. I had the same concerns as you all, which is why I just updated the rules to explicitly forbid this type of thing. Although forcing people to delete and re-roll has always been a possibility in peace terms, with the addition of easy city deletion I think this does become a more substantial issue and one that needed to be addressed. While I was at it, I threw in a clause for trying to make people quit, which is also something that we've seen in the past. I want the game to be as fun and fair for everyone, and I'm glad that you all feel the same way by making this pledge. I hope we can continue in this spirit of mutual respect and fairness in all aspects of gameplay.
    5 points
  6. For the record, I agree with Thalmor, Sheeps is setting himself up on a slippery slope. I assume he made the new rules because his intention was to make his life easier when people bother him about deleting cities, and probably didn't think about other uses of the city deletion mechanic. (I love the little guys that are buying and selling cities to hit people, nice job by you guys) I tried to do this politically so that we can police each other, the second Sheeps gets involved we all know the outrage machine is going to go into full affect, and you will get people whining and crying, threatening to quit the game, and actually quitting the game. So while I do appreciate you Sheeps moving quickly and making these rules about forced city deletion, and forcing people from the game, I think in the long run, you are setting yourself up for failure.
    4 points
  7. Whoever posts below me is stupid
    3 points
  8. No, it's not getting through. First off, thanks for providing a good response. The invulnerability of those is a factor I didn't consider and will meditate on more. That being said, I disagree with your post and I will explain why. I really don't like the argument that it's 'toxic' to an unholy degree to attack these things and that admin intervention is needed. I'm strongly against city deletions in peace terms. I think alliances that push it should be decced on and raided. I also don't think any alliances today would push such a peace term or be friendly to those who did. However, I think the player base and meta should have the freedom to drift in that direction as the years go on. Additionally, so what if they are pushed as peace terms? People can just keep fighting. Nobody have to accept any peace terms. Maybe that causes some people to quit, but oh well. People quit when they're raided for the first ever time. I'm okay with it being against the rules to pressure people to delete their nations, but I don't know how that (or the city deletion policy for that matter) will be enforced with Discord logs not being counted as evidence. The biggest concern I have is that this will led to Alex intervening more in politics as he dictates which peace terms are acceptable and which aren't. In your post, you've laid out the argument that projects and land should also not be targets of peace terms. Great. In the span of less than day, we've intellectually already expanded the list of justifications Alex has to intervene in politics. If he doesn't add projects and land to the list, he's being a bad admin. If he does, it's admin action becoming more involved in politics. It's a lose-lose situation. Eventually, with Alex intervening more in politics through dictating which peace terms are acceptable, he himself will become more involved in politics. This is a dangerous slippery slope for a number of reasons. He will stop being a neutral party in politics and that will affect his admin decisions. Imagine if starting with NPO's First Time, Syndisphere and co were pushing terms Alex considered rule-breaking. Imagine then that NPO and co were interacting with Alex and being friendly to him (courting him) where Syndisphere and co weren't because they were angry at Alex for punishing them for pushing terms they thought were fine. Alex is a normal human being. His subconscious bias would kick in. It could very well be kicked in now, but at least Alex has yet to interfere with politics so we're not in trouble now. But, in this parallel universe, Alex is active in politics. Now, imagine the game played out the same way until February 1st, 2020. Would Alex still ban NPO's leadership and shut down GPWC? I don't think so. I don't think the argument that 'well NPO would be in trouble for trying to get Coal A to delete'. I disagree. Discord logs aren't evidence to Alex and I think that's for the best because logs can be faked and allowing them as evidence is a can of worms we don't want open either. This is not a criticism of Alex either. As I said, he's a normal human being and we're all open to our subconscious biases affecting our decision making. At the end of the day, this is not about city deletions. I've already laid out that I think city deletion terms are bullshit. What this is really about is Alex losing the important position of a neutral observer who is there to ensure there's a degree of equality of the playing field. This is about rather or not we want a figure we cannot fight with or negotiate with deciding what is political acceptable or not. This is about rather or not we want to decide what is fine and what is unacceptable, or if we want to outsource that to a person who is basically God in this field of play. We should be free to destroy each other, and to stop us from destroying each other. We shouldn't make either of those things the responsibility of anything or anybody else. EDIT: I meant to throw this screenshot in originally but forgot. Alex is admitting there's no way to enforce player agreements except with admin actions. This is Alex opening the door to enforce other player agreements as well, and we don't want that.
    3 points
  9. Shit, the gig is up.....release Covid-20....Orbis needs to be cleared
    3 points
  10. Otherwise known as the "Whale Protection Pledge".
    3 points
  11. Investor Contact: Leopold von Habsburg Media Contact: Partisan SYNDICATE, INC., ANNOUNCES COMPANY PANDEMIC MEASURES AND EXECUTIVE BOARD RESTRUCTURING Company Retreat, Diocletian's Palace, Spalato (de facto provisional Corona HQ) NASSAU, Bahamas (de jure), April 10th, 2020 – SYNDICATE, Inc. (NYSE:SCC) Amidst growing global pandemic crisis, the executive board has escaped a lively corona epicentre from Bahamas and decided to spend the rest of self-imposed quarantine measures in the Company retreat at Diocletian's Palace, SPALATO. Diocletian's Palace came into possession of the Syndicate during the breakup of Yugoslavia. It is rumoured, but never proven in court that the Company acquired this wonderful location and converted into a luxurious Company retreat by bribing the local government with 300 liters of gasoline. Amidst the global chaos, attempting to maintain social distance and abide by Company imposed quarantine rules, the incumbent Executives have grown ever more irrational. It is rumoured by the Retreat's staff that Mr Leopold, incumbent COO has been heard yelling in an inarticulate language at present wall paintings in his quarters. Later, it is believed that this language is known as Austrian German, deciphered by a staff employee, the laundry boy Pablo. Attempting to alleviate and de-escalate the situation, the Executive Board has introduced Resolution 138, calling for mandatory NO PANTS policy for all incumbent board residents, regardless if meetings were to be in person or via Skype. Furthermore, while Company shares continue to plummet contingent to the global trends amidst a growing pandemic, the Board has felt obligated to increase security amongst its employees now working from home, with no pants on, and forthwith hire a rising star of the Company as Chief Security Officer. It is rumoured by close confidants of the CSP, Mr Partisan, that he has been infected by a disease. Mr Partisan, a known hypochondriac, fearing influenza infection, has frantically invited a certain Mr Shiho to decipher the disease. After close examination by Shiho Nishizumi, it has been established that Mr Partisan has contracted syphilis on one of his many encounters around the world and will be treated accordingly. It is believed that Mr Shiho has gained such trust with swift action on Mr Partisan's behalf, and gained enough favour of the leading figure of the Company, that has prompted the aforementioned Mr Partisan, otherwise known in the red-light districts as "The Snake" to promote Mr Shiho Nishizumi to the position of Chief Security Officer. The motion to pass the resolution 139, the no underwear policy, has been shut down by the rest of the Board, and its proponent, incumbent CFO, Mr Theodosius, has been left devastated ever since. The board will continue to monitor the global developments and accordingly increase preventive measures in the future. The board once again implores its employees to stay safe and take all precautionary measures to protect themselves from the rampant pandemic, and syphilis (amended by Mr Partisan 15:36). Signed, the Board, Partisan, Leopold von Habsburg, Theodosius, Shiho Nishizumi
    2 points
  12. Not a single member from Blitzers went to Arrgh. Every single government member in the Blitzers got a government position in Error 404, which randomly created and entered the top 50s within five days of it's existence. I still don't understand how nobody managed to connect the dots
    2 points
  13. 2 points
  14. This is the problem with making city deletion peace terms against the rules. It's OOC intervention against IC behavior. There's nothing special about cities that should make them off-limits. They're expensive, sure... but so is 4,000 infra in each city. So is 9,000 land in each city. So in a 29 city nation getting 100% military. So are a lot of projects. So are the contents of an alliance bank. Are all of these things going to have to become against the rules to push in peace terms? Will Alex have to personally oversee peace terms in major alliance wars? Where is the line drawn? You're faced with 2 options: This is an arbitrary rule, or you have to apply the same logic to other things like I described above. The latter is really bad because it injects moderation quite heavily into politics and that's pretty gross. I believe the intent behind this thread and the rule change are friendly and good. I have no problems with this thread, but I don't like the rule change. I am fine with the part of making it against the rules to push players to delete (so as long as jokes and banter are still allowed). Unlike the city deletion part, the nation deletion thing is an OOC response to an OOC thing, and that's fair. Finally, this is not to say that it's okay for people to push others to delete cities in peace terms. I can agree it's shitty and any political repercussions that come as a result are warranted. However, I think I laid out pretty well that making it against the rules is nonsense. Players should feel free to direct politics how they wish within the realm of IC interactions.
    2 points
  15. Even though I know you're shitposting, lolno
    2 points
  16. Threads like this make we wish we had Roq and Leo back. City deletion was stupid anyway, but the whiny and victim role “pls no bully” is so god damn cringey. Just gonna force people to delete projects then or delete discord and their forum account. Gotta find a way to keep plebs down. Just rename the game Banter and Peace. Give everyone 500 cities and first person to dissolve their borders and become a city-less utopia wins. Instead of raids and looting just add a gift system and reward the most charitable nations. fricking kumbaya peace pipe circle we got goin’ on now.
    2 points
  17. 2 points
  18. I had my doubts. Now I’m doubting them. Thank you for your clarifications that only led to more questions.
    1 point
  19. Should have included 'why i hate mars' in there so i have something read as well:(
    1 point
  20. Finally, the questions and debates that took place over the course of eons can be put to definite rest. The great cosmic pantheons of wanderers and mystics can now rest knowing that you cleared up these questions that literally every entity in the multiverse capable of harboring thought was plagued with. Thank you for this great deed. We can all hope that this thread is enshrined and immortalized, and never again should someone ponder the answer to the question, "Literally who?" God speed.
    1 point
  21. I will post below you to fulfill the prophecy. Also thank you for clearing it up.
    1 point
  22. Tinfoil face masks!!!!1! Make sure they're airtight, none of the mind control spores will get me!!!!1!!!!! suffocates and dies
    1 point
  23. I was a bit surprised when Ronny hit me up asking for TCW's signature since forcing city deletions wasn't something that even occurred to me as something which could be leveraged in peace terms, but we're happy to support this measure and I'm glad to see the game is pretty much in unanimous agreement. However I'm also in agreement with @Epi and @Thalmor, as it stands now the current rules which Alex wrote up are pretty broad and I feel would be heavy handed in situations where a certain degree of nuance is required. Actions intending to try and push people out of the game should be addressed by the player-base, only when does it drift into the realm of OOC involving harassment and bullying should the admin draw a line in the sand. Scenario 3, which Epi described is especially relevant since most alliances who have been victims of bank thefts, treason or other actions are certainly entitled to take punitive actions against those who back-stabbed them. @Alex I know you're trying to Improve the community, and its a good thing that benefits us all, but I feel that more rules and regulations aren't the answer, what will heal the wounds the last war caused is time. Time for alliances to repair themselves or for new alliances/blocs/spheres to establish themselves, for politics to reset itself and for the playerbase to recover. Name it Keshav's law.
    1 point
  24. Im glad we were able to come to this understanding even before Alex made it a rule. Moving forward im would like to see a bigger and more formal agreement made regarding warfare and practices no one will use.
    1 point
  25. Well lets be honest, Akuryo has low nobility, reputability, respect, honor, loyalty, responsibility, etc. Which we at least have alot of it among our BoC realms The same applies to the our friends & allies
    1 point
  26. hmmm idk guys but I think alex have been steeping in ingame stuff too much recently. I mean how is he gonna enforce this? is he gonna take discord SS as evidence now? What about the second rule? Is he gonna enforce it by stopping any war that takes more than couple months through mod actions?
    1 point
  27. I fully support such a pledge, and would even go so far as to suggest any alliance that forces such terms upon another should be subject to global scrutiny and action. Don't be so uncreative, it's the Whale Preservation Initiative.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.