Jump to content

Gnilraps

Members
  • Posts

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Leader Name
    Gnilraps
  • Nation Name
    Gnilliland
  • Nation ID
    12967
  • Alliance Name
    MensaHQ

Gnilraps's Achievements

Casual Member

Casual Member (2/8)

24

Reputation

  1. Was the MensaHQ bank just looted by the game Admin? Because it seems like the MensaHQ Bank was just looted by the game Admin.
  2. Bottom line: Sheepy adjudicated a punishment against those who were smarter than he (and presumably our enemies). We saw something he and they (apparently) didn't. It's horrible administration.
  3. You all keep getting this one point wrong. There were TWO mistakes. The FIRST mistake was to leave spy ops open. We were all equal victims of that mistake. The SECOND mistake was to delay the spy ops portion of the rollout. ONLY those who took strategic advantage of the situation are victims of the second mistake. The second mistake is FAR WORSE than the first.
  4. I'm not going to get into an argument with you, it really does not appear that you are listening. But I'll respond. You say I am entirely incorrect in my analysis, but the only point which you offer a different shade of meaning is to suggest that the specific thing you are changing about the change is something that could not have been tested because it relates to an error in your judgment. Of course I agree with you that the "rollout" procedure was not part of the test server. That was not at all what I was talking about anyway. What you were rolling out was tested. That's my point. And since what you were rolling out was testable and tested both by you and by us, and then the parameters of your rollout were set by you and understood by us (and even complained about)... you cast the die. Then you uncast the die AFTER a segment of the gaming community had already made significant investment in time, resources, risk, and relationships. They made a gambit based on all of the details that were fully laid out on the table for everyone. If you then made a mistake, we were all equally "victim" of it. Your latest mistake, to change the details of your rollout, creates a class of victims. We are not ALL victim of this latest mistake, ONLY those who made their gambit based on the widely known details are the victim of your latest mistake. I sincerely hope you log out and think about this long enough to grasp ahold of what I am saying. If you cannot, you ought not administrate a game.
  5. I am chiming in with a response to Alex's announced decision to alter the rollout of his war updates. That thread got locked before I could speak my mind. Now I've even more reason to want to. First of all, Alex's decision is a change to a change. This is dizzying. I think it is extremely good practice to do several of the things Alex did. He opened up a test server where all were free to experiment with the new system. What does this accomplish? Two things at least. First, he gets to tweak his changes before they go live. Second we get to learn how to make best strategic use of the upcoming changes. Win/win. Alex also announced in painful detail the how, why, and (intentionally ambiguous) when. We all knew the process he was taking, we all knew what would be possible before, during and after. We knew. No matter how you feel about the changes themselves, their rollout was being handled spectacularly transparently, even painfully so on several points. Anyway, what was good for us was good for him. At some point Alex felt confident enough to announce the rollout, he announced it, and alea iacta est. Or so we thought. Lo and behold, what was going to change has changed, but AFTER a group of players invested their assets into a strategic plan based on the test server and rollout announcement. Bad move, Alex. Second of all, it is clear what has led to Alex's decision to change the rollout by delaying the spy ops portion of the update. That is, some players formed a strategic plan to take advantage of the announced update (which had been available for all to "test drive" on the test server - so definitely no surprises to anyone), and the group of players that were on the losing side of this strategic plan complained. In a game, players are expected to make strategic plans to take advantage of whatever is within the legal boundaries of the gaming environment. This is called gaming and when done well it leads to winning. Theoretically, this is a desired outcome in a game. And so my second point is that Alex's decision is antithetical to the gaming spirit. Sometimes arbitrary game changes happen which destroy a gained advantage, and these are understood as part of playing an evolving online game. But this was not an arbitrary decision, it was made specifically in reaction to a set of players and their dreaded "winning". This changed change is really no different in substance than the kid who quits as soon as he thinks he's going to lose. It's Lucy swooshing the football away from Charlie Brown's impending boot. In essence, Alex has moved a target that had squandered its chance to move itself. Admin has played its hand on one side, not the other. The reason I am putting my thoughts out there for you all is this. I'm a gamer. This isn't the only game I play, but just as I try to make smart choices in the games I play, I also try to make smart choices about which games I play. As others have pointed out, this is not the first example of Admin abuse of power. What I am saying is that this latest unfortunate incident crystallizes for me that this game is on the top of my "to be replaced with a new game" list.
  6. I do not understand why you want to intentionally disrupt strategizing. You create a game that invites strategy, then you intentionally disrupt the players who are attempting to strategize? Do you WANT us to play? smh
  7. This war was a ton of fun. My "targets" were all honorable opponents. If anything, this Peace comes too soon. gg wp
  8. I gained respect for Cornerstone for what they did. Rose doesn't deserve you.
  9. I for one did NOT vote for my own alliance. Instead, I cast my vote for the alliance which is my least favorite. It seems I am not alone.
  10. Selling goods during times of inflation is wise. Such advice!
  11. I think Naziism is terrible and must be stopped.
  12. You really lost a lot of tanks, bro. Your losses seem consistent with other similar attacks I've seen. So your tank losses are really pretty high. And It seems like they are supposed to be pretty high based on the game mechanics that allow for pretty high tank losses like the pretty high tank losses that you suffered as indicated in your OP. Man that's a lot of tanks you lost tho.
  13. We love to hate oblige. We hate to love oblige. Oblige loves to love oblige.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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