Dubayoo

You realize we're trying to talk about an actual point here instead of engaging in personal attacks, right? This isn't an in-game discussion. The fact that you talk about being a salt lord in an OOC thread suggests that if you did see medical professionals that you're so psychopathic that you acted the whole way through your evaluation.

I don't think I've ever seen someone refuse to get their own psychopathy checked out so much that they accused others of being autistic out of denial. Are you trying to confess you're a creepy stalker who refuses to knock it off because you're totally sick in the head?

I'd say trolling is a version of insanity, so I wouldn't disagree... ...but yea, it's just important to remember reputation is a community, not individual, characteristic. Getting mass-voted one way or another for better or worse makes reputation lopsided to how some individuals relate more than others.

I thought you'd say something that makes sense. Instead, you remind me of how these people make sense: https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Swedish-people-come-across-as-rude-to-other-cultures-Or-is-it-because-English-is-not-their-first-language-that-they-sound-rude-most-times https://www.beeswedish.com/politeness-according-to-swedes/ https://www.thelocal.se/discuss/index.php?showtopic=4437&mode=threaded https://allthethingsiam.wordpress.com/2011/12/11/why-are-swedes-so-rude-2/ https://www.reddit.com/r/sweden/comments/2hm7xh/why_are_swedish_people_so_rude/ I'm usually available from 7:30 - 9:30pm on weekdays, or 2 - 4pm on weekends EST.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's pointless because politics includes reputation. The value of the score, however, is to assess people's reputation based on how many people approve or disapprove of the person. Allowing specific stalkers and peons to sink or prop up other people's reputations ruins the point. The score is no longer a reliable benchmark to see how many people approve or disapprove. I agree that my suggestion would make it harder. That's the point. Specific individuals do not deserve the opportunity to portray themselves as speaking on behalf of everyone. It doesn't just work that way though. It would also make it harder for people to maintain massively high reputations just because they have a small gathering of people who constantly vote them up. To a newcomer who just joined the game, that number will appear much higher than it deserves to be. Newcomers will believe some people are incredibly popular, but in reality, they're just... part of a small circle of friends. On the side, I'd also say deleted nations should no longer have impact on people's reputations, and people should be required to like or dislike a player every month so reputation remains updated. Reputation is often forgotten since people don't have memories that last forever. If a relationship isn't maintained, then it shouldn't count towards reputation anymore. A more nuanced formula would involved weighing opinions relative to the average time it's been since a relationship has been updated, but that would take a lot of coding to figure out. Using a monthly system is a good compromise.

This is getting a bit ridiculous. I've some random troll who's literally downvoted me 40 times completely out of the blue. The guy furthermore doesn't knock it off when voted back. Obviously, you vote back because if you don't, then the person can literally just downvote every single post without consequence. As it stands, because he has less posts than me, there's a limit to how much retribution can be done which biases the forum's reputation against players who create more posts. You really need to change the forum reputation formula so everyone only gets 1 point of reputation per person. Whether you vote for someone 1 time or 100 times, it doesn't matter. You don't get to sink or prop up someone's reputation by yourself. Reputation is a community score, not an individual score. The score as it is enables creepy stalkers with an addiction to go after people which is seriously screwed up. The same thing applies the other way as well. It enables pathetic peons to prop someone up just from an obsession. Is PnW supposed to be a game full of creepy stalkers and pathetic peons? Is the game supposed to discourage activity instead of encourage it? That isn't a way to build a community. That's a way to literally tell people to not play PnW unless you want to deal with people with serious mental problems. You could argue the point of reputation is to play the game with other people in terms of who likes who, but that's exactly why reputation should only have 1 point. 1 point per relation between players is measured accurately. 1 point per instance of people just wanting to say something overvalues some relations before others. The point should be weighted as a proportion of how you have liked or disliked someone's posts over time. If you've liked 50% both ways, then it's 0 points. If you've liked 3/4ths and disliked 1/4th, then it's 0.5 points. If you've liked none and disliked all, then it's -1 point. If you don't score it this way, then you're enabling people with addictions and obsessions at the expense of people with normal mental health. You're literally turning the game into an insane asylum. You could also argue the counter is to have other people like your posts, but that turns the game we play for fun into a job. Now, people would have to regularly be on patrol to vote for each other just to counter insane people. It furthermore drives the game into bias towards old players because old players would already have people constantly voting for each other to prevent new insane people from downvoting. This creates an innate massive hurdle for new generations of mentally healthy players to overcome. They would literally be joining a game with zero reputation against established players whose reputation would be exponentially growing... despite how it really isn't. It's just a few players just voting for each other over and over. This creates deception in the reputation score. It suggests some people are massively popular when in reality, they're not.

Arrgh is war when you don't just raid inactives. If anything, you can talk with Ripper about this too. One of the reasons he thought I was a BAD pirate was BECAUSE I built up infrastructure and units instead of just keeping track of inactives when "my ship is ready." In fact, I very deliberately went after active players because I knew you could ransom them off, and it worked any number of times. The reason I left Arrgh was because Federal Reserve offered me a senior officer position, so I took it.

I was in Arrgh where I fought regularly, and I fought in Roz Wei before. You don't become a senior officer in three alliances for being a nobody.

What do you think fighting is really about other than putting your resources on the line? The whole point of poker is to do that on a level playing field without any outside help.

This for anyone who hates my guts. If you wanna go, come play poker on the poker server where we can play heads-up. I'll play any amount from $5-50m so the game has some actual weight. If you want to play $100m games, let me know a week in advance so I have enough time to gather enough cash to play. Don't leave until a player's stack is depleted, don't bring anyone else in, no re-buys, and if there's an internet hiccup, wait for the person to return before continuing to play hands. You should be in the voice channel on the poker server as well so hiccups can be easily detected. If you don't pay up, that just goes to show how much of a loser you are too and how your reputation is untrustworthy trash.

lol... Akuryo the troll doesn't have the guts to risk his resources, so instead of playing cards, he just downvotes. What a loser.

I'm not calling you stupid. I'm stating facts. For example, when you ran TCW and I was in Arrgh, I raided your members who you failed to train or organize effectively. You'd request other members downdeclare on me which still failed to fend me off, and you even had to request someone from NK intervene despite how NK purchased raiding insurance with Arrgh which meant it wasn't supposed to intervene. The fact is you don't know how to do anything in this game at all.You're a total loser who knows absolutely nothing. Instead, you brownnose old players to scrap for any sense of dignity you can get. If you want to go, then meet me at the poker table with $100m heads-up, and show me how good your wits are without needing an age boost to prop you up.

Not really. If you wanna prove yourself right, feel free to play poker anytime and show how good you are at figuring out how to use your resources on an even playing ground. Otherwise, it's obvious you're just an ageist provocateur who plays favorites towards old people with an OOC advantage. Meh.

I'd agree if it wasn't for the fact that I've followed Zhen since I first joined Arrgh and know he's been involved. You can claim he's trash, but I know much better. As for pixel hugging, he's nowhere close to a pixel hugger. The size of Yakuza's members is nowhere close to the whales out there who literally just sit around like mouthbreathers. Either you're incredibly sarcastic, or incredibly out of touch. Either way, meh. The big boys never fought a global war. They just ganged up on TKR and continued sitting around. Granted TKR's FA was garbo, but the big boys still picked on an easy target and had no aftermath in mind. Alliances like Yakuza have the brains to see through nonsense claims like that. Unless you're trying to say it's cool to be dumb, there isn't much point to what you're saying. On the side, I'm kind of grateful I didn't join TCW when I first joined the game now since you're not showing anymore intellect than Hades did when he kicked me out of HBE. In the time since then, I became a senior officer of two and now three alliances, one in both major spheres of the game, and one in between.

1) I was in vacation mode for 6 months from being bored of PnW. 2) I'm not in charge of FA. 3) Yakuza's a protectorate. It's not really up to us. 4) It doesn't really matter how much you want to go to war if you're not the eldest generation of players in PnW. Being aggressive without having the time to build-up is asking to get counter-rolled. The problem is old players troll by default of doing nothing. Merely existing in a position of strength and making nothing of it automatically makes you a troll even if you keep quiet. PnW is not real life. Saving resources to enjoy peaceful retirement isn't an option here. The mechanics imply it's a wargame, so saving resources and not going to war with them is automatic trolling. You can argue there's politics too, and I agree, but it's politics and war. There should be constant conflict while people are maneuvering in the middle of it to decide where to strike next.

It seems like a good idea at first until you realize how expensive infra and land are compared to improvements, and how people often have cities with different layouts. Implementing this is only good if it's given a tick-box option with a warning that lets players know that any mistakes could be very expensive. The decimals don't really matter if you think about them. For all intents and purposes, we could just have two more digit places instead. Shift the decimal two places to the right and voi la.

That moment when iron costs more than steel. That's it guys. We need more iron.

On the side, it's interesting how almost everyone says they hope the next war happens sooner than later.

I'd say the problem in America goes back 150 years to the onset of pragmatism which displaced virtuous living. William James, John Dewey, and Charles Sanders Peirce established the idea that what's true is what's useful, but what's useful is a matter of opinion. Different people have different ways to maintain and/or transform facts into the future. Once pragmatism took off, people became enabled to play favorites towards others who were useful in their opinion and play favorites against others who were useless in their opinion.

Just curious, what do you believe is the solution to government corruption when politicians don't listen to words or ordinary people overtly support politicians in playing favorites when it comes to providing service? I'm just hoping you don't believe in ruggedly individualist libertarianism where you blame the victim in telling the victim if it doesn't like corruption then it can leave.

The game should have automated leagues, yes. It'd be like playing a fantasy league except with made up players and teams. You wouldn't even need to click the play game buttons anymore. You could just build up a team, sign up for a league, and go. A lot more people would play then since it's not such a redundant click-fest anymore. They could be given constructive things to do to click as well like interactive training programs. Instead of clicking over and over, you could gamble a certain amount in the training program, and the better you performed, the more return you'd get for your wager. Higher wagers would make the program more difficult, so you'd still have to wager a soft maximum and redo it over and over to succeed efficiently. The same thing could apply to stadium upgrades in having to do some interactive building program. Maybe even do the same thing to have your team travel to other stadiums, heal injuries, or scout new recruits. There's just so much potential that's not unlocked.

The problem is the away team would become the leech since it takes investment to build a stadium. The better solution is to have players advertise games with their teams with a listed percentage of home versus away pricing and win versus loss pricing, and people could choose which host to visit. The community would establish a market equilibrium of what the rates should be between hosting versus visiting and winning versus losing. This is only true for well established teams where players and stadiums have been invested in. If you're talking about new players who haven't yet invested, winning means a lot. Also, what you're describing is a flaw, not a feature. If anything, it's a problem that winning and losing doesn't earn as much. To keep it realistic, teams should benefit from their success or failure. The problem is baseball IG lacks a merchandising feature which could be easily coded by saying the amount of games played and the winning percentage determines a certain rate of income per turn in the game. If that feature isn't programmed, then the game should just vastly increase the amount earned from winning games.

Just reading through an old thread here since I used to play baseball a lot. The OP is loaded with common sense, and it's really shameful people can't get it. There's a reason more people don't play baseball - they see it as a ripoff that takes a long time to get rolling. The fact is home players do leech off of everyone else, old players basically screw new players over, and the upgrade time makes it way too annoying to rebuild your team. Keep in mind I say this as the record holder of building a maxed out team from scratch without receiving a single penny in city-grants. I know very directly and uniquely how difficult it is to get established paying baseball. I also have the following stats: Money Invested: $59,747,500.00 | Money Earned: $156,337,634.80 10) Dubayolis Dubbuds Dubayolis Dubayoo Dubbudbuddub Arena 28,516 10,545 2.09 The only person in the top 10 with a better win-loss ratio than me in the game is Who Me, and that's because he literally played thousands of games against me with a maxed out team while I was building up from nothing.

I do hope I don't have that much control over the forum through provoking reverse psychology. ? I'd agree with the rest of that post though. It's typical for MMORTS. Old players get powerful, don't like to relinquish control to a next generation, the future gets hopeless, and the past gets bored. The game dies because some people in the past linger to hold onto their power, and the future ultimately has no chance at accomplishing anything at all.

You sound like you believe in fate over there, and that those who are lucky aren't trolls.