Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

104 Excellent

About Etatsorp

  • Rank
    Active Member

Profile Information

  • Leader Name
    Laner TInu
  • Nation Name
  • Nation ID

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ah the old IC/OOC divide. It is indeed difficult to discern at times. I'm certainly not an old hand in online communities such as this, but it seems some like to bring the IC/OOC element into any discussion, very occasionally as a valid response, but mostly as some sort of reverse Ad Hominem or straw man argument. In my view, people who break the rules automatically are operating OOC - the rules of the game apply to all players and an IC bad-man antagonist operating within the rules of the game could be a much valued contributor. An IC lovable character breaking the rules (caveat being intent to cheat etc) is not an OOC good person (as far as can be determined by the average online punter anyway) and is not a valuable contributor to the game IMO. Goons springs to mind at this juncture. I had my reservations from the beginning from gut instinct, difficult to sustain in the face of a large portion of the game claiming they were all just IC and were playing within the rules (everyone tripping over themselves to jump on board the anti-nazism agenda not a bad thing in itself ofc), and that OOC they were all just great fun peeps. But there were clues to their true OOC character including IMO their using moderation as a weapon (rule breaking if proven), and the appearance of their mercy board. But what sealed the deal as to their true poisonous OOC character was their response when the coal B (not everyone I know) cheating scandal was exposed and their voluminous libelous claims against Alex out of pure spite. These actions remain unforgiven in my mind, but a non-issue because they're happily gone.
  2. I guess I had this coming when responding with a different view.... how dare I....hahaha. I challenge you to find any one person that my post singles out. It was meant as a mildly amusing caricature of a person online taking stuff too seriously. Anyway, it's never been said that I'm a master of the written word. So in the modern interest of ensuring no-one is offended either directly or obliquely, you may consider any such unintended consequence regretful. On another note, I guess the core of my contribution in the first instance (curiously yet to be addressed without resorting to some vague Ad Hominem response should have known better on this platform) is that holding onto grudges is not generally a healthy thing. I am not pushing for people to forgive as that is too personal an issue, and there are individuals out there who are yet to be suitably held to account. Nor have I suggested forgetfulness, a foolish notion that would lead to a repeat of history. I am suggesting perhaps a slightly more charitable outlook in consideration of the large numbers of new members, in both former coal A & B alliances alike, who ought not share in any planned retribution for the historical wrongs of others. Also that it'd be nice to see some new (or at least evolving) points of difference drive the politics and war of Politics & War.
  3. lol this is but a game yes I'm one of those people. Some think in the right circumstances it takes more conviction and strength of character to walk away from a contentious issue rather than to react. Here this is not the case for me though, it is generally quite a relief to just walk away from some imagined pixel based pretend online game conflict involving no-one I know IRL. I couldn't care less about the heart-rending, teeth-grinding, head-banging, frothing-at-the-mouth, aneurysm-rupturing rage some over-nourished unwashed no-life, who resides in some god-forsaken corner of our expiring globe in his mother's basement, has in response to one of Epi's comments. May these poor souls carry this burden alone! Have a great day my friend ☺️
  4. I did mate, I fought IQ for the whole war (except for a week sabbatical to take the kids camping). I’m not intending to trigger anyone here, just don’t think it’s healthy to hold on to so much anger. It’s not that I don’t empathise, I do! I remember well how testing the war was to our community too. I have a great deal of respect for our leaders and the broader community for resisting their scourge to the end. I’m just presenting a neat little outlook that can be applied to many bad incidents in life, largely to your benefit 🙂 Each to their own though I guess, grudgees suffer remarkably little due to another’s grudges.
  5. Moving on though, I don't think it healthy to hold grudges. There is something to be said for enjoying the present and what the future holds, reopening old wounds and rehashing the past in front of an audience who either has no context/experience/interest, or a selective memory is a little sad and inflammatory IMO. A bit like going to your school reunion and loads of your old school mates reminiscing how great/terrible those days were, and have clearly never moved on. That is not to say there is no worth in having a memory for lessons learned and personalities to mind, but the best times in Orbis must be ahead of us! It'd be a crying shame if the next war hinges off the last, I'd like to see some new sources of contention develop!
  6. o7 sad to see you disband your alliance, though happy most of you are hanging around.
  7. Sad to see you go, I thoroughly enjoy your forum contributions here!! I hope for the posterity of the game that the TGH spirit will persist. All the best IRL ?
  8. This is a great conversation to have right now!! The environment is ripe for debate and compromise, and the concepts introduced by the op are a good start. @Akuryo yes subjectivity exists, the question is can a middle ground be reached that renders everyone partially unhappy and partially happy?? Just because we all experience subjectivity does not mean agreement cannot be reached. Also please see the following regarding the term 'good faith', I think you'll find this definition is broadly accepted https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/good+faith With regards to bullying, the bully rarely thinks he/she is bullying. A good guide to whether or not bullying is occurring is a) do not look to your deity fearing drinking buddies who are egging you on, but b) take the pulse of the broader community, open your eyes and ears, and practice a little empathy for your 'opponent'. I do agree however that specifically morally disallowing the hitting of protectorates and grudge-holding is impractical, somewhat game-stifling and virtually impossible anyway. Also that IMO grudge holding is psychological rather than biological i.e. it is an acquired pathological behaviour that damages the grudger greatly more than the grudgee. @Epi your PnW 'Bushido' idea is interesting, and if intelligently created and introduced will still allow for a good level of banter, conflict and political angling while supporting a degree of decorum IC and OOC. Having some very few ethical precepts of this type that underpin interpersonal interaction on the forum and in-game is all that it would take to minimize toxicity.
  9. My friend, I am here, it is you who is overseas!! Seriously though, this is a good change! I don't think we should automatically know when our opponent's update is, a bit of unpredictability that isn't RNG is a good thing. This hopefully will be a useful and challenging dynamic that will make war that much more interesting.
  10. Maybe already suggested however I've a couple of preferences: Land should positively influence population. Ships v planes The number of military improvements to negatively influence population. Anti-aircraft improvements additionally to barracks etc (not a project). Perhaps 1-5 improvs with an associated 20-100% chance of protecting infra and other improvs from plane attacks (aa improvs not protected). Ground-defense improvs (in a similar spirit to the above). 1-5 improvs with an associated influence on attacker attrition. The ability to capture land and cities in war to inspire war as a valid game mechanic in the face of greater odds (see above). Several tiered military research projects that positively influence military performance however declines in influence as city count rises so as to make down-declaring more challenging.
  11. If the people that have left were either cheaters or essentially unengaged with the game in general, being a farm or bot or whatever, then good riddance. It is a shame about the others who left, however life in Orbis will go on. This treaty is a good thing, a genuine mechanism of the game that will hopefully stimulate (non-toxic) controversy and contention (why we are here after all) and make the game that much more colourful. Good luck with your collective futures OWR and HS ?
  12. @brucemna a couple of points, crimes that happen behind closed doors are still crimes, and RL standards of evidence do not apply here, we must accept the admin's decision and move on for the good of the game. This is akin to displaying good sportsmanship on the field, you don't need to like the ref's decision, but you do need to accept it. Anyway, given that it seems the vast majority of the Orbis community appears satisfied (to varying degrees sure) with the outcome of Alex's investigation, I would like to suggest that you put down your sword, shield and microscope, have a coffee and think about the future. I mean at some point it is usually worth looking in the mirror and wondering why it's you against the world. This is no RL moral dilemma here, no-ones questioning your stance on contentious RL issues, no-ones life is on the line. Believe it or not, almost everyone just wants to get on with playing the game such as it is intended to be, the war is still going on after all.
  13. Love your attitude, thanks for a good fight ?
  • Create New...

Important Information

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