CALL FOR NU&U TREATY

[LordRahl2]

How is that any different from telling players that they can't use nukes or your little 'League' adventure (literally: play by my rules or be punished)? You'd have to be blind to not see the hypocrisy in what you just said. Come back when you have a valid argument.

 

I was pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument.  Actually I am unsure if you, Gandalf, made the "cant tell me how to play" argument.  But you clearly agree with it.

[Dolores Abernathy]

I was pointing out the hypocrisy of your argument.  Actually I am unsure if you, Gandalf, made the "cant tell me how to play" argument.  But you clearly agree with it.

Where was I taking away from the choice of players?

 

Common knowledge is that players either join an alliance or get the shit raided out of them. Food is readily available in alliances (honestly if your alliance doesn't help you out with rss when you need them, then you should consider joining an alliance that can) and on the market (like I've been saying, and it's super cheap). This 'shortage' or 'crisis' is a farce and you know it.

[LordRahl2]

Actually you motivated me to go look at the behavior of new players. Obviously, there is the instant quit group which we can exclude. Then there is a group that is recruited from out of game by big alliances. Then there are smaller and newer alliances activly recruiting new players. Then there are some that stay out of alliances for days and days. Maybe they are alliance shopping?

 

There is also a potential for several players to join together and band up in an alliance. I do not see that in the current data set.

 

Sheepy has a mechanic, by the way, that keeps players safe from raiders for days. He does not have a mechanic that keeps them safe from zero food production. In fact he istructed us to figure it out for ourselves. Maybe you should direct your angst at him.

[Valdoroth]

Wait, this isn't the spam thread?

Edit: In reality, if the nuclear radiation levels are already below -100% after 3 days, it's not a problem.

 

Example:

Notice the sharp decline back towards normal? It's not like the food jumped to 23000 each like it did last year for a single day.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Valdoroth

[Dolores Abernathy]

Sheepy has a mechanic, by the way, that keeps players safe from raiders for days. He does not have a mechanic that keeps them safe from zero food production. 

 

 Maybe you should direct your angst at him.

 

 

Well look at that, you just answered yourself! You think there's a problem with the game, not me. If anyone should be airing their grievances with Sheepy rather than the player base, it should be you.

 

Until new players are given extra (deemed unnecessary by many) protection, the market is more than capable of sustaining the new players if their alliance cannot. While it's less cheap than before the war, food is still cheap enough for them to buy. 0% production isn't permanent, eventually it will be back to normal. If a nation wants food, there are multiple ways they can obtain it (see my other posts), we aren't forcing a certain play style upon new players. War happens maybe once every 2-3 months. That's more than ample time for everyone to build up a sufficient war chest for food. 

[LordRahl2]

Well look at that, you just answered yourself! You think there's a problem with the game, not me. If anyone should be airing their grievances with Sheepy rather than the player base, it should be you.

 

Until new players are given extra (deemed unnecessary by many) protection, the market is more than capable of sustaining the new players if their alliance cannot. While it's less cheap than before the war, food is still cheap enough for them to buy. 0% production isn't permanent, eventually it will be back to normal. If a nation wants food, there are multiple ways they can obtain it (see my other posts), we are forcing a certain play style upon new players. War happens once every 2-3 months. That's more than ample time for everyone, to exclude new players and start up alliances - but who cares about them, to build up a sufficient war chest for food. 

 

People did.  He answer.  I am fine with his answer.  You are not fine with the results of his answer - hence my recommendation to direct your angst elsewhere.

 

I fixed up your second paragraph a bit for ya.  Your welcome.

 

I do agree that every 2-3 months there is a war which last 2-3 weeks.  Radiation extends impacts for about a week after that.  So we are looking at 20-25ish% of the time with this effect.  That is 1/5 to 1/4 of new players impacted.  But in your world they MUST join an established alliance.  Hence YOUR hypocrisy is angstiness over directing how people play a game. 

I have no problem doing so - so no not hypocritical.  This is a game, its a war (and politics) game.  Using game mechanics to alter others behavior is how a game is played.

 

I just chose to prioritize the newest and weakest players over older nations who should know how to play.

[Damdaka]

1) I want you guys to take this in consideration, this war was not as big as the one we fought in feb, so when such wars broke out i expect the more launch of nuclear weapons,so the radiation level will be above 90% for at least 4-5 days. So during that time, the food price may shoot up even 10 to 15 times..... so what will the small nations new do then? Even it may hurt alliance bank and big nations during such time right? 

 

2) Don't you think nuclear weapons are pushing nations to join alliance within 2 days? If nations join the alliance in 2 days without considering advantages and disadvantages or game mechanisms properly, how will small nations manage? even alliances may find it difficult if members keep moving from one alliance to other due to small understanding in game.

[Mikey]

 

Its all well and good to try and come up with these international conventions. I will always support the effort because I enjoy seeing what plays out, even if I disagree and refuse to endorse. Such is my case here.

 

That said I simply do not believe, and have seen no effective argument to make the claim, that any of these kinds of efforts can help. Anything at 50% or above is going to be devastating to new nations who are aiming for self sufficiency and have the misfortune of creating themselves on or near a major war. Those who join an alliance obviously will have no problem (no excuse not to have good stockpiles after this). Those who don't, of course, will suffer. Now most of these new nations will probably quit anyway, even with no radiation. I hate to say it, but its the way it goes. Most of those who end up in it for the haul probably join an alliance very quickly. Still, there is a small subset who join, don't join an AA (or join a tiny micro) for a bit, and then eventually realize the need/desire to get more involved and join a real one. I don't want to lose these people. Nobody does I think, we all benefit as the player base expands.

 

But the costs of limiting nukes are high. Talk all you want about nukes being a losers weapon. That completely misses the point. I think Bambino said it quite well, that nukes have an important place in the losers arsenal. Maybe you know, for whatever reason, you will be fighting a losing battle. Maybe you just like that kind of warfare (see NK). Some people have reasons to stockpile. Even if you think its going to be a more even contest, somebody has to lose, and having an NRF and the ability to produce nuclear weapons is good insurance. I'm no war expert, but I fail to see how beige has a benefit if there are no counters coming or no ability to launch further attacks on you. If they can't stop you from building up or getting a reprieve anyway (because their conventional forces are gone or too heavily outclassed) then it doesn't make much difference.  The nukes still do major infra damage, and infra, at the higher levels, aint cheap. Looking at infra damage done vs taken by some of these nuke heavy alliances will bear this fact out. They end up worse, of course, because they lose. But its a way to reduce the damage disparity and engage in some asymmetrical warfare for a bit. The actual win itself (getting the surrender) is important and helps tremendously with the political game, I don't doubt. But we cannot ignore the economic damage done, as that will determine the relative standings and positions of the alliances after the peace. A loss where you deal a close amount of damage as you take, is one which can be recovered from relatively quickly.

 

I believe that nuclear weapons are among the factors that cause war to be so costly for all sides involved. SK has clearly lost this conflict, but as of update yesterday we have done 7bil in damage and taken 8bil. A loss for us, no doubt, and that gap will slowly increase as the war goes on. But the ability to do at least a decent amount of damage, relative to what you take, is what allows both sides to bounce back relatively quickly (at least vis-a-vis their opponents). Compare that to other games where losing means being severely crippled relative to the winners. People are more willing to take a gambit here because they know a loss is not insurmountable with proper post-war planning. People who lose are unlikely to hold as much of a grudge as they would if they were rendered irrelevant for a long period of time. With fewer hard core grudges and relatively less risk, people are more inclined to try new things and its easier to shake up the political scene. I think this has contributed to the dynamism of this game.

 

Obviously nukes are no be all end all. You don't want to have to use them, but they play a role. The radiation from nukes bought exclusively during war alone will climb high over the course of the war, and that will hurt new players. Nobody wants that, but whatever extent that effects them is an intangible. The benefits of nuking to keep the scales somewhat more even as you head towards defeat, is a more tangible effect for most AAs, and they are going to prioritise that. Whether you believe this initiative a laudable one or not, I personally do not have faith that enough alliances will hold to it to make a difference.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Mikey

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Please point out where I said my nation was more important than new players. The price of food is barely double of what it was at the beginning of the war. It's gone from cheap as shit, to slightly less cheap. This whole 'sky is falling' attitude is completely unwarranted. The fact that I've fired a nuke (or 12) has zero impact on the argument I was making. It's still super easy for new players to obtain food. It's as easy as joining an alliance, which is what new members do anyways. If for some reason they choose not to join an alliance (and somehow  avoid getting raided), a new nation consumes less than 100 food per day, which at current market prices can be bought for under 20k (less than the daily income). This so called 'nuclear winter' is hyperbolic. 

 

Since your main concern is protection of the new players, tell me, do you also campaign against Mensa's stance on raiding unaligned players? Surely that would be a much more just cause than this minor bump in the cost of food. Surely getting raided is much more disheartening to a new player than a cut in income. 

 

Your intentions are clear as day. Your nukes create a negative externality on all other players, and it hits the new players the hardest -- some of them do not even know how to use the market, and start off by building their own farms. IIRC it is even advised in the tutorial. Imagine their surprise then, that their farm is not working. Maybe they might even think that it's a bug and leave the game.

 

You are assuming hypercompetent new players who are willing to jump through hoops and get into an alliance within 2 days of starting the game. That doesn't happen mate. If they cannot stand on their own in the first few days, most wouldn't bother continuing with the game by becoming beggars. No one wants to be a beggar in a virtual nation sim.

 

And actually, the alliance line of argumentation is completely rubbish. When do nuclear winters hit? During an alliance war. Who bothers answering the questions of newbies and actively recruiting and helping them during a war? No one. By the time the dust settles and the alliances can afford to spend effort on helping the newbies, they would already be gone. So much for that line of reasoning.

 

Show me one newbie nation Mensa HQ members have raided in the recent past, and I will send you 1 million right now. Can you promise to do the same if you cannot find one within 24 hours? I doubt you can.

 

Here is the choice I and every other nation in Orbis face:

 

Do I favor:

 

A) Huge whales who want to have an excessive number of nukes just because they suck at conventional battles

New players who can bring new blood and excitement into the game, who lack the resources, know-how, and contacts to overcome the economic externality the nuke-whales inflict on them

 

The choice is obvious. Spin it all you like: You have much more resources than the newbies, and can live with no nukes much more easier than they can do with 0 food production and excessive costs

[Mikey]

Jump through hoops to get an alliance? You'll probably have six different recruitment messages in your inbox within 1 hour of being in this game. Its the alliances who tend to jump through hoops to attract new players. Even during war, I'd reckon, as the cost of bringing on newbies is essentially 0. You obviously aren't going to be giving our city grants during war, but there's no cost to accepting people, and no cost to handing out food when a 1-3 city nation might only be using 100 a day.

 

Maybe you haven't raided any new nations. How many new nations have you protected? How many small micros - many of them active, some of whom even post on the boards (usually poorly as they lack experience, I'll be honest) - have you stepped up to the plate to help? How many of you, posting here, have heaped them instead with scorn, when they come to the OWF for help, confused and alone? When Arrgh raided our nations we all responded. I don't think there is a major bloc/sphere in this game that hasn't fought them. But I can't name many who have gone out of their way to involve themselves when they see Arrgh raiding some young new alliance that has no idea what it just got itself into. These guys are just as active the new nations during war you are so keen to protect. Few have done much to help them. We don't either, I won't claim otherwise. I just find all this righteous indignation to be coming rather late in the lifecycle of "abuse" done to small nations. We could all likely save a lot more players if we all agreed to go after raiders or protect the small micros with active members.

 

Fact is nukes are a game mechanic with an important tactical value, one that admittedly has no use when you are on the winning side of a conflict, but which can help equalize the damage counters on the other end when hope for a turnaround is largely lost. Sheepy saw the devastating effects raids would have on new nations out of the box, so he gave them extra time in beige to get settled. Why does he not give them the same for radiation? I don't know. He made this game mechanic, he can't expect us to deal with the negative consequences that spring from another mechanic which is directly incentivized in warfare. There was a lot of criticism for implementing this in the middle of war. If this is really going to be so devastating to new players, even moreso than the pounding they will get by raiders the second they leave beige with no AA, then we should be critical of him for not exempting them from it.

 

If you still want to try with this international treaty go ahead. I am all for the attempt at politics. But trying to frame this as some righteous crusade against the big bad bullies who just want to hurt the little guy is ridiculous. There is a real reason people use nukes, however much some groups rely overly much on them. If everyone was just as outraged over raiding I could at least respect the consistency of the argument, but clearly people aren't That's fine, nobody is expected to be. But if you want to really solve the problem, setup an inter-alliance foodbank and message the new nations during war that you will be providing food for all active nations in need. Many alliances are clearly capable of getting recruitment messages off near instantaneously with their creation, no reason they cant get out the news about the foodbank just as fast. This is just an excuse to cut down on nukes for whatever reason and act sanctimoniously doing so.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Mikey

[Brooklyn666]

Taking bets on how long anyone is going to care about this once food production goes back to normal. I'll be generous and give it a full week.

[Kemal Ergenekon]

snip

 

How many newbies did SK recruit during the war?

[Mikey]

How many newbies did SK recruit during the war?

 

Unless things have changed recently, SK does not actively recruit, so we aren't a good example. Maybe you don't, but I honestly see no reason not to keeping fishing if you are a mass recruiting AA.  In either case, my point stands. Where is this anger and indignation when small nations are raided? Where is the drive for an international task force when new micros find themselves with Arrgh breathing down their necks? How many people have been laughed off the OWF during their DoEs, just for being newbies who don't know any better? Say what you will, but its hard to believe all this newfound concern for small nations is coming from a place of sincerity.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Mikey

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Unless things have changed recently, SK does not actively recruit, so we aren't a good example. Maybe you don't, but I honestly see no reason not to keeping fishing if you are a mass recruiting AA.  In either case, my point stands. Where is this anger and indignation when small nations are raided? Where is the drive for an international task force when new micros find themselves with Arrgh breathing down their necks? How many people have been laughed off the OWF during their DoEs, just for being newbies who don't know any better? Say what you will, but its hard to believe all this newfound concern for small nations is coming from a place of sincerity.

 

Anger and indignation against raids accomplishes nothing since there is something called the score range. Once you leave the newbie score zone, you cannot intervene against anyone there.

 

When Mensa first joined the game, we did have our own fights with raiders and the 99%, but we quickly grew out of the relevant range.

 

Edit: Forgot to respond to the first part. So you are saying that SK didn't actively recruit. Can you tell me who did? These many alliances who have been fiercely competing against each other to recruit and help newbies during the war that you talk about. Who are they?

 

Or are you just imagining facts which suit your narrative? I guess that's the case.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Kemal Ergenekon

[John X]

I completely agree that nukes are horrible and am taking steps to decrease my supply as we speak...

 

I noticed another nation had those horrible nukes and NO SPIES! Someone should step in and save the world, spy off the nukes.

 

https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=15294

[Greatnate]

I completely agree that nukes are horrible and am taking steps to decrease my supply as we speak...

 

I noticed another nation had those horrible nukes and NO SPIES! Someone should step in and save the world, spy off the nukes.

 

https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=15294

 

Your cities are too fat to not nuke.

[Dolores Abernathy]

I fixed up your second paragraph a bit for ya.  Your welcome.

Ah yes, I exclude new players and alliances SO MUCH. It's not like I pay for an ad that's constantly advertising SK's ACDC program. We help micros get up off the ground and supply them with the resources to make a successful alliance. So quite frankly, it's bullshit to say that I/SK do not care for micros. We're the only alliance with a program like that. If you want to white knight for Micros so often, perhaps you should consider starting one up at Mensa too.

 

 But in your world they MUST join an established alliance. 

Things I never said: this. Newly formed alliances are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. Pooling money to help those in need is much better than going alone.

 

 

Your intentions are clear as day. Your nukes create a negative externality on all other players, and it hits the new players the hardest -- some of them do not even know how to use the market, and start off by building their own farms. IIRC it is even advised in the tutorial. Imagine their surprise then, that their farm is not working. Maybe they might even think that it's a bug and leave the game.

Is the market not part of the tutorial? I thought it was. Even if it isn't, it's not exactly rocket science. You literally just type in the amount of a resource you want and then click the giant blue button that says buy. I think you're vastly underestimating everyone's intelligence. 

 

 

You are assuming hypercompetent new players who are willing to jump through hoops and get into an alliance within 2 days of starting the game. That doesn't happen mate. If they cannot stand on their own in the first few days, most wouldn't bother continuing with the game by becoming beggars. No one wants to be a beggar in a virtual nation sim.

Jump through hoops? New members are literally flooded with messages with alliances practically begging them to join. In some alliance's it's as easy to join as signing up on their forums, and some don't even require that. Joining an alliance is easy, and people have plenty of time to 'window shop' during their beige period. 

 

 

Show me one newbie nation Mensa HQ members have raided in the recent past, and I will send you 1 million right now. Can you promise to do the same if you cannot find one within 24 hours? I doubt you can.

Put your money where your mouth is:

Mensa member Serendipitous hitting a new nation in a micro alliance (~1 month ago): https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=140266

The same Mensa member hitting a tto applicant (~1 month ago): https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=140277

 

I will accept the money in cash or in a 2m worth of food donated to any micro allied to SK, Rose, UPN, NPO or VE.

 

And actually, the alliance line of argumentation is completely rubbish. When do nuclear winters hit? During an alliance war. Who bothers answering the questions of newbies and actively recruiting and helping them during a war? No one. By the time the dust settles and the alliances can afford to spend effort on helping the newbies, they would already be gone. So much for that line of reasoning.

Maybe this is a poor reflection on Mensa, but I feel like this is something that every alliance should do. SK had a member (https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=46809) join in the middle of the war, and we still made sure that he had everything he needed. We answer his questions, and provide him with resources as needed. You join SK, and we take care of you. In times of peace, in times of war, someone will always be there to lend resources or cash. 

 

 

Here is the choice I and every other nation in Orbis face:

 

Do I favor:

 

A) Huge whales who want to have an excessive number of nukes just because they suck at conventional battles

New players who can bring new blood and excitement into the game, who lack the resources, know-how, and contacts to overcome the economic externality the nuke-whales inflict on them

 

The choice is obvious. Spin it all you like: You have much more resources than the newbies, and can live with no nukes much more easier than they can do with 0 food production and excessive costs

A: Huge whales aren't the only nations that can have nukes.Next!

B: This assumes that new players are only affected by nukes, which is not true. Where is the outrage when a micro is rolled by Arrgh or BK, or a new nation is raided? 

 

Regarding that last bit, did you just choose to ignore all the times where I said food was the cheapest resource in the game? A couple weeks of buying food off the market during the war isn't going to bankrupt anyone. At the end of the war everything will go back up to 100% and everyone can stockpile again.

 

But please do continue acting like it's literally the worst thing to ever happen to Orbis, it's fun to watch.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Gandalf

[LordRahl2]

 If you want to white knight for Micros so often, perhaps you should consider starting one something up

 

Solid advice - will do.

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Ah yes, I exclude new players and alliances SO MUCH. It's not like I pay for an ad that's constantly advertising SK's ACDC program. We help micros get up off the ground and supply them with the resources to make a successful alliance. So quite frankly, it's bullshit to say that I/SK do not care for micros. We're the only alliance with a program like that. If you want to white knight for Micros so often, perhaps you should consider starting one up at Mensa too.

 

Things I never said: this. Newly formed alliances are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. Pooling money to help those in need is much better than going alone.

 

 

Is the market not part of the tutorial? I thought it was. Even if it isn't, it's not exactly rocket science. You literally just type in the amount of a resource you want and then click the giant blue button that says buy. I think you're vastly underestimating everyone's intelligence. 

 

 

Jump through hoops? New members are literally flooded with messages with alliances practically begging them to join. In some alliance's it's as easy to join as signing up on their forums, and some don't even require that. Joining an alliance is easy, and people have plenty of time to 'window shop' during their beige period. 

 

 

Put your money where your mouth is:

Mensa member Serendipitous hitting a new nation in a micro alliance (~1 month ago): https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=140266

The same Mensa member hitting a tto applicant (~1 month ago): https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=140277

 

I will accept the money in cash or in a 2m worth of food donated to any micro allied to SK, Rose, UPN, NPO or VE.

 

Maybe this is a poor reflection on Mensa, but I feel like this is something that every alliance should do. SK had a member (https://politicsandwar.com/nation/id=46809) join in the middle of the war, and we still made sure that he had everything he needed. We answer his questions, and provide him with resources as needed. You join SK, and we take care of you. In times of peace, in times of war, someone will always be there to lend resources or cash. 

 

 

A: Huge whales aren't the only nations that can have nukes.Next!

B: This assumes that new players are only affected by nukes, which is not true. Where is the outrage when a micro is rolled by Arrgh or BK, or a new nation is raided? 

 

Regarding that last bit, did you just choose to ignore all the times where I said food was the cheapest resource in the game? A couple weeks of buying food off the market during the war isn't going to bankrupt anyone. At the end of the war everything will go back up to 100% and everyone can stockpile again.

 

But please do continue acting like it's literally the worst thing to ever happen to Orbis, it's fun to watch.

 

Yes, Gandalf, yes. We should let the newbies starve or else POOR GANDALF is going to have to use a less than obscene amount of nukes, all the while increasing food cost for established players by 20-30%. They don't know how to use the market and have to subsist in the first few days? HOW DARE THEY?? If they cannot buy Gandalf's overpriced food, it's THEIR problem, am I right? Yeah, I completely understand you pal.

 

NO, new members are NOT flooded with messages during an alliance war. You are talking out of your ass and straight out lying.

 

Seren (39 Days Old, Mensa HQ) attacked Sebastian Seidlitz (50 Days Old). How is that attacking a noob? Seren is younger than the nation he is attacking. Are you on drugs?

 

Nice SK advertorial there pal. The thing is, your pals said you didn't send recruitment messages to newbies during the current war, and I trust him more than a compulsive liar.

 

A) Most of the nations who have nukes are huge whales. Exceptions do not change this fact, and have no place in the analysis.

No, it does not have such an assumption. This is a single issue, namely should we allow nukes or not, and raiding is a completely orthogonal issue. The decision on whether to have or not have nukes does not have any implications on raiding.

 

I know you took no logic classes, but basic consistency is demanded even from elementary school students. So please show some more effort, will you?

[Doktor Avalanche]

 

Yes, Gandalf, yes. We should let the newbies starve or else POOR GANDALF is going to have to use a less than obscene amount of nukes, all the while increasing food cost for established players by 20-30%. They don't know how to use the market and have to subsist in the first few days? HOW DARE THEY?? If they cannot buy Gandalf's overpriced food, it's THEIR problem, am I right? Yeah, I completely understand you pal.

 

Seren (39 Days Old, Mensa HQ) attacked Sebastian Seidlitz (50 Days Old). How is that attacking a noob? Seren is younger than the nation he is attacking. Are you on drugs?

 

A) Most of the nations who have nukes are huge whales. Exceptions do not change this fact, and have no place in the analysis.

No, it does not have such an assumption. This is a single issue, namely should we allow nukes or not, and raiding is a completely orthogonal issue. The decision on whether to have or not have nukes does not have any implications on raiding.

 

I know you took no logic classes, but basic consistency is demanded even from elementary school students. So please show some more effort, will you?

Is a member of Mensa arguing/justifying to end the sovereignty/rights of others from using a weapon/force offered in the game?

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Is a member of Mensa arguing/justifying to end the sovereignty/rights of others from using a weapon/force offered in the game?

 

>sovereignty/rights 

 

lol

 

People have nukes. Nukes have negative externality on all nations in Orbis. Dealing with it is completely justified.

 

Do people who want a factory pouring out toxic waste into their water and air to stop "end the sovereignty" of the offending factories?

 

"SORRY GUYS I !@#$ED UP YOUR NATION, BUT IT IS MY SOVEREIGN RIGHT SO HAHA."

Edited September 22, 2016 by Kemal Ergenekon

[Doktor Avalanche]

>sovereignty/rights 

 

lol

 

People have nukes. Nukes have negative externality on all nations in Orbis. Dealing with it is completely justified.

 

Do people who want a factory pouring out toxic waste into their water and air to stop "end the sovereignty" of the offending factories?

 

"SORRY GUYS I !@#$ED UP YOUR NATION, BUT IT IS MY SOVEREIGN RIGHT SO HAHA."

Do I want some asshat to tell me how to play an internet browser game? Stop invading my internet safe space with your bullshit form of oversight.

 

Buy more food then. Make more food then. If you seriously give a crap about small nations, be a doll and buy them food too, which I highly doubt you would make the effort.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Lo Pan

[Mikey]

Nice SK advertorial there pal. The thing is, your pals said you didn't send recruitment messages to newbies during the current war, and I trust him more than a compulsive liar.

 

A) Most of the nations who have nukes are huge whales. Exceptions do not change this fact, and have no place in the analysis.

No, it does not have such an assumption. This is a single issue, namely should we allow nukes or not, and raiding is a completely orthogonal issue. The decision on whether to have or not have nukes does not have any implications on raiding.

 

 

The nation in question, TEG, did in fact join us during this war, and was accepted and given necessary food and aid to tide him over during it. Doesn't challenge what I said though, he found us on his own and applied. We do not actively send out recruitment messages or otherwise try and gain new members at any time, war or otherwise.

 

As far as whales go...I didn't realize having 13-15 cities made you a whale now? The largest nation in our alliance has 18 cities, and he stands a full head and shoulders over the next largest (or did in peacetime before everybody was bombed out). I'll call him a whale, but I think its stretching it to refer to much of the rest of SK as such, unless we are counting the entire top 500 as whales. My nation has only existed for 6 months and I'm rapidly closing in on that territory. These nations aren't small, obviously, nobody is trying to claim otherwise. But its incredibly disingenuous to claim some conspiracy by the top players to keep down newbies for...what exactly? I don't even know. Selling food? Maybe some people who had large stockpiles are cashing in (and I see people selling from many different AAs across the spectrum), but after this war its going to get you nowhere. Established alliances will start buying large quantities when prices go down again, and these newbies would never be able to buy in any kind of quantity for it to matter, even at 300 ppu if it ever gets there.

 

Whether you agree with it or not, many alliances seem to place real tactical value on having nuclear weapons. They aren't opposed to this out of some idiotic desire to make money off overpriced food nobody will ever buy when the war is over. If we are going to have to bear the burden of balancing Sheepys game for him, there are better ways to do it, like just sending food to all the nations in need like the food aid Floof Floof started. How hard would it be for the mass recruiting AAs to have their recruiters or bots or whatever send out food relief messages instead during wartime? We haven't recruited in ages but I remember going through a page of nations in 2 minutes, its not hard.

 

You can cry about negative externalties all you want. War has negative externalities. Raiding is the complete embodiment of a negative externality. How many micros or new players get driven from this game because of it? Is a micro founded by a few 3 month old nations less deserving then these new players? Is it not natural, when you first start an mmo or similar type game, to want to create your own guild with some friends? Yeah its a bad idea here, but how many alliances have stepped up to offer them guidance or negotiate on their behalf if they get raided? You might be too big to counter them but you aren't too big to threaten their alliance. Where was the attempt to create an international organization to enforce rules on that, like this nuclear treaty? Maybe you had your reasons, but you should understand the skepticism when this abundant care for new players springs up out of nowhere.

 

Keep advocating for the treaty or the league or whatever you want. Its politics, its part of the game and these conversations are always worth having, success or no. But spare us the histrionics, its embarrassing.

[Sisyphus]

Do I want some asshat to tell me how to play an internet browser game? Stop invading my internet safe space with your bullshit form of oversight.

 

Buy more food then. Make more food then. If you seriously give a crap about small nations, be a doll and buy them food too, which I highly doubt you would make the effort.

You don't have to go through all the trouble of buying food and sending it out if you just spy the problem away.

 

Keeps people from rage-quitting in the very small window of time between new players creating a nation during a war, realising this mechanic is shit for them, and rage-quitting because a bunch of unskilled nuke-lobbing kids wanna act tough while they're losing.

[Doktor Avalanche]

You don't have to go through all the trouble of buying food and sending it out if you just spy the problem away.

 

Keeps people from rage-quitting in the very small window of time between new players creating a nation during a war, realising this mechanic is shit for them, and rage-quitting because a bunch of unskilled nuke-lobbing kids wanna act tough while they're losing.

Preaching to the choir, my friend.

The Covert tactic is my favorite. I am not a fan of nukes and find them pointless except in a massive losing war. However no one should try to play good guy by dictating some blanket doctrine over the game either, whether for good intention or not.