SirWilliam's Sandbox

Will there be any triple-teaming or backups, or are GOONS raiders are on their own if they hit the wrong victim (such as a nuke-armed one that mentioned "Raid and eat six nukes" in its bio)?

Also, considering that you mentioned, "No reps", if a raider was to hit a member of a major alliance, such as GPA or VE, I'm assuming the raider is not responsible for rep payment. Correct?

I'm pretty sure it only applies to valid tech raids. If they hit an alliance they're gonna be coughing up the dough. Or throwing out the member, whatever floats their boat that particular day.

Will there be any triple-teaming or backups, or are GOONS raiders are on their own if they hit the wrong victim (such as a nuke-armed one that mentioned "Raid and eat six nukes" in its bio)?

It would be at the discretion of the original and any fellow raider really.

Also, considering that you mentioned, "No reps", if a raider was to hit a member of a major alliance, such as GPA or VE, I'm assuming the raider is not responsible for rep payment. Correct?

If the raider hit an unaligned or otherwise valid target that joined a major alliance such as GPA or VE, he would not be responsible for the payment of reps. However, if he hit a member of such an alliance he definitely would be (if he remained a member that is).

Also, considering that you mentioned, "No reps", if a raider was to hit a member of a major alliance, such as GPA or VE, I'm assuming the raider is not responsible for rep payment. Correct?

We would nuke first and ask questions later.

I can attest to the fact that I have asked the GOONS to end several raids, and they have always done so. As far as negotiations go, they are a lot easier to talk to than many others.

-Craig

Surely something this reasonable is not the work of GOONS...

Is this a "reminder" because someone actually want reps for a war that started before the nation joined (a-la-ironchef and mini-GGA) or is this an actual reminder?

It's not that anyone sought reps but that a couple alliances now have more or less demanded peace (one seemingly hiding behind the protection of a large alliance). I understand wanting peace for applicants so that they may become members, but we have certain protocol ourselves.

1) The war will be allowed to expire and everyone goes their separate ways.

I assume you mean that you don't keep attacking during the time your waiting for the war to expire right?

I remember the old days when the raid policy was simple, only raid people who are unaligned and a couple of days from autodeletion. Then it was more of a matter of grabbing something nobody wanted and nobody got their noses out of joint. I thought this was a good system.

Also I am curious as to what you mean by allowing the war to expire and everyone going their separate ways, does this mean that the attacks stop and the war stays current (EDIT- with no more wars after that), or do you mean that the attacks continue but there are no additional wars?

How is attacking someone only a couple of days away from autodeletion "raiding"? After ~12 days inactive, all captured money / tech / land is destroyed rather than stolen. So if they did abandon the nation, you aren't doing anything but destroying your own military, and if they didn't, you are screwing up their already unoptimized sled (I assume by about to autodelete you mean >20 days inactive). This doesn't strike me as a good system.

How is attacking someone only a couple of days away from autodeletion "raiding"? After ~12 days inactive, all captured money / tech / land is destroyed rather than stolen. So if they did abandon the nation, you aren't doing anything but destroying your own military, and if they didn't, you are screwing up their already unoptimized sled (I assume by about to autodelete you mean >20 days inactive). This doesn't strike me as a good system.

Casualty raiding.

It's a good policy. These aren't the old days when there was a huge, almost herd-like group of nations close to deletion run by bored teens who'd made just enough infra/tech to be worthwhile; these days pickings are a hell of a lot slimmer.

That being said, it's the fairest policy possible in the current enviroment. Good job to GOONS for maintaining their policy posture.

It's a good policy. These aren't the old days when there was a huge, almost herd-like group of nations close to deletion run by bored teens who'd made just enough infra/tech to be worthwhile; these days pickings are a hell of a lot slimmer.That being said, it's the fairest policy possible in the current enviroment. Good job to GOONS for maintaining their policy posture.

Yeah refusing to peace out after the nation has joined an alliance would really help your plan to increase playership.

It's a good policy. These aren't the old days when there was a huge, almost herd-like group of nations close to deletion run by bored teens who'd made just enough infra/tech to be worthwhile; these days pickings are a hell of a lot slimmer.That being said, it's the fairest policy possible in the current enviroment. Good job to GOONS for maintaining their policy posture.

Yeah refusing to peace out after the nation has joined an alliance would really help your plan to increase playership.

Meanwhile, you're still doing your part to increase membership by making snide remarks every time we post anything. I'm sure that's what brings in the players...people are dying to hang around that kind of crap.

Meanwhile, you're still doing your part to increase membership by making snide remarks every time we post anything. I'm sure that's what brings in the players...people are dying to hang around that kind of crap.

Hey retard, I posted in support of your position in this blog:

Is this a "reminder" because someone actually want reps for a war that started before the nation joined (a-la-ironchef and mini-GGA) or is this an actual reminder?

I also supported the reforms which lay out this policy:

I'm unemployed!

I'm glad that GOONS has given thoughtful consideration to cleaning-/tightening-up its front-end policies, which will hopefully reduce after-the-fact messes that have defined GOONS's reputation. Hopefully, enforcement will be present, evenly applied, and followed-through to reinforce compliance.

My reply to Margrave is that it's silly for him to go on about a plan to bring membership way back up and also advocate raiding aligned nations.