Judge X

Good fight. Look forward to seeing you guys again.

[quote name='Therm' timestamp='1290481202' post='2520860'] 72 duckroll nukes to 1 sf nuke, along with nearly twice the average NS. This is gonna [s]hurt[/s] be interesting. [/quote] 72 Nukes? Are you stupid? what are you waiting for an invitation? I hope you got your ducks in a row because hoarding all just sad and cowardly. Go get 'em! Good Luck and let me collect quick before my environment goes to hell!

[quote name='Husker' timestamp='1290485792' post='2520930'] This is correct, and why I resigned. [/quote] What came first? The chicken or the egg?

Congratulations on the "change" Guys. I'm sorry I was not able to post earlier. I wish you the best of luck.

[img]http://i852.photobucket.com/albums/ab85/JudgeX76/Decorated%20images/Hellcats.png[/img] [size="5"]OR[/size] [IMG]http://i852.photobucket.com/albums/ab85/JudgeX76/Decorated%20images/Hellcats2.png[/IMG]

This is a Joint Operations, Special announcement From Cyberian Tiger Alliance and The Hell Patrol. Tonight we engage in Guerilla warfare with Destructor Fleets and wish them the best of luck. [IMG]http://i852.photobucket.com/albums/ab85/JudgeX76/500px-Flag_of_the_Siberian_Tiger_Alliancesvg.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://i852.photobucket.com/albums/ab85/JudgeX76/THPFlag-1.png[/IMG] Signed The Hell Patrol High Council and Emperor Kolchak Imperial Regent Conistonslim

I suggested the ability to change your resources once. Similar to the Moon/Mars wonder. A timer on it would mean that you can only do it once per round. [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=94140"]Resource change[/url]

[quote name='lazaraus45' timestamp='1289870821' post='2513950'] doubtful, the alliances holding their ground are in a very good position to do so, it would take a large coalition to take them, something everyone always says "OMGNOWAITOOMUCHLIKESE" to, the only other way things would change if a new AA arrived and siezed alot of power, but new alliances tend to get targetted early in the round [/quote] We got targeted early. Didn't work too good. I myself don't care if I lose a war. It is more important that my point get across. So I guess I do have politics for TE. Just I'm willing to kill my nation off over and over again to keep free war alive.

[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1289864439' post='2513869'] OPs average NS. [/quote] Go to war. What can you lose? You win either way. Defending casualties or Attacking casualties. Pick one. If your lucky you get both. Hope this makes sense.

[quote name='lazaraus45' timestamp='1289860238' post='2513807'] you answered your own question, the problem is a lack of desire by the parties in power to do anything that MIGHT shift the dynamic of TE in a way that doesn't favour them unless there's some kind of "problem" that would make it a worthy risk, that's the same thing that has caused stagnation in SE and that's what will eventually cause stagnation in TE. [/quote] No it won't. The Hell Patrol will ride to deaths door (next door neighbor BTW) to stop stagnation in TE. If this means attacking the most powerful alliance, so be it. Im sure other would join agree with me.

[quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1289868446' post='2513926'] I've never heard of either of you. [/quote] And you are? Congrats guys.

Open to switching to a majority team color(White team prefered). Lead: GDI Crossfire Pigs: GDi Crossfire Oil: Aluminum: Furs: Coal: Gold: Iron: Lumber: Marble: Rubber: Silver: Bonus resources are: 1.Asphalt - Lowers infrastructure upkeep cost -5%. Requires Construction, Oil, and Rubber 2.Automobiles - Increases population happiness +3. Requires Asphalt and Steel 3.Construction - Reduces infrastructure cost -5% and raises the aircraft limit +10. Requires Lumber, Iron, Marble, Aluminum, and a technology level greater than 5 4.Microchips - Reduces technology cost -8%, increases population happiness +2. Requires Gold, Lead, Oil, and a technology level greater than 10. Lowers Frigate, Destroyer, Submarine and Aircraft Carrier navy vessel purchase and upkeep cost -10% 5.Radiation Cleanup - Reduces nuclear anarchy effects by 1 day. Improves a nation's environment by 1. Reduces global radiation for your nation by 50%. Requires Construction, Microchips, Steel, and a technology level greater than 15 6.Scholars - Increases population income +$3.00. Requires a literacy rate greater than 90%, Lumber, and Lead 7.Steel - Reduces infrastructure cost -2%. Lowers all navy vessel purchase costs -15%. Requires Coal and Iron PM GDI crossfire and/or post here.

I redact my last statement. It would make it too SE like.

[quote name='lazaraus45' timestamp='1289669127' post='2511916'] i like the idea of a timed NAP/MDP bloc, basically several alliances get together declare an NAP for the first 20 days or so, and hold an MDP together until that time is up, then on day 20 the wars start, this would cause utter chaos, plus no one could be caught off guard, basically a TE wide free for all [/quote] Now that is an excellent idea. Maybe run that from 14 days on the short end to 20 days on the long end. I would have to be for the 14 day NAP so that new TE players would not get bored and quit. A 14 day build model could greatly increase the NS of alliances yet would ensure that not all nations have nukes. A limited nuke count will help with teaching lower tier "training" nations the chance to learn to fight effectively.

[quote name='Frostfirefox' timestamp='1289542467' post='2511001'] I still think the lack of politics will be bad. Not SE politics where its all treaty signing and complaining, but TE politics. TE politics as in, a motive for war. Strategically using political aspects of the game for wars. I don't know if I even thought about the current motive for wars or brought it up. My view on things have shifted as others participated in the discussion. But it really is as confusion has said. Who didn't look at this war and think, oh goodbye RE (no offense RE but given round history as a mass recruiter, it happens). The war was decided by everyone before anything really happened. And its already at a peace. But overall we all do have our own ways of playing as has been said but never trying anything outside of the comfort zone of each and everyone will only limit things. Maybe we will stumble upon a greater way of play through exploring. I've played this system for a few rounds now. As has everyone, I'd just find it fun to try something else now. At an artists standpoint, the first idea generally never is the best, so my ideas were not the best at first but I did try. With a collective of everyone though something good should ensue. [/quote] If you want to spice it up so bad in TE maybe you should try flashy and entertaining DoW's. Another option would be to have a witty, colorful, and entertaining post in the threads you post in, not constantly whining. Sometimes making the best of what you have and trying to make it better within the boundries (60 days) we are given. You would try and instill long term politics in a 60 day round. you strike me as a person that holds a grudge for a long period of time and that is what makes things unfun. It's battle royal, no holds barred fun. I'm sorry that you seem to have skipped learning how to play checkers and have gone straight to chess. Make no mistake, TE is checkers, SE is chess If you try to play chess in TE it WILL have an unfun effect.

I have a bit of an idea. Why don't we have alliance increments. Let's limit the amount of members to alliances to 30 and 60. 30 for small alliances and 60 for large alliances. Then we would not have huge alliances and would have more alliances at say 60 nations who are able to pick from a large amount of 60 nation alliances. Same for 30 nation alliances. If you cannot bust the, say 51 nation mark for your alliance then you have to shed to become a 30 nation alliance. This would change statistically the face of TE. Then the playing field would be leveled quite a bit and make some alliances have to rely more on strategy than as some rely on, sheer numbers. I don't know, sounds crazy in my head but hey it also sounds like more diverse wars. You also can find ghost flag runners easier and can actually have a 3+ alliance war that become interesting. Kinda like bracketing TE like a true tournament. You guys need to leave the politics in SE though. It'll ruin TE for the noobs who just wanna learn how to fight and for the experienced who wanna fight without all the BS of SE. If you don't like it pack sand and twist your web of lies and half truths elsewhere(politics). We have 60 days of fun not 6 months of "I don't like that you raided a Pink team Nation. I'm gonna roll your AA." Or something along that line.

Here are my feelings: White Peace - a mutual cessation of warfare from dueling Alliances Surrender - When a declaring Alliance has some statistical advantage ([b]large[/b] or small) but declares war for personal reasons. Then loses miserably and is threatened with the continuation of warfare to the point of being un-fun for them (to the end of the round). (See our war)

[quote name='KOwens06' timestamp='1289399968' post='2509316'] No you see when I or the Warriors war we war for pride we don't war for stupid reasons. We fight three wars a round and we fight as a group. I don't need to branch out because I don't care what other people think about me. I care how my alliance fights and how people view us. And you are asking what I have done? All I see you do is sit here and praise people you don't fight you don't create fail coalitions (Confusion) you don't do anything. At least I fight, I war, I help my alliance win and in TE where I pride myself on that thats all I care about. [/quote] What he said except the praising and fail coalitions part. I'm too new to know all the drama.

Congratulations on your promotion RodRod. It is most deserved as you set a fine example for your fellow alliance mates to follow. o/ THP o/ Abyss

Why not? We are rolling an AA twice our size. Apparently we will have to debate on this further. Only 39 days left until the Abyss gets a break. Unless they issue a complete surrender.

[quote name='Frostfirefox' timestamp='1289335777' post='2508422'] An RPG and 1st person shooter are completely different things. Politics and war fit hand in hand, especially in a nation rp game. I'm just saying, if things were weighted more on a political aspect of dominance, wars would be more complex and hence, you would get more of what you want. I mean alliances are now just attacking the same alliances they have in the past 5 rounds without any alterations to how it is done. Are you guys afraid of mixing it up a bit? Are your precious PRs worth that much that you can't organize anything that causes an alliance to think creatively to win? Everything is just based on stats now. [/quote] You must not visit our entertaining threads too often.

[quote name='Frostfirefox' timestamp='1289333481' post='2508390'] Since when is a 2-4 day war where 1 side always complains about how the other side never fought back fun? TE shouldn't be SE. But TE shouldn't be total crap either. TE should be a place where people actually fight each other in larger wars. You can hold onto your 1v1 wars where EVERYTIME people complain in some form or another about how their opponents did that or didn't fight or were dishonorable. Just slap some coalitions together and go at it as a whole. When I played Round 2 I remember a very large scale war with MI. Funnest thing ever. The smaller alliances all organized to take out the top dog who was implementing something on the lines of they can raid who they want when they want. You don't seem to realize that war is based around politics, and when you remove the politics all you have left is a slap in the face and crying. Doesn't anyone else see the slowly downward progression of activity. It's because TE is boring because nothing ever happens politic wise. When I first joined TE the alliance I was in was based around our SE alliance but named differently along with our nations because people didn't want TE wars to hit their SE stance. We had secret treaties and the works. Literally lines were drawn all over the place so when war broke out, it broke out everywhere practically. With more than side 1 and side 2. At the moment, being rogue is much more fun than any 1v1 war I have been in (minus joining MI a few rounds back and getting my ass kicked. that was hilarious. they were completely unorganized.) [/quote] Now that I partially agree with. Wars should see fighting from both sides for the duration of the war. I got nuked and I'm still not done fighting. We plan on fighting till the end of the round if they don't surrender. On the political note though, Bleh. Everybody needs to take a break from a RPG to play a 1st person shooter.

[quote name='Frostfirefox' timestamp='1289330426' post='2508338'] Quite, I was beaten without knowing it. 40 or so messages in my inbox when I checked 3 days into it. Onto point though, the poor leaders of TE don't realize that even though TE is based solely around war, it is not just hitting each other with nukes until you white peace 2 days later and say good fight/fun war a million times. You wouldn't know a good war even if you were in it (point being that has already happened). The political side of war is much more amusing when it comes down to it but you can have your fun for now. The progressive movement of change has already started. Well at least a revert to how things used to be. [/quote] Sorry F3 that is terrible. Treaties have no place in TE beyond a protectorate to give them a chance to get off the ground. It sounds like you would like to Stagnate TE as much as SE. It would be a sad day if like minded souls would have to "cleanse" this idea off the face of TE. So don't try and ruin the fun. Keep the business end of the pen in SE and the business end of the troops in TE. Have fun, kill pixels.

[quote name='Moridin' timestamp='1289291192' post='2507758'] This has to be the single worst combination of post and response ever. Please stop. [/quote] I concur. It would have been easier to say No U.

[quote name='delendum' timestamp='1289291092' post='2507757'] You forgot to mention our mothers are whores. [/quote] See now. Why can't people be civilized?