Jump to content

Instr

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    730

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Instr

  2. Merger Announcement

    in Tournament Edition Open World Forum

    Posted

    Heh.

    If we were looking at an easy war, you should find this understandable because we had gotten curbstomped by Specify Other twice earlier this round; the first time, getting paired with a training alliance and with our pants down, the second time, getting attacked only 5 days after the last war and getting nuked while not holding nukes ourselves. When we attempted to counter Specify Other, SO made the deliberate effort to declare nukers on our non-nuclear nations and make our re-building even harder. Skia currently has about 7 members, out of an original deployment of 18 members. There is a reason for this. If our war had failed, the alliance would most likely have to disband, and this time, for real and permanently.

    The original plan was to go after Misfits with War Doves, and Samwise is correct, I originally proposed going after Misfits with War Doves; it would have been a fun war since at the time War Doves and Les Fleurs du Mal (this is the proper name of the alliance, I would ask that you call it by that name) would have been vaguely an up-declare against Misfits.

    Bombuator ended up calling around a similar time to us, and he wanted me to help us attack Warriors instead. I suggested he talk to Samwise and for us to add Warriors into the requisite war, and we ended up putting NDO, Warriors, and Misfits into the same war.

    ===

     

    As far as accusations of down-declares go, it was an ANS down-declare, a near-parity declare in total NS, and a . This is NGW's post, where he lists the pre-war stats

     

    http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/117879-merger-announcement/#entry3156585

    The stats NGW should have included as well should have been infra levels, and when I had originally recorded the data, Warriors + Misfits had an infra level, according to my calculations, having about 120-129k infra total, while our side had only 110k infra total. So it was an infra updeclare, and our blitz was screwed up with only 17% of Warriors and Misfits being sent into anarchy at the time.

     

    ===

     

    With regards to the Protectorate crap; I thought it would have been funny to falsely list Warriors as our protector at the time, especially since we were planning on hitting them in about 72 hours. I like these kinds of tricks and traps, but I don't intend to cause undue offense.

    I would be fine if, say, Specify Other were stuck handling junk PMs asking about a protectorate agreement with LFDM 2 days before we launched an up-declare and smashed them, but I have no special beef with Warriors. You hit Hershey's alliance last round 3 days out of war, but honestly their first war was rather easy and most hostilities had ended 3 days after the war started.

    I do note of course that in PM, after accusing you of not having a sense of fun and taking out the protectorate agreement, you said that you were okay and fine with me so this volte-face is a bit of a surprise.

    [b]I'm hereby apologizing to you on mine and Skia's behalf for the fake protectorate agreement and if you want to discuss this further, I'm always on IRC and we can set a time.[/b]

    With regards to Misfits, no formal protectorate agreement was made and our nations were instructed to ghost Misfits, not seek protection with Misfits, until we could find a time to reform.

    I have worked together in the past with Misfits, and we have been collegial in the past. I am not wholly happy with the way you hit War Doves earlier this round (packing them in with third-rate alliances and focusing them instead of others). I thank you for allowing our members to ghost you at the time, and I acknowledge that it is a show of bad form to participate in this joint attack on your nations. [b]I acknowledge that I am at fault for the improprieties I am involved with by attacking you and I am apologizing for that.[/b] As with Warriors, if you ever want to talk this out, I am usually on IRC and I am willing to talk through these issues with you.

     

    ===

    Paul... were you seriously considering raiding the remnants of Mume, an alliance that your friends in SO have rolled twice in not particularly an honorable fashion? FYI, you don't even need XP; you had enough wars to gain XP on all your nations, and we don't have substantial amounts of land. Is there some other issue I should be aware of?

  3. User-maintained Changelog, Known bugs

    in Question Center

    Posted

    Small changes, adjustments; these are not documented and would not warrant changes on the main-game change log as it would quickly clutter up the change log.

    IE, change of functionality to allow batch renaming through the pending / new user / user trick, change of the game so that failed ground attacks no longer provide XP, and a myriad of other things.

  6. Twice Daily Updates (or at least war updates)?

    in Tournament Edition Suggestions

    Posted

    This is more like a thread necromancy of this thread from 2009, but:

     

    http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/51193-te-is-rapid-wha/

     

    This is actually a pretty good idea, because the twice daily updates help alleviate the advantage people with good time zones have over others, and make the game a lot more playable for Euros.


    You don't even have to make it so that you can collect twice a day, just make it so that there's both a mid-day and mid-night blitz in TE.

    Compare the player population of SE to TE; in TE, there are almost no Euros because people can't stand getting online at 6 AM in the morning to meet update blitzes.

  15. Assassinate Generals Odds Unusually Low?

    in Report A Bug

    Posted

    I've tried assassination 5 times already, with 5 external successes but 5 internal failures. After update I will try again, but it strongly seems that something is wrong with the odds.

    The opponent only has 1 general, and as far as I understand this means that if my assassination attack succeeds as a spy op, it should try for a 75% odds, then if it succeeds there, it should assassinate his general.

    Is it in fact the case that if it succeeds, it first tests the 75% odds, then it randomly selects a generals slot, and if it's empty, it fails?

  17. 8 (9) Spy Ops in a Day with 3+2 wars.

    in Report A Bug

    Posted

    Is this normal behavior?


    I've launched 8 spy ops and I have authorization to launch a 9th on an unaligned. I don't think this should be normal, because I've only declared on 2 players today, and at the start of the day I had 2 active wars. IIRC, the game allows you only to do a number of spy ops equal to 2 + the number of active wars you have.
     

    Mission Date     Operation By     Operation On     Mission Type
    7/22/2013 8:09:47 PM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Mazda
    Ruler: King Masher
    Alliance: Unavailable      Destroy Cruise Missiles

    Success, Not Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 8:09:34 PM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Etopia
    Ruler: Lady Bella
    Nebula-x      Destroy Cruise Missiles

    Success, Not Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 8:06:54 PM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Etopia
    Ruler: Lady Bella
    Nebula-x      Gather Intelligence

    Success, Not Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 7:50:50 PM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Mazda
    Ruler: King Masher
    Alliance: Unavailable      Gather Intelligence

    Success, Not Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 12:29:27 AM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Pearl Harbor
    Ruler: SirBombAlot
    Alliance: Unavailable      Assassinate Generals

    Failure, Not Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 12:28:57 AM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Pearl Harbor
    Ruler: SirBombAlot
    Alliance: Unavailable      Assassinate Generals

    Success, But Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 12:28:23 AM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Bracharia
    Ruler: Slain
    Dying      Destroy Cruise Missiles

    Success, Not Caught
    Details

    7/22/2013 12:28:17 AM         


    Grahf
    Ruler: Instr
    Not An Alliance         


    Bracharia
    Ruler: Slain
    Dying      Destroy Cruise Missiles

    Success, Not Caught
    Details

  20. Everyone is a new recruit?

    in Question Center

    Posted

    A feature was recently added where if you change the new member title, then set a group of users to pending and then reapprove their membership, you'll be able to batch-change their member titles. I haven't tested it, but I suspect they'll lose all their special privileges when that occurs and you'll have to reset it, however.

  24. Approve Member will not Update Title

    in Report A Bug

    Posted

    Let's say a member has a title of "Will and Desire" (Mume). I make this member pending, and I change the "New Recruit" title to "safetitle" (previous titles have included "Very Very Gay" and "Macro-Terrorist"). The game will not update their title to either Very Very Gay, Macro-Terrorist, or safetitle, even though they technically do not have a title while pending.

    Please fix this bug; it's part of a nice trick that allows you to group-change member titles by changing the New Member title and sending members into and out of Pending Status to reapply the member title.

×
×
  • Create New...