Attacked from behind

[Burning Glory]

Coming from someone that tries diligently to make friends and keep the peace between fellow game members,

this is a bit of a shock. I logged on today to find that BOOSHIFIED has attacked me, and for what reason IDK.

Now it isn't a surprise that I would be attacked as far as my friends have enemies, and I'm in the # 2 position.

But what is the surprise is that just days ago I had offered BOOSHIFIED and his former alliance a chance

to join my team of friends, and also i had protected his alliance on various other occasions before this.

This is just a game to me..... One i do enjoy playing, to the point I get Biatched at constantly from my girl.

But even as a game there should be a code of conduct while playing or just plane ethics. Frankly I don't care

if i'm 1st, 2nd or 10th place, as long as I'm having fun while getting there.

Its no secrete that i will protect my friends to my last standing soldiers, even if it means last place. But I would never

attack anyone for no cause or defend a friend that has no cause to attack some else. I always keep my alliance and

my friends interest above mine. Some things just don't add up and I believe that i know why i was attacked, if this

surfaces to be true then no one involved will make it in the top 100 nations from this round on.

I give a shout out to my TRUE friends, the ones that are in the various alliances that have befriended myself and TPF.

MHA, MI, Echelon, OTAN, Ubercon, and my new friends of Viridia and NEO and last but not least WAPA....Yes WAPA,

there are some good people in this alliance, and the alliance as a whole is not bad, its the few bad nations in it that

give it, or put it in its current situation. If i have forgotten anyone, my apologies!!

BG.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Burning Glory

[Owned-You]

Heh, welcome to CN:TE.

[BamaBuc]

Look, no offense, but it's TE. Calm down and enjoy a good fight. I assure you, they don't mean it maliciously, they're just having some fun. That's what TE is about... anything goes. None of those sticky moral obligations of CN:S.

-Bama

[jer]

Sorry dude, but it sounds as though you've been outplayed.

[TheEraser]

Look, no offense, but it's TE. Calm down and enjoy a good fight. I assure you, they don't mean it maliciously, they're just having some fun. That's what TE is about... anything goes. None of those sticky moral obligations of CN:S.

-Bama

i agree with Bama, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen

[BamaBuc]

i agree with Bama, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen

I think the TE universe is about to end. Me and ElB agreed that someone is taking TE too seriously.

-Bama

[Trout]

TE needs less treaties and moar warz

[KingDingaLing]

TE needs less treaties and moar warz

The treaties allow for huge wars !

TE need less holier than though people saying its just TE

[hormones74]

The treaties allow for huge wars !

TE need less holier than though people saying its just TE

You make a good point King. We love our treaty partners and will kill off whole alliances if they try to take our love away.

Less treaties will mean less wars. You people arent understanding that yet. Say that Murder Inc. had no allies, and we decided to hit a smaller alliance just for kicks. How would we have any competition to fight us back? Same can be said for the rest of the alliances. Treaties are good in a sense here. Yes they can overlap and cause a few headaches. But they can make this game a little more fair for alot of people.

How many wars have we had in TE now? How many curbstomps have there been? The only times I can recall a total beatdown for any alliance, is when they dont have an ally to call on. I realize this is TE, and I also realize its just a game. But you people need to realize something also. I play to win, and I am pretty damn sure most of you do as well. So quit whining and complaining and just deal with whatever happens.

[Burning Glory]

Look, no offense, but it's TE. Calm down and enjoy a good fight. I assure you, they don't mean it maliciously, they're just having some fun. That's what TE is about... anything goes. None of those sticky moral obligations of CN:S.

-Bama

Yeah I agree, this is about having fun! As i said earlier in my original post It doesn't matter where i place as long as I'm having fun.

But this isn't your usual game of cards so to speak.....As i said he was in an alliance that I protected and helped out

several times, and just days before offered help again. This isn't fun when you have to fight someone that is part of an alliance

you consider to be your friends. Or attacked for no prime reason.

Sorry dude, but it sounds as though you've been outplayed.

There wasn't a game to be out played, and as you can see the peace has been made...lol no pund intended.

i agree with Bama, if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen

Love the heat! I didn't make it to #2 by handing out roses, and my Tech level speaks for its self.

Ask around I'm no stranger to war, I just believe in the old term speak softly and carry a big stick.

[Otto Verteidiger]

OMG LOL! I just lol'd at the title...

Attacked from behind

hahahahaha

Errrr,

[Owned-You]

You make a good point King. We love our treaty partners and will kill off whole alliances if they try to take our love away.

Less treaties will mean less wars. You people arent understanding that yet. Say that Murder Inc. had no allies, and we decided to hit a smaller alliance just for kicks. How would we have any competition to fight us back? Same can be said for the rest of the alliances. Treaties are good in a sense here. Yes they can overlap and cause a few headaches. But they can make this game a little more fair for alot of people.

How many wars have we had in TE now? How many curbstomps have there been? The only times I can recall a total beatdown for any alliance, is when they dont have an ally to call on. I realize this is TE, and I also realize its just a game. But you people need to realize something also. I play to win, and I am pretty damn sure most of you do as well. So quit whining and complaining and just deal with whatever happens.

Actually, less treaties could equate to more wars. Simply because if you have an alliance with no treaties, that alliance act's like a prick to a bunch of alliances. That alliance will get romped for it. If nobody act's like a prick, nobody pays for it. All treaties do is act as a deterrent, much like nuclear weapons do. Treaties only serve as a way to exert political power and ensure that whomever holds the most weight in the treaty web will succeed in winning the game. Simply because they will have all the major players in there pocket, and easily eliminate any would-be usurpers who seek to challenge there authority.

It makes the game far less interesting, unless you have a counter treaty-power. And I personally know that my alliance isn't playing the treaty game...

[Chalaskan]

Hell, I just fight to fight there. If someone gets me upset I take a beatdown, restart and hit em again. Never been above top 100 cause I am usually involved in a ton of wars from the inception of the round. And man I love it!

[Williambonney]

Reset is in 12 days anyways, so have fun and blow stuff up!

[Burning Glory]

Reset is in 12 days anyways, so have fun and blow stuff up!

LOL, i say the real fun starts in 12 days!

[Burning Glory]

You make a good point King. We love our treaty partners and will kill off whole alliances if they try to take our love away.

Less treaties will mean less wars. You people arent understanding that yet. Say that Murder Inc. had no allies, and we decided to hit a smaller alliance just for kicks. How would we have any competition to fight us back? Same can be said for the rest of the alliances. Treaties are good in a sense here. Yes they can overlap and cause a few headaches. But they can make this game a little more fair for alot of people.

How many wars have we had in TE now? How many curbstomps have there been? The only times I can recall a total beatdown for any alliance, is when they dont have an ally to call on. I realize this is TE, and I also realize its just a game. But you people need to realize something also. I play to win, and I am pretty damn sure most of you do as well. So quit whining and complaining and just deal with whatever happens.

You took the words right out of my mouth Horms! Although i can see the othe sides point too.....Guess we'll just have to fight them about it LOL!!

By the way love the new sig!

BG.

[TheEraser]

I think the TE universe is about to end. Me and ElB agreed that someone is taking TE too seriously.

-Bama

NO U!!!

[BamaBuc]

It makes the game far less interesting, unless you have a counter treaty-power. And I personally know that my alliance isn't playing the treaty game...

That's just it. There is none. Ah well, reset is soon anyway.

Also, ElB, YES ME!!!

-Bama

[Bob]

Less treaties will mean less wars. You people arent understanding that yet. Say that Murder Inc. had no allies, and we decided to hit a smaller alliance just for kicks. How would we have any competition to fight us back? Same can be said for the rest of the alliances. Treaties are good in a sense here. Yes they can overlap and cause a few headaches. But they can make this game a little more fair for alot of people.

How many wars have we had in TE now? How many curbstomps have there been? The only times I can recall a total beatdown for any alliance, is when they dont have an ally to call on. I realize this is TE, and I also realize its just a game. But you people need to realize something also. I play to win, and I am pretty damn sure most of you do as well. So quit whining and complaining and just deal with whatever happens.

Says the NPO of this game. Having fun being a member of the controlling bloc that has scared the resistance into withdrawal and when resistance is attempted, the general public laughs and ignores it, and peaces out to avoid losing infra in a game that lasts 90 days.

Reached your goal you have, was it worth it?

And no, I have never played any game to win. I play for fun, and fun is not winning a game to the point where there is no resistance or you beat down any resistance.

Edit: Oh, and I have to say, I have had fun. I am one for losing wars over and over again

Edited November 18, 2008 by Penlugue Solaris

[Owned-You]

That's just it. There is none. Ah well, reset is soon anyway.

Also, ElB, YES ME!!!

-Bama

Indeed, let's hope things start spicing up after reset.

[TheEraser]

Says the NPO of this game. Having fun being a member of the controlling bloc that has scared the resistance into withdrawal and when resistance is attempted, the general public laughs and ignores it, and peaces out to avoid losing infra in a game that lasts 90 days.

Reached your goal you have, was it worth it?

And no, I have never played any game to win. I play for fun, and fun is not winning a game to the point where there is no resistance or you beat down any resistance.

Edit: Oh, and I have to say, I have had fun. I am one for losing wars over and over again

yes, it was worth it.

If you want to find fault in us for having a clear, concise, goal in mind AND creating a game plan to execute and achieve that goal, then go for it, its not our fault that we're better than you are.

Edited November 18, 2008 by elborrador

[Vhalen]

yes, it was worth it.

If you want to find fault in us for having a clear, concise, goal in mind AND creating a game plan to execute and achieve that goal, then go for it, its not our fault that we're better than you are.

He said he was having fun. That seems to be his goal. Since he's achieved it without all that extra work you guys put in, the argument can be made that he's better than you are.

Edited November 19, 2008 by Vhalen

[JoshuaR]

Says the NPO of this game. Having fun being a member of the controlling bloc that has scared the resistance into withdrawal and when resistance is attempted, the general public laughs and ignores it, and peaces out to avoid losing infra in a game that lasts 90 days.

Reached your goal you have, was it worth it?

And no, I have never played any game to win. I play for fun, and fun is not winning a game to the point where there is no resistance or you beat down any resistance.

Edit: Oh, and I have to say, I have had fun. I am one for losing wars over and over again

Heh, and they wouldn't have gained the prominence they did without so many other alliances banding together to take a stab at IDIOT. By doing that, you forced AirMe to sign a treaty with the group which allowed them to get in on the big action whilst not being the primary target. They carefully chose which treaties to hold onto (TPA held, WAPA dropped) to knock out an additional foe. They took advantage of the disappearance of IDIOT leadership and the allure of facing one fewer enemy (TPA) if IDIOTs merged to Murder Inc. Then, they were a superpower of enormous strength with great allies to boot. They had luck and skill to get where they are. I'd say it was well played and probably well worth it.

The mistake on the other side was hitting IDIOT (treaty-less) over morals rather than Murder Inc. since they were "ruining the game" (I just made up that quote) by signing so many treaties. Clearly, Murder Inc and Co were going to be the rulers of TE with that planned structure.

Of course, I can't fault you for hitting IDIOT at some point. Otherwise we would have taken out the competition one by one... haha.

The best thing about this: the game resets in just over a week. All of this means nothing. Perhaps the game reached the point of a large controlling bloc, but just as it happened, voila, reset! This is the beauty of TE. You can play however you want. With blocs, without, as you choose. I don't mind Murder allying all over, since it doesn't matter long term.

TE is fun. Good luck to all fighting out there, and even those hoping not to fight (I'm looking at you, #1 nation, muahahaha). Now to see about my WAPA targets...

[Owned-You]

Heh, and they wouldn't have gained the prominence they did without so many other alliances banding together to take a stab at IDIOT. By doing that, you forced AirMe to sign a treaty with the group which allowed them to get in on the big action whilst not being the primary target. They carefully chose which treaties to hold onto (TPA held, WAPA dropped) to knock out an additional foe. They took advantage of the disappearance of IDIOT leadership and the allure of facing one fewer enemy (TPA) if IDIOTs merged to Murder Inc. Then, they were a superpower of enormous strength with great allies to boot. They had luck and skill to get where they are. I'd say it was well played and probably well worth it.

The mistake on the other side was hitting IDIOT (treaty-less) over morals rather than Murder Inc. since they were "ruining the game" (I just made up that quote) by signing so many treaties. Clearly, Murder Inc and Co were going to be the rulers of TE with that planned structure.

Of course, I can't fault you for hitting IDIOT at some point. Otherwise we would have taken out the competition one by one... haha.

The best thing about this: the game resets in just over a week. All of this means nothing. Perhaps the game reached the point of a large controlling bloc, but just as it happened, voila, reset! This is the beauty of TE. You can play however you want. With blocs, without, as you choose. I don't mind Murder allying all over, since it doesn't matter long term.

TE is fun. Good luck to all fighting out there, and even those hoping not to fight (I'm looking at you, #1 nation, muahahaha). Now to see about my WAPA targets...

Just want to make a point, NAAC did not go to war with IDIOT over morals it was nothing more then they were the dominant super-power and we wanted someone to fight. We went in with the same notion in our war with Murder Inc. We didn't attempt to actively dethrone either with much effort. We simply went to war...no real goals other then to do that make peace and move on.

--

Now, onto another thing. Stop with the whole "We play better" nonsense. I'd reckon the majority of players don't play with a serious mindset and organized structure with goals. So to make the notion that "Your better" you'd have to compare yourself with the rest of the populace...and since the majority aren't "Playing" under that notion it's a moot point. It's very condescending and not needed in this game. That's the type of stuff that made CN boring, and I personally don't want to see it on CN:TE.

That said, it's been a fun round. I personally put 14 people into anarchy while only going into anarchy once I ate two nukes as well. Which is like a badge of honor in NAAC and the only reason I ever went into anarchy. So as you can tell my e-pen for this round is large. I've also had the pleasure of meeting many cool players. So with all that said, let's hope the good times keep rolling!

B)

[JoshuaR]

Now, onto another thing. Stop with the whole "We play better" nonsense. I'd reckon the majority of players don't play with a serious mindset and organized structure with goals. So to make the notion that "Your better" you'd have to compare yourself with the rest of the populace...and since the majority aren't "Playing" under that notion it's a moot point. It's very condescending and not needed in this game. That's the type of stuff that made CN boring, and I personally don't want to see it on CN:TE.

I'm not a part of Murder Inc. Yet I still think they played better. I'm not trying to be condescending, unless to myself. I was in IDIOT, and IDIOT failed in this game. :/ NAAC did far better, as they yet survive! (Of course individual NAAC members are worse for the wear, weaker even than most non-aligned nations after the recent fight). Of course, Murder only succeeded in one part of the game, being the strongest alliance. (tbc)

Since most aren't playing under that mindset... then sure, of course the guys that do will reap the rewards, and it's not necessarily that impressive.

Now, some people have different goals. Some play to practice for standard. Some play to have the most cruise missiles (who buys 50 anyway???), some to buy a worthless Hidden Nuke Silo wonder, some to have the most infra, some to be number 1, some to have their alliance be number 1, some to have the most casualties, some to just escape the boring situations they may find themselves in SE, some to launch a nuke, some to stay out of anarchy while dishing it out, some to have the most tech, etc. To continue on Murder Inc. Sure they had the strongest alliance, but that's not necessarily the best indicator of the top alliance. Look at MHA. They might not be as strong collectively, but what is the point of an alliance? To guarantee protection of members and allow for individual growth. In the MHA, they have some of the strongest nations in the game. They succeeded.

I was just saying, that as far as alliance rankings go, Murder played it just right. As far as other personal rankings go, to each his own. Personally, I was going for the number 1 nation rank until getting ZId in just a couple of days (I failed). Then my goal was to make the casualty count, which I almost had until the recent major war. 75k casualties just doesn't cut it anymore (I failed there). Now the hope is to just be within the top 100 before planning whatever I may do next round.