Icy McFlame Posted July 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I would like to thank Myworld and the alliance of DT for their rapid and honorable resolution to the specifics of this incident. I also thank all those that offered support and undertook preemptive actions on my behalf. o/ Dark Templar o/ CN community o/ none Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogaden Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 (edited) that's kind of my point. You weren't the world police (nor should you have had to have been) and you were more than content to let "this kind of crap" happen all the time. You did make an effort to help reduce it by giving a safe refuge in red but you took no measures to prevent the behavior anywhere else.The person I originally responded to made a statement that this kind of thing would never be allowed by NPO, which is false. It was allowed all the time, just not on one color. This kind of thing would never be allowed, because he's a Red unaligned, the person you were replying to was correct. If you mean in general across the world then no, but again, that wasn't the circumstance. There was never anything stopping other color spheres from drawing a line around their spheres and saying the same, and there still isn't. Instead of attacking the Revenge doctrine for either not going far enough (and end raiding everywhere), why not ask why other spheres have not done the same? Edited July 23, 2009 by James Dahl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King DrunkWino Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Respect to DT for concluding this affair in a cool way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nintenderek Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Sorry man, I just can't trust you here when we've already heard from a member of DT that this was in fact approved. Instead of flip flopping on whether it was approved or not, a far better course of action would either to defend your members actions or reign him in.For a 12k nation without an alliance to provide aid and just being a year and a half old, I gotta say it's most likely too tough a jump to make. If that's the case, then I would like to know how Tsar was able to be in range of him and nuke him. I would think it would be hard to get an MP for him as well. I know this has been settled, but I, not knowing a whole lot about the actual nation building part of this game, am a bit curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocOctane Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I'd appreciate it if you keep your requests for sanctions to your own alliance members. While your sentiment on the situation is well expressed in this. That any sanctions will be handled by the actual parties involved.--- Now to address the OP. While it has been said in this threat that we supported or not supported this is the actions that are in the process of being taken. Tsar and Icy Flame have been instructed to peace out and Tsar will pay reps for the damages done by the nuke. It's not within our policy of raiding to take a raid to nuking unless the target has fired a nuke first. I can't explain why this went to this level cause I'm not even sure at this point. At this time DT would like to apologize to Icy Flame for the glowing of his nation and Tsar will be talked to about this. Wish we could of handled this in private instead of bringing this to OWF. No hard feelings on your actions, but in the future please come talk to us first. Thanks and again Sorry. Cool points added to my record books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattski133 Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 This kind of thing would never be allowed, because he's a Red unaligned, the person you were replying to was correct. If you mean in general across the world then no, but again, that wasn't the circumstance.There was never anything stopping other color spheres from drawing a line around their spheres and saying the same, and there still isn't. Instead of attacking the Revenge doctrine for either not going far enough (and end raiding everywhere), why not ask why other spheres have not done the same? It is a lot of risk for almost zero gain (unless you count Karma/feeling good about yourself as a gain). I can see a potential issue arising should say, Orange, Blue and Black ban tech raids on their spheres (and that has been talked about a little, I think, on Orange). The raiders would turn their attentions to the smaller, more fractured colors, intensifying the raids there and making those already difficult to live in colors even more so. I used to tech raid when I was in a smaller alliance. I condemn it now. But it's not my decision to say what another nation can do. I think...bad as it is, that's the only solution for this. The Revenge Doctrine was more or less a way for Red Team to keep more nations that didn't necessarily want to be in an alliance around for trading, in my eyes, than looking out for their well-being, though it served both purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King DrunkWino Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 If that's the case, then I would like to know how Tsar was able to be in range of him and nuke him. I would think it would be hard to get an MP for him as well. I know this has been settled, but I, not knowing a whole lot about the actual nation building part of this game, am a bit curious. Welp, looking at Tsars' nation, he has quite a lot of wonders. Like a WHOLE lot. Much more than a 4.4k infra nation should ever be able to get their hands on. So, I don't think it's a leap of logic to say that at one point he was at a much higher infra and NS level. Something high enough to afford the price of all those goodies. A 5.4 million casualty report seems to back up that he's seen quite a bit of action. On to Icy. There's a different can of worms. 200k casualties says he doesn't fight a whole lot but does on occasion and something like 3.4k (don't know how much he lost,) says he isn't making a whole lot of pocket change. He's got a couple of Wonders which suggests either he's good at saving money, but even then the wonders he has cost an average of around 33% of an MP. For a mid-range nation to save up for an MP is a long investment to make. Looking at his nation charts, the periods he wasn't moving suggest that he was sledding and the dips (and aid screen,) also suggests he's selling tech. Now, it could very well be that he has been saving up for one, but just the math says that if you were making (hypothetically,) 2 mill a day after taxes, you still have a 50 day wait without dealing tech. Longer if you want to save up to get some nukes and/or keep a nice warchest. It can be done at that infra level, but it takes quite a bit of time and effort to put toghether the needed cash and reserves to keep on growing afterward. Me, I waited till I hit the 4999.99 infra level before I started in on wonders just because at that point, I was clearing (with a full trade circle,) in the neghboorhood of 4 mill a collection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen MoP Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I find it interesting that no one ever thinks that maybe there was also a factor of the NPO thinking, "It would be nice if this game had more players. Tech raiding seems to drive away more people than anything else. Maybe we should stop that to make the game better. How can we mitigate this problem?" I realize making caricatures of evil is fun, though, so it's hard to assume the bad guy ever does ANYTHING good except for purely selfish reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penkala Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I find it interesting that no one ever thinks that maybe there was also a factor of the NPO thinking, "It would be nice if this game had more players. Tech raiding seems to drive away more people than anything else. Maybe we should stop that to make the game better. How can we mitigate this problem?" I realize making caricatures of evil is fun, though, so it's hard to assume the bad guy ever does ANYTHING good except for purely selfish reasons. Please. NPO has EZI listed players, kept entire alliances under eternal veceroyships, made alliances disband, etc. etc. They didn't do it to keep players in the game. They did it for trades among other reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Praise Admin for the honour of thieves. They'll rough you up a bit to steal your technology, but at least these exemplars of morality won't maim you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 geez people come on... unalaigned nations are getting wiped from the planet every day by raiders... while this is a particularly savage case the end result of destruction is no different to 20 or 30 other targets that get hit every day. Normally they get hit by conventional attacks but the end result is the same. Just accept it... if you play the game without allies you need to expect to be destroyed sooner or later. Its no different to a nation that refuses to purchase any defences and just sits on 30% troops for ever... they are going to get wiped as well because they don't care enough about their nation to defend it proporly. Stop defending this guy otherwise he will never learn to look after himself... his 12K NS now... and still without any allies i'm surprised he's made it this far to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King DrunkWino Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Just accept it... No. Seriously just no it shouldn't be accepted. It's just greifing in every since of the word. Because it happens daily isn't an excuse. At least most alliances put heavy rules down for raiding, the most common being ground attacks only and offer peace after every round. Stuff like this? Nuking somebody because they didn't want to play your way? No it's not acceptable and it shouldn't be acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Well if your going to go play world police then do it across the board and don't play double standards. I saw 3 nations the other day tripple attack an unalaigned guy and ZI him.... whats the difference? The damage is 10 times more then this guy got. And I could give you a list of names as long as my arm of times this has happened. Personally I stand by my comment its an EPIC FAIL to play a nation simulator and not set up any allies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fant0m Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I find it interesting that no one ever thinks that maybe there was also a factor of the NPO thinking, "It would be nice if this game had more players. Tech raiding seems to drive away more people than anything else. Maybe we should stop that to make the game better. How can we mitigate this problem?" I realize making caricatures of evil is fun, though, so it's hard to assume the bad guy ever does ANYTHING good except for purely selfish reasons. NPO has driven more loyal players out of this game than tech raiding ever will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King DrunkWino Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 Well if your going to go play world police then do it across the board and don't play double standards. I saw 3 nations the other day tripple attack an unalaigned guy and ZI him.... whats the difference? The damage is 10 times more then this guy got. And I could give you a list of names as long as my arm of times this has happened. Personally I stand by my comment its an EPIC FAIL to play a nation simulator and not set up any allies. Since I don't know anything about the 3 on 1 ZI, I can't really make any informed comments on it, can I? World police? Just cause you bring it up doesn't mean anyone here's trying to police the world. See, there are things like a society wide accepted standards of conduct. Nuking a raid target for no other reason but some perverse pleasure just happens to fall outside those accepted standards of conduct. Don't think they exist? Go raid some random dude in an alliance and see for yourself. Just as FAIL as you see it by not getting allies, it's just as FAIL acting like a tool and running anyone and everyone out of the game. That's not world police, that's just common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gauner Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I honestly dont think that nuking in a tech raid is all that bad...even if launching the nuke itself is relatively unprovoked. The only thing that i think is rather distasteful is how he attempted to use the nuke as a threat to make him basically surrender some tech to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 actually i think you would find removing tech raiding would run more people out of this game then vice versa. If this game went to peace mode tomorrow thousands would leave... its the warfare and raiding that keep a lot of people interested in between the mundaine routine of tax collection and bill payments. I really dont think you can justify your stance on the fact that you are trying to keep more people in the game for the good of the game. Nuke attacks are by definition limited to the serious long term gamers , not noobs fresh in from the real world... if you've been hit by a nuke chances are you've had plenty of time to sort yourself out and get an alliance. honestly. Also do you really want me to get you some lists of current non allaigned nations being tripple hit by alliances at present? just hit the wars across the world screen its full of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzelger Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 geez people come on... unalaigned nations are getting wiped from the planet every day by raiders... while this is a particularly savage case the end result of destruction is no different to 20 or 30 other targets that get hit every day. Normally they get hit by conventional attacks but the end result is the same. You can't fight every battle. That doesn't mean you fight none of them. If another player comes into the public domain asking for help against unwarranted aggression I will do what little I can for them - i.e., fight the rhetoric battle. The tech raiding apologists cry "sovereignty" and expect people to be cowed into biting their tongues when stuff like this happens. They are correct too, that all nations have the right to declare war. That doesn't protect them from the consequences though. Other nations have the same right to take any action against the aggressor that they feel is appropriate. Were this a realistic nation-simulator tech raiders would be met with sanction and expulsion from alliances (unless their alliance was essentially a thieves' guild which, regrettably, it seems that most are). Given the twisted way this game has evolved, militaristic action to defend a nation that you don't know is suicide and will have no real impact on the way things work. All one can do is speak out when injustice is seen and hope that there is an evolution in social thinking. It worked out well for Walford, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I'm actually all for helping people, and I have many times come to the aid of non allaigned nations being raided ... but after they join my alliance. You cant reward lazyness. If he wants some help i'll give it right now but he can make the effort to at least change his AA. Its a two way street you can't just sit on no AA and then cry for alliances to help you without at least offering to join one. As I said before you need to let this guy learn his mistakes ... if all the non allaigned nations got protection tomorrow who would bother signing up to an alliance... half at best. This is a perfect advertisment for the benifits of joining an alliance and I for one would like to keep it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime minister Johns Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 I think that this is a disturbing development. Using nukes to extort tech out of smaller and weaker nations is a cowardly and low act. What we need is a large alliance to offer protection to unaligned nations on their color sphere..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King DrunkWino Posted July 23, 2009 Report Share Posted July 23, 2009 As I said before you need to let this guy learn his mistakes ... if all the non allaigned nations got protection tomorrow who would bother signing up to an alliance... half at best. This is a perfect advertisment for the benifits of joining an alliance and I for one would like to keep it that way. Not finding a community that he thinks is a good fit for him isn't a mistake. Want somebody to join your alliance? I can think of better ways to get quality active membership apart from the barrel of a loaded gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime minister Johns Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Not finding a community that he thinks is a good fit for him isn't a mistake. Want somebody to join your alliance? I can think of better ways to get quality active membership apart from the barrel of a loaded gun. Indeed. Forced recruitment produces loyal members who will stick by you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodivine Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 I think that this is a disturbing development.Using nukes to extort tech out of smaller and weaker nations is a cowardly and low act. What we need is a large alliance to offer protection to unaligned nations on their color sphere..... There was no extortion of tech. It was clearly a statement to buy soldiers to continue a fight or get nuked. And my stance on that has been noted in my post on the resolution of the issue at hand. Situations like this don't happen all the time and when they do people take the action they feel is needed to resolve the issue. Each is a case by case bases. It doesn't matter what sphere a nation is on or size you are. People make their choices and depending on the situation resolutions of the problem can come to an easy solution and closure as like this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 Well if an alliance really is going to play cowboy and dish out vigilantee justice and protection for non-allaigned nations i think they had better make some official public annoucements. ... and then get ready for a lot of work. Also i beleive you may have mis-interpreted my notion of helping nations only after they change AA. Its not one of my boys attacking them... so it isn't me holding a gun to their head. I'm simply offering protection if they join. You would also be interested to know some of the most loyal members I have seen have come through this method, they actually witness first hand you helping them and see what protection can offer their nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groucho Marx Posted July 24, 2009 Report Share Posted July 24, 2009 (edited) Actually, PWN hasn't said no raiding on pink, they have said "No being a dick to people you raid on pink", something I assume this would fall under. It would. We wouldn't allow for someone to use nukes on a Pink nation in a tech raid. Edited July 24, 2009 by Emperor Marx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts