A Couple of Tech Raiding Rules

[wickedj]

[quote name='white majik' timestamp='1283200460' post='2436073']
Haha werent you one of the raiders who nuked me wicked? also I want my land back
[/quote]
Nope. i spent the last year in a non-raiding alliance

Also, sorry Sal, id love to but.... 64,093.710 (My nation strength is: 102,851.584)

EDIT:
[quote]Look at the evidence:[/quote]
Timmeh and Oink are both FOK(or atleast were at one point if they arent anymore lol) and the times you posted, assuming eastern timezone, is 11am-noon for them.

Edited August 30, 2010 by wickedj

[Masterof9puppets]

[quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1283202257' post='2436094']
I don't see how I'm trying to be world police. I'm trying to start a precedent to not be jerks and directly cause harm to other alliances by stealing slots and half-assing it against rogues.

I honestly don't see how so many people are voting no. Do you want to be nuke rogued by a larger nation and then have three tiny nations steal the rogue's defensive slots immediately and not do !@#$?
[/quote]

Who you callin' tiny?

People are voting no for the following reasons-
[list=1]
[*]There are way too few targets that us [i]large[/i] nations can hit in the first place
[*]I don't give a !@#$ if that nation is a rogue, if anything it will be all the more fun
[*]Rogues are cool anyways
[*]A "World Police", or set of rules, or whatever you want to call it, will only result in more stagnation on Planet Bob
[*]Stagnation leads to more complaining, which is pretty annoying too
[/list]

[quote name='Salmacis' timestamp='1283201226' post='2436083']
Tired of raid targets that CM/nuke/etc... you? Want a profitable raid?
Salmacis of La Farlede is the tech raid target you've been looking for! In seven days, ten seconds past update time, free tech could be [I]yours[/I]!

Three good reasons to raid La Farlede:
1) La Farlede low infrastructure facilitates GA victories.
2) Obedience to Legion may cause: Self-loathing, irreversible loss of pride and hydrocephalus.
3) The OP might whine about another failed stagger, for your entertainment and mine.
[/quote]

Stay within the 70k range and perhaps we can have fun again

Edited August 30, 2010 by Masterof9puppets

[Lord Fingolfin]

[quote name='Eden Taylor' timestamp='1283204055' post='2436122']
If their slots aren't full, then whatever role they have as a rogue they are not being fully punished for; that's the fault of whoever wants to do the punishing. This goes for both 'rogues' and 'criminals'.
[/quote]

I think you missed the point, it's pretty standard procedure, as I'm sure you are well aware, for two nations to declare on a rogue as soon as possible and to leave the third defensive slot open for a stagger at the discretion of the defending alliance. If a raider decides to attack on the same day that nation #1 and nation #2 do, the rogue can just not accept the raiders peace offer, and right after update on day seven jump into peace mode, completely screwing over the defending alliance.

[Aeternos Astramora]

[quote name='Eden Taylor' timestamp='1283204055' post='2436122']If their slots aren't full, then whatever role they have as a rogue they are not being fully punished for; that's the fault of whoever wants to do the punishing. This goes for both 'rogues' and 'criminals'.[/quote]
If their slots aren't full, it could easily mean that the war was a) just declared like in the Salmacis case, or b[b][/b]) waiting for a stagger.

[quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1283204637' post='2436130']Timmeh and Oink are both FOK(or atleast were at one point if they arent anymore lol) and the times you posted, assuming eastern timezone, is 11am-noon for them.[/quote]
Yeah, and? It proves the fact that it wasn't incompetence on our part that led to others declaring war. It was mainly due to timezones as all three of the first attackers on Salmacis were Dutch (Timmehhh, oink, and DLT).

[quote name='Masterof9puppets' timestamp='1283205179' post='2436142']Who you callin' tiny?[/quote]
Nation Strength: 73,676.853 (My nation strength is: 104,612.378)

You.

People are voting no for the following reasons-
[list=1]
[*]There are way too few targets that us [i]large[/i] nations can hit in the first place
[*]I don't give a !@#$ if that nation is a rogue, if anything it will be all the more fun
[*]Rogues are cool anyways
[*]A "World Police", or set of rules, or whatever you want to call it, will only result in more stagnation on Planet Bob
[*]Stagnation leads to more complaining, which is pretty annoying too
[/list]
1. Then start more alliance wars.
2. You're actively hurting other alliances.
3. No.
4. A "World Police" could easily cause more wars as people try to violate the laws (see BiPolar, a "police action" sort of war).
5. These rules are unrelated to the topic of stagnation.

[oinkoink12]

We spotted the nation 3 hours before he declared.

He had in his bio "free tech and land if you GA me only"

Timmehhh contacted me on irc but I was at work, timmehhh decided after he started attacking you to jump him before the slots were full.
I declared from work an hour later (when i saw the message).

I dunno really why you started this discussion cause he peaced you out after 2 days after a few "BAWWW MY PRECIOUS INFRA" pm's
I understand that you dont like the situation but we had the target listed before he attacked you, thats why we still decided to jump him.
And we coordinated (atleast tried) as much as possible (plus he can only get nuked once a day)

And you forget 6: I need to get back to number 1 casualties. ASAP

Edited August 30, 2010 by oinkoink12

[Eden Taylor]

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1283205605' post='2436150']
I think you missed the point, it's pretty standard procedure, as I'm sure you are well aware, for two nations to declare on a rogue as soon as possible and to leave the third defensive slot open for a stagger at the discretion of the defending alliance. If a raider decides to attack on the same day that nation #1 and nation #2 do, the rogue can just not accept the raiders peace offer, and right after update on day seven jump into peace mode, completely screwing over the defending alliance.
[/quote]

And I think perhaps you missed my point, as well. I find roguery completely legitimate, though it is of course roguery.

[Masterof9puppets]

[quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1283205868' post='2436155']

Nation Strength: 73,676.853 (My nation strength is: 104,612.378)

You.

1. Then start more alliance wars.
2. You're actively hurting other alliances.
3. No.
4. A "World Police" could easily cause more wars as people try to violate the laws (see BiPolar, a "police action" sort of war).
5. These rules are unrelated to the topic of stagnation.
[/quote]

You may be large and at a higher nation strength than me, but that doesn't make me small bud.

1. Perhaps this is a good step towards one.
2. That's part of the game.
3. Yes.
4. It really wouldn't work out that way. Not that a World Police could ever get started anyways.
5. They kind of would contribute to it.

[white majik]

I want one of his slots, Ill be in range and hit ya

[Aeternos Astramora]

[quote name='oinkoink12' timestamp='1283206257' post='2436164']I dunno really why you started this discussion cause he peaced you out after 2 days after a few "BAWWW MY PRECIOUS INFRA" pm's [/quote]
If he violates his word and basic respect, then I will use whatever means necessary to get what I want from him.

[quote]I understand that you dont like the situation but we had the target listed before he attacked you, thats why we still decided to jump him. [/quote]
However, you shouldn't have done that. You missed out on air attacks, navy attacks, and CM's because you didn't want to get nuked ("BAWWW MY PRECIOUS INFRA"? ).

[quote]And we coordinated (atleast tried) as much as possible (plus he can only get nuked once a day)[/quote]
I'll give you the coordination thing. You guys were great at that. The nuke thing is semi-right. He can only get nuked once per day, but by getting a stronger nation on him to nuke the rogue, we could have done more damage. Additionally, it spreads out and wastes the rogue's nukes more quickly.

[quote]And you forget 6: I need to get back to number 1 casualties. ASAP[/quote]
I did forget that one.

[Bob Janova]

A tech raider who screws a stagger should have to pay reps for any extra damage done. Taking the first two slots seems fine though if they coordinate and attack properly.

[Lord Fingolfin]

[quote name='Eden Taylor' timestamp='1283206282' post='2436165']
And I think perhaps you missed my point, as well. I find roguery completely legitimate, though it is of course roguery.
[/quote]

Fair enough, to each his own.

[Eden Taylor]

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1283208416' post='2436207']
Fair enough, to each his own.
[/quote]

That precisely my opinion actually. At the same time though I can understand and settle for this:

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1283207908' post='2436193']
A tech raider who screws a stagger should have to pay reps for any extra damage done. Taking the first two slots seems fine though if they coordinate and attack properly.
[/quote]

[Salmacis]

[quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1283207401' post='2436187']
If he violates his word and basic respect, then I will use whatever means necessary to get what I want from him. [/QUOTE]

[I]You[/I]'re giving lessons about basic respect?
And fyi, rogues are supposed to be deceiving, they don't follow some sort of moral code.
I felt pity when you called me a "!@#$%^&" for a few hundreds infra levels. Your whining nature wouldn't have gone public if you didn't make a fuss about this small matter. You rewarded my lenience by a hammering of questions about the alleged responsible for your loss of precious pixels. You brought drama to innocents to boast, but nobody cares, and the - temporary - results of this poll clearly proved that you overestimate your importance and that perhaps you could find a better way, a sane way to make people talk about you.

[wickedj]

[quote name='Salmacis' timestamp='1283210681' post='2436257']
[I]You[/I]'re giving lessons about basic respect?
And fyi, rogues are supposed to be deceiving, they don't follow some sort of moral code.
I felt pity when you called me a "!@#$%^&" for a few hundreds infra levels. Your whining nature wouldn't have gone public if you didn't make a fuss about this small matter. You rewarded my lenience by a hammering of questions about the alleged responsible for your loss of precious pixels. You brought drama to innocents to boast, but nobody cares, and the - temporary - results of this poll clearly proved that you overestimate your importance and that perhaps you could find a better way, a sane way to make people talk about you.
[/quote]
Dude you just figured out Otter loves his infra? he came to me not long ago to ask if i had sent a rogue after him..he seemed quite upset about being rogued

[Aeternos Astramora]

[quote name='Salmacis' timestamp='1283210681' post='2436257'][I]You[/I]'re giving lessons about basic respect?
And fyi, rogues are supposed to be deceiving, they don't follow some sort of moral code.
I felt pity when you called me a "!@#$%^&" for a few hundreds infra levels. Your whining nature wouldn't have gone public if you didn't make a fuss about this small matter. You rewarded my lenience by a hammering of questions about the alleged responsible for your loss of precious pixels. You brought drama to innocents to boast, but nobody cares, and the - temporary - results of this poll clearly proved that you overestimate your importance and that perhaps you could find a better way, a sane way to make people talk about you.[/quote]
You're so cute...

Salmacis attacked me due to an OOC reason and requested by a third party. My "whining nature" was [i]deceiving[/i]. After all, once I'm deceived, I do my best to deceive back. It worked. You fell for it. Get over it and stop whining and trying to defend your decision. Also, what does this thread have to do with estimating my importance? Your post is just an irrelevant ramble. "Lenience" is not "nuking someone for an OOC reason and then giving peace". In fact, it's quite the opposite from leniency.

See the end of my post for more.

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1283207908' post='2436193']A tech raider who screws a stagger should have to pay reps for any extra damage done. Taking the first two slots seems fine though if they coordinate and attack properly.[/quote]
This would be perfectly acceptable.

[quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1283213181' post='2436293']Dude you just figured out Otter loves his infra? he came to me not long ago to ask if i had sent a rogue after him..[/quote]
I don't remember this at all. I remember you claiming that I did before. If I had asked you, it was an obvious joke. When I got rogued for a "third party request", never in my mind did "WickedJ" come up.

If you're joking about that though, that's fine. Just use a smiley.

[quote]he seemed quite upset about being rogued[/quote]
As would most people who were rogued by a "third party request" on an OOC reason.



Anyway, this thread isn't about my specific case. You can continue to talk about it of course, but it's not the main topic, and I won't be talking about it more considering that it's just a red herring to get us off track. I'm just using this case as an example of an actual occurrence and as background for why these rules need to be implemented. I'll ignore any future references to my specific case and only talk about the proposed rules.

[CRexx]

[quote name='Aeternos Astramora' timestamp='1283214343' post='2436309']


As would most people who were rogued by a "third party request" on an OOC reason.


[/quote]

Suck it up. The various Emperors of Pacifica have eaten more nukes than anyone else on Bob due to various grudges that date back years or simply because nuking Ivan when you raged out was trendy (for a mixture of IC or OOC reasons depending on the rogue). Other leaders of alliances have gotten the same treatment. GGA and TPF leadership both enjoyed a period of time as trendy rogue targets.

Crying over one rogue just shows an irrational love of score. Take the rogue down, spy the nukes away and deal with it. Your alliance has 64 nations and an average NS of 50k. The fact you're crying over one rogue says bad things about your military capabilities.

[Aeternos Astramora]

[quote name='CRex of Gulo Gulo' timestamp='1283214987' post='2436323']Suck it up. The various Emperors of Pacifica have eaten more nukes than anyone else on Bob due to various grudges that date back years or simply because nuking Ivan when you raged out was trendy (for a mixture of IC or OOC reasons depending on the rogue). Other leaders of alliances have gotten the same treatment. GGA and TPF leadership both enjoyed a period of time as trendy rogue targets.

Crying over one rogue just shows an irrational love of score. Take the rogue down, spy the nukes away and deal with it. Your alliance has 64 nations and an average NS of 50k. The fact you're crying over one rogue says bad things about your military capabilities.[/quote]
Again, please take your inane ramblings elsewhere. This thread is about the rules I put forward, not about this specific case. It would be incredibly easy to dismantle your stupidity, but not worth it and would only drag the topic further off-topic. The very fact that I'm not "crying over one rogue" and am, in fact, trying to talk about the MAIN POINTS OF THE OP disprove your very argument.

Back on-topic people.

Edited August 31, 2010 by Aeternos Astramora

[CRexx]

Hit a nerve we have.

[Salmacis]

Ohh caps are coming :v

[Aeternos Astramora]

[quote name='CRex of Gulo Gulo' timestamp='1283215449' post='2436333']
Hit a nerve we have.
[/quote]
More like "Not posting about the main topic, you are."

If you're going to post in this thread, please make it about the proposed rules and not about this specific rogue. The rogue is only one of many possible examples out there. Which specific example I used is totally irrelevant.

Now, after a full page of off-topic-ness, will there be an on-topic post? (Edit: I see Salmacis pre-sniped my post, proving that the answer was "no" before I even finished typing it. Way to go... ).

Edited August 31, 2010 by Aeternos Astramora

[Bavaricar]

The angst and wasted alliance operations time put forth by the OP is humorous to someone like me.

Has anyone ever thought of actually talking to a "rogue" instead of wasting alliance resources trying to keep them out of peacemode?

Most rogues usually have a reason that can be talked through. Try talking to one, you might surprise yourself. Not that I have any experience with this sort of thing or anything...

[Aeternos Astramora]

[quote name='Bavaricar' timestamp='1283216435' post='2436361']The angst and wasted alliance operations time put forth by the OP is humorous to someone like me.

Has anyone ever thought of actually talking to a "rogue" instead of wasting alliance resources trying to keep them out of peacemode?

Most rogues usually have a reason that can be talked through. Try talking to one, you might surprise yourself. Not that I have any experience with this sort of thing or anything... [/quote]
Thanks for actually talking about the OP.

If talking to a rogue helps, then do it. However, I'm guessing it usually won't, although the times it does work would be valuable. I suppose I implicitly assumed that attempted diplomacy had already failed when making this thread, in which the OP stands.

[Shakira]

[quote name='Derwood1' timestamp='1283203913' post='2436119']
Damn that was the target Timmehhh was trying to get me to join him on.......Think of all the free tech, land and Otter angst I missed out on

Yeah those FOK guys are pretty fast
[/quote]
Wouldn't be the first time Timmehhh set people up with targets with interesting results..

[Augustus Autumn]

While well-intentioned and well-reasoned, the main failure of the effort in the OP will be that there are a large number of national rulers within the 'verse who either 1) enjoy warring on unalligned nations and to hell with whatever else is going on or 2) love upsetting someone else's apple cart. As much as we'd all love to think that there is some sort of respectful undercurrent within the 'verse, there really isn't. If a rogue has decided to hit you and make the lives of you and yours more difficult, asking others to stay away is as likely to be accepted as you getting a message back which says "do something about it". Until there's a popular desire to decry rogues again you'll probably have to deal with failed stagger, interlopers and general shenanigans.

[Jens of the desert]

[quote]Do you approve of the two rules?[/quote]

No, and this game has already been ruined by too many rules and too much etiquette. Stop adding to our problem.