Verified:

Cerberus Game profile

Member
EE Patron
3849

Feb 28th 2020, 15:50:40

168 tagged in Alliance. At one time, RAGE had more than 500 all by themselves. It looks like the most hardcore players have stuck around, and all the casual players have left. How to get them back again... That's what we need to do, start a campaign to bring life back to the game again.
I don't need anger management, people need to stop pissing me off!

Red X Game profile

Game Moderator
Primary, Express & Team
4935

Feb 28th 2020, 16:15:31

That is what they are working on. A email was suppose to go out around or after Christmas. I did not receive it, but it may have went out. I do not check my email a lot these days. You are right though, but the issue is its a text based game. People are not crazy to play them anymore. I would love for this game to grow to the size it use to be.
My attitude is that of a Hulk smash
Mixed with Tony Montana snortin' bags of his coke stash
http://nbkffa.ghqnet.com

ninong Game profile

Member
1575

Feb 28th 2020, 16:28:59

wow this is news to me
ninong, formerly Johnny Demonic
IX

Chevs

Member
2061

Feb 28th 2020, 16:57:02

Originally posted by ninong:
wow this is news to me



LOL 10/10
SOF Head Of Poop
2019-04-03 21:40:26 PS the stinky deyicks (#599) Beryl Houston (#360) LaF 30638A (43783A)
En4cer: Chevs... u would have beaten me by more than 100m

Red X Game profile

Game Moderator
Primary, Express & Team
4935

Feb 28th 2020, 18:26:28

Welcome back chevs
My attitude is that of a Hulk smash
Mixed with Tony Montana snortin' bags of his coke stash
http://nbkffa.ghqnet.com

KoHeartsGPA Game profile

Member
EE Patron
29,488

Feb 28th 2020, 18:27:57

Hey yay Chevs is back!
Mess with me you better kill me, or I'll just take your pride & joy and jack it up
(•_•)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6VRMGTwU4I
-=TSO~DKnights~ICD~XI~LaF=-

S.F. Giants 2010, 2012, 2014 World Series Champions, fluff YEAH!

Chevs

Member
2061

Feb 28th 2020, 18:37:53

i will always be here in your hearts
SOF Head Of Poop
2019-04-03 21:40:26 PS the stinky deyicks (#599) Beryl Houston (#360) LaF 30638A (43783A)
En4cer: Chevs... u would have beaten me by more than 100m

Red X Game profile

Game Moderator
Primary, Express & Team
4935

Feb 28th 2020, 18:39:47

Originally posted by Chevs:
i will always be here in your hearts


and on our fluffs, please don't forget that you will always be here on our fluffs.


ty

<3
My attitude is that of a Hulk smash
Mixed with Tony Montana snortin' bags of his coke stash
http://nbkffa.ghqnet.com

Rasp Game profile

Member
948

Feb 28th 2020, 20:43:14

Originally posted by Cerberus:
168 tagged in Alliance. At one time, RAGE had more than 500 all by themselves. It looks like the most hardcore players have stuck around, and all the casual players have left. How to get them back again... That's what we need to do, start a campaign to bring life back to the game again.


didn't you leave? quit?
[16:18:00] znc-rasp: We can kill bushido, but not bushifo, zack, moriarty, ghost rider, or darkling
[16:18:07] Req: Is that all the same person?
[16:18:12] symba: yea
[16:18:25] mob: my kids are like dad why are you laughing so much

Marshal Game profile

Member
32,589

Feb 28th 2020, 20:49:07

game has been dying past 20 years but still exists.
Patience: Yep, I'm with ELK and Marshal.

ELKronos: Patty is more hairy.

Gallery: K at least I am to my expectations now.

LadyGrizz boobies is fine

NOW3P: Morwen is a much harsher mistress than boredom....

galleri Game profile

Game Moderator
Primary, Express, Tourney, & FFA
13,960

Feb 28th 2020, 23:30:51

Normally this is a thread that mccuban posts. Now I am wondering if cerberus = mccuban LOLOL


https://gyazo.com/...b3bb28dddf908cdbcfd162513

Kahuna: Ya you just wrote the fkn equation, not helping me at all. Lol n I hated algebra.

braden Game profile

Member
11,480

Feb 28th 2020, 23:35:48

Rage at 500 was spam not quality.
How many were rage run multi? 300?

The game used to be great! Let's please get lc back?

Sov Game profile

Member
2462

Feb 29th 2020, 0:29:17

The game has more players this set than the same set last year.

Marshal Game profile

Member
32,589

Feb 29th 2020, 11:55:22

Originally posted by braden:
Let's please get lc back?


if you mean lemon chiffon then you need necromantic skills.
Patience: Yep, I'm with ELK and Marshal.

ELKronos: Patty is more hairy.

Gallery: K at least I am to my expectations now.

LadyGrizz boobies is fine

NOW3P: Morwen is a much harsher mistress than boredom....

Suicidal Game profile

Member
2215

Feb 29th 2020, 13:47:32

Originally posted by Sov:
The game has more players this set than the same set last year.


Warring sets tend to being back members and increase numbers....
Netting is like watching flies have sex or watching paint dry.... nobody wants to see that....

Growing this game, with advantage towards netters, has the same odds as WeeZy getting pregnant and having a snowflakes baby.....they have been trying for years but, IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN

Gerdler Game profile

Forum Moderator
5077

Feb 29th 2020, 14:29:54

Out of the last 10 game changes, 9 have had the intended or unintended effect of screwing netters.

Spal penalty changes, NW modifier for grabs changed, NW modifier to special attacks, bots added(hypercharged all suicides), bots increased(megahyperchaged all suicides), etc etc.

Two sets before last I took something like 25-35 effective turns of a suicider costing me well over 400m NW each time... Suicides have never been so powerful in EE history as they were in the 250 bot era with all those changes that were done from 2012-2014 empowering them. One changeset a limiter to the damage was introduced and you go "all changes are in favor of netters". Its epic how fast you forget.
Remember also I was against this changeset that we got. It works decently tho.

Sometimes I just wish you morons got your way and all the bots were removed so I could hear you all complain of how LaF farms you into permanent retirement one by one.

Gerdler Game profile

Forum Moderator
5077

Feb 29th 2020, 15:05:29

Originally posted by Suicidal:

Warring sets tend to being back members and increase numbers....

Lowest number of players in the last 7 sets this set when a big server war is announced.

As blind as you are, surely you can't avoid seeing the big ugly lie you just told.

Its not ONLY war that makes players play this game.
Some people want to war 100% of the time, some wanna war 85% the time, some 15% of the time and some 0% of the time. Some people play to war and to die on a Sunday.
The game retains more of its players if most of them get to play approximatly the way they intended and their lives permit. War is impossible unless you are in one of the goldilocks time-zones or if you are a very dedicated player, so its only about 50-70 players who can do that every reset and they have mostly gone to alliances that do war every set and have no problem finding a war each and every single bloody set, no matter what or who wants to stand in their way.

The players who wanted to net have mostly gone to netting alliances who net at everyone elses pleasure.

There is a huge imbalance here and you are on the side with the permanent benefit. You recognice and defend it and, being the hypocrite you are, suggest bias towards netters whenever anyone attempts to bring it to discussion.
It is in fact so important to you that this discrepancy percists that you argue against solutions that would not affect warring negatively to keep it, ultimatly leading to a change that does affect warring negatively, which you now complain about. gg no re!

Edited By: Gerdler on Feb 29th 2020, 15:08:15

mazooka Game profile

Member
454

Feb 29th 2020, 16:46:25

Originally posted by Gerdler:
Originally posted by Suicidal:

Warring sets tend to being back members and increase numbers....

Lowest number of players in the last 7 sets this set when a big server war is announced.

As blind as you are, surely you can't avoid seeing the big ugly lie you just told.

Its not ONLY war that makes players play this game.
Some people want to war 100% of the time, some wanna war 85% the time, some 15% of the time and some 0% of the time. Some people play to war and to die on a Sunday.
The game retains more of its players if most of them get to play approximatly the way they intended and their lives permit. War is impossible unless you are in one of the goldilocks time-zones or if you are a very dedicated player, so its only about 50-70 players who can do that every reset and they have mostly gone to alliances that do war every set and have no problem finding a war each and every single bloody set, no matter what or who wants to stand in their way.

The players who wanted to net have mostly gone to netting alliances who net at everyone elses pleasure.

There is a huge imbalance here and you are on the side with the permanent benefit. You recognice and defend it and, being the hypocrite you are, suggest bias towards netters whenever anyone attempts to bring it to discussion.
It is in fact so important to you that this discrepancy percists that you argue against solutions that would not affect warring negatively to keep it, ultimatly leading to a change that does affect warring negatively, which you now complain about. gg no re!


Outstanding post gerdler! Both of your posts actually. I hope they are read and understood.

Drow Game profile

Member
1592

Mar 1st 2020, 1:03:03

I disagree that 9 out fo the last 10 changes have damaged netters gerdler. only hacve to look at the what 1 billion NW final score of the top player last set?
the fact that 100 million wasn't even enough to net top 50?
100 mil used to be a target that only the very best netters, working their arses off, and using FA chains, could hit. now even a mediocre netter such as myself can hit it. That's the game being tuned to favour netgainers, plain and simple.
Now you can make claims about "arbitrary numbers and values" all you want, but the facts stand on their own, that the numbers have gotten bigger as the game has been changed to benefit those netgaining. Yes, it increases the rsik from suiciders, but that is very definitely an unintended side effect of those changes.

The issue with the game dying has more to do with the remaining playerbase, and the age of the game, and the predominance of certain tactics, than it does with any bias towards netting or warring. The casual players had basically all left when I retired 5 years ago, and it's the dedicated vets who have kept the game limping along. Now the vets are getting burned out, bored, done, having RL to attend to, and the numbers die harder and harder, and I don't think anything is going to change on that front.

Retired Earth type.

Original Skywise L Game profile

Member
594

Mar 1st 2020, 1:55:25

A lot has to do with the time of year. I'm barely playing, and I like the game regardless.
Skywise

Gerdler Game profile

Forum Moderator
5077

Mar 1st 2020, 1:59:18

Originally posted by Drow:
I disagree that 9 out fo the last 10 changes have damaged netters gerdler. only hacve to look at the what 1 billion NW final score of the top player last set?
the fact that 100 million wasn't even enough to net top 50?
100 mil used to be a target that only the very best netters, working their arses off, and using FA chains, could hit. now even a mediocre netter such as myself can hit it. That's the game being tuned to favour netgainers, plain and simple.
Now you can make claims about "arbitrary numbers and values" all you want, but the facts stand on their own, that the numbers have gotten bigger as the game has been changed to benefit those netgaining. Yes, it increases the rsik from suiciders, but that is very definitely an unintended side effect of those changes.

The issue with the game dying has more to do with the remaining playerbase, and the age of the game, and the predominance of certain tactics, than it does with any bias towards netting or warring. The casual players had basically all left when I retired 5 years ago, and it's the dedicated vets who have kept the game limping along. Now the vets are getting burned out, bored, done, having RL to attend to, and the numbers die harder and harder, and I don't think anything is going to change on that front.

You just have to get used to the new numbers.

Either way I strongly oppose the premise that all changes that increase the NWs are inherently good for netting/good for netters or vice versa.
Thats like saying that if they changed the GS, BR and AB attacks so that it took only one to kill a country it would be good for warring. It would certainly be bad for warring.

You have a very simplistic view on the game. I advise you broaden it. Participate in a real war once, and try to master netgaining once. Maybe your eyes will open.

The bots have had many changes, most recently their defences were increased massively, which reduced NWs and favored netting, because stronger grabbers will now distinguish themselves from average grabbers, such as happened last set:

1 Free Crimea too (#373) 120 $1,020,919,469 H LaF = 5 DH(Defence held SS/PS)
2 Myke Hunt Hurtz (#6) Game profile 24 $709,272,872 HG LaF = 11 DH
3 Advocate of Freedom (#396) 24 $687,979,361 HG LaF = 15 DH
4 nervous neon names narcs neuroma (#20) 14,555 $646,000,000 HG MONSTERS = 27 DH
5 We Are the Singularity (#432) 213 $604,280,086 H LaF = 30 DH

https://www.eestats.com/alliance/oldranks/1960

This is quite a perfect example. Other factors certainly play an important role as well but the number of DHs reflect very well the effort put into grabbing. Effort also translates to gains in other areas. But the DHs would have looked completely different before the increase of bot defences.
Which is my point; higher bot defence leads to the best netter winning. Therefore, the change is good for netting despite obviously lowering the NWs across the board.

The overall trend tho from the changes back in 2012-2014 and the changes made since the bot era is that a warring country and a netting country will look increasingly different. This is something warring people seem to oppose on a broad front. Netters(me in particular), completely agree with the warring people in this, but netters have no choice, if you want to play for top ranks you have to play without spies or much defence or the race is lost.
-Clan GDI was suggested to help change that, but it was broadly opposed by a lot of people, I was always for it. (favors netting despite obviously lowering NWs)
-Bot retals may be a step towards fixing it, another change suggestion I'm for (that imo favors netting despite obviously lowering NWs)

I have argued for fewer bots(which with current changeset I no longer think is neccessary), I have argued for greatly reducing the amount of units created by burning oil or alternatively changing the oil burning mechanism. These are all suggestions that would noticeably reduce the NWs in 1a across the board. And I suggested them for no other reason than to create a better netting environment in 1a. So if implemented the NWs would be reduced by changes that are for netters. This is not unique in any way.

Edited By: Gerdler on Mar 1st 2020, 2:03:38
See Original Post

Primeval Game profile

Game Moderator
Mod Boss
3037

Mar 1st 2020, 2:20:20

Remove spies and military units and replace with runes and rainbows.

Suicidal Game profile

Member
2215

Mar 1st 2020, 3:37:36

Originally posted by Gerdler:
Originally posted by Suicidal:

Warring sets tend to being back members and increase numbers....

Lowest number of players in the last 7 sets this set when a big server war is announced.

As blind as you are, surely you can't avoid seeing the big ugly lie you just told.

Its not ONLY war that makes players play this game.
Some people want to war 100% of the time, some wanna war 85% the time, some 15% of the time and some 0% of the time. Some people play to war and to die on a Sunday.
The game retains more of its players if most of them get to play approximatly the way they intended and their lives permit. War is impossible unless you are in one of the goldilocks time-zones or if you are a very dedicated player, so its only about 50-70 players who can do that every reset and they have mostly gone to alliances that do war every set and have no problem finding a war each and every single bloody set, no matter what or who wants to stand in their way.

The players who wanted to net have mostly gone to netting alliances who net at everyone elses pleasure.

There is a huge imbalance here and you are on the side with the permanent benefit. You recognice and defend it and, being the hypocrite you are, suggest bias towards netters whenever anyone attempts to bring it to discussion.
It is in fact so important to you that this discrepancy percists that you argue against solutions that would not affect warring negatively to keep it, ultimatly leading to a change that does affect warring negatively, which you now complain about. gg no re!



Hey snowflake, try to keep up.....prearranged wars are as dumb as you are....

BROmanceNZ

Member
420

Mar 1st 2020, 11:28:46

This might be super simple or super stupid, but would having a dedicated phone app for EE help?

I try to play on my lappy most of the time but I only really use it when I’m working; so I’m either playing during my lunch break at work, or when I’m working from home.

I’ve done a destock on my phone and that sucks balls. I can run turns on my phone but it’s a bit clunky.

Red X Game profile

Game Moderator
Primary, Express & Team
4935

Mar 1st 2020, 12:50:23

I do hate prearranged wars with a passion. That's why I kinda stopped caring about 1a
My attitude is that of a Hulk smash
Mixed with Tony Montana snortin' bags of his coke stash
http://nbkffa.ghqnet.com

Requiem Game profile

Member
EE Patron
9057

Mar 1st 2020, 14:36:18

The real answer is more pang bucks. If we keep buying them he will keep working (for them free cups of coffee).

Gerdler Game profile

Forum Moderator
5077

Mar 1st 2020, 14:43:35

The only alternative to prearranged wars the last 3 years has been to FS LaF which costs us 10+ members and then we retaliate and OOP FS the aggressor the next set and make 10-20 of their players leave the game.

Someone FSed early on a prearranged war once a year and a half ago or so. Apart from that a tag that was supposed to take part in a prearraged war took it upon themselves to FS their would be allies prior to the war and thereby made the war really hard to rebalance.

So what non-prearranged wars do you suggest?

SuperFly Game profile

Member
5063

Mar 1st 2020, 15:15:11

I blame Corona virus. I don’t feel safe going to my local Internet cafe and running my 12 countries. I am sure that others feel the same way.

Requiem Game profile

Member
EE Patron
9057

Mar 1st 2020, 15:32:01

Arranged wars arnt actually that bad.

First of all even many people in war clans do not want to dedicate their time for an unexpected FS because we are all adults now with kids, wives and jobs. It is much more convenient to say "Hey the FS is at this day". In addition to that the FS is actually really fun to know when to be on and play; the greatest enjoyment in war is walling. Everyone is on, we all have pretty great banter and its rather enjoyable.

This is in juxtaposition to "Oh fluff we got FSd and I died, well there goes my 20 days of game play for nothing I guess Ill just peace out for the rest of the set". I do not see how that is enjoyable game play.

My suspicion is people who really say that they dislike arranged wars just want to blindside someone (usually netters) because they feel superior fighting with an advantage.

Who the fluff wants to be on guard all set for a potential FS**? I certainly do not.

**Besides retired people with nothing but free time to sit in front of their computer.

Edited By: Requiem on Mar 1st 2020, 15:47:19

Suicidal Game profile

Member
2215

Mar 1st 2020, 16:04:06

Originally posted by Gerdler:
The only alternative to prearranged wars the last 3 years has been to FS LaF which costs us 10+ members and then we retaliate and OOP FS the aggressor the next set and make 10-20 of their players leave the game.

Someone FSed early on a prearranged war once a year and a half ago or so. Apart from that a tag that was supposed to take part in a prearraged war took it upon themselves to FS their would be allies prior to the war and thereby made the war really hard to rebalance.

So what non-prearranged wars do you suggest?


I suggest SOL and SOF FS LAF and let others pick a side.....then no whiny crap carries over to the next set

chapman951 Game profile

Member
208

Mar 1st 2020, 16:13:38

#427 = cheat0r

TheLegion Game profile

Member
EE Patron
168

Mar 1st 2020, 17:30:08

Originally posted by Requiem:
Arranged wars arnt actually that bad.

First of all even many people in war clans do not want to dedicate their time for an unexpected FS because we are all adults now with kids, wives and jobs. It is much more convenient to say "Hey the FS is at this day". In addition to that the FS is actually really fun to know when to be on and play; the greatest enjoyment in war is walling. Everyone is on, we all have pretty great banter and its rather enjoyable.

This is in juxtaposition to "Oh fluff we got FSd and I died, well there goes my 20 days of game play for nothing I guess Ill just peace out for the rest of the set". I do not see how that is enjoyable game play.

My suspicion is people who really say that they dislike arranged wars just want to blindside someone (usually netters) because they feel superior fighting with an advantage.

Who the fluff wants to be on guard all set for a potential FS**? I certainly do not.

**Besides retired people with nothing but free time to sit in front of their computer.


I resent that
I mean these folks cry about the game but can't even forum correctly.
- galleri

trolls be trolling
- KoHeartsGPA

I'd rather have just the bad flu than the bad flu and migrants, so..
- braden

Requiem Game profile

Member
EE Patron
9057

Mar 1st 2020, 20:21:09

My apologies lol

Ruthie

Member
2584

Mar 1st 2020, 20:27:22

i see some people i recognize on the boards. glad to see familiar faces are still around :)
~Ruthless~
Ragnaroks EEVIL Lady

Marshal Game profile

Member
32,589

Mar 1st 2020, 20:44:28

Originally posted by Suicidal:

I suggest SOL and SOF FS LAF and let others pick a side.....then no whiny crap carries over to the next set


and tag to 2 tags with ~equal number of members?
Patience: Yep, I'm with ELK and Marshal.

ELKronos: Patty is more hairy.

Gallery: K at least I am to my expectations now.

LadyGrizz boobies is fine

NOW3P: Morwen is a much harsher mistress than boredom....

Drow Game profile

Member
1592

Mar 3rd 2020, 23:08:16

Originally posted by Gerdler:
Originally posted by Drow:
I disagree that 9 out fo the last 10 changes have damaged netters gerdler. only hacve to look at the what 1 billion NW final score of the top player last set?
the fact that 100 million wasn't even enough to net top 50?
100 mil used to be a target that only the very best netters, working their arses off, and using FA chains, could hit. now even a mediocre netter such as myself can hit it. That's the game being tuned to favour netgainers, plain and simple.
Now you can make claims about "arbitrary numbers and values" all you want, but the facts stand on their own, that the numbers have gotten bigger as the game has been changed to benefit those netgaining. Yes, it increases the rsik from suiciders, but that is very definitely an unintended side effect of those changes.

The issue with the game dying has more to do with the remaining playerbase, and the age of the game, and the predominance of certain tactics, than it does with any bias towards netting or warring. The casual players had basically all left when I retired 5 years ago, and it's the dedicated vets who have kept the game limping along. Now the vets are getting burned out, bored, done, having RL to attend to, and the numbers die harder and harder, and I don't think anything is going to change on that front.

You just have to get used to the new numbers.

Either way I strongly oppose the premise that all changes that increase the NWs are inherently good for netting/good for netters or vice versa.
Thats like saying that if they changed the GS, BR and AB attacks so that it took only one to kill a country it would be good for warring. It would certainly be bad for warring.

You have a very simplistic view on the game. I advise you broaden it. Participate in a real war once, and try to master netgaining once. Maybe your eyes will open.

The bots have had many changes, most recently their defences were increased massively, which reduced NWs and favored netting, because stronger grabbers will now distinguish themselves from average grabbers, such as happened last set:

1 Free Crimea too (#373) 120 $1,020,919,469 H LaF = 5 DH(Defence held SS/PS)
2 Myke Hunt Hurtz (#6) Game profile 24 $709,272,872 HG LaF = 11 DH
3 Advocate of Freedom (#396) 24 $687,979,361 HG LaF = 15 DH
4 nervous neon names narcs neuroma (#20) 14,555 $646,000,000 HG MONSTERS = 27 DH
5 We Are the Singularity (#432) 213 $604,280,086 H LaF = 30 DH

https://www.eestats.com/alliance/oldranks/1960

This is quite a perfect example. Other factors certainly play an important role as well but the number of DHs reflect very well the effort put into grabbing. Effort also translates to gains in other areas. But the DHs would have looked completely different before the increase of bot defences.
Which is my point; higher bot defence leads to the best netter winning. Therefore, the change is good for netting despite obviously lowering the NWs across the board.

The overall trend tho from the changes back in 2012-2014 and the changes made since the bot era is that a warring country and a netting country will look increasingly different. This is something warring people seem to oppose on a broad front. Netters(me in particular), completely agree with the warring people in this, but netters have no choice, if you want to play for top ranks you have to play without spies or much defence or the race is lost.
-Clan GDI was suggested to help change that, but it was broadly opposed by a lot of people, I was always for it. (favors netting despite obviously lowering NWs)
-Bot retals may be a step towards fixing it, another change suggestion I'm for (that imo favors netting despite obviously lowering NWs)

I have argued for fewer bots(which with current changeset I no longer think is neccessary), I have argued for greatly reducing the amount of units created by burning oil or alternatively changing the oil burning mechanism. These are all suggestions that would noticeably reduce the NWs in 1a across the board. And I suggested them for no other reason than to create a better netting environment in 1a. So if implemented the NWs would be reduced by changes that are for netters. This is not unique in any way.


I've been retired for 5 years, but before that, I was a long running and playing vet. I've participated in full server wars, indeed, I was actually HoW for PDM for awhile, and a warchat runner for some time before that.
to say that anything that makes total NW's higher isn't in the best interests of netgaining is disingenuous at best. the whole point of netgaining is literally to finish with the highest possible country NW.
and if "bot defences being buffed massively" has reduced NW's across the board, then I'm the king of England. again, look at your top 20.
as for clan GDI, everyone was against it because it puts everyone in one of the tags in Clan GDI in a special sandbox where there is no risk whatsoever to them. that means, no risk of retals, no risk of losing NW in any way shape or form other than a marginally non optimal choice of strat, or slightly bad timing.
increase of bot defences MIGHT make a difference, but I doubt it personally.
This set, the final NW's will be down a little I would guess, but only because there is a server war, making that top 20 cutoff somewhat lower. possibly.
EDIT: Yes, a netgaining country is always going to look different to a war country, or wargaining country, because the aims are very different. for a netter, there's a trade off, brought on by risk, of defence vs costs. for a warrer, you want the military, because you're going to use it, but the military means that you'll never get a high finish. Without the risks, there's no trade off question. And again, with the constant crying by netters every time they get hit, and the instant "there's no point running any defence because you can always be broken argument" without recognising that, yes, even though you CAN be broken, having more defence means you are less likely to be picked as a target, as well as it actively costing the person targeting you more to actually break you, there becomes a point where the CAN break you stops being viable for the person grabbing.
We are never going to agree on this unfortunately, because you don't want to recognise that the changes have benefited netgaining, whether intentionally or not.

Edited By: Drow on Mar 3rd 2020, 23:17:30
See Original Post

Retired Earth type.

The Cloaked Game profile

Member
491

Mar 4th 2020, 0:01:37

I've always been a big fan of sending out a mass email that the game is ending and bring everyone back for the final set of the game.


then at the end, tell them you lied, and they should stick around cause of how much fun they had.

Gerdler Game profile

Forum Moderator
5077

Mar 4th 2020, 0:04:47

Originally posted by Drow:
to say that anything that makes total NW's higher isn't in the best interests of netgaining is disingenuous at best. the whole point of netgaining is literally to finish with the highest possible country NW.

You clearly never understood netting if this is your take on it. The purpose of netting is to finish at the highest RANK as possible. If Pang triples the NW of all military units it wont do anything to make netters game experience better.
Originally posted by Drow:

and if "bot defences being buffed massively" has reduced NW's across the board, then I'm the king of England. again, look at your top 20.

Fiftieth round: Feb 08, 2018 - Apr 10, 2018:
First set with 250 bots, the last 150 were introduced halfway so didnt have full effect. https://www.earthempires.com/alliance/50/ranks

Fifty-first round: Apr 10, 2018 - Jun 09, 2018
Only set with 250 low def bots all set. 4th highest t20 ever, 2nd highest t1 ever with LaF netting(high NWs are always harder to achieve with all of LaF netting).
https://www.earthempires.com/alliance/51/ranks

Fifty-second round: Jun 10, 2018 - Aug 09, 2018
Bot defences were raised massively mid-set here, so the early grabbing was excellent. Bots had a long shutdown during this set which made the server have less land than usually. Still the 2nd highest t20 NW ever and the highest t1 NW ever with all of LaF netting.
https://www.earthempires.com/alliance/52/ranks

9 sets have passed since then with varying amounts of wars and suicides but the bots have mostly all been on all set and the t20 NWs have on average been well lower during LaFs netting resets in that time than these two sets: 251m, 333m, 399m, 218m, 226m, 356m(with nerfed suicides).
Average T20 when LaF netgained in the higher bot def era: 297m
Average T20 in all sets in the higher bot def era: 246m
Average T20 with 250 low def bots: 374m

NWs are significantly lower across the board after the bot def increase of the 2018 summer - QED.
Originally posted by Drow:

as for clan GDI, everyone was against it because it puts everyone in one of the tags in Clan GDI in a special sandbox where there is no risk whatsoever to them. that means, no risk of retals, no risk of losing NW in any way shape or form other than a marginally non optimal choice of strat, or slightly bad timing.

The suggested clan GDI would offerer protection from all kinds of attacks at some cost provided you reached some defence values and had not attacked the player or the tag at all during the reset. There is nothing there about protection from retals. It would force netters to get defences if they wanted the protection.
Originally posted by Drow:

increase of bot defences MIGHT make a difference, but I doubt it personally.

Well now I've proved it so there you go
Originally posted by Drow:

EDIT: Yes, a netgaining country is always going to look different to a war country, or wargaining country, because the aims are very different.

Back in the day, and indeed in primary even today because you were grabbing players you would need defences from PS, AB, GS, Missile and harmful spy op retals. Some people called what they were doing "wargaining" and even the pure netters had to defend against everyone they farmed. therefore it was not a huge transition as it is today to change gears from netting to warring, and suicides were less powerful as well because of this. If I do the same now, I will get 300-400m NW instead of 1B NW. I was suicided 2 sets in a row before last and got 600m NW, so the losses from defending oneself are far greater than the losses from being suicided, which is silly. It is therefore impossible to win by defending oneself from suicides, and it is impossible to win when suicided, all of which is bad for netters ofc since suiciders decide the winner more often than does skill, and there was nothing to do about it til last set.

Edited By: Gerdler on Sep 9th 2023, 4:18:15

TheLegion Game profile

Member
EE Patron
168

Mar 4th 2020, 16:34:41

Originally posted by Drow:

I've been retired for 5 years, but before that, I was a long running and playing vet. I've participated in full server wars, indeed, I was actually HoW for PDM for awhile, and a warchat runner for some time before that.


Rude af too, you made me stop a werewolf game so we could start a wc.. it might have been someone else but you were HoW, so I'm blaming you
I mean these folks cry about the game but can't even forum correctly.
- galleri

trolls be trolling
- KoHeartsGPA

I'd rather have just the bad flu than the bad flu and migrants, so..
- braden

Kat Game profile

Member
668

Mar 4th 2020, 17:00:22

I actually agree that the point of netting is to max out your country with the highest possible nw. I think having a higher rank is just a happy side-effect to pushing the boundaries. I think, at least on some level, most netters agree with this. A person who ranks in the top 10 consistently or even the #1 always aims to be better than the previous set even if that means beating their own past country.

Each time new formulas and loop holes are created, it's from the netters who push what we all thought were limits. So, by all means, hamper the netters. Embrace the challenge. Let's see what else you smarty pants' come up with. ;)

Requiem Game profile

Member
EE Patron
9057

Mar 4th 2020, 18:56:44

Respect Drow for old times in PDM!