Gotta consider this a major win for those in charge who railed against how unhealthy it was when the two war alliances SOL and SOF had the gall to have the most members and be allied. Now that netting alliances have the luxury of having the most members and the admins making netgaining changes and tweaks for their benefit every other set - maybe we can start to seriously look at making additions that would make that other aspect (shhh don't mention war) of the game more challenging/enjoyable.

Here's to hoping.

it is already easy for warring alliances to attack and kill netting alliances

what more do you want?

must be cos the netting alliances haven't got as many random bs beatings as they used too.

thats because the warlords are playing nice :)

But when was the last time a true netting tag was randomly FSed?

Alliances could benefit more from the changes if they didn't insist on fighting little kiddy wars against opponents half their size or during the first 10 days of the set. How are we supposed to make 2:1 fights or 800 turn fights exciting?

warring in the first 10 days blows

I actually fully agree with you there slagpit

lololol

Then the game needs to be changed to make warring an alternative effective netting strategy. If the winning side profits off winning a war to finish even higher in NW, then the line between "warring" and "netting" is blurred and they would become the same thing.

That doesn't even make any sense - warring, by its very nature, is a wasteful endeavor when it comes to resources. Why would you make players who are wasteful with their resources able to play on even ground with those who are conservative and not wasteful with their playing style when it comes to accumulating NW?

You guys are a buncha fluffing whiners - if you want to compete in NW, try netting instead of warring. Otherwise, stick to the measurements that are in place for fighters, and quit crying already.

or you could make it more worthwhile but not AS worthwhile as netting purely which satisfies everyone.

wars throughout history have been fought to steal or protect resources, wealth..or nw in this instance. not to disagree with now‹3 but i hope you know what i mean

Braden - True, but the act itself is a wasteful one, not a productive one. When I think of a war in EE/Earth terms, I think of it in terms of several sets, each set being an individual battle.

I actually am in favor of the land grabbing formulas being relaxed a little bit in favor of the grabber. Realistically, they probably work pretty well, but from an instant gratification standpoint (which, let's be honest, retains players to some extent) they leave a little bit to be desired. I really miss 30k acre grabs :-(

war!

When LCN FSed iMag OOP mostly by farming them, LCN had like half of the top 10 land countries in the game when SOL FSed them. It can be done...

Look at LaF last reset.

I don't agree with Nowie too often...but he is spot on right here.

some netting alliance gained members because some member decided to text everyone on his phone list from 12 years ago.

not because whether that alliance is netting or not, it's because it's that alliance.

This is a by-product of a game that doesn't set any parameters for clan warfare. War should be banned in the embryonic stages of a reset - I agree it's stupid. So code it so that clans need to actually declare war on each other instead of war being a side quest or pointless exercise in a Wild West type of environment. Reward activity, create a ranking system. Surely you see that making the war component of EE something that can grow the player base instead of diminishing it is an exercise that is worth getting out of the netgain-centric bubble we are currently in.

Why don't you appoint a few war-oriented players in the closed circle of admins?

Remove the restriction on dropping acres for war-declared clans.

Give more war oriented bonuses.

Give clans a 'stance' option - defensive or offensive.

Give at-war restarts a restart bonus.

Promote the achievements of war-active players like good netgainers are promoted.

Create a boxing ranking style system where the champion alliance may be challenged for the war title instead of leaving it to stupidly biased AT rankings.

Allow attacks to grant resources for at-war clans/countries.

.. I could list 30 things that would make this game really kick ass and make it easier for war alliances to recruit and keep people interested in EE. As it is, most veterans are universal in saying that war in EE has gotten so bad that the only reason they hang around is loyalty to their clan-mates. Maybe that is the goal?

There are no measurements for warring. That's kind of the point.

I have no idea what to make of that post. Do warstats not exist? Are they somehow not relevant since they aren't implemented to your liking in-game?

Netting and warring have always balanced each other. If all you do is war, people won't be very good at netting, which ultimately hurts your ability to war. If all you do is net, people won't be very good at warring, which ultimately hurts your ability to net.

If you don't understand this dichotomy, maybe you should try a different game, since it's been at work here since the beginning. What you're proposing is changing the game entirely to suit your individual vision.

I would like to see taking as a viable means of netgaining - like dividing the assets of dead countries among the countries that hit them in the 24 hours before they died, ps's and ss's bringing pop, gs's food and population ...

Me too! (although the admins have some borderline solid reasons why that might not be the best idea) =S

At the same time, I'd like to see killing made more difficult. Walling is one of the fun elements of war (and a great equalizer), but 7 second kills take it away.

A country can't die in 7 seconds unless it is completely unprepared for war. Pacting, political maneuvering, preparation, and alertness (clan X stopped retalling, are they saving turns?) can each prevent 7 second kills from happening.

Not sure, when was the last time SOL attacked someone?

if your enemy has enough people on and is willing to over send, 7 seconds can be done no matter how well you prep. 7 seconds is not enough to time to react unless you get lucky.

Yes, but is that sustainable in an FS? What stops an alliance from alerting vulnerable people before they're hit once an FS starts?

A blindside will always be just that, and can never be coded out of the game. But don't take the element of preparation and coordination completely out of the game by nerfing attacks. Active defense is a meaningful way for an alliance to distinguish themselves, and that shouldn't be taken away.

we seem to be in complete agreement.

To address dagga's initial comment, war clans by definition need to fight other clans. Ideally, this will be other war clans or war-prepped netting clans. When SOL/SOF were allied, arguable the largest opposing war clan was iMagNum. The pair could field as many countries as 3-5 netting clans, and would still have the advantage of less coordination needed.

However, now the situation in general has reversed the conditions of the server are not inverted as well. With SoF and SOL not allies, they have a warring clan of near size and skill to square off with. With Evo and LaF as the largest two clans, there is no one dominate coalition on the server. Unless you count SoF/MD/LCN/etc, but such a coalition would be roughly an even matched by whatever mixture of allies SOL could scrape together.

Competition to see who's the best is much preferable, to me at least, as compared to domination through brute numbers. If we have a situation where the top 2 netting clans are winning the Triple Crown and second place across the board (Members, ANW, TNW) then you'd have a situation of netting dominance similar to the warring dominance of SoF/SoL.

Slagpit was War Head in IX.

IX were one of the best war alliances ever. Who else would you like to appoint as a war leader? Yourself?

lululul

Uber - he just likes to whine. No requirements on it actually being logical...

Thanks Snaw - I <3 j00 too! :-)

UBer Bu - you're biased as hell and are making no attempt to see the real issues here. You're being lazy, try harder.

The problems that are espoused by 'netters' when the game is in a period of war-clan based dominance (every so often) is that they get dragged into wars they don't want to be a part of etc etc.. Then their representatives bleat about how bad for the game it is, poor people just trying to net, members leaving because they're frustrated blah blah.. Wars have little context inside of the game because there is nothing formalized. War decs are done on AT, war stats are made by external sites, there are no War Power rankings ingame, there are no clan-wide war bonuses or options by tag admins, there is no criteria to 'win' a war. War has been left to rot, leaving the waging of it incumbent on alliances to do whatever they please. This leads to problems when the alliances playing the game to the two formalized netting rankings (ANW, TNW) get hit. The goal here should be one and the same. Give war some criteria to win or be ranked and all the problems of war having no ingame relevance will fade away.

This is an opportune time for the three netgaining oriented guys running the game (qz - EVO, slagpit - EVO, Pang - LaF, yes he is still a LaF guy) could bring in someone who gives a different perpective to make some changes that would push this game to new heights.

I refuse

i just think itd be cool to have random civilians slaughtered

"30 people died for shoppin at walmart"

"45 teens were brutally beaten, stripped naked and left hanging in a polar bear cave for not pulling thier pants up"

"15 people were blown up for declaring themselves democrats"

We bring plenty of war experience to review/consult on mechanic changes. We have many war-focused individuals on staff who are consulted for changes and, as anoniem noted, there is plenty of war experience at the admin level. I'm sorry if you don't agree with that, but could you drop this 'admins hate war people' campaign, Kanye?

Imag keeps trying to pull off a war that is not at 10days....but the rest of the kiddies won't allow it!!

Also Dagga.....you think too much. And when you think...it is bad. Stop it now.

lol pang

Galleri come find me!

hide n go seek!!

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
GO GO GO GO!!!

I'm not saying admins hate war people - don't put words in peoples mouths.

What I am saying is that this game needs to focus some attention on improving the war feature. Doing so would have multiple benefits for the game, one of which would be making it much easier to retain players.

What I am saying is your abject failure and neglect in this area will come back to bite you on the ass if you're not careful. Ask any veteran if war in this game is worse than ever before and I'm sure the response might surprise you.

I think clan based war rankings might actually inspire some people to compete in certain war-oriented alliances...

I've complained about how big LaF is, but I complain about just about everything.

I agree on a few of the points made by dagga, if we had ingame rankings for war alliances, formal war declarations, spread of resourses of the killed countries, etc, things would be better.

However, I do see that the admins are trying to come up with a way to rank war effort, and is hard to come up with one that would please everyone and be balanced.

But I think we are focusing in the wrong things!

Formalice Clan War Declarations Ingame.

Add Ingame War Stats.
Save alliance/tag records ingame (not just the netting ones), like Total hits done, average hits per set, total pop killed, total missiles shoot, total defenses, average defense hits per set and total resourses looted.

That way clans will be added ingame, and they will have several rankings

For example

Alliance name/most used tag name/Total networth Rank/Average net rank/ Total hits rank/average hits per set/Total pop killed/Total missiles/Total defenses/average defenses/resourses looted durring war

Evolution/EVO/#1/#1/#12/#14/#19/#24/#19/#21/#17
Soldiers of Liberty/SoL/#11/#18/#1/#1/#2/#1/#2/#4/#4
Paradim/PDMy/#5/#10/#9/#14/#4/#11/#8/#7/#11

And only land grabs on formal wars count towards the resourses looted durring war... And writing all that from a phone sucks so be thankful.

What's the point in war rankings anyway? This is the usual trend.

Alliance A FSes Alliance B (1/3 of alliance A's membership)
Alliance B loses
Alliance A FSes Alliance C (1/3 of alliance A's membership)
Alliance C loses
And so on and so forth


hmmmm real skillz to pay the billz there

Well having Rankings will create more friction and will spice the game more.

Also I was thinking the formal war declaration would work like this

Clan A declares on Clan B

Only hits done 24 hours after the war declaration count to war rankings or when defensive clan aknowledges the war status.

That way we could separate the rankings to Hits done in a set, and hits done durring war, to with only the attacks done durring war could count towards the war rankings.

anoniem displays the typical Evo view (shared by admins currently). That is, make alliance server the Primary Server with tag protection so you can farm untaggeds.

Cool.

How do you know what the admins view is? You just post a load of crap.

Dagga, i'll agree with you on some aspects. More ingame war options would be nice and changes to the warring system are being worked on.
but you have to remember that this game is not run by a professional company, but by private people with their RLs to take care of and many of the suggestions you posted take a lot of time.

and i'd also like you to stfu in regards to the admins and their "one sided view". you got no clue whatsoever whats going on behind the scenes and even though we mods cant really decide anything we're in the loop of everything. the admins set up a very transparent system and we're able to comment on every aspect of the game. we also have mods from various servers and alliances on the team, so i know when i say that no one-sides development is being done.
your anti-admin tirades hurt the game more than it helps and i'm getting sick of wasting my time with people like you who are totally clueless but act as if they know everything.

so yeah, thaty my 2 cents

Who the fluff cares if SOF is better at warring against NA. I just want to compare war clan vs war clan like you noobs compare Evo vs LaF every set.

In that case,

War Rankings:
1) EVERYONE
2) IMAG

Happy? :P