This resolution is enforcable by every **signed member against all alliances in game**, regardless of signing.


This resolution overrides any and ALL pacting in place without exceptions.


Extreme acts of war (which include kill runs, cripple runs, harmful spy ops and missile runs) may not occur prior to the beginning of the **21st** day of the set. Stray accidental hits are tolerated and recurring infractions will be dealt with harshly.


Countries/tags that participate in EAoWs will be killed by any or all of the alliances that have signed this pact. Participation from all tags signed is expected as it is in place to protect everyone.


The signed parties understand that breaking this pact will nullify ALL other pacts signed, including FDP, LDP and uNAPs.



-EAoW definition:

--10+ special attacks (non-missile) made, by 2+ countries, against any country within 24 hours

--10+ harmful spyops made by at least one country against any single country within 24 hours

--5+ landgrabs by any country on a single tag within 48 hours*

--5+ landgrabs by any tag on a single country within 48 hours*

--5+ missile attacks made, by 2 countries, against any country within 24 hours

* - mutual landtrading and retals are exempt from this definition


-If a set of attacks does not meet EAoW thresholds, then the matter will only be decided between the offender's alliance and the defender's alliance.

**-If a set of attacks does not meet the EAoW thresholds, but is deemed an intentional act of provocation against a signatory by a majority of the EWPP council, the pact may be invoked against the offending alliance.**


-If a set of attacks does meet an EAoW threshold but the parties are able to resolve the situation independently, this pact need not be invoked.

--In the case the offending alliance wishes to resolve the issue independently, as long as a fair offer is made in a timely manner, this resolution may not be invoked.

--Definition of a fair offer:

---Offending alliance detags and kills the suicider ASAP

---Offending alliance makes an offer within 48 hours, to pay fair reps by the formula below to the victim, and payment must take no more than 96 hours unless the victim allows for an extended window.

----Reps in terms of tanks. Accepted rates for reps are as follows: 300tpa first month. 1 tank=3 jets/turrets = 4 troops = $550. Reps for tech points lost will be $3300 per tech point in the first month.

-----If a special attack (other than NM, which is calculated as above) is used and reps are owed, then $60,000 per building is owed in the first month. Military lost will be returned with 10% extra. Stock lost will be returned with 10% extra as well.


-If a country or alliance commits an Extreme Act of War against another and there is no independent resolution, the offending alliance, as a result of this resolution, automatically declares war on all signatories of this resolution.


-If a signatory of this resolution believes a country or spam tag (definition below) is going to suicide on their or another alliance, they are allowed to declare their suspicion on AT up to 24 hours after a pre-emptive EAoW against the suspected suicider. If the suicider initiates hostilities, there is no need for such a declaration as the suicider, by attacking, would have violated the terms of this resolution.


-Definition of a spam tag:

--Any alliance without formal relations to another alliance in the game

--Any tag under 10 members by day 7 that has not played the previous set

--Excludes SoF, SoL, MD, LaF, RAGE, Evo, PDM, DK, TPA, ICN, LCN, Omega, MONSTERS, RIVAL, DANGER.

**PLEASE READ AND RE-READ THE DEFINITION ABOVE BEFORE YOU fluff ABOUT BEING CALLED A SPAM TAG**

After signing, this resolution is active for two sets until the end of the **Jun15-Jul15** set.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Short version: This pact prevents all early wars **against signatories** on the Alliance server for the next two sets. The only early war that should occur is when one alliance declares war on another (or at least commits an extreme act of war), all signatories of the pact declare war on the aggressor. **If two alliances mutally agree to an early war, this pact does not apply.** This does not include suiciders and untagged landfarms.

****Changes: -Lowered the duration of the pact to day 21 from day 29.
-This pact no longer governs the actions of non-signatories, unless directed towards a signatory.
-Added details regarding the handling of provocative attacks that do not meet the threshold.****

Signatories:
Evo - 1/30/15
Sof - 1/30/15
Rage - 1/30/15
Lcn - 1/30/15
Sol - 1/30/15
Laf - 1/30/15
PDM - 1/30/15
MD - 1/30/15
TPA - 1/30/15
DK - 1/30/15
Omega - 1/30/15
Rival - 2/2/15
Icn - 2/4/15

WOHOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LANDGRABBING (OUTSIDE TRADING) IS NOW OFFICIALLY ILLEGAL!!!

Non-sequitur much?

CONFIRMED!!!

Why is this stickied? Mod abuse much? :P

tellas all bout that mod abuse bout that mod abuse no freedom

every post of his is perfect from the daggas to the schlop.

Yeah, my warchat leader told me don't worry about your readiness
he says, "alliances like a little more kills to hold at night."
You know I won't be no 40turns & 5k troops/jets hitter
So if that's what you're into then go ahead and join GDI

I'm bringin AB FSes baaack
Go ahead and send those whiney fluffes FA
it's just a game but you're running a fluffty rainbow strat

i read your whole post.

still ewpp kills landgrabbing outside trading.

btw are you saying that imag is spamtag?

Imag is not a spam tag.

How? Most alliances would issue a kill run on any one country that made 5+ hits against it's tag in 48 hours or any one alliance that hits a single country, retals withstanding. The pact also clearly states that issues can be resolved independently with a 'fair offer' or some other mutually agreed upon means.

Land grabbing outside trading had one foot in the grave long before the EWPP's inception. The game's shrinking player base and the shift toward L:L retal policies (I believe your alliance enforces one of these policies) is a far more significant factor. If a member of an alliance signed to is concerned about the consequences, that member should speak to it's leadership. If a player isn't a member of one of the signed alliances and takes issue with the EWPP, fight it.

by tella's definition imag could be counted as spamtag since it has under 10 members and its not listed in excluded list.



single country doing 5 grabs against 5 separate countries and not grabbing before previous hit is retalled leads death under ewpp while no ewpp country could have just suffered 5-7 retals (depending alliance which got grabbed originally).

and 80+% l:l: there ain't any alliance (besides imag i think and maybe danger) which doesn't have l:l in their retal rules. i'm ok with that although it also kills non-trading landgrabbing (since its somewhat normal that 1st attack brings back under 80% land so 2nd attack takes 50-70% more land from attacker and only defender/retaller gains land) but not as badly as 1 hit:kill policies which haven't yet found their way to alliance (those will quite likely someday and then ewpps becomes pointless).

Just for you marshal. The line above the white list.



Did iMag play this set? Sure looks like it http://www.earthempires.com/alliance/clan/ranks/Imagnum

I stand by my statement. If any one country hit 5 separate countries in the same alliance within 48 hours, without some special circumstance, that country is probably on a kill list anyway. Most alliance leaders, and likely members, would be concerned about the integrity of their tag. Even without the EWPP the whole alliance could suffer collateral damage or be held accountable. The only difference that the EWPP makes is that it makes it compulsory for all signees to participate in the policing action. Furthermore, the terms of the pact only govern actions until the 21st day of the set. If a player thinks that tapping an alliance 5 times in 48 hours is a viable strategy, that player can do so without triggering the EWPP on day 22. I'm willing to bet your FA department and the defending alliance would still be in arms about it.

The above argument also continues to completely disregard the freedom alliances have to solve their issues independently BEFORE invoking the pact. There is no situation the EWPP creates that restricts non-trade based land grabbing further than it's already been restricted. What it does prevent is a situation where a country 5 taps an alliance, the alliance wishes to respond with war but can't because politics and numbers make war an unfavorable option. If the absence of this scenario is a concern, that's basically advocating for bullying alliances out of their retal policy by force.

Based on the assumption that imag qualifies as spam tag, when the pact clearly states it is not, and continually ignoring the independent action/resolution clause, confused parties should reread the terms of the pact and attempt to better understand it.

Marshall is just arguing to argue.

He has tag protection and his tag is part of this EWPP.

If he has issues with this, or suggestions to improve it, he can take it up with his leaders and we will hear them.

Marshal, I know this is likely to go over your head, but this is why we have FA departments in alliances.

As far as Imag goes, I don't consider them a 'spam tag'. The list of alliances was directly copied from last set. In addition, Imag doesn't meet the other 2 requirements, as they have too many members and formal relations to be a spam tag. So no, according to the definitions in this pact, they are not a spam tag.

And furthermore, you know this pact has been in effect for 2 sets now, right? Lots of people still landgrab outside of trading, and this pact was only invoked once against imag for straight up killing a country. You're about 4 months late with your asinine arguments...

So, Imag, Stones, ICN, TITANS, OMA, RIVAL, MONSTERS, DANGER are not signatories which mean they do not have to abide by this EWPP.

Hmmm, so are any of these recruiting ;)

imag is, to get to 10 members.

We had 11 members this set Marshall. WE don't have that now, but we still had more than enough. Why do you actually care?

We await your return elvesrus :)

Reading isn't your strong suit, is it?

I even singled out the line for him, but its like he stopped reading after the number 10

What about the TITANS fluff you tella! We've only had pacts last 4 or 5 sets... Sigh :(

I didn't make that list, and it doesn't mean you're a spam tag....

YAY for nor being a spamtag. Its only taken 6 or 7 sets. :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujdHvpyn4Z8


still they need more members if they want to win wars in future.

Again why do you care Marshal?

Because he doesn't realize getting tag killed is considered a war win for iMag

No more farming untags? WTF?

Lol.

Yeah, that is the part that surprised me too... I guess chalk it up to this being 1A.

Of course if you resolve it separately (such as if it is your own personal pre-arranged landfarm) that would still be ok since the defender wouldn't invoke the pact. ;)

My mind is boggled by how people keep reading things like this into the pact...The pact has barely changed since last time, and it sure as hell didn't prevent people from farming untags for the past 2 sets. It quite clearly states that untagged countries and 'spam tags' don't count......

CLEARLY, MOD ABUSE

Funny how our tag STONES isn't included anywhere.
But ya know something? That's just fine
I make alliances with tags I know and respect.
I count on friendships to mean something in this game
If that makes me and the rest of STONES unworthy of anyone making contact with me about this , again that's fine.
P@ss on it
You can count on myself to do what I feel is right for the Stones and if that doesn't match up to this "pact" ,deal with it, as I will.
I will get around to posting our policy on our site. That way there's none of this cr@p that no one knew.
Have s swirvy set
BladeEWG
STONES
... And yes, this has p@ssed me off .friggin politics ruins this game

Hawkster
Come on over ;)

You are 100% correct Blade. We have your back.

As I've said multiple times, I literally just copied the pact from last time(you know, the one that has been in effect for 4 months now), and made the changes we had agreed upon(which are clearly marked). The list of alliances was from last time, and it honestly doesn't matter much.

As I said regarding imag, just because you're not on that list, doesn't mean you're a spam tag. Blade, we've had plenty of dealings between us, and we have had a pact. Beyond that, you guys have been around for a few sets now AND you had more than 10 members. You literally do NOT meet ANY of the three requirements of a 'spam tag'. So honestly, I have no idea what you're so pissed about.

In the end though, if you don't want to deal with this pact, then don't FS one of the signatories before Day 21. As long as you wait 3 weeks, nobody gives a fluff what you do.

Shutup with your facts tella, blade's busy being OUTRAGED!!!

AT gets slightly more tolerable when you just think of this picture whenever you see one of blade's posts

http://i.imgur.com/91sn32Q.jpg

What I am pissed about Tella is this...
The thread goes up and the list of signees is there omitting tags including mine.
So what would you have me think?
Forgotten or disregarded?
Yes, you and I have had good dealings as I've had with others.
But rather then tossing up a thread regarding this so ALL tags can read it and make suggestions, instead it's done behind the scenes in what we used to call circle jerks
Perhaps that's a strong term, but I am as Trife pointed out an old grumpy man that is weary of all the back door deals I see of late.
If this so called pact was designed to actually help the game as some are claiming, then why not include the rest of the players?
That's my point
Not saying at all that I or STONES would signed what I feel is a misguided idea. To me, this is nothing more than yet again a co alition formed to protect those that don't need protecting and instead is designed to punish the smaller and newer tags that are actually trying to survive and grow.
But eh?
WTF do I know...
::shrugs and walks away from the thread::

We are not creating a Coalition

We are stopping the week 1 wars that were happening because each side was scared the others were going to hit. This would draw out the reset and people were quitting the game because they did not want to have these restart wars that goes on for weeks.

The first reset we opened it up for everyone to sign up and we took the people who wanted to sign up.


You people get so upset with us trying to keep the game going.

People are already leaving so the ewpp in my opinion HASN'T worked.

All you've done is create a safe heaven for traders to trade, and the rest a reason to not be so active. If there isn't a eminent war, people are clearly less active and only login to run turns.

You have removed the anticipation, you've taken the edge off and smoothed the edges way too far, besides md / sol / sof and a few mid tags from both sides, there was passion, fire, team building, war chars, recruitment emails to defend your tags honour. Yes there was a slow trickle of players leaving, but now there is a huge draft of players leaving as its boring as fluff!


In short...

The ewpp has failed and made the server boring as fluff!

you can still sign if you want to, the ewpp was just signed by the above alliances so far because they were around when we talked about edits, in the same chat room we used when the pact started being written 3 sets ago

so basically if you arent listed as a signatory right now, you can still sign the pact, its not like an exclusive thing or anything

Sorry FDF but it is an exclusive thing which is very apparent by the way this was handled.Perhaps you don't feel it is , but facts are different.
Let's take a moment and really look at the crux of this whole pact shall we?
OOP wars are eliminated
In a nutshell that's what this whole blooming thing is about.
Who do OOP wars help the most?
Small tags
Why?
Because only OOP are tags somewhat even.
A small tag chooses to war OOP and plans for it.
Their target usually a larger tag that was a bully in earlier rounds by farming or whatever.
So the small tag says " we' ll get them on the reset"
So the small tag hits OOP not thinking they can win a war on a larger tag but just they can f up the larger tags start and possibly impact their set.
But Noooooooo, we can't allow that!!
So we make a pact to protect the large tag and in doing so eliminate the threat of the smaller tag.
That's the way to even the playing field right?

Then we have this....
Countries/tags that participate in EAoWs will be killed by any or all of the alliances that have signed this pact. Participation from all tags signed is expected as it is in place to protect everyone.
Yep, let's show everyone that we will do all we can to protect the ones that usually cause the problems, not the ones that need protecting. This is just a incredibly one sided deal.

Being a former Rager as yourself is now, you might recall the times we fought OOP wars.
Why? Because we would get our arses kicked over something and were not prepared for a war.
Usually it happens over a bad FA matter and even a personal slight. Sh@t happens.
So we would take it in the shorts one round and plot revenge possibly in the next set or the one after.
That was a huge part of fun for many. It rallied the troops by them knowing they would get their shot back. Saber rattling is a huge part of this game...oops sorry, past tense.... Was.
But noooooooo.. We can't have that anymore so let's make a pact and sell it to everyone as a way to save the game.
A misguided idea.
You want to end OOP wars ? then have your FA people get their heads out of their arses and start dealing with others with respect and set personal feelings aside. Otherwise deal with it the way a war game is designed.
Enuf already with the internal tweaks designed only to help those that don't need the help

Now I don't expect many to agree with me or see it from this side
That's fine
I've said my piece and that's enough for me.
I'll go back to simple threads now such as chiding Marshall for not enuf BOOBIES!
I do know what's more important in this game

Blade, I like you. Except for some jerkoff members, I like Stones. The problem with you guys is that you expect pacts to come to you. Same with OMA and (sometimes) with Titans. If you want pacts, you should ask for them.

This pact isn't exclusive. You notice how not everyone signed on the same day? Several FAs have approached me about joining the pact, and they were added. This is not the old boy's club. This is not a circle jerk. This is for whoever the hell wants to join in and stay away from early wars.

The signatories don't want early wars, so we created this pact. The first time around, we enforced it on the entire server, regardless of whether you wanted it or not. This time we removed that part of the pact, and made it opt-in only(unless you attack one of the signatories). We also dropped it back by a week. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not, this is how it is. And it doesn't concern you unless you want it to. If you feel like this restricts you and your ability to play, then you need to rethink how you're playing.

Let's say this pact didn't exist, and we all just made bilateral pacts to avoid early wars. And then Stones wants to war..say..Laf. You figure the best option is to hit them early(which is not the right move for many many reasons), because you think it will be more in your favor. Laf calls in Sof and MD, and Stones is gone in a few days, and now you either continue an obviously lost war for 6-7 more weeks, or you quit for the set.

Please tell me how that is better(or even different) from the ewpp?

http://i.imgur.com/91sn32Q.jpg

Tella
This has absolutly nothing to do with pacts between tags. But since you brought that up
Yes I posted on at that we were pacting if anyone wanted to contact me.
Do you assume that's the only way I or anyone makes tag pacts?
Of course not
A few tags came to me from that AT post but most were from contacts I had already made and asked.
The ones I have not had contact with, well when issues happen then I suppose we will speak then.
That's how it's always worked before for me, don't see why that would be different now.
What OMA or any other tag does to make FApacts is none of my concern.

Does this EWP jazz change the way I play or how we lead the STONES?
Not at all, if I have a reason to war to protect the STONES, then we war
That's pretty darn simple.




And come on trife..... Make the effort and find another pix
Recycling is just not worthy of you ;)

recycling is worthy for everyone

but reducing and reusing are more important

http://i.ytimg.com/...tc2_AQA/maxresdefault.jpg

gay