Verified:

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Apr 18th 2018, 21:24:44

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Apr 4th 2018, 17:34:58

bonus

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Mar 26th 2018, 19:45:31

1

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Mar 23rd 2018, 0:29:39

asdf

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Mar 2nd 2018, 17:51:49

bonus

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Feb 20th 2018, 18:13:32

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Feb 4th 2015, 23:17:04

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

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Feb 4th 2015, 23:16:22

Originally posted by BladeEWG:
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


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

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 30th 2015, 2:26:16

skype is probably best for me

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 30th 2015, 2:23:29

put me on the list yo

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 11th 2015, 22:22:11

yeah I have no idea who it is lol

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 8th 2015, 16:04:03

cultural advancement
http://i.imgur.com/h8pWkQP.jpg

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 8th 2015, 15:56:06

Which one of you clowns is this :P

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 5th 2015, 16:20:23

Sup,

LaF is policing for RAGE while we chug beer and kill wine drinkers.

-FDF

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Jan 3rd 2015, 7:44:43

I got something like 1820 hits last war does that make me an all star :P

either way down for something like this!

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Dec 29th 2014, 5:21:57

bonus

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Dec 17th 2014, 4:06:11

dont worry the bills will get smacked by brady and the pats week 17 :P

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Nov 11th 2014, 19:07:43

fluff everyone but USA

USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA

fluff taxes too tho

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 30th 2014, 5:06:59

EWPP lasts for 4 weeks. It doesn't matter if someone signs the pact or not, it's enforcable against any recognized alliance in the game. Danger's recognized. What more do you want...

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 30th 2014, 3:09:17

"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."

"Countries/tags that participate in EAoWs will be killed by any or all of the alliances that have signed this pact. "

"Definition of a spam tag:
...
--Excludes SoF, SoL, MD, LaF, RAGE, Evo, PDM, DK, TPA, ICN, LCN, Omega, MONSTERS, RIVAL, DANGER."

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 30th 2014, 1:39:15

Hi All,

As some people have noticed, Imag has broken the EWPP with their declaration of war on Danger. It is obvious that both these alliances are recognized by the pact (they are listed in it), so without a doubt this is a violation of the terms of the pact and the signatories are going to act accordingly. Because a violation of the pact against any recognized clan (non-spam tag) is considered an act of war against all signatories, and because the 29th day of the set is still a little way off, all the signatories of the pact are now at war with Imag. The signatories decided that killing imag over and over would be useless, so this will not become a set-long thing and will hopefully end quickly. When we all signed the pact we all knew and expected to call upon each other to enforce it, and the rest of EE will see that this pact is not something we all take lightly.

-FDF

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 29th 2014, 16:53:26

I haven't read anyones BS in this thread but let me say this:

1) TITANS are considered a spam tag by the pact so idk why anyone is fluffing
2) 4 LGs by Evo, which started this, are within the terms of the pact (5+ = EAoW, not 4+. L2Read)
3) Missiles/harmful ops by TITANS do count as an EAoW and as far as I know no reps were offered. Thus everyones technically at war with TITANS but if Evo wants to just farm them I dont think anyone has a problem with that.


Is the EWPP really that hard to understand? Take the news, apply the pact to it and see if it checks out. Then make sure the tags involved aren't spam tags. Let me make this clear: if someone breaches the pact, all signatories are at war with that tag. Evo never asked anyone for assistance in killing TITANS, I assume because they're content with farming them. If they do want help killing the tag then the assistance will be provided.

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 20th 2014, 20:14:43

nobody else confirmed this so i guess I will :P

riddler is stones' police

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 18th 2014, 16:59:52

oma was around for like 2 weeks last set

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 18th 2014, 3:36:04

Just for clarification a 'war' between two spam tags (oma/stones) has no relevance on the EWPP. And to check that they are spam tags read the definition of a spam tag in the pact.

Also seriously Ragers chill out. Let oma/stones have their little war and blow off some steam but when its done can we please just net for one single set >.>

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 15th 2014, 2:21:39

The pact says nothing about single/double/triple taps or their retals, you can still do those. Besides when would you ever farm another alliance before unless you wanted a war?

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 13th 2014, 21:00:24

best way to contact is in IRC #earthempires

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 10th 2014, 6:40:08

Anyone care for a sick FB profile pic? How bout myspace (so indie now doe)? Freelance photographer FDF at your services!

*no animals will be harmed in the process
*photos are vegan-friendly
*fedoras are a MUST
*all shoots are free because money is an evil creation of this corrupt capitalist society
*open to all 52 genders and sexes
*color photos available for the non-artistic

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 10th 2014, 6:32:34

message sent

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 8th 2014, 19:53:59

I saw a preview of the updates, its worth the wait of like 2 days >.>

plus if marshal can take a break from that battle game im sure we can all take a break from using the site :P

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 8th 2014, 19:51:19

If the pact was meant to be pro-netter, I wouldn't have written it Blade :P

War is more fun when things like strategy and country building actually matter :)

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 6th 2014, 3:53:57

Lol, 72 hours is probably more accurate :P

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 4th 2014, 18:33:57

lol bonus

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 3rd 2014, 2:38:48

beginning of the november-december 2008 set

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 2nd 2014, 5:33:51

Originally posted by iccyh:
The signatories of the agreement compose most of the server. The threat is in there because it makes no sense for them to hamstring themselves by agreeing to something like this while allowing others to adhere to a different standard when they can add an enforcement clause that no non-signatories will dare test.

Of course they'd include that and of course they'd stand by it; they don't want to be taken advantage of.


Also this. Nobody would sign if it meant guaranteeing an enemy a pre-week 5 FS :P

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 2nd 2014, 5:32:32

Originally posted by blid:
Say 5 Evo players each attack a separate OMA player two times per day every day without violating those definitions. Say OMA finds this unacceptable, and they are not interested in "fair offer," they prefer to fight back and do. It's still the first month of the reset. Is that Evo's problem to deal with alone, or is this bit below enforced on an unsigned alliance who didn't agree to this deal:
Originally posted by FailDiegoFail:
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.

1) The fair offer is a reps formula (rounded up a bit) I found in a unap, I'm pretty sure as long as the offer is as good or better than what is in the above pact it is worth taking.
2) If Evo commits an EAoW against a non-spam tag, they'll be declared on by the signatories of the pact. If Evo grabs OMA a few times a day every day without violating the conditions, then yeah technically OMA would not be 'in the right' to declare war on Evo, based on the text of the pact. But, if OMA fits the definition of a 'spam tag' (it may or may not), then there's really no restriction on anyone grabbing OMA. If OMA declared war on Evo it could be everyones problem but I doubt Evo would need assistance with that.
3) The pact is enforced server-wide, regardless of signing (as explained in the first few lines).

Originally posted by Xinhuan:
Hey, I'm just trying hard to find loopholes!

For example, SoF could disband and form 10 different tags of 6 members each, SoF1, SoF2, SoF3, etc, so now none of these would be recognized as a signatory, but they could all FDP each other and each SoF tag could do 4 grabs every 48 hours on every other tag without it being an EAoW!


That is possible, though with escalating retals and some form of L:L that most alliances have, the countries that participate in this will essentially be farmed to the point where they cannot keep up with the growth of others. Retals aren't included in the landgrabs per 48 hours, and you can still do 4 more to stay within the bounds. Also, since SoF# (a tag of 6 members) would not have played the last round and is under 10 members, they would be considered a spam tag and would be able to be killed with a suspicion that they will suicide or commit an EAoW.

You'll probably always be able to find a loophole, but the point of the pact was to stop this cycle of needing to get the FS first so badly that it happens in the first week. You can still war on day 29; this pact is no longer in effect the start of the 5th week of the set. So if SoF# have been skirting the rules till then they should expect to be destroyed in week 5. No leader worth anything would even try that.

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Oct 1st 2014, 16:22:55

Hello members of the Earth Empires Alliance community,

As everyone knows, for the past few sets wars between the two major sides have been starting earlier and earlier, approaching a truly OOP war. This set, the war started on day 8, meaning only about 5 days of growth for the alliances involved. The war was quickly decided within less than two weeks, though it still continues. Being at war for about 5 weeks when either you mostly cannot hit down to or hope to lemming targets (depending on which side you're on) is definitely not what the war experience should be like in EE. We all know that later set wars are more fun and more strategic (rather than relying on your members to run a decent C/I for less than a week), but preventing this is a sense of paranoia that has overtaken most if not all of the major alliances. To combat this, and better the game in the process, the leaders of many alliances came together (including Rage, SoL, SoF, LaF, MD, PDM, Evo, Omega, LCN, and Rival) via a skype conversation and over the course of a couple weeks we have formed a resolution to stop early wars for at least the next two sets. Understanding that there is a time and a place for an early war, the conclusion reached was that it is best to put a hold on all of it for two sets at minimum. The terms are as follows:

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

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 29th 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 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.


After signing, this resolution is active for two sets until the end of the Dec14-Jan15 set.

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

Short version: This pact prevents all early wars 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. This does not include suiciders and untagged landfarms.

List of pact signatures:

RAGE - Signed - FDF - 9/29 - Skype
SoL - Signed - CC - 9/30 - Skype
SoF - Signed - Aponic - 9/30 - Skype
Evo - signed - tellarion - 9/30 - Skype
MD - signed - tav - 9/30 - Skype
LaF - signed - ingle - 9/30 - Skype
Omega - signed - tulosba - 10/1 - Skype
PDM - Signed - AusPiggy - 10/1 - Skype
ICN - signed - Nole - 10/1 - Skype
LCN - signed - Scribble - 10/1 - Skype
RIVAL - signed - Heinrich - 10/1 - Skype
TPA - signed - PaoLo - 10/1 - Skype
DK - signed - bstrong - 11/3 - Skype


Lastly I'd like to thank Colonel Chaos for writing the basis of the pact; he basically got the ball rolling on working out the actual details of what we were all going to agree to. Of course I'd also like to thank the representatives of Evo (Tellarion), LaF (Ingle), LCN (Scribble), Rival (Heinrich), PDM (AusPiggy), SoL (Mdevol, Colonel Chaos, Makinso), SoF (aponic, WArriOR), TPA (PaoLo), MD (Randy, Tavaren), Omega (Tulosba), as well as Robyn, my companion from Rage.

Hopefully this step will make this server more enjoyable and start to build trust where it has long been absent.

Fail Diego Fail
RAGE HFA


Edit 11/4: Added DK as a signatory

Edited By: FailDiegoFail on Nov 5th 2014, 1:06:35
See Original Post

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 30th 2014, 14:16:59

lol thats great

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 30th 2014, 0:15:10

bonus

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 25th 2014, 23:02:37

yeah I dont think there is going to be a CF this set. maybe we'll CF when every single md/sol/evo/pdm/dk/tpa/icn is out of range of everyone on our side :P

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 24th 2014, 5:26:37

70% aint bad when some of our guys are on their 8th restarts lol

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 23rd 2014, 17:33:18

method 1 of curing violence in the middle ease: nuke everything
method 2: no such thing

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 23rd 2014, 1:56:45

bonus

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 20th 2014, 21:33:01

wait no someone put an extension on my browser i think....

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 20th 2014, 21:32:21

enough nick cage already lol

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 19th 2014, 18:03:36

collective sigh of relief from the labor party lol

FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 18th 2014, 21:00:29

on the plus side, look at how much better the rest of the UK will do after their taxes stop flowing to scotland :P


FailDiegoFail Game profile

Member
184

Sep 16th 2014, 4:21:01

damn gotta get killed again and restart as farmer