Verified:

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 20th 2019, 20:47:11

Originally posted by The Cloaked:
the restart bonus made wars lame too.

Shouldn't this help warring alliances though? Doesn't this make stonewalling significantly more powerful?


Stonewalling was already significantly powerful.
This will push all of it over the edge.

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 20th 2019, 20:44:58

Originally posted by Raging Budda:
I think disabling the restart bonus completely will lead to less players on the server, which would exacerbate an already existing problem. If the goal is make restarts less powerful (obviously) then maybe tinkering with the restart forumla is the way to go.

Personally, I came back after an extended 2.5 year break a few sets ago. I was just to be for a set or two, but I'm still here for a 3rd set. Mainly because the wars that were arranged were fun, with the restart bonus meaning that after a welcome day off you could be back in the war hitting hard if you managed your country properly. Starting from scratch would dis-encourage restarts because the mentality would be "What is the fluffing point?" and not reward well built countries that died in 10 seconds during a FS. Let players keep some of what they built.

And as Sov said, this will lead to more early wars that will likely end earlier, leaving the lots of players involved in the war not interested in playing the 2nd month of the set.
Well we could spend the 2nd month suiciding netters XD

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 20th 2019, 14:54:23

Originally posted by Marshal:
poor suiciders who get killed, yay for netters since war restarts will be buying more stuff.


Buying more stuff? LOL with what cash, with what money? This is the final step needed to push warring into a deadly boring activity.
The new attack formula's will force wars to be GS wars only from now on. (BRs are no long worth it due to building loss constraints and ABs are even worse). And the loss of restart bonuses will lopside wars within days as a strong FS will end a war directly. There's no way for a player to make a comeback after being chem rushed in the FS for instance. As he loses all his stock and time invested in building his or her country. You do get that nice 100 acres restart with no CS and 100 troops! Good luck getting back o hitting and making a difference in war.

Not to mention that I foresee people not restarting anymore because there's no point in restarting.


Enjoy your server netters!



Edited By: Makinso on Dec 20th 2019, 14:58:46
See Original Post

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 17th 2019, 20:57:56

People forget how easily this fluff is solved.

Red button

BOOM

Done

all the hard life will be instantly over.

On to the better days.

- Boris Johnson
Man of Wisdom.

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 12th 2019, 9:30:31

This shows that LaF was not suicided enough hmph! ;)

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 7th 2019, 0:28:09

Yeah EG shows different stats then GHQ lol. No idea why.

100M NW diference. ANW differs roughly 7M
with a 9 member advantage that's a ton more breakers on the SME side. Stones didn't even break 19M ANW @ war start.

SME made up for 30.5M ANW with the lowest ANW being 25M (mercs).
SS made up for 26.9M ANW. With Stones being the lowest with 17 members at 19.2M ANW.
That's a large difference between both groups. War was won on breaking power. Which we lacked quickly on our side.

Dont get me wrong it was fun from what I have seen / heard.

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 6th 2019, 22:38:44

Originally posted by Drow:
keep it up guys, this is entertaining to watch. great to see a close war being fought all the way through. currently SME has the edge though, looking at it. more kills and activity, and NW that's only marginally lower, despite the member count disadvantage.


Yeah they had a NW advantage from the start despite having a member disadvantage. Primarily has to do with Stones having am much lower ANW then all participating parties. Other then that it has been fun.

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 4th 2019, 22:43:34

wth where did that thread go....

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 4th 2019, 20:36:58

So where could members apply?

http://www.looneybin.completelybonkers.com?

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 4th 2019, 20:32:59

Originally posted by Red X:
Originally posted by sinistril:
Why do you need lafers makinso? Gerdlers claim to which you agreed is that you can pick sols 10 best and compete. If the competition is taking the best 10 non elders in the game and fighting elders, then it's obviously going to be close


@Sin are you nervous about 5 from each tag?



/me gets popcorn.

/me thinking if this actually happens next set this should be good

/me thinking Derrick might owe me a thank you for making this damn thread

<3


That is actually pretty easy.

for both SOL and LAF counts that our membership rotates ALOT, we can like rotate 50% of our members in 1 set (this is also what keeps SOL alive and as big as we are). Meaning if you want me to give you the pound for pound challenge you're looking for I can get 6 - 8 consistent members that compare to being as long and consistently playing as the Elders/Mercs group. That means numberwise I probably can't give equality. So getting the pound for pounds from a similar tag sof/laf (whom are the only other ones really warring frequently) is the only way to give you the challenge you seem to be looking for.

LaF has the same.

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 4th 2019, 19:13:27

Originally posted by Gerdler:
Disagree. The tip of the spear is no sharper or duller than before but the broad masses of minions are no more. The highlights we have today, the bots, the tools and average levels of knowledge and skill within almost all alliances are at a level far beyond what anyone ever had before. Pound for pound most alliances now are better than the alliances of yore. And this is NOT a good thing. It just means the rigors of war has forced out what was once the base of this game.

Take IX in their hayday with the best war leaders and their tools, of that day and then RANDOMLY cut away 85% of them so you have member pairity with todays SOL, then put them against each others; SOL would crush.
The reason you are putting them on a pedistal is because they had more members and its far far easier to war lead and to make war efficiently with more members. Further, maybe 1 or 2 of the warleaders really was better than they are now, regardless of membership, but that doesn't mean that the average warleader of that time is better or even achieves pairity with todays best.

What elders have is a tight group of veterans who nearly exclusively played for war in the past years and they are not really taking many new people to teach. Being great pound for pound is something only Elders work towards right now, so they are winning a competition in which they are the only participant.
If LaF, SoF and SOL putting their 10 most active and skilled members(in terms of war) in a separate tag and then warring with that tag they would all be challenging Elders.
I don't know who would win that and I suppose it would deppend on when the war happens. Either way I don't see it happening.



Tend to fully agree.
Not to mention that what qualifies as "good war leaders" is massively different. 6 - 8 years ago Good war leaders had target selection and decent game knowledge compared with knowing some war formula's. However one of THE most important skills they had to have was CONTROLLING the warroom. Getting people to listen. Warrooms could consist of 40 - 50 hitters. <--- That has much more to do with the social skills of the warchat leader as an individual.

Warleaders now are seen as great when they "finish" targets. Or pick the right ones to kill. But that criteria can't be more wrong. As the factors involved in turning such a decision in the best possible result (a kill) are partially controlable but most of it is out of the current chatleaders hand. (examples being: out of hitters, to much stock on the wallers end compared to your hitters left etc. etc. are all limitations)

Looking at warleaders of old, it was far more in their hands. Much more control. Warrooms consisting of 15 - 50 hitters. Managing those hitters was part of the succes of your warroom AKA being able to finish targets. Stuff like running into a waller was a challenge, would force people to devise a plan to finish that particual waller off. Criteria you could set for good warleaders then was stuff like: Tactics and strategy to target finishing, war room control in rushes, spy op use etc. etc. etc. Those criteria still count but are very much limited by the current amount of players. (Hence me constantly blaring that MORE players will solve most of the current problems (which are open wounds with bandages being sticked upon them).


As for pound for poundness I full heartedly agree that Elders is likely the only one trying to compete in that area.

@Gerdler I'm willing to gather up some SOLers/LaFfers to make Elders/mercs work for their much desired title?
If ABM as our new godlike leader agrees to it SOL can help you man handle whatever griefers come your way.

Let's chat about that :)

Edited By: Makinso on Dec 4th 2019, 19:18:07
See Original Post

Makinso

Member
2888

Dec 4th 2019, 8:17:37

Where can I sign up?

Makinso

Member
2888

Nov 27th 2019, 14:11:39

Originally posted by Gerdler:
Restart bonus gone = kills are stronger
ABs weaker due to this change

I think one of the things qz and pang has stated that they do want is for war to be about more than kills, so this is a step in the wrong direction with what they set out to do.

I'm pretty sure this is a work in progress tho.


Made a long post making an argument on taking away from war flexibility and war goals with these formula's accidently deleted it. Pang/QZ mind if we talk this over in person whenever you have time? I stand by the fact that a lot of these issues will be fixed once we fix into a bigger playerbase.

Makinso

Member
2888

Nov 27th 2019, 8:27:42

Well for the small numbr wars we have I guess ABs are completely ruled out as of now. It's ridiculous that you need to match buildings. Anti suicding stuff all fine. But stuff like this takes away from war flexibility ALOT.

Makinso

Member
2888

Nov 26th 2019, 20:47:07

So we were analyzing the hits on #20.

Countries seem comparable in land yet only 5 - 6K acres taken in 40 hits.
How the hell does that add up. It means taking half the land by ABs would take 160 - 200 hits?

Are we / am I missing something here?

Makinso

Member
2888

Nov 20th 2019, 14:12:49

....

The solution is easy. Upgrade the game to get a decent player base going. It will stretch the damage on risk/reward for going low damage and being suicided on. If you get a good player group going (unlike the 150 - 250 odd some countries now) by ratio the amount of suiciders won't grow much. Especially if you get new fresh players to the game.

What you guys are consistently doing is trying to bandagefix a system that was built for a 1000+ countries. An enviroment that had a natural risk / reward concept with risks being spread due to tons of potential targets.

Right now we see 4 - 5 suiciders a seton a 250 player base. Looking back through SOL boards, saved AT posts and EG stats we had at best 5- 10 a set when we had 1000 players. (I excluded organized netting ruin wars like Imag FSing a netting a tag to make a statement or SOL FSing LaF (which was unwinnable due to the fact that SOL had sustained two wars) to make a point about grabbing SOL restarts or L:L or w/e). I counted those as wars knowing you could see those actions as suidcidal (to do damage being the goal).

Back to the point it means by quadrupling the player base the suiciders only double up at best. So the more players the less noticeable suicider damage will become.


I've said it many times and will say it again. Go talk to the utopia guys. And how they manage to keep a steady 2 - 3K players (and have been keeping that for the past 3 - 5 years). And they have a standard fluctuation of incoming and leaving players.


Makinso

Member
2888

Nov 5th 2019, 21:43:29

Mods please delete BigDog

I've always been supsicious of that fluff!!
DELETE ALL OF HIS NASTY MULTIES.

Makinso

Member
2888

Nov 4th 2019, 6:54:50

Originally posted by Gerdler:
Originally posted by Requiem:
That even is leaving out the fact that you can have 3 offensive allies but only two defensive... If their goal is to top feed.

You forgot the 50% PS bonus.
.


Smart suïcider with little self respect don’t PS much

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 31st 2019, 0:09:15

Originally posted by Drow:
Savage is correct.
a suicider is someone who is intentionally going out of their way to harm a clan's game. we aren't talking small numbers of landgrabs here, we are talking the mass missile attacks, AB's, nukes, mass farming etc. the sort of thing a clan will only do to another clan during a war, when yes, the odds of them getting killed in return are fairly good. If you can't tell the difference, then there is something wrong with you.


So what if said clan detags a few players to mess up their enemy pre-war or pre netting competition tot get an advantage.....
Is that suiciding? Is it politics? Is it war? If you label it suiciding do you delete the whole group/clan that instigated it?
Going on a ban spree for "suiciding" can get really iffy real quick. Have to tread really carefully.


The problem with suiciding (like netting like war) is the same as it is for all problems. PLAYERS. Or better said the lack there of. It's simple if you have 2000 players you'll have 200 suicidable netters. Chances on the same people being singled out for suiciding a few sets in a row are slim. (Unless specifically targetted on 1 person. But in general history that's pretty rare).
400 players only truly gives 10 - 20 top netters which are "worth" suiciding on. Thus the same guys get fluffed on a regular basis. Countering that with bans/deletions etc doesn't make that go away. Getting more active players will not make suiciding go away. But it will divide the burden. WHich also goes to say for "victims of war" to speak in netters terms.

As for SOL doing the bushel stock raid thing to netters, we did it rival in old earth. I can't remember doing it to TIE.

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 17th 2019, 7:34:51

That's about all I read aswell XD

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 17th 2019, 7:34:35

Originally posted by Chevs:
so tl:dr from what i gather
maybe we really just need to change this into a climate change thread, i heard sui once say fluff the turtles as he drank out of a plastic straw


LOL that made me laugh in the middle of my office with some co-workers wondering wtf.

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 13th 2019, 8:11:46

Originally posted by galleri:
I quit


Finally ;-)

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 10th 2019, 10:54:40

Effective end of this set I will be retiring from SOL leadership.
It's been a pleasure!


Until a replacement is found (if found) ABM will be handling all of SOLs external communication.

With regards,
Makinso
God of nothing and beyond.

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 7th 2019, 20:55:06

Well played Sir,

Well played!

Makinso

Member
2888

Oct 2nd 2019, 20:16:34

KILL EM ALL!

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 29th 2019, 21:51:04

Okay .... thats true, Boltar will do things beyond your imagination....

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 29th 2019, 18:46:54

Don't do it Req.

It's a trap, it'll haunt you forever. Traumatizing stuff they do over there!

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 29th 2019, 18:46:21

Originally posted by Symbolic:
Oh damn the slit wars, I don't wanna think back too those days.
Originally posted by Symbolic:
Oh damn the slit wars, I don't wanna think back too those days.


Lovely era.
Originally posted by Boltar:
Originally posted by Makinso:
Originally posted by Raging Budda:
I don't think this has ever happened before....or maybe once...


XD

I think SoF is actually the alliance SOL fought the most in 20 yrs of history.
IX comes in second I think


lol stewie didnt war angy!!!


Meh 3 sets of that.

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 27th 2019, 21:02:37

Originally posted by Raging Budda:
I don't think this has ever happened before....or maybe once...


XD

I think SoF is actually the alliance SOL fought the most in 20 yrs of history.
IX comes in second I think

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 20th 2019, 11:15:05

Makinso Sex God

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 20th 2019, 11:14:17

Meh it's our aliens.

Makinso

Member
2888

Sep 9th 2019, 21:10:10

2

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 27th 2019, 20:17:59

Was about to ask about that leg. Took me zooming in to see iT was under your other leg lol. At first glance i thought the NSFW pic would be the two Halves of your leg LOL!!

Glad you’re okay though!

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 25th 2019, 10:29:43

Originally posted by Boltar:
Sol's site still does that. They have a way to take it off tho.


All auto uploads now but yeah we can still set update requirement

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 25th 2019, 9:59:57

Kiss me

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 21st 2019, 11:18:00

Originally posted by martian:
don't forget WULFBAM!

Not gonna comment on the list but I will say that playing the game as an alliance leader/political negotiation level was a whole different experience than simply running a tag internally or playing a country.

Several of us (myself included) had opportunities to really FUBAR alliance server though politics but for the most part none of us went that far:P

Who you rank/credit is going to depend on which tag you played for and which "side" you were one at any given time more than anything because it impacted who you interacted with. That and alliance leaders that liked to post losts to AT (no idea who they may be :P )

Also what is the basis for your ranking? War victories? Server impact? Netting? Whoever ran NM (i forget) should rank high up there for keeping the tag out of trouble (mostly) and netting quietly for a long time.

One day I will read through my earth logs which I have somewhere for a good laugh:P

You me them everybody.

FA was the most fun 2002-2011 or 12 at best. After that it was all teaparties

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 19th 2019, 15:34:41

Originally posted by Servant:
Maki....


After all we have been through together, this is how you Your people treat me?????


Could just shoot me a msg instead of dramatizing iT I did you tbr favor of messaging but we could also be asses about it XD

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 19th 2019, 9:51:39

We Made a booboo

Forum msg Will do

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 15th 2019, 11:56:59

That damned DaBears knocked me off number one in the last day :-) damn reseller!

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 10th 2019, 16:57:42

Originally posted by Gerdler:
What is not insignificant, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths:

• 22,938 (76%) are by suicide which can't be prevented by gun laws (3)

• 987 (3%) are by law enforcement, thus not relevant to Gun Control discussion. (4)

• 489 (2%) are accidental (5)

So no, "gun violence" isn't 30,000 annually, but rather 5,577... 0.0017% of the population.

By what weird logic are gun related suicides not directly tied to the abundance of firearms?

Same thing with law enforcement, how often would they have to use lethal force if firearms were not as abundant?

Do I actually have to say anything about the accidental deaths lol? It goes without saying that they are almost directly proportional to the number of firearms in circulation.

That said its still a low number. So why are you attacking the gaming industry?



There is a ton of research into if violent games promote agressive or violent behavior in teens/adolescents. Ive written a review about those studies long ago. If memory serves me right: i reviewed 11 studies of which 9 concluded aggresive or violent behavior correlated with violent gaming, HOWEVER:

These exact same studies pointed out that all subjects showing violent and/or agressive behavior also had many other factors correlating. Like psychological pathology (anywhere from depressions to very heavy personality disorders), low social and or economic status, broken or divorced family problems, being victim of neglect or abuse, receiving mental healthcare, academic problems and being raised by parents with an authority based parenting style instead of an autoritative based parenting style.

So base conclusion was gaming can promote agressive behavior but only if other factors pre-exist in a subject.
Researcher stressed the risks of gaming addiction more, as their “healthy” test subjects actually had the same rate of addiction based problems as their “unhealthy” subjects.

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 9th 2019, 11:59:30

One of the funniest memories I have is Rage doing a NINJA vanish to escape a losing coalition war (think it was SLIT?)

They got killed for it. But it was a hilarious action.

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 8th 2019, 22:18:06

Another problem that can solved with a simple solution.

More players.

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 8th 2019, 22:16:51

At least the later part of that time period.

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 8th 2019, 22:16:37

Originally posted by Servant:
There's some old timer's on it, The majority of the remainder of the list is old timers...

I'm just really weak from 2003-2009, for example I know TIE had a dominant run then, and I don't know who that leader was.


of people I can think of from 2009 onward, Son Goku/Xyle/Makinso are the only ones that are worth consideration.

Everyone else (including me) doesn't really come close.
Pre 2003 I"m good:) But I do appreciate any names being brought up,
2003-2009 Is the era I know least of.


That was mostly set with Peki Mao and Ant I think.

Makinso

Member
2888

Aug 1st 2019, 22:54:14

Its hilarious how Derrick tries to troll at every occasion XD

Makinso

Member
2888

Jul 29th 2019, 7:29:49

Originally posted by jcatron:
NA - all around hard to beat what we had in the glory days of NA.

CC - best at warring.

ICD - best modern netters.

HS - We were the best at...restarting.


lol at HS

Makinso

Member
2888

Jul 29th 2019, 7:24:18

Gimme my oil. I only have 1,3b i feel deprived

Makinso

Member
2888

Jul 22nd 2019, 21:04:12

Oh and let's not forget MakDuque! Was a great burger and person!