still waiting

thanks

and here comes the tough guy image lol

you're so predictable

"its our policy to do"

sounds to me like you're following everybody else. anywho, you're all getting boring for me. out!

warster, i will agree that cm is not a proper retal. however, even though the nuke destroys land and the retaliator will not get it back, the retaliated will lose land no matter what. so what does it matter if they lose it to the player or to the game?

bstrong, i will forgive your insult since it is pretty obvious that you do not have an intelligent contribution to the topic. In your head you are probably "this guy is right. if i hit somebody and gain 1000 acres, money, tech, and food and they retal with a nuke i will only lose land. It may not even be the full 1000 acres! hey! I might come out ahead!"

However, i know you are a follower just like the vast majority in this world. You do not question the system but just assimilate into it and that is okay. We can't all be leaders and look beyond what is given to us in front of us.

Let me see if i can put it in "low iq" terms for you lol

you punch me(ss)
i can either punch you back with knuckles(ps) or i can spit in your face(em).

THE EM DOES LESS DAMAGE TO YOU BUT YOU WON'T ACCEPT IT BECAUSE IT IS AN ACT OF WAR AND IT WILL ESCALATE.

logically, you should accept the spit but you don't want it because it is in YOUR CULTURISTIC view more disgraceful.

I just wanted somebody to explain to me WHY they didn't see the spit acceptable(some people are just too full of pride and still say they'd rather get punched than get spit on....STUPID!!!)

this server is bad lol...im not playing dragon btw as i said above im sticking to primary but it was just an eye opening experience seeing you all defending your rationale as to why missiles are not an acceptable forms of retaliation.

not one could give a good logical reason how an em is a lot more harmful than a ss/ps

i dont know if it is because it has been the norm for so long and you guys are just brainwashed into accepting it or it is a tradition and you guys are just so elderly-like stubborn to give up the old ways.

either way i find it funny though that even after i said i'm sticking to primary whooze says people die because turns isn't a problem. doesn't really answer the underlying reason of why an em is > harm than a ss/ps

twain, says people don't grab outside so I shouldn't worry about retals much. that helps...lol

marshal goes completely off and tries to sell ffa by saying i can try different strats.

none address my question and that in itself says a lot about the group that plays this game. the level of intelligence here is a bit on the durp durp side

lol it is like me asking for an apple and you guys try to sell me an orange haha.

yeah, the game admins leave too much in the players hands. it could be a good thing or a bad thing. i think it has gone a bit on the bad side.

thanks for all the info and cooperation but from what i've been reading ffa does not sound fun. i'll be sticking to primary.

thx all

I do not see how an em is much more worse than a regular ss/ps when it comes ingame mechanics. Which is why I'm trying to understand the logic behind the implementation of it.

Twain, you said it. I didn't call them stupid just me trying to understand them. Think of it as you can show me how to fish, but don't tell me why the rod is made that way. If you understand it then you will be able to work with it a lot better.

Perhaps maybe the em was different back then and would be more harmful than it is today. That would justify the reason why they weren't allowed as an acceptable means of retaliation. I hope you see where I'm going with it.

A lot of the reasons you are giving me sounds like "this is my way or the highway" and if that is the case and how it is done then i rather not play lol

just me and i'd rather know now than later

This also is not just. how is it different from trying to sabotage a missile to block a retal than somebody causing dissension and making them lose troops to take away their offensive power?

i also want to address the "best to just say". this is good men accepting the lesser evil. is that how things are done here?

again, im trying to understand the implementation of policies and not just trying to join something that i do not understand or would agree with.

that's not really a good explanation on how they got to make that rule. what is the reasoning behind it? both attacks make the other lose land. in fact, isn't it less harmful than a ss or ps due to not losing food,tech, and money?

i just do not see the logic behind it other than people not liking it. it should be considered for revisement since it doesn't really make sense.

is it not better to get em'ed than retalled the other way? granted it'd be one missile per hit

why isn't an em or the one that destroys land considered an acceptable means of retaliation? the aggressor still loses land and there is still a chance of the missile not going through such as failing a ss or ps

please no answers such as because it has always been that way. i'd like to know the reason behind that rule and if there is a logical explanation to it.

thanks for your help

oh yeah, my clan name will be Big Boi

going to play ffa and see how it goes here playing more than one country

i think im going to play 4 countries only but i might step it up to more than that later if i feel i need the protection.

i heard you need to let people know here on the boards so this is my notice. can all clans state their rules of attacking or is there a general rule somewhere and i dont see it.

also, can each and every clan post their method of contacts here or pm me stating their clan name and best form of contact. this will help tremendously

thanks for your cooperation and helping me get off the ground.