Verified:

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 24th 2015, 15:17:40

Originally posted by farmer:
TWAIN sounds like you have had a good experience with common core. Maybe it is not common core i am so frustrated with but more the state of Indiana and how it handles education in general. are the teachers in ill pay raises based on teacher evaluations? I also think that maybe public schools have more problems with discipline than private schools. Charter schools in Indiana have been taking enrollment away from the public schools so there budgets have been cut. I know several teachers and none of them seem happy with the changes that are taking place here.


I'd say my experience with it is mixed, but the negatives aren't necessarily the fault of Common Core, but rather just that there's always a new big push on how to make schools better every 5 years or so, and that means we teachers end up having to re-align everything every 5 years or so, which is mostly making some small modifications, maybe adding or subtracting a unit here or there, and then doing a TON of paperwork to line things up.

There are plenty of negatives about it, so I'm not trying to sound all rose-colored about CC. We went textbook shopping a couple years ago, and our options were fairly limited because the textbook companies weren't all fully realigned with CC yet, so we only really had 2 books to choose between. Beyond that, it's of course those same textbook companies that are the ones that benefit most from all these changes, because they get to re-align their own stuff every 5 years and then try to peddle off new books and resources.

bstrong: I don't agree at all with what you say there. First off, 9-7 is still 9-7. The new standards simply try to teach some real number sense to show the kids what 9-7 means instead of just making them memorize that 9-7=2 without really thinking about that these numbers actually symbolize things.

I said this in my earlier longer post, but again, if I want to do some multi-digit multiplication, I like let's say 199 x 5, I could try to do each digit separately in my head, trying to remember what my tens and ones columns are, or I can realize that 199x5 is 200x5-5 and figure out that it's 995 much faster. That's the number sense that the new style of math seems to be teaching.

Furthermore, how many other subjects can you really just sit down and start helping your kids with their homework immediately on anyway? If I assign a short story for my students to read, most likely as a parent, you: a) have never read the story, and would have to read it to help your kid, or b) read it when YOU were in school, which is presumably at least 20 years ago, and you probably don't remember it well enough to help without re-reading it to help your kid.

I would assume that with the help of the math text that most parents could figure out how the problems are supposed to be done, but people who are good at math assume they know everything about math at lower levels that what they've achieved, which isn't true about history or English. No one assumes they've read every story that a 7th grader is likely to read, or that they know every fact or every issue that might be discussed in a freshman level history course.

Overall, I hope I don't come across as a blind apologist for Common Core. It certainly has its flaws. However, as a teacher, I can tell you that I most likely understand the full positive and negative implications better than most people, and the issues that are the ones that are politicized aren't the real issues. The real issues deal with whether standardized tests really test anything meaningful, and whether it's fair to judge a teacher's salary on how his or her students do, and whether all the extra time spent prepping for a bubble test could be better spent in other ways, and the commercialization of education that is caused when we change standards twice a decade, causing supposed obsolescence of all our previous textbooks, and, and, and.

Not whether the average person can sit down and immediately answer their 5th graders math homework without even bothering to look at the textbook.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 24th 2015, 12:59:52

I know the concept of net neutrality sounds good. I've read just enough to have some skepticism over whether the rules being put in place are as good as the idea is in theory.

That's actually a reason I want to see what people here have to say about it.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 24th 2015, 3:23:37

Originally posted by ssewellusmc:
Originally posted by Twain:
Originally posted by ssewellusmc:
Mdevol - Remember the last heaping pile of fluff that Congress passed before the American public was able to view before passage. The ACA has been a disaster. I am pretty confident that our forefathers would be shooting by now. I'm disappointed to say the least...


Instead of trying to derail the conversation with the ACA, why not stick to the current topic?


The part about passing an unknown bill that the American public can't review is on topic. It seems like you like having giant turds jammed down your throat?


That tangent isn't "on topic." mdevol's topic was net neutrality. Instead, you bring up the ACA, which arguably has been successful, with millions more getting insurance, many of whom couldn't previously afford it, not to mention the fact that premiums are rising at a slower rate this year than they were prior to the law being passed (yes, I'm fully aware that there are many people who argue that market conditions have just as much if not more to do with it than the ACA, but it's impossible to truly know what weight to put on any given variable).

But instead of talking about net neutrality, now we're talking about the ACA, and my guess is, instead of going back to Net neutrality, now you're going to feel the need to give rebuttal to what I just said about the ACA.

Personally, I'd rather hear what people have to say about net neutrality.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 24th 2015, 3:10:22

I'm actually a teacher. I teach high school English and am in the 10th year of my career. I currently do teach at a private Catholic school, but we use the Common Core standards. So perhaps my view of this will be different from those in public school, because while we're using the standards, we don't have the same pressures due to testing.

Here are some thoughts:

The standards are more rigorous than the previous state standards that were used in Illinois, and I'm certain that the Illinois standards were much more rigorous already than many other states. The standards are also quite general and don't prescribe what to teach, only what goals we should be striving for. For instance, one of the 9th and 10th grade standards for literature is: "Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text."
There's nothing in there that tells me what short stories, poems, or novels I have to cover.

Furthermore, the standards try to push the teaching of reading and writing across the curriculum, which is very important, because while I can certainly teach how to write a good argumentative topic or a literary analysis paper, and I can certainly teach how to analyze a short story or a piece of Shakespeare, I don't know how a lab report should be written or what reading strategies should be used to best analyze a history text, and these are the types of skills that have traditionally just been thrust upon the English department and ignored by other departments.

The only annoying thing is that the next big educational idea comes around about every 3-4 years and teachers basically end up spending a ton of time re-aligning curriculum each time the next big idea comes out.

Beyond that, for the common core math thing: I hear everyone complain about how it's stupid and how it's too convoluted, but honestly, as a teacher, I've wondered what the big fuss is and read enough of the websites both complaining about them as well as the ones that stand up for common core, and I've come to the conclusion that the supposed "common core math" is exactly how I do math in my head. It's just understanding how to play with numbers in a way to make math easier. For instance, subtract 198 from 791 without paper. You could go column by column, borrowing each time, or you could realize that 198 is 200-2 and you could subtract 200 and add 2 and get 593. THAT'S the supposedly evil, convoluted common core math that you see on all those worksheets.

Beyond that, while this community may be a poor group to sample, how many people do you know who say they hate math? If we've been teaching math in a certain way for a long time and it creates a lot of people who think they hate math and aren't good at it, perhaps we're teaching it wrong.

So my thoughts on Common Core? I don't mind it. The English standards I very much appreciate for many reasons, and I've picked up some new methods that I think have been very helpful in the suggestions on how to teach these standards.

The math stuff? I truly am far from an expert since it's not my field, but the whining and crying about it seems like much ado about nothing.

And anyone that is going to claim it's some giant government conspiracy to teach a curriculum to control the population has completely missed the point and has absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 24th 2015, 2:34:57

Originally posted by ssewellusmc:
Mdevol - Remember the last heaping pile of fluff that Congress passed before the American public was able to view before passage. The ACA has been a disaster. I am pretty confident that our forefathers would be shooting by now. I'm disappointed to say the least...


Instead of trying to derail the conversation with the ACA, why not stick to the current topic?

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 23rd 2015, 14:53:06

As I said, I'm not playing this set, so I can't speak for PANLV, but if they don't say anything here, shoot a msg to Juusto or Bigwiggle and I'm sure they'll be happy to put you in the embassy with a NAP.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 20th 2015, 15:45:49

If you're looking for a clan, first off: to war or to net?

If it's to net, most of the big clans would probably be willing to take you, but I know when I took on a player that had a negative image on the boards, I usually tried to instill the idea that you have to be a model citizen. Netgaining clans thrive by staying out of drama.

What that means is if you come here and want to find a netgaining clan (or even some of the war clans that have their own agendas and don't want to war because of accepting you) then you need to be above what others can do. So when you make a thread like this and mrford baits you, you need to ignore it and not engage him.

If you can be above it, I'm sure most any clan would take you. If you can't, you limit your options because of your past baggage.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 20th 2015, 15:41:15

I'm just a board lurker this set, but if PAN never got a hold of you, shoot Bigwiggle or Juusto a message. They're the two active leaders right now. I'm sure they'll be happy to give you a NAP.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 9th 2015, 15:39:16

Originally posted by Leto:
Vaccinations lead to superbugs, its proven. Those superbugs kill more than sharks do in any given year.


That's either incredibly stupid or incredibly sarcastic.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 9th 2015, 15:32:57

Suiciding with provocation is fluffty no matter what, and it's relatively pointless at this point in the set, since most good players could restart pretty quickly and not have lost THAT much ground either for netting or warring purposes.

Having said that, you have to consider that not everyone knows what a country is named after. and Hneft isn't completely off base (although perhaps he could have shown a bit more tact) with saying that just because you name a country after a person who just died you should get immunity from things. If I named all my countries Mad Morticia, I might be a bit upset if they were hit, but I can't necessarily expect every player in the game to know who Mad Morticia was or to realize that I'm doing a tribute to her.

Having said that, if the person deliberately targeted them BECAUSE they're a tribute. That's especially fluffish.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 8th 2015, 21:21:05

If you're really new to the game and want to learn, I'd suggest spending your first two sets netting then warring.

Join TKO, PAN or ICD to have great people who could teach you everything you need to know about netgaining. But I usually steer people away from the biggest clan, so I'd recommend TKO or PAN instead of ICD.

CC, NBK, Chaos war more often.

There are plenty of other peopel within the game that could help you also.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 7th 2015, 0:21:01

Juusto or bigwiggle are the best ones to get a hold of if you want to PM them. Otherwise, hopefully one of them sees this.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 5th 2015, 18:09:58

I do like the idea of a sliding scale to make it more difficult to get ridiculously huge

I'd probably put a bracket starting at 100k though (maybe 80%), then 250k, then 400-500k maybe at 50%. And then that's it. If you want to keep getting fatter on 50% of the expected ghost acres, then go for it.

They could be harsher too, if you wanted, but I think 100k is where the gains should start decreasing. I think that'd be a much better way to deal with all of this than anything else. And that would be an easy thing to tweak the amounts per server if you wanted, rather than having completely different rule sets for each server.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 5th 2015, 15:43:22

ICD's been the biggest clan the last several sets, and I personally like to suggest people go to one of the other clans, so I'll suggest PAN or TKO.

Both are great netting clans for a long time (if you look at last set's stats, you'll see PAN wasn't present due to war, but any other set, you'll see us near the top).

You should expect a chance to netgain in peace few to no problems in either place.

I'm a member of PAN, so I'm a bit biased and think you should join us.

Our site is: eepandora.com

TKO can post their own site, but I'd go with one of those two. If you really feel joining the biggest clan is what you want though, ICD is a good group of guys and they've also got a great set of netters right now, as you can see from last set's rankings.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 4th 2015, 23:27:18

Wait..... you came after us as fat hobbitses, then you name yourself hobbit?

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 4th 2015, 23:12:10

Too bad Stryke/Shi/Slash isn't around, it seems like she always had all sorts of info about old finishes.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 4th 2015, 23:11:11

I'm not sure.

I just know that I started REALLY playing the game when I was a sophomore in college, which was 2000/2001, because I got back into it when I had a college job manning a 24-hour desk during night shifts, when nothing would happen.

I know I had one really good finish where I think I was right around t25 (don't remember the exact rank) and I had like 27M networth, which is obviously laughably bad now. I'm not sure when the NW formula change was, but if 27M finishing in the top 25 helps you figure that out, I;m guessing that finish was probably around 2002 or 2003.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 4th 2015, 18:38:09

wiggle: That was a ridiculous group of netters at that point. I usually think of myself as an above average netter in this game, but I was probably about 6th or 7th best in the clan when it was you and AJ, Andrew, Juusto, and Havoc all around at the same time.

SithBob: I remember him being really good, but I'd imagine with the way things have changed in the game, I'm pretty sure no one's touching either what llaar did in set 3 (which many people discount because there was a rule in place that was immediately changed because llaar found a really insanely effective way to netgain), or what people like Andrew did in 20, or what many of the ICD guys did in this set.

I remember average networths for good netgaining clans usually barely made it into 8 figures, and I remember some games around that time period where I finished t100 and even t50 with networths between 20-30M. I'm sure Brendan would learn the new rules and be very very good again, but I highly doubt his 2001/2002 finishes would be in the same ballpark with the game as is now.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 4th 2015, 12:53:29

Ah, I didn't count them to be sureI had them all, so I missed the 208M one.

TUrns out with that additional 208M added in, it's actually closer to 375M average. Dude was a monster. Too bad he's too busy to still play. :(

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 3rd 2015, 14:21:46

I found the set. 20th set, AndrewMose had ~360M average. About 5.8B total.

If you're leaving out llaar's set, then to my knowledge that is (or at least was before this set) the record.

http://www.earthempires.com/ffa/20/clans/PANLV


Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 3rd 2015, 13:26:21

If I get a chance later, I'll look back at PAN's top. AndrewMose had one awhile back where we were pretty sure he was the record. However, this set might change that.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Feb 2nd 2015, 1:56:27

Originally posted by Primeval:
Am I crazy or do I still see countries in vacation mode?


I'm pretty sure he's at under 100 turns on those and they're restarts from the war. Hence why they're still green even with the vacation rule.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 28th 2015, 15:04:33

Originally posted by Waseem:
Yes, we sure do like tree-hugging here in ICD :)


Ha! Let me just put it this way: There aren't a lot of clans that have won the TNW crown (I think it's 5-6 if I remember correctly) and ICD's done it the last 3 sets.

I know you have a bunch of guys who would probably love to war as well, but three straight TNW crowns does make you a netting clan for now at least.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 27th 2015, 14:54:11

Originally posted by tate:
marshall for the most part, TSE 1a was actually started twice. The first time i think they merged into TIE and the second, me and Exar ran for a number of sets, then I thik it either merged or disbanded


Likewise, there was an early attempt at creating TIE in FFA, and the first incarnation of that merged into TSE. Then later, a few of us that were originally FFA people but played for TIE in 1a brought TIE back to the FFA server.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 27th 2015, 14:50:51

Originally posted by SwedishViper:
Yea, should easily see Entry values around:

1 billion for Top 10
250mill for Top 50
180mill for Top 100

or around that. (Might be less though, as not everyone took advantage of the bots).


I'd be surprised if T10 made it that high. Highest it's ever been is 815M for 10th spot, but having said that, you're much more of an expert on netting than I am. It seems like there were more people netting when the 815M happened, with PAN and TKO both being 200+ countries and ESD being around. This set it's mostly ICD and TKO that are the true netgaining clans.

I'd tend to guess it'll be higher than average, but not record-breaking, so I'll put my guesses in at 700M for t10
280M t50
and I'll copy your 180M for t100.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 16th 2015, 14:48:48

On another note: I assume there's at least a chance that you guys didn't hit last set since many clans (obviously including us) were playing in tribute to Mad Morticia.

If that's the case, then I thank you for that at least. Even though I wasn't playing last set, so it wouldn't have affected me, it still just would've felt wrong.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 16th 2015, 14:25:18

Originally posted by Donny:
Bullfluff papa smurf- you guys waited a full week... lmao.


Look, as I said, it's old news and you guys have gotten your revenge, but Smurf's actually right on this (also, he's an NBK guy, not a PAN guy).

I don't remember what NBK was planning as far as timing, but PAN was convinced the plan was to hit at the time we actually DID hit, but either NBK/Ares had different thoughts or Ares wanted to go early, or something. I didn't bring this up at the time (or at least I don't think I did) because it was fresh and I didn't want to say things that could make allies look bad when the event was so fresh, but the joint-FS, for all we knew, was supposed to happen a week later than it did.

the PAN guys playing that set (I was active on the boards, but I wasn't actually playing that set) weren't prepped for war though. But we had made a commitment to our allies, so we honored it.

From our side, we were doing what we thought was right. At the same time, I also completely understand how crappy the act looked from the other side. Having a chance to do it again, I'm sure there are at least parts that we'd have done differently, but at this point, I'd rather move forward than dredge up the past.

I'll ask that anyone making statements from our side of the aisle (PAN or any allies of PAN's speaking on our behalf) just let the old stuff die (like my Disney World themed countries did--Sidenote: You bastards just virtually destroyed the happiest place on earth). I'll probably be incapable of doing this myself, because I'm terrible at letting things go, but I'll pretty much just post responses, if anyone responds to me.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 16th 2015, 1:23:08

Originally posted by Raging Budda:
Twain, timing wasn't based on you coming back. A few other factors were in play.


I know, RB. I'm not actually upset, nor did I ever think you were really being fluffs (well, okay, maybe a little, but no more than anyone is when they declare war). I'm just talking.

Donny: With the networth you guys already had, with war builds (I'm guessing here, I didn't do a single op, because I just launched missiles and by then didn't really have the countries left alive to really attempt another kill), and if you also had that much stock, restarting is really just an exercise in futility and in helping your kill counts.

As far as the old ICD stuff, I could certainly try to defend the rationale of PAN back then, but the simple fact is: PAN was involved in the ICD war, and we joined at a time that made a lot of people angry, and now the people that returned to CC the next set feel they've gotten their revenge, so that chapter is closed.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 15th 2015, 21:46:15

Originally posted by Donny:
Meh- was hoping for a bit of a showing. now what do i do with 40m NW tyrs.


You outnumbered us, you had a lethal first strike on us, and we're netgainers at heart who, at least for me, and probably true for everyone else, had no alerts set for being hit.

I'm not saying this to complain, but this was never going to be a war. It was a slaughter.

Like I said, I'm just glad I was at least able to have enough chems left to at least get the symbolic win of taking out the top country in your tag. It's a small victory, but at least it's something.

You guys are still fluffs for picking the first set I've come back in a long-ass time to kill of PAN though. Damn dirty bastards. You should've killed them off last set so I'd get to netgain.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 15th 2015, 2:37:48

lol, looks like I'm the only one left that's not dead or in vacation mode.

I imagine you'll have me dead by tomorrow morning, but at least I brought down your top guy, and I bought up to at least make it a little harder for you.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Jan 4th 2015, 19:08:34

Originally posted by iTarl:
difference was they were voted #1 last 8 years, when they had to earn it they didnt do as well


Because the votes were arbitrary, right?

I'm glad the SEC gets shut out of the big game this year. I think it's awesome. But that's like when I root against the Yankees. I don't say "Ha ha! The Yankees are a loser organization!" as soon as they're eliminated.

The SEC still is the best conference in the NCAAs for football, even though it'll be Pac-10/Big 10 for the National Championship.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Dec 23rd 2014, 22:23:05

Angel: I'm very amused that you placed an educational policy as one of the biggest issues for Bush. For the most part, education isn't really ever an important national issue and Common Core is no more in the public eye than No Child Left Behind was. As much as I'd love for people to actually care enough about education to make it an issue that might actually sway one's vote in a national campaign, his support for Common Core won't be what makes or breaks his chances at the White House.

Having said that, I do think Bush is in danger of being pushed out by the tea party part of the Republican party. The good thing is that with Iowa and NH being the first two big states, if he could actually show well there, he might still have a path to winning the primary simply by having some of the tea party favorites (whoever they end up being) get knocked out.

I think the real risk for Bush is that someone like Rand Paul puts up a strong showing in those early states as well.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Dec 23rd 2014, 21:46:50

Originally posted by Oceana:
Actually the ruling allowing checkpoints didn't state they were constitutional. If anything it clearly implied they were unconstitutional, but only slightly, so it was Acceptable.
"the weight bearing on the other scale -- the measure of the intrusion on motorists stopped briefly at sobriety checkpoints -- is slight. "

So I'm guessing: "Shall Not Be Violated" really means "Shall Slightly Be Violated"

Must just be a typo in the 4th:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”


I'm not really weighing in on the issue, but I am weighing in on one aspect of this.

I hate when people use the above argument and say something that has been adjudicated in front of SCOTUS is actually unconstitutional despite the SCOTUS allowing it.

The very definition of whether something is constitutional or not is defined by the Supreme Court's judgment of what the Constitution means, so no, it's not unconstitutional if the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, no matter what you or anyone else, with your vast legal knowledge that clearly outweighs that of people like John Roberts and Ruth Bader Ginsberg, thinks.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Dec 10th 2014, 2:44:47

yeah, I think it'd be interesting to have a reveal at the end of set which ones were bot-run, but I don't think we can know in the meanwhile, which I assume is your plan since you didn't tell us which ones they are.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Dec 8th 2014, 15:14:40

Unless people view you as being a bigger problem than it's worth, almost any clan will take more members. CC and NBK are the other two main war clans beyond IMP and Chaos right now.

Reach out to the people in those clans.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Nov 30th 2014, 22:08:46

Originally posted by Desperado:
sv, cx, llaar, crippler, vern, bj, dragon, ford, twain and troy for mine.


if they can't out net you, they' can just kill your countries :D


How about that? I made someone's list. :)

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Nov 26th 2014, 12:57:25

Crippler: Good choice. There's a lot of really amazing netters, so it's easy to overlook someone. A couple of other people that deserve mention are llaar and Ketchup, who both held the #1 spot for Overall networth on the leaderboards for several sets before they both seemingly just got bored with netting.

RB: Well, probably not on the warring thing. You could certainly war PAN, but I haven't had the time to play a set in quite awhile. And if I do come back, I'd rather not get my ass kicked by you guys in my first set back, even if it would give me a greater appreciation for your warring abilities. After all, I already know YOUR abilities from the FoCuS/PAN vs. NBK war way back. :)

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Nov 25th 2014, 15:03:15

Originally posted by Raging Budda:
Troy, AngryJesus, Donny, Bigwiggle have to be at the top of netting draft.


I'm not sure about your choice of Donny. He's great at putting up the big country, but from his overall TNW, I don't think he makes top 5. Perhaps that's just because he tends to be in a lot of wars though. Maybe I'm not giving him enough credit.

I'd put AJ and BW from PAN (And AndrewMose if he'd play more often, to my knowledge, he's got the best ever ANW set in FFA), and guys like Troy and pollex from TKO.

It also depends on if you're trying to build for one set or if you're trying to go one set only, because there are a lot of really great players that have either gone away and don't seem to play anymore (guys like Havoc, Ozzite, AndrewMose), or guys who seem like they come and go (like Rockman for awhile), not to mention some guys that may not get enough credit because they came back recently, so their leaderboard numbers don't look as strong (like some of the ICD guys).

Lastly, there's Juusto, who won't claim his account, but I'm pretty sure he's the Unlinked Account at #4 overall. That guy's lazy sets where he lets his countries sit with turns wasting away still end up being close to 100M ANW typically.

Having said all that, for netting, I'd take AJ, BW, pollex, Troy, and probably AndrewMose if I could get him to come back. If I had to pick someone playing currently, I'm not sure who I'd put #5, but it'd probably be Juusto. (my PAN bias coming out)

For war, I'd probably go mostly some of the older NBK guys and a few CC guys. I've never had the horror of warring against CC though, so I haven't had to deal with them first hand, so I probably have more NBK war guys (gambit, K4F) that come to mind as people I'd hate to have to war against.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Nov 17th 2014, 15:31:54

In the past, I'd be on your side, farmer, but here's the situation:

This server doesn't get a lot of new players, but it does get its share of players claiming to be new to hide and grow big enough to be effective suiciders.

The vast majority of people playing untaggeds in Free For All either are clearly harmless or are suiciders trying to hide in the collection of untaggeds.

They're primarily attacking suiciders and occasionally killing off an innocent. If you're that innocent, this sucks, sure. However, this is ultimately an alliance server, and for that matter, there's nothing in the rules that says that a person can't be a fluff (otherwise we'd have been able to ban suiciders, after all!) and kill whoever they want. I don't say that to mean that people killing untaggeds are just being fluffs, but moreso to show that all our "rules" of good play are ones the community has come up with and enforces.

Does it probably drive a few new players away? Yes. I'm almost positive it does. And that's unfortunate. But clans like TKO, with Warster pointing out they would typically lose 2 top-10 caliber countries per set to suiciders, have no obligation to a random new player, but they do have an obligation to the players under their tag. I don't blame tags like TKO (and others, I don't mean to single them out) for going after suiciders preemptively.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Nov 4th 2014, 22:59:12

I love these posts. With the exception of a few idiots who either sell ridiculously low or ridiculously high, the ingame rates are set by market demands. It's easy to say that no one should sell for under $200 (or whatever, I don't have countries right now), but if I have oilers that need to run turns and have no cash, I'd rather sell for $190 than have oil sit on market at $200.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 23rd 2014, 16:01:39

qwertyuiop~

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 23rd 2014, 16:01:18

Originally posted by Raging Budda:
/me sends missiles to Twain pointy end first.

That work?


Ooohhhh...... I like the pointy end.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 23rd 2014, 16:00:34

Since you have no desire for a pact with PAN, I've made the decision that we declare war on you immediately.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 22nd 2014, 1:25:55

I've been trying to work my way up the all-time charts for missiles defused. Suck it, everyone! All your missiles are belong to ME!

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 19th 2014, 17:36:40

I would say the guy with the most t100s on the server all time should play however he deems best.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 12th 2014, 13:06:40

One of the biggest differences I'd say has to do with the fact that LeBron has shown he can win a championship now and that he's presumably committed to staying in Cleveland for awhile.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 12th 2014, 0:26:20

Well, perhaps I'm a bit harsh on you in particular. There are people that come on here and fluff about this every few months.

Alliance, Free For All, and Team are your alliance-based servers (although Team has teams of up to 5 only), whereas the others are solo servers.

If you want to find success in Alliance or Free For All, the best way is to join one of the alliances or try to start your own (but start with making a tag to put your countries in and let everyone know who you are). As mrford said, there's so much possibility for one person with 16 countries to do serious damage, so for the most part, we're a bit suspicious of untagged countries, especially if they seem to have an aggressive build to them.

If you want to play solo and don't want to tag up (or aren't planning on playing multiple countries) you're probably better off playing one of the other three solo servers.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 11th 2014, 2:43:15

It kind of bugs me when people talk like this. Seriously, it's an alliance-based server, and beyond that, where else do you find a game where groups with large numbers use their advantage over groups with small numbers.

That's the very nature of the competition.

The fact is, this server is actually INCREDIBLY welcoming to new players. Generally, if you play nice and announce who you are, most people will leave you alone or will at least only grab you minimally (no more than they would any established clan).

But this idea that you're entitled to equal treatment as the big clans is ridiculous.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 10th 2014, 16:39:30

Originally posted by KoHeartsGPA:
I don't get the hatred towards success part, I guess I would have to be a liberal to understand that mentality, I applauded success all my life, with that being said, I'd love to see my Giants in the WS again :-)


Yeah, bullfluff. Hatred towards success when your team struggles isn't a political thing, and trying to steer your own thread off topic towards politics with a jab like that is bush league.

You're saying you've never hated a team like the 90s Bulls, 2000s Lakers, 2000s Patriots, or any other dynasty type team?

Or the Yankees?

And yeah, ssewell: I thought about taking that list one further to include the Tigers, but top 5 was convenient.

Twain Game profile

Member
3320

Oct 9th 2014, 12:03:45

I do love them taking down Hollywood, but if experience is the key narrative this year, the only other team that has anywhere near what the Cardinals have is the team they're facing.

And it may just be the small sample size of a three-game series, but the Orioles as a WS team to beat scare the crap out of me, as they pounded this fluff out of StL in early August (iirc).

If they make the Series though, it'll be an interesting storyline either way though, becuase it'll either be the former St. Louis Browns vs the St. Louis Cardinals OR it'll be a rematch of the I-70 series in 1985. If that happens, the Don Denkinger references are gonna fly.