Verified:

ponderer Game profile

Member
678

Nov 16th 2010, 19:47:24

I can't speak for Helmet, but I was driven away by the lack of control over bots, and the apparent lack of interest on the part of the game developer to control and prevent the bots. The game is under new management, and heavily moderated, which is why I was willing to come back.

My understanding is that Helmet left and swore to never return for similar reasons. The new management has addressed those concerns, so rename or no rename, this is a different game.

I also said "the better part of decade" because helmet had been running SoF for 5 or 6 years when I left. I don't know when he left earth:2025, or what happened in TEQ. Not to mention that competently building and running a 200+ member alliance aught to count as double time.
m0m0rific

mrford Game profile

Member
21,378

Nov 16th 2010, 19:52:25

Ahhhhhhhh the glory days
Swagger of a Chupacabra

[21:37:01] <&KILLERfluffY> when I was doing FA stuff for sof the person who gave me the longest angry rant was Mr Ford

Ruthie

Member
2641

Nov 16th 2010, 22:35:18

yea my thoughts exactly

it had its bad points, but i sure had a lot of fun playing back then
~Ruthless~
Ragnarok's EEVIL Lady

iZarcon Game profile

Administrator
Game Development
2150

Nov 16th 2010, 23:18:00

yep. i vaguely remember an imagnum with over 100 members. that would be crazy now.

I never had much dealings with u helmet, but sof never really bothered imag as much as the netters did when i was prez. laf were the worst for pact breaking.

*shrug* i don't hold many grudges

sucked to see sof disappear so long ago. nice to see it rebuilding
-iZarcon
EE Developer


http://www.letskillstuff.org

Helmet Game profile

Member
1344

Nov 16th 2010, 23:19:31

Originally posted by locket:
And we are listening to someone who swore to never come back? A clear word breaker he is...


This isn't Earth2025 and it's not run by Mehul Patel. That's the only reason I'm back.

Helmet Game profile

Member
1344

Nov 16th 2010, 23:26:09

Originally posted by ponderer:
I can't speak for Helmet, but I was driven away by the lack of control over bots, and the apparent lack of interest on the part of the game developer to control and prevent the bots. The game is under new management, and heavily moderated, which is why I was willing to come back.

My understanding is that Helmet left and swore to never return for similar reasons. The new management has addressed those concerns, so rename or no rename, this is a different game.

I also said "the better part of decade" because helmet had been running SoF for 5 or 6 years when I left. I don't know when he left earth:2025, or what happened in TEQ. Not to mention that competently building and running a 200+ member alliance aught to count as double time.


Yep, that's pretty much dead on.

I had been logging in to the Sof site maybe once or twice a year tops. They asked me to come back this set and I just shrugged it off, but I decided to log in to the Sof site more. I started chatting on the forum and a week or two in to the set I realized it wasn't a Mehul Patel game and the cheating was gone. That completely changed my attitude on playing.


Servant Game profile

Member
EE Patron
1250

Nov 17th 2010, 1:02:10

Hmmmm:)

I feel throughly complisulted.

Complimented in that I achieve my allainces desired objectves every reset, despite the warmonger in me.

Insulted in the insinutaton of how I bend over to make it happen. Which happens less than most realize, but yes it does happen.

I think Helmet is right, and I think Pang is right.

Warring is more fun and warring allainces require more activity and it is easier to build a dominant alliance that wars.

But, the server is small enough right now we need to be somewhat cooperative in seeing that everyone gets a chance to play the want to play the majority of the time.

Which may even require Monsters to war on occasion (once a year?) as part of that responsibility to the server

Nice seeing old friends. It is only good for the game, that the most highly competent leaders in the game's history are returning 1 by 1.
Z is #1

Lord Slayer Game profile

Member
601

Nov 17th 2010, 2:55:40

Helmet: I came back for similar reasons and see similar things.

Servant: Let me do FA and people won't think we bend over:P

Whoever it was saying helmet isn't qualified: You were probally still in diapers when helmet started his leading ways back in the days at Omega, when he later created SOF to take from a smaller break off alliance to the most powerful alliance in the game only beaten by bots. *I think that's right but memory gets foggy with age*

That all said, I have alot of other feelings about what is said in this thread, and the 20 others arguing about the same thing, but I think besides the fact of where I currently play, most know my thoughts already, and I don't feel like typing alot:)

H4xOr WaNgEr Game profile

Forum Moderator
1982

Nov 17th 2010, 3:03:13

"laf were the worst for pact breaking" <-- examples?

The only one I can think of is MD, and LaF still maintains that there was no pact.

dustfp Game profile

Member
710

Nov 17th 2010, 11:06:19

Originally posted by Soviet:
If you're giving the best reach around ever, I'd expect you to want something more than a promise from the reciever. Maybe something like a uNAP.


a uNAP is far from a guarantee, there has been pact breaking even in the short life of EE
there's a 3rd reason that wars start: the end of a set is drawing near and a war clan has no legitimate reason to strike a particular clan, so they just pick one at random out of those available.
this happens because there is an imbalance. netting clans will war, but warring clans (so far in EE anyway) will very rarely actually net (if at all)
-fudgepuppy
SancTuarY President
icq: 123820211
msn:
aim: fudgepuppy6988
http://collab.boxcarhosting.com

iPesT

New Member
3

Nov 17th 2010, 12:09:50

Helmet back at the helm of SoF would be fun. It would be the real SoF again

SolidSnake Game profile

Member
867

Nov 17th 2010, 14:13:15

Originally posted by H4xOr WaNgEr:
"laf were the worst for pact breaking" <-- examples?

The only one I can think of is MD, and LaF still maintains that there was no pact.


maintains? there was no pact, elrond admitted that later

Junky Game profile

Member
1815

Nov 17th 2010, 14:21:40

Originally posted by dustfp:
Originally posted by Soviet:
If you're giving the best reach around ever, I'd expect you to want something more than a promise from the reciever. Maybe something like a uNAP.


a uNAP is far from a guarantee, there has been pact breaking even in the short life of EE
there's a 3rd reason that wars start: the end of a set is drawing near and a war clan has no legitimate reason to strike a particular clan, so they just pick one at random out of those available.
this happens because there is an imbalance. netting clans will war, but warring clans (so far in EE anyway) will very rarely actually net (if at all)


I've only Net'd <-blahg 3 times in my career in Earth I've been playing spuratically since 98'
I Maybe Crazy... But atleast I'm crazy.

iZarcon Game profile

Administrator
Game Development
2150

Nov 17th 2010, 14:46:30

Originally posted by H4xOr WaNgEr:
"laf were the worst for pact breaking" <-- examples?

The only one I can think of is MD, and LaF still maintains that there was no pact.


meh.. i meant with iMag. for the most part, any form of DNH/NAP with LaF was useless in the early years of iMag. it was completely disregarded, FA's refused/ignored any contact and then they'd get annoyed when we ankle bit them a few times. Tho the same thing happened with a few other clans like TIE/IX/MD it was always worse with LaF.
-iZarcon
EE Developer


http://www.letskillstuff.org