Oh, just like retail stores start doing Christmas sales in October? Yeah, I can almost understand if RD were to make a 4 month deadline for Christmas cards.

First Choice:
-Kiss My fluff Peloponnese

Various Other Choices:
-RD's Farmland
-Bending Over
-Thank You Sir May I Have Another
-Any and all other euphemisms for taking it like a man

I wonder which one they'd prefer I didn't have?

OGT, I seem to remember you saying that RD would have to kill your country... I'm not sure why you aren't treating this as vindication of your previous points.

I think that, also, is being discussed on another thread. I'm not sure what the consensus on that one is, though.

By necessity, PS/SS-only attacks will take away missiles, but does this mean that tanks and troops would be taken out of the equation? I'm not sure that's what's being suggested, but I want to clarify.

Also, long, drawn-out, inconclusive wars might be a good way to draw in more people, in that they will find a game full of action but no real way to lose. That said, I don't know if I like that idea.

Considering the hopefully-soon-to-arrive FB population, I would think that they might be attracted to the game by a massive war, whether for land or just for the fluff of it. As a netter, I wouldn't find it too appetizing, but I can imagine someone who's never played the game before thinking, "There's a lot of action going on in this game! Let's get in on it!"

The downside is that veteran netters won't be happy to be forced into random wars for the sake of newbies. Nor will smaller clans care for the added strain. Just an idea, but it has its drawbacks.

If country:country retals became policy, which (as I might have mentioned in my last post) I would not support in a server based off of strength in numbers, I think there would have to be a redefinition of what is "standard retal policy." If we can no longer depend on strength in numbers, we're going to have to find some other way, no matter how distasteful, to keep predators off of our backs. And if that requires missiles, so be it.

Either that or a good priest. I'm not tempted to grab, just irritated by the limitations that entails.

I would add that, since the game is practically made for grabbing, why would anyone that plays it refuse to be grabbed? That's a serious question; I'm curious why you'd want to play the game if you miss out on half of it.

I tried looking up "Diversity" on Wikipedia, and couldn't find anything. But I'd love to know more.

While farming is a problem, I'm not sure it's the only problem this server or any other has. Hint, hint.

xRDTx is a new addition. When was that formed?

No, I don't have a problem with the fact that they hid during war. We did it ourselves, so I'd be a hypocrite to have a problem with it.

And I wasn't yelling at you, de1i.

Be careful, the player hasn't stopped running yet. You'll get your finger caught if you try to change the record now.

Why would a tag made up of people already playing in alliance create more diversity? In terms of actual countries, there would hardly be a difference.

Note: The above is a serious question, I'm not being sarcastic. You seem to think this is a viable strategy, I just want to know what I'm missing.

I was under the assumption that making game mechanics work to your advantage was part of playing any game, not just this one. I can understand frustration in taking advantage of a mechanic to make a game less fun, but then again, those who do well in Earth, in my opinion, are those that spend so much time crunching numbers that there isn't any fun to be found anyway. I always thought that was what separated the veterans from the rest of us: the ability to exploit the advantages of gameplay.

I'm not sure running bad countries (though I would dispute that in all cases besides my own) has anything to do with the point: ALMOST EVERYONE IN MKR ALREADY HAD A COUNCIL CLAN! My point, if you would care to understand it: Moving would kill us because we would have exactly two people left that didn't have prior commitments.

EDIT: And possibly less now because I've recently started playing Alliance too.

Okay, I'm two months behind. I said I'm sorry. All I know is that this xTx stuff came out of nowhere and brought back bad memories.

Clearly you don't understand what I'm trying to say, mainly because I screwed up set numbers. My idea is that A TAG NO LONGER AT WAR should have no reason to hide. Again, I apologize for mixing things up, but that has nothing to do with you: 1) missing my earlier apology and 2) missing the point about what I'm trying to say--when a clan ISN'T hiding (i.e. isn't at war), there's no reason for strangely named tags. If RD hides during wars, I don't complain about it. If RD isn't hiding now, there's no issue.

So who is "they" again?

Oh, so that wasn't a joke?

Contact is good, I don't mean to say otherwise. But the implication of Mr. Lime's statement ("legit retals will be GRANTED with color authorization," emphasis mine) is that RD is at the top of every clan's hierarchy.

I wasn't referring to xTx, as that had just been cleared up to me. Unfortunately, the tags I WAS referring to were last set's tags. My mistake, I'm a month behind as usual.

Sadly, and I REALLY hate to say this considering how many times RD killed me during the war, but de1i has a point. I think a lot of us need to put our views regarding smaller tags on paper, so that our opinions don't change based on who's being discussed.

Although personally I would be pleased to see an easier clarification, in that if there is a tag in RD (or protected by RD), it would be helpful for that tag to have RD in the name. You aren't hiding anymore, why bother making things more difficult for the rest of us?

I would like to point out that MKR, for one, discussed (briefly) moving to the alliance server when 1a became Team. It was considered an unattractive option because of Archaic's point. You wouldn't be gaining any more players, but would instead be killing another clan.

While I assume Mr. Lime refers to the surrender, I find his confirmation's position just underneath locket's statement to be very telling.

I can't be the only one that thinks it strange that we have to go through ANOTHER clan's leadership to make our clanmates' actions legitimate.

To go back to an earlier discussion on this thread (my apologies)...

Tag protection is not inherently guaranteed, as anyone with any experience in this game knows all too well. Regardless, having or building up tag protection is, as far as I'm concerned, the main goal in having an alliance in the first place. If we just played clan-based servers to have friends, we would better spend our time going off and doing wonderful things with RL people than sitting in front of a computer. The friends a clan provides are wonderful, but the first and most important aspect of a clan must be its attempt to protect its members from being grabbed.

Because what is grabbing? As has already been said, it is stealing, legal or not. Is that a bad thing? No, because it is a basic part of this game. But that doesn't mean people will want to be grabbed. And people will know that someone who is grabbed and does nothing will be grabbed again. Someone's already threatened (jokingly or not) to retal country:country hits with missiles. I can already tell you, from primary experience, that I've done it before. I was killed by twenty guys afterward, but as a noob I felt I had no other recourse. This is what I expect from a country:country policy shift. If countries are expected to defend themselves alone, I would have to expect that the underachievers are going to throw courtesy out the window in order to make retals their countries aren't suited for, if only to explain to any other potential predators that their countries are not free farmland.

You has? I want. Also, someone teach me to tech, if it's so much better than the farming I make my living from.

/me buys up whole block. "Land, yes!"

*likes traps*

Only because they seem to like me a lot; I keep falling in them. So I try to return the favor.

Thanks for clearing that up for me, although that surprises me based on all of the people bragging about how many countries they kill per set there.

I wasn't talking to you, Dragon.

Where is it? Tech sales must be happening in the wee hours of the morning; I haven't gotten my hands on any agri tech at all.

Sounds a tad like what I find in the fantasy section of the local bookstore...

No, your quote tells me to put on more patience in response to more wrongs. I'm not sure how me freezing in January is a good metaphor.

You're using the Da Vinci Code as historical evidence? [shudder]

What makes a "better" server? I only wonder because if someone hates netgaining, the "better" server is at war all the time, and vice versa. No one's really come up with a consensus on this point.

The idea behind FFA just sounds like too much work and not enough fun. Not that I understand the specifics, but to create as many countries as you want would require a lot more dedication than I'm willing to put into this game.

Enough of us still rely on Alliance etiquette in this server that there isn't much difference. At least, so I've been led to believe, unless someone's holding out on me.

My thanks to dixiechick and everyone else who helped me with this problem. And if I'm acting like any girlfriend you've ever had, locket, I pity you.

I recently applied with your clan as a foot in the Alliance door, and was looking forward to helping you out this set to the best of my ability. However, through my own stupidity (and a lack of Boxcar knowledge), my choice of username/password on the Boxcar site has caused some problems. I have been unable to log onto your site, and it seems Archaic hasn't come back to his Team clan's Boxcar site recently enough to find the message I sent him detailing this problem. Therefore, I apologize for waiting so long to make this problem known to you, as at the moment you probably think I was simply wasting your time.

Moreover, if there is some way that I could contact ICN privately while bypassing Boxcar until this problem is taken care of, could I use that for the time being? I think Archaic is probably tired of answering all of my questions at this point.

Again, apologies to all involved.

--Peloponnese

Wait a minute. So, according to this, if someone does something wrong, we should look the other way? Um, no. Gaming does not work like that.

Edit: Archaic, do you even use Boxcar anymore? Give me a way to contact you, please. (Although if you give me an ICQ number, there's about a 50/50 chance I'll be able to find my old account, so that might not be helpful.)

I like how the RD version of "fun" is practically guaranteed to make everyone else hate this game.

I wish you the best of luck while you net in protection, then. Mind if I grab some acres from you before you get turned into an inferno?

I'm not sure showing off your kill count, established by using multiple teams at once, really makes a difference regarding a proposed 5 vs. 5 battle. Not that I have anything to do with Lita, but if BRated is as good as she claims, then I would be interested to hear the results of a straight fight.

"Some," having no limit, could just as easily mean "an extra hundred countries" as it could mean "one country."

Archi, I sent you a PM in Boxcar on that subject; please respond.

Nice to know that RD is still being bitten, but unfortunately for me, current MKR policy is what made this thread happen, and I don't plan on clan-hunting in the Team server. So I guess I'll wait till next set before I do anything important.

Where were you last week? We could have used some help.

...Make that a one-country clan.

Seriously, is anyone sticking around? Please?

So... whatever happened to the idea of unity in the face of adversity? I really don't want to find myself in a two-country clan next set!