Search For Author: SolidSnake - Earth Empires Forum

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jan 13th 2015, 10:35:07

Originally posted by Vamps:

You guys should play and show the rest of the "scrubs" how it's done then. This will only get more enjoyable with the more people involved from different alliances. It certainly sounds more entertaining than landtrading (yawn) or the same old stale wars that have recycled themselves the past few sets (yawn).
Besides, are you really going to let Tob represent LaF? ;-)

I know your game vamps. Trying to suggest we have to show scrubs that they're scrubs requires two months of logging into the game (or rather, x + 2-3 days, where x is the amount of days prior to the war). And I'm much happier berating scrubs for being scrubs from the sidelines until a time where the game may actually have a few players playing capable of being competitive and then show the capable players that they are also scrubs, just not as scrubby scrubs as the rest of the scrubs.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jan 12th 2015, 11:10:07

Originally posted by euglaf:

nice list of scrubs.

This...

I see a lot of "all" and very few "stars".

SolidSnake

Member
867

Dec 10th 2014, 11:01:15

Originally posted by SolidSnake:

For me to ruin that I would have to claim you were good at something, which you weren't, aren't and unless you pay me to devote 70 hours a week for a year taking you step by step through every aspect of netgaining, never will be.

#noteventrolling

SolidSnake

Member
867

Dec 3rd 2014, 6:53:31

What does it matter, I think everyone can agree everyone sucked this set.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Dec 3rd 2014, 6:50:15

Originally posted by Osso:

Slagpit ran the best all-x I've ever seen. Hit $177,843,612 with 171(#171) in the set ending August 2011.

Did a rep casher -> demo destock with a killer eos resell. That will always be a legendary finish in my eyes, along with the time he broke $100m nw with allx commie and $200m nw with a grabbing commie.

lol @ anyone being impressed by slagpit's netgaining.

Are you also impressed by Frasier's leadership skills?

SolidSnake

Member
867

Nov 15th 2014, 2:37:38

Originally posted by Riddler:

my only input about what SS said is this "The whole EWPP thing was just another way for leaders to put even less time into their alliances over anything else." well honestly thats because the alliance leaders aren't 13 years old anymore, the ones who have stuck it out this long have all grown up and have jobs and families now...Text based games aren't played by new players or younger generations anymore.

I agree. It doesn't change the fact that the EWPP is a means to invest less time in the game, which has the domino effect of increasing the speed of the decline of the game.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Nov 15th 2014, 0:52:55

Originally posted by iccyh:

Might be possible if you could get a C/I to like 70k A. Otherwise, no.

*sighs*

This is why it would be possible to win untagged now.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Nov 13th 2014, 23:25:48

Originally posted by tellarion:

Originally posted by SolidSnake:

TBH I would take a contradictory view to most of you. The reason the game is dying is because people dont care about their alliances as much as they used to. New members haven't been what was keeping playing numbers up for about a decade. A lack of caring for someone's alliances, also increases suiciders because you get these tards playing untagged just to ruin other peoples resets.

The whole EWPP thing was just another way for leaders to put even less time into their alliances over anything else. The only thing that would appear like a challenge at the moment would be to attain rank 1 untagged, and in all honesty that looks entirely possible, which is incredibly sad. Probably wouldn't be possible for me since the admins would leek my country # faster than you could say boo, but that's another story.

Cry me a fluffing river. Please please PLEASE bring it up again how people are leaking numbers. I'm sure martian would LOVE to waste his time investigating this bullfluff again.

To my knowledge martain never did investigate it? If he did, he did it on his own since I didn't bring it to him, I brought it to pang years ago. Pang admitted it happened already though, at least in relation to me, so maybe talk to him before you call bullfluff?

Originally posted by Pang:

Originally posted by SolidSnake:

... Probably wouldn't be possible for me since the admins would leek my country # faster than you could say boo, but that's another story.

translation: "I don't have the skill to do it, so I'll blame the admins being corrupt so I don't have to fail!"

Yes Pang, like how I didn't landtrade because I was only good at old strategies and couldn't adapt. Except I won doing that too having never done it before. So I'm going to guess that's just an attempt to troll me into playing again? and you complain about the server being toxic for the game... how about the admins?

The truth is winning untagged would be hard but still possible, but not because of the nw required, but because of getting suicided by someone (probably both tagged and untagged suiciders in this instance) knowing there would be no ramifications for the suicide.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Nov 13th 2014, 7:26:48

SolidSnake

Member
867

Oct 28th 2014, 0:37:26

Oh deer... couldn't you have found some logs of me threatening someone or demanding enormous amounts of reps for stuff? That conversation is far too civil.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Aug 27th 2014, 11:57:02

There's this forum, it's called bugs and suggestions. Go fluff off there.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Aug 24th 2014, 0:47:27

Originally posted by Boltar:

Originally posted by En4cer:

Kalick for the most part you are pretty well spot on... However that extra 27 hours is 100 turns... That 100 turns (later that LaF was planning to FS) was actually 4-500m cash or close to 2m nw each that over 50 members of the alliance went without which has laws to our subsequent slaughter lol :)

Alin I would fully support the LaF leader that goes down that path... And realistically from what I can see it needs to be LaF or SoF that comes across like that that would see it happen :)

the only way a LaF leader will do that is if u lose a couple of times and cant stack the odds in ur favor.. this i know from talking personally with a former Don of laf about the LaF way of life. u do not lose or put anything to chance to lose.. and will anything it takes not to lose.

Tbh I've made many an offer of a friendly war to alliances, no one ever accepts them. I even offered them with a 25 member disadvantage to laf... No one really wants friendly wars when there is an alternative.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Aug 11th 2014, 8:59:13

Heyhey waseeem

SolidSnake

Member
867

Aug 9th 2014, 13:58:30

I'm pretty sure omega is older than sol?
From what I remember it goes laf, omega, md, sol with md having disbanded so not having played all the sets in between, but as a tag existed before sol.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 20th 2014, 5:06:06

Originally posted by RandyMD:

Needless to say, any ideas or plans, anyone has heard around the alliance community regarding SOL and/or MD are wrong unless you heard we are fighting each other this set in a friendly. This has been planned for weeks and our plans have never changed or been altered, I don't care who your "sources" are.

We would like to also like to extend an offer for alliances unpacted to MD and/or SOL at this time to come forth and pact us. We do not wish to have altercations with other alliances, but if they should happen, will be dealt with on a case by case basis by both alliances.

That whole part of the post just reads as running away. Cant really expect that after making alliances prep for war you can then avoid the war by saying you dont want to anymore and think that everyone else goes along with that despte netgaining already having been compromised. (I'm sure you'll dispute that you ever were looking to war sof and or laf but that's just a game of he said she said, as soon as pacts weren't signed everyone knew the score this set).

But what do I know i'm not involved in politics anymore.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 18th 2014, 22:21:58

*cheque

bonus

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 11th 2014, 8:48:52

trollololol

Edited By: SolidSnake on Jun 11th 2014, 8:50:54

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 10th 2014, 7:46:14

Originally posted by qzjul:

pang did it :)

From the looks of it, he missed something, because its still not reset properly.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 6th 2014, 23:58:51

Yeah well played this set osso, was competitive right until the end.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 6th 2014, 7:45:34

Just so that there is no confusion, you suck at killing stuff too.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 6th 2014, 6:55:53

You don't have to claim to be good for people to say you're not. You just agree with everyone else that you are bad.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 5th 2014, 12:44:06

Originally posted by mrford:

Buyouts are really bad. They don't deserve their finish.

People who get to 100k land on the other hand, super legit elite netters. Deserve everyrhing!

It's funny how perspective changes your viewpoint on legit isn't it?

Not really considering I've said from the outset landtrading is bs too.
I did it this set to make a point and attempt to get it nerfed by beating everyone by miles, but scode took the second half of that away from me with his suicide. Hopefully it still gets nerfed.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 5th 2014, 11:52:38

1: a group of players buying a certain item on the market to an inflated price despite not needing that tech/good so as to allow one or a few people to benefit from selling that tech/good at an inflated price.
2: people seeing these attempts then sell goods at prices in between the normal selling price and the hugely inflated price to attempt to stop people buying the hugely inflated prices.
3: fluffkids
4: whoever is selling at an inflated price
5: because it's easier to transfer $ this way than via fa and harder to trace.
6: generally end of the set to get a couple to a rank they do not deserve.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 5th 2014, 1:51:33

Tbh I probably shouldn't have gone off on you osso, I lump you with the Evo I do know despite not knowing you other than as that guy that always landtrades.

Tella and rasp if you seriously thought I was having buyouts run (which everyone with the smallest ounce of sense knows who is actually running bit outs and it's someone I dislike almost as much as the two of you) then drop the pact with laf, let your stupidity and ignorance destroy you again. We both know you won't.

I may not be modest, but why sugar coat the truth, the game is being tailored to help people play fluff strats like land trading and still none of you can compete with anyone that actually plays at top tier level. All that's happened is you've succeeded in making good players bored of playing to the point average players win every now and again since no one good is netgaining.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 4th 2014, 20:39:42

Well, actually osso will win, only way he doesn't is if he's hyper fluff (as in more than I already think he is, and I think he's pretty fluffing fluff).
Scode suiciding me and feeding him land took me from easily beating him by a good 50m + to being about 100m behind, the only reason I even got close is because he's not any good.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 4th 2014, 20:13:34

Oh deer, there go Evo, embarrassing themselves and putting their foot it in... again. Some people are just beyond helping.

I could tell you who is running the buy outs, but it's much more entertaining watching you run your mouths in an attempt to get your alliance killed and farmed, again.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 3rd 2014, 0:44:34

Originally posted by Wu:

La Albiceleste will win the World Cup. (if you don't know what country's nickname Albiceleste is w/o googling, then you need to watch more football :P )
Also some of you experts have forgotten that no European country have won the World Cup when its hosted in South America. I recommend re-assessing your predictions.

... and SOL is ranked too high.

There hasn't been a World Cup in South America for 36 years... To suggest fitness levels and preparation hasn't changed in that time is ridiculous. Spain won in South Africa, while brazil/Argentina looked distinctly average. I'd say Argentina have got better since then, brazil not so much...

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 2nd 2014, 14:01:57

Originally posted by XiQter:

Why is everyone putting england over uruguay, there is no frickin way england is going to make it past the groups, they are almost as overhyped as belgium!

I would guess it's because Uruguay are a two man team... (three if you count godin)
England have a better goalkeeper, defence, midfield. Uruguay have a better attack. England have better squad depth.

And I never underestimate England's capacity to suck, but Uruguay struggled to make it to the world cup, and it's not because they've got better, they've got significantly worse, even if two players have continued to improve their other top class talent is now over the hill (Forlan).

SolidSnake

Member
867

Jun 2nd 2014, 10:40:24

Group A:
Brazil
Croatia
Mexico
Cameroon

Group B:
Spain
Chile
Netherlands
Australia

Group C:
Colombia
Ivory Coast
Greece
Japan

Group D:
Italy
England
Uruguay
Costa Rica

Group E:
France
Ecuador
Switzerland
Honduras

Group F:
Argentina
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Nigeria
Iran

Group G:
Germany
Portugal
Ghana
USA

Group H:
Belgium
South Korea
Russia
Algeria

Round of 16:
Brazil beat chile
England beat Colombia
Spain beat croatia
Italy beat Ivory Coast
France beat Bosnia
Germany beat South Korea
Argentina beat Ecuador
Portugal beat Belgium

Quarter-Finals:
Brazil beat England
Germany beat France
Spain beat Italy
Argentina beat Portugal

Semi-Finals:

Germany beat Brazil
Spain beat Argentina

3rd Place: Argentina beat Brazil

Final: Germany beat Spain

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 19th 2014, 9:42:49

Originally posted by DJBeif:

Yes, cause that's apparently how the pros do it? Anyone can run a commie indy or a techer that doesn't stock and be big enough to outrun some retals, that's just like WB did...All you'd do is make techers blow their stock early to retal you, and burn relations with other alliances.

The "real top tier"...hahaha, sure.

*sighs*
1: Who are you? (as in, do you have another display name you go by?)
2: Do you believe you're proficient enough as a netgainer to even enter into this discussion? (yes/no)
3: Have you ever learnt how to netgain? (yes/no)
4: If yes, where did you learn? (Self taught, possible. Taught by retards, also possible.)
5: Was it evo? I'm betting it was evo. If I'm right you should go back to questions two and three, change your responses to no and skip questions 4 and 5.

Edited By: SolidSnake on May 19th 2014, 9:45:33
See Original Post

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 16th 2014, 7:03:21

Originally posted by tellarion:

Ok :) people sometimes don't like trading with us because we're really good at retalling. If you would like to donate your land to me, I would be happy to oblige you :)

Let's do it. I give give you 30 days notice I'm going to farm you senseless and still be 100% confident you have no one good enough to retal me. That's the skill disparity between real top tier and the clowns that think they're good because they can get 300mnw land trading these days.

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 16th 2014, 0:21:31

Originally posted by tellarion:

But you know, I'm sure SS will place at least top 3 and tell everyone how amazing he is. In reality, he lost 21,860a to scode, made 15k back on his own retal(and would likely have broke even if not for bouncing once), and since then has made 43,474a from MD.

So I guess your possible victory will be thanks to scode and MD. But really, landtrading is just stupid and takes no skill and SS is better than you.

Please drop your pact with laf so I can farm you next set, land trading is boring I need an Evo sized land source.

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 15th 2014, 13:05:23

Originally posted by DJBeif:

Um...more countries with more land and more net *does* equal more competition..no runaway countries since everyone has access to land. Regardless where the land comes from, whether they bump up exploring to 100A per turn and leave it like that all set, people all have an equal chance at getting the same amount of land, or more if you're more clever at it. Because of that fact, the people who will come out ahead of the pack are the ones who know how best to utilize their turns (read: the actual pros). Anyone can just tech/cash all their turns and buy stock, but when to catch the peaks of everything for sale, when to stop grabbing, etc takes the actual skill.

Have a look at the guys over 50k this set, how many of them are good netgainers, almost none. Competition is at an all time low, because all the good players are being forced away because no one good wants to partake in bs landtrading.

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 14th 2014, 13:15:16

Land trading sucks, everyone doing it sucks, it's boring as fluff, skillless as fluff, and the game would be a better place if ghost acres were completely removed from the game again. The concept that grabbing pacts are any different to agreed trades is preposterous as most of the alliances with such pacts still make prior contact before hits are exchanged, and when they don't it's common courtesy to make sure gains will be even. fluff even gains, make your own country big and strong and make the other persons small and weak. It's a war game, people need to grow a pair.

More land /= more fun
More nw /= more fun

More competition = more fun.

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 9th 2014, 9:14:01

Flexa = iScode, just as an fyi.

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 7th 2014, 7:20:13

plus 1

SolidSnake

Member
867

May 1st 2014, 8:38:12

But DANGER never left?

SolidSnake

Member
867

Apr 15th 2014, 12:36:32

It is currently the largest reset on reset drop in player base across all servers since the game began...

At this stage undoing every change made in the last year would boost player numbers. Quite simply, learn when you're getting things wrong, and undo them, there's no shame in admitting you were wrong, only in refusing to accept you were wrong when you quite clearly were.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Apr 8th 2014, 15:45:24

Originally posted by archaic:

I hate quoting myself but,

Originally posted by archaic:

I love how its always the Laf guys that are opposed to shaking up the game. They have so much invested in a set of strats from years ago and they are desperately clinging to the past.

Cry me a fluffing river SS.

Archaic remind me at what point you gained any degree of netgaining competence to even be able to have an informed opinion.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Apr 8th 2014, 8:55:14

Originally posted by RaTS FYA:

I wish 1a would have picked up land trading back when llaar got it nerfed. The amount of insanity that would have arisen, from people having million acre countries would make this thread look dull.

landtrading did exist in 1a... and all the alliances doing it got killed for it. The problem now is that with the admins pushing it and most alliances on the server accepting it, no one is big enough to fight it alone anymore. And a coalition would only lead to more cries of bullying and running people from the server anyhow.

SolidSnake

Member
867

Apr 8th 2014, 7:46:56

Originally posted by archaic:

OK, how about all tags play a little game and allow internal trading, mass internal FA, tech leaching, landfarms, everything that an alliance can do to propel one player to the highest possible NW. No holds barred, pull out the stops and lets see how it goes. I am betting that it would not end the game, in fact, I bet it would be the most fun set in a long time. How high can the bar be set if an alliance puts away the egos for a common cause?

I love how its always the Laf guys that are opposed to shaking up the game. They have so much invested in a set of strats from years ago and they are desperately clinging to the past. Its a game, let loose and play it like one.

Have you ever looked at the score list when laf land traded? If anything it aids laf more than anyone else, the difference is most people in laf actually like competitive game play, I personally do not want to click create country, click explore, click explore 2.0, and take rank 1, which is essentially all it would take right now, hence why i've refused to landtrade thus far.
Of course that leads to comments of "blablabla do it then", and the longer land trading doesn't go nerfed i guess the closer I get to doing it, maybe the only way to get things changed is to waste my time illustrating how fluff the current system is since people dont seem to understand game mechanics well enough to understand it without 2 months worth of proof.