If I don't win or kill 5-25 griefers the reset is a waste of time.

There is no way of knowing when I need 2-3m turrets or 20m turrets to avoid a hit that will probably make sure I can't win.
If you say I need 2-3m turrets right now, but I know that there are people who can quintipple PS that without blowing more than a quarter of their stock, it is pointless.
The defence then has to be blending in with the others, as best I can, and hoping the griefers go for the fattest, even though I know they generally don't.

When it comes to wars they would have been easy to create if Elders didn't take the route they did. LaF would have been itching for war 1-2 times a year and if the war tags were all lead by adults they could create interesting scenarios for each side every reset without backstabbing, agreement/pact-breaking that leaves a bitter taste for years to come.
You might have had fun sometimes and we might have had fun sometimes but in contrast to your story I think it was despite your actions and not because of them. And the result you have pointed out yourself; it's almost impossible to find a war that is challenging both ways.

Still 2-3m turrets is not a 300k jet break.... That is all I'm saying.

30k land with 300k jet break, you deserve to lose your land....

i was getting to buying turrets, buying jets was expensive :P

But it is the same, because the PS mechanic means that a 3M break is essentially effortless for anybody that wants to grab it. I can start with 0 jets, run 50 paltry turns making 150K bushels, sell them on the private market for chump change, and buy enough jets to break 2.8M turrets with no tech. Hell, for that matter if I'm going after somebody with 30K land and I'm heavily tech'd up - a 10M break is not a deterrent at all.

On the other hand, carrying 10M turrets all set to protect that land for a month of stocking completely defeats the purpose of having the land to begin with.

Cerb is 100% wrong about 'no risk'. The mechanics of this game are set up so that 10 people that want to war can prevent 30 people from netting for a set. One person with no interest in netting who likes to do big grabs can ruin the netting sets of as many people as he wants. Trying to net peacefully in this game is a lottery of hoping somebody that does not care if they only finish with a 25M NW set does not knock your top 10 build out with a double tap during your last week of stocking. If thats not risk, what is?

You carry enough turrets to avoid being an easy BR kill and you keep your land through alliances, intimidation, and the threat of reprisal. Nothing has really changed since 2000 guys, its just on a microscopic scale now so we all actually know the guy who just fluffed us over.

Keep playing the lotto then with mass land and minimal defense..... Your alliance, intimidation and reprisal will not stop me..... And it shouldn't stop anyone else from having what ever form of fun they choose to have whole playing the "game".

And your math sucks.... 150k bushels at $29 = $4,350, 000*30 = $130, 500, 000

That's less than 680k jets max at full price, a PS power of.... 1, 019, 531.25

Even at 35$ food sales you can only get a PS of 1, 230, 468.75

1, 514, 423.07692 PS break if you have the ability to get the cheapest price on jets. But you said no tech....

Go break a 3m turret break with that poon....

I get it, it's counter productive to make the max stock/nw possible through having appropriate defense, this just shows that this game has been mechanically maxed out by the clans of old and everyone just does the same thing set after set(clan politics) . If that's what you enjoy, so be it, I don't and will continue to play the game as I intend to. So better build a fence for your ugly lawn. Your all seriously making me want to dedicated my self to actually destroying sets as you claim I have done.....

150k X 50 = 7500000 bushels X $30 per on PM = $225000000 / $120 per jet = 1875000 jets X 1.5 PS = 2.81M break

OK, so I didn't do taxes and I have no idea what jets sell for during a peaceful set when they are cheap, so maybe you have to generate bushels for a whole days worth of turns to do it - the point is, there is no number of turrets that are enough. This notion that "you guys just need to have more turrets herp derp, then I won't be so mean to you" is just absurd. You're a griefer, its no biggy - just own it - you like breaking netters for fun. You do it a lot, then you get killed, then you suicide. Rinse repeat. No matter how hard you try you will never EVER be as annoying as Marshal.

Make your history public Xninja, prove me wrong

I actually tend to think a war that I'm losing and get multiple chances to wall is more fun than a war I'm winning easily. Look at stones. Hell, even imag is disappointed if they don't all die. Again, its not a thing where a small percentage of the game are griefers. Its like half of us. Kinda always been that way as well but its not as exaggerated for a couple reasons.

First, many would rather avoid drama. I'm very obviously not in this category but you can be sure many SOL members would absolutely rather war or grief but just don't like the blowback.

Second, when elders and sof were pinned together they had essentially no options for war and were absolutely not going to be caught dead netting. Sure. Waiting for the two times a year someone wanted to war is an option. An option that would lose the membership that is specifically here to war.

And I still stand by the fact that I'm not buying up and blowing stock to send 2m jets on a ps unless I know you and specifically don't like you. Otherwise I tend to look for smaller breaks.

Localize that a bit. Even netters will hit the smaller defend bots first. That's why the 50 jet breaks always have like 20 drs. People go for smaller breaks first. If you are running a tiny break, you're essentially inviting griefers in. If you run around 3m they will almost always skip you in favor of smaller breaks. So again, running defenseless is absolutely risk/reward. No question about it.

And again, xninja would have absolutely hit me when I was third place in land IF I wasnt carrying defense. That should be fairly obvious. There was two top ten SOL countries in the land race up until this week as well that also didn't get touched. That isn't because xninja likes SOL or ICN a lot. He's played LaF if he's played anywhere recently on this server. He's not specifically targeting netters. He's specifically targeting defenseless netters. As is all too often the case with any griefers. I don't think the risk/reward factor should be ignored. If you run defenseless, you give yourself a greater chance of winning while carrying a greater chance of getting land tapped by a griefer. Whether its elders, former lafers (not just talking ninja, hellrush fits in here too), MD suiciders over hits on Lenga, etc. They always have and always will seek out the smallest breaks. EVERYONE seeks out the smaller breaks.

Gonna have to throw in a few points here, first of all this is the alliance server where the goal is to do thats best for your alliance, getting killed running a fluffty country annoying bigger tags who will get your alliance killed isnt really what i want from a friend in my tag no matter what kind of alliance im in.

in reply to derricks post, SOF used to net and do it quite well too it just didnt happend very often but when we did we did it very well also when you talk about netters hitting low breaks, netters will hit what gains them the most bad or lazy players will hit low breaks because A they cant afford the higher breaks and B its still a bit better then hitting the explore button. If yer out to suicide a tag/person you will target whatever hurts the most.

/Ivanfluff

Believe it or not I actually netted for one set in sof years and years ago. I remember that. But an sof/elders merger that was forced together by attacks from SOL and Stones was going to be this way. Perhaps if they came together on different terms you'd see a different scenario. It made SOL a natural enemy given its history with SoF and the fact that they blindsided elders. The server only has itself to blame for unleashing that beast. Without that blindside, sof would have likely gone on hating elders and elders would have remained a 9 man tag. I know SOL history only started when Maki became president 3 sets ago, but that dynamic was just a bad play. The elders intensity grew to a max size because of bad politics and then shrunk due to more bad politics. Lines were drawn and large tags became targets. SoF, going into that, hated us and SOL was considered friendly. What a difference a set makes.

To your first point ivan, I value a good fluff starter. Buch found us half a dozen wars that were all fun with his griefing and if I were ever planning to net, I literally couldn't play with the guy. It's that simple. Getting killed, for us, is the whole point so in some circumstances I do actually enjoy that. Not while I'm attempting to get top ten tho ofc.

Your second point only furthers what I'm saying. Someone who wants to hit you will hit you. But someone who is just griefing will find low breaks. If I wake up and say I want to hit Ivan, I can ruin my country and break anything. However, if I just want to get a huge amount of land and see some horse tears, plainly I'm looking for low breaks like we've seen with ninja. He spied me. He spied those sol countries. We just happened to have defense. You can't even argue that. It's just a fact of what happened. You go with the risk you get rewarded sometimes and you get massive losses other times.

I don't break Netters for fun, I would much rather just war if that were the case or AB your buildings that would cost far more money to recover than buying a couple 100k jets to retal and rebuild. I kept my break low the entire time I was hitting.....

I have not hidden my history. Sure, I screwed you personally a few times in Team server, out side of that I have not ruined anyones set.... Unless your counting this current set, which is hardly set ruining.

The point is yes turrets will protect you, I would rather hit a 300k turret break on 30k land than a 3m turrets break at the same 30k land. I don't feel that anyone is being mean either, all points are valid in their merit, I can own that, the issue is the rest of you can't.....

Alas, you make it sound like I target individuals, I don't know who runs what country.... Besides on team when I was being a fluff, which I will own and have not denied.... Out side of that you tell me my dirty history where I am always being a grief, destroying Netters for fun, then die, then suicide and do it over and over again.... I promise you, you can't.

Edit.
Thinking about it, I think there was a time or 2 when Chaos in FFA did screw TKO unprovoked and unwarranted. I'll state for the record that it was not my choice and I actually think my string flaked out shortly after the FS if it even hit .... So I actually am against the very thing your accusing me of. But like I said, I think.... I could be wrong, I could have killed.

To me, it's almost like saying it doesn't matter how many turrets I have at war because no matter what I can be broke.

There's truth to that statement, however, people should at least realize if you run 0 turrets during war, you're not going to last as long as someone with a tough break.

Someone pipe up right now and tell me a story where you had 3m break and kept getting land farmed and griefed all set by someone who wasn't targeting you or your tag specifically. It simply doesn't exist.

Also, I prefer the term griefing to topfeeding so so so much. It more implies the truth. Topfeeding implies you've gone up the ladder in some way. Griefing implies that you're just trying to be an ass. I've seen hits called topfeeds that were on smaller countries with less land but were absolutely holding the sole intention of starting fluff. At the end of the day, I think that's what you all meant in using that outdated term.

Thank you!

All single landgrabs are acts of war towards that player and their entire alliance and should be retalled 1:farm/kill for the first offense. How dare you try to take land away from another player - Do you think this game has some sort of ranking system at the end of each round or something? There is no strategic advantage from taking resources away from another "real" player. Don't be ridiculous, xninja.

What was I thinking? Someone taught me to play this game the wrong way....

At elders we always preferred the <1:kill retal policy. You can be killed for words as quick as acts of war such as a single LG. Lol

Also.... Labeling me this....

grief·er

(in an online game or community) a person who harasses or deliberately provokes other players or members in order to spoil their enjoyment.

If you think this definition truly defines me here on Earth Empires, you don't know me at all..... I'll be honest though, some of the outlandish things claimed against me might just turn me into one....

Yeah. Its harsh. You have a point. You're more having your own fun than intentionally spoiling others' enjoyment. This is plainly true in what you stated. Some can only see the goal of getting first place.

Gerdler couldn't understand at all why me and two others would race one set to 20k acres. He thought it should obviously be a race to 20k built. Which makes sense had I been looking to finish well haha. But I won the race and got owned by building costs for two weeks. But in my head, I finished first that set having fun my way.

Once in a while I really really enjoy trying to get first. And when I do I run low defense and I get spoiled about 1/3 - half the time. But I knew that risk going in. When I'm just trying to get top ten I run a bit of defense to be safe and I net peacefully essentially the entire time every time.

God forbid people assign other people he role of Head of Foreign Affairs, Retal Minister, leadership that actually has to listen to their members/other tags that can ruin them.

The reason elders had any weakness was because there wasn't any order. Everyone trying to keep everyone in their tag happy instead of making the tough calls when presented.

I remember Boot Camp like it was yesterday...

fluff your lawn maintained by illegal immigrants and Tylenol PM.

This statement stringed me the most 😂😂😂😂



It's fun making friends
#LOVEUARCHAIC
#BFFL
and don't forget....
#GofluffYourself

Seriously Prime.

This is a competitive game, taking resources from another player who is doing better is what it's all about. The only reason bots were introduced was to reduce the churn from butthurt players loosing to other players. We have all been butthurt at some point, maybe I should build you a bridge so you can get over it.

IMO part of being a good netter is building a country that can defend itself from the wolves, and scavengers. You could have any break, if you are being targeted, you will be broke at some point, period. Being targeted is a difference between making an LG to give yourself an advantage to an opposing player. Being targeted for a set, and being bullied are two different things. That's a distinction and the tough decision that mods get to deal with, that's why they are there.

Take boxing, for example, or most any sport, do boxers fight the person that is better than them or the person that is weaker than them... What gain would there be had in fighting someone who was weaker, in my eyes the only reason is to fluff your ego. I am further understanding why this is a dying game, in case you missed it, SPOILER ALERT, its the community.

boxers: that depends, some fight easier matches for easy money and quick matches and some fight for good opponents for good money and for glory.

i have no issue with ninjas hit on me, i knew i was riding my luck sitting at 300k turrets, i had just put food up for sale to buy turrets like 40 minutes before he hit , good timing by ninja but he let me take my land back and he ended up with more land and i got all my land back so win win in my opinion , i lost 2 days with rebuilding but i still made my land goal a day earlier then i planned

now on the other hand #185 is someone who goal is to fluff people over triple and quad taps

The game is imbalanced in the favor or offense (just hownthe game is designed). No amount of defense will ever keep you safe from a grabber if they were so inclined to break you. Thats not even a debate, just fact.

Now quit crying and restart.

Offense allies are so good.

Thank you for your honesty.