Everyone here has likely suicided or gotten suicided on. We can talk about reasons why but this thread i just wanna see a quick good/bad

I vote good

I vote bad (don't support suiciding).

How can you put that to a simple vote?

The very ability for suiciders to exist is probably a good thing for smaller alliances. (In some situations, not the current suicide.. That did nothing good for PDM or Laf)

The ability to suicide can be politically persuasive, individual random suiciders do no good for anyone.

I vote bad. empircally, it hasd not caup earth to stop sform sucking and has amde many eople unhappy. ends do not just ify meana

I vote both

no, really - it's both

A member of an established alliance hits some 3 member tag 12 times in a day and its farming.

Member of said tag hits the established alliance back a month later in the set while they are stocking and its a "suicide".

There is no easy way to just ban "suiciding" ... unless you get rid of all attacks.

There are obvious changes to me that can help tho
A) Decrease upkeep costs
B) Cap the amount of food a country gains in an attack


Thats easy enough perhaps the real question is how do you make it so that landgrabbing can occur on the alliance server. The answer to this is also obvious to me

A) Do away with all non LG attacks, so that LG wars would occur and attacking could be beneficial to an individual/clan
B) Play primary if you want to attack, play alliance to explore(I dunno why the fluff people enjoy this) or to war SOL panks off the server.

PS. The quality of this post is way too high for this thread I will prolly post it elsewhere too

As a retaler you get suicided alot by people who fail to make good grabs and then get retaled for twice the land they got, or more. I vote good. Loosing 5k acre to kill someone is a good way to get out of any peace time boredom.

The way I see it there are two reasons for suiciding, firstly, just for fun and general boredom with a more conventional state of play (such as warring or netgaining along clan guidelines), which is why I did it (and while I'm on the subject, it was totally LaF's fault that I hit them I'm perfectly aware of PDM's anti-suiciding stance which is why I made sure noone in the clan knew about it. LaF was my target because I thought their fat, poorly defended countries deserved to be hit for not bothering to defend properly, as well as their [leadership's] having a history of generally being wankers. I also thought it would be funny seeing what a big deal they made of it when they routinely find new players and farm them until they realise it's pointless for them to continue trying to play - which it totally was lol!), and suiciding as a reaction to being screwed over by the target alliance.

Mehul designed this game as an attacking game. Even on the front page of Pang's earthempires, it states:

"Build your country to destroy your opponents in war, or strive to finish the round with the highest networth you can."

So what about the players who want to build their countries for the purpose of destroying their opponents in war?

Sure, the vast majority of players will choose to play in a clan, and play along clan guidelines. Many because they enjoy working together and being directed and trained, but also because it's necessary for their own protection. Obviously this means the majority of these players would be anti-suiciding, as anti-suiciding measures would offer an extra layer of protection to their countries.

However (and after some thought, contrary to the opionion I gave in another thread) it's wrong to make game-altering decisions that cater only to the interests of these players. Especially when the person proposing the changes plays in a clan full of people who all value the non-fighting side of the game above warfare, and who, due to their playstyles and policies probably generate more resentment amongst opposing players than any other clan.

Back to the two types of suiciders, I believe that as much as you may dislike it, both kinds deserve a place in this game.

Regarding people who suicide for fun or because of boredom: in a game based upon the ability to interact through warfare as well as trade and diplomacy, it's wrong to remove the warfare aspect for countries who are considered rogues, and leave it in place for countries who conform to conventional rules regarding attacking other clans. Fair enough if someone attacks a clan from within one tag, the clan that houses them can decide they no longer deserve to be affiliated with the tag, but the conventional playstyle should not be enforced by altering the very mechanics of the game, let people play as they choose!

The second type of suicider is the kind who gets repeatedly raped by larger countries, and naturally, develops a spiteful attitude towards the countries who, day after day, ruin any chance it has at developing. These countries, while many may simply choose to stop playing, have the option of using the warfare component of the game to get their own back on the countries that attack them in the first place. Altering the game mechanics so that larger countries can continue to farm small countries, but small countries - who are being targeted because they're in no position to grow enough to grab their land back - are unable to retaliate in any form, is SO obviously the wrong thing to do.

It's ridiculous to be perfectly cool with being directed to sacrifice your country to politically motivated warfare, but when a person is genuinely aggrieved (please note I'm NOT referring to myself here) by the actions of other players, to turn around and condemn their act of warfare for not being sanctioned by any clan's hierarchy - this is a fighting game, NO country deserved full immunity from attack simply because they're in a clan that likes to netgain and have "worked hard for two months". Every player knows they CAN be attacked, and it's their responsibility to see that their defense is adequate, and if it's breached, to simply get on and deal with it like every other country subject to attack.

agreed

suiciding is a part of the game mechanics
-- it allows players who're bored out of their minds to express such boredom
-- it allows players who are being farmed (or were being farmed) like no tomorrow to get back at those people (even if its outside the politically accepted 72h retal window)
-- it encourages running some defense as opposed to no defense

Although a server full of suiciding is bad, the occassional suicide here and there is ok. There really shouldn't be new game mechanics put into play to counteract these activities. Every player knows he/she has the potential to be attacked at any moment - it's part of the game - there's no need to give extra special protection for people who want to net, or people who wantto explore all-day.

It's both good and bad.

I think it's acceptable if a person runs a decent country that's untagged all set that gets land raped over and over. The tag that land rapes untagged countries in this case deserves anything that comes to if from this country.

It's bad if someone has tag protection all set then goes off on a tag.

"We can talk about reasons why but this thread i just wanna see a quick good/bad "



Congratulations to Bobby, thataguy, and lolicon on some awesome reading comprehension.....

It's a thread where people are voicing an opinion on part of the game, I think asking for a simple good/bad response is oversimplifying the issue, so offered a rationale along with mine.

Is trolling bad for a community?

people who don't troll: yes
people who troll: no

bad

iScode your idiocy never stops to amaze me. Lower upkeep costs would mean stocking countries could stock with much more serious military levels, perhaps 10M turrets, 2M tanks, 2M troops could become standard if upkeep costs were 1/10th of what they currently are.

The game is so badly unbalanced currently in part because production is so quickly reduced even after military levels go past even a marginal level. Thus those with a high military level are those who will not finish well. In part this is a major part of the fun of Earth (the extended stocking time and all the strategy that goes into it) but I'm sure most netters would accept shorter stocking time for much less effective suiciding.

Unless those 10 countries all have 300k turrets each.

In that case, any bum with a million jets and 120 turns can ruin all 10's set in 5 minutes with 6 fat grabs on each.

The fact that some of them are invariably going to have stockpile at home is just gravy. Tasty gravy.

Suiciding is absolutely necessary in the game.

well now what good is a cake if it aint gettin eatin :(

lets see here,

I think we should bring back GS steals food again!!!!

















NOT!!!









I bet everyone that thinks suiciding is right and perfect in this game would agree. Which in turn negates their opinion.

There is NO amount of defense that will stop a suicider. Anything can be broken

Do I think suiciding is to powerfull right now? Yes

Should it be taken completely out of the game? No



So all in all, to answer the OP right now it is bad. IMO

Another netter with a moderator tag.

I need someone to enlighten me as to how you are going to weaken suiciding and not weaken wars?

Me a netter? HAH

You need to research more.

Who are you?

You seem to know from your previous post, so you tell me.

Its part of the game always has been always will be get over it.

iScode serious question do you know how to read?

ok ok clearly you know how to read I'm being too harsh. I guess my question should be do you have any idea how to read and understand a statement?

your arguement is no longer that its netgainers faults for having low defence (although i wouldnt call 15m raw d low defence, but apparently im mistaken about that) but instead your saying the game is designed for suiciders to function, and any attempts to remove that function is not acceptable?

dont get me wrong, i dont think there shouldnt be any ingame changes in relation to suiciders, but you should really decide on an arguement and stick to it, rather than bundle thirty together and hope one works.

The only thing I would say is wrong with it is the land dropping.

People want to resort to suicide tactics thats just fine. At least give the target a means to fight back or recover. They drop the land, not much you can do strategically to fight against that.

edit: finally member :P (and wrong icon lol)

I don't suicide, but it may not look like it. In fact, everything I do probably looks like suicide.

I do think the 72hr window for retaliation should be reduced. Since the game changed to 20 minute turns, there is greater advantage in getting land back and discourage grabbing if there was any to begin with. Otherwise it could be extended, but solely by the defender. That would put a great spin on the game. It would be a netgaining race of real skill then and not the imaginary "if I get this much land and don't get hit or spill $2bil and steal a couple buyouts without getting goods stuck, and snipe a few cheapies and stockpile a tonne" type of finish that everyone wants.

Personally, I like retals within 24hrs by the defender only or within 2 market sales (8hrs) by the clan. Something like this would give attackers a greater chance in keeping land and encourage tactical grabbing (and possibly develop the tactic of blocking). There's a chance to pick targets with out being retalled. It'd also develop more specialised countries within a clan to play different roles, and players will know what they are.

All this aside, there is still the need to reduce policies to permit grabbing.

Suicide labeling is wrong.
There's nothing wrong with dropping land. Although it prolly is suicide if you drop it to zero.

ziggy wtf you!????

If the given server contained ´rules´ pertaining to landgrabbing, retals, and farming, there would be no need for suiciding. Until that time, or another solution is reached, suiciding has purpose. Certainly, it has a largely negetive affect on the game, but so do the standard retal policies and farming of untagged countries.

Balance out other negetives before singling one out.

damn colombian! :P

you got mail!

Ziggy is a dirty netter! Get him!

TAN good everything else bad!

look no dmiss

penis!