Earth Empires Logo


Verified:

Pontius Pirate

Member
EE Patron
1907

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:23:33

Originally posted by Mr.Silver:
Originally posted by iScode:
Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by iScode:
Vic they pretty much do as it is.


i disagree locket.

So if 20 players from some clan retired and decided that they would stay around and suicide Evo and MD every set for the next year you would have no problem with that? The alliance which they came from can not be blamed for it correct? What does Evo do to avoid this? Try politics? Nope. Kill the previous alliance of the players? Nope. Only would spur them on most likely. Kill the players? It doesn't matter to them. Even killing them hurts Evo and MD's netting goals.


nope wouldnt have a problem with it because if 20 members are that angry the alliance must of done something to piss them off. though they could get a but more class and infiltrate EVO or MD and suicide from the inside. (we are only using evo/md as in example, dont think im endorsing people hitting you guys :P)


There's a difference between someone retaliating for something that was done and those that play for the sole purpose of making others quit.


PP, KJ, KJ's other account, and Edge do nothing but suicide fo ratleast the past year some longer. The only thing they even try to do is get others to quit.
poor sweet innocent RD :(
Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

iScode Game profile

Member
5720

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:24:21

Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by Mr.Silver:
Originally posted by iScode:
Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by iScode:
Vic they pretty much do as it is.


i disagree locket.

So if 20 players from some clan retired and decided that they would stay around and suicide Evo and MD every set for the next year you would have no problem with that? The alliance which they came from can not be blamed for it correct? What does Evo do to avoid this? Try politics? Nope. Kill the previous alliance of the players? Nope. Only would spur them on most likely. Kill the players? It doesn't matter to them. Even killing them hurts Evo and MD's netting goals.


nope wouldnt have a problem with it because if 20 members are that angry the alliance must of done something to piss them off. though they could get a but more class and infiltrate EVO or MD and suicide from the inside. (we are only using evo/md as in example, dont think im endorsing people hitting you guys :P)


There's a difference between someone retaliating for something that was done and those that play for the sole purpose of making others quit.


PP, KJ, KJ's other account, and Edge do nothing but suicide fo ratleast the past year some longer. The only thing they even try to do is get others to quit.

Apparently we have to protect the people who are trying to get players to quit so that we can maintain the integrity of the game... yah.... that sure sounds great eh? Banning is the only option with the people you mention and if half these people had to deal with something like this they'd probably change their opinions.


So netters actions of farming untageds and small alliances is not trying to get them to quit?

You cant have your cake and eat it to.
iScode
God of War


DEATH TO SOV!

Pontius Pirate

Member
EE Patron
1907

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:24:47

Originally posted by aten:

If they get farmed or screwed with set after set for years on end (e.g. by RD), why is it somehow not legit for them to return the favor now that the game actually has active cheat detection?
it's not about what RD did in 1a, it's about what RD does set after set in EE
Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

Mr.Silver

Member
680

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:28:43

Originally posted by Pontius Pirate:
Originally posted by aten:

If they get farmed or screwed with set after set for years on end (e.g. by RD), why is it somehow not legit for them to return the favor now that the game actually has active cheat detection?
it's not about what RD did in 1a, it's about what RD does set after set in EE


They've managed to be successful and for many to have fun while having to fight you burning through about 40 countries suiciding them.

Mr.Silver

Member
680

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:29:31

I'd probably hit you in another server for them... but all you do is run suicider countries on every server you play. You're just a cancer for the game and lose in every aspect of it.

Mr.Silver

Member
680

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:30:50

correction: except for making some players quit. As I say you've got rid of about 2% of the players so far... and likely more since that's not counting other servers. so likely it's closer to 3-4%.

maybe by end of next year you can aim for 10% ! yay!

Pontius Pirate

Member
EE Patron
1907

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:32:59

Originally posted by Mr.Silver:
Originally posted by Pontius Pirate:
Originally posted by aten:

If they get farmed or screwed with set after set for years on end (e.g. by RD), why is it somehow not legit for them to return the favor now that the game actually has active cheat detection?
it's not about what RD did in 1a, it's about what RD does set after set in EE


They've managed to be successful and for many to have fun while having to fight you burning through about 40 countries suiciding them.
you're so successful that even highrock is threatening to suicide you
Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

Pontius Pirate

Member
EE Patron
1907

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:36:28

I think highrock's post is really all I need to quote here now that you're playing the "we're the innocent victims here" card

Originally posted by highrock:
Note: I am no longer playing this game and am unaffiliated with MD.

With that said, I check AT from time to time when I get bored. This crap that RD pulled farming MD is despicable. Couple that with the constant intra-alliance farming to claim the top spot, I have decided that RD is a cancer to the game.
Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

Mr.Silver

Member
680

Nov 2nd 2012, 22:38:10

2 RD's did something dumb this reset and got killed over it which I think they deserved to be.

Highrock's a whiner and always had been and has likely will only accomplish 2 things.. 1. Hit players that didn't hit and also disagreed with MD getting grabbed 2. manage to make MD a suicider target as well.

it's what griefers do. much like you.

Edited By: Mr.Silver on Nov 2nd 2012, 22:50:34
See Original Post

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 2nd 2012, 23:58:50

Originally posted by iScode:
Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by Mr.Silver:
Originally posted by iScode:
Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by iScode:
Vic they pretty much do as it is.


i disagree locket.

So if 20 players from some clan retired and decided that they would stay around and suicide Evo and MD every set for the next year you would have no problem with that? The alliance which they came from can not be blamed for it correct? What does Evo do to avoid this? Try politics? Nope. Kill the previous alliance of the players? Nope. Only would spur them on most likely. Kill the players? It doesn't matter to them. Even killing them hurts Evo and MD's netting goals.


nope wouldnt have a problem with it because if 20 members are that angry the alliance must of done something to piss them off. though they could get a but more class and infiltrate EVO or MD and suicide from the inside. (we are only using evo/md as in example, dont think im endorsing people hitting you guys :P)


There's a difference between someone retaliating for something that was done and those that play for the sole purpose of making others quit.


PP, KJ, KJ's other account, and Edge do nothing but suicide fo ratleast the past year some longer. The only thing they even try to do is get others to quit.

Apparently we have to protect the people who are trying to get players to quit so that we can maintain the integrity of the game... yah.... that sure sounds great eh? Banning is the only option with the people you mention and if half these people had to deal with something like this they'd probably change their opinions.


So netters actions of farming untageds and small alliances is not trying to get them to quit?

You cant have your cake and eat it to.

Not even remotely. Netters do not want people to quit otherwise why would we play this game? War clans do not want people to quit for the same reason. Laf does not want Evo out of the game and I doubt Evo wants Laf gone. Same with Sol and Sof. I am sure every group would like some changes made by the others but none are currently trying to force anyone out of the game. Certain individuals are however trying to do so.

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 2nd 2012, 23:59:40

Originally posted by aten:
Every action has the potential to cause players to quit. Anyone recall Arrow leaving as a tag because they were screwed reset after reset?

How about all the people telling Fazer to stop playing and leave already? Are they not also trying to drive players away?

Sucks to be on the receiving end, but who are you to determine when "enough is enough"? What is a proper retaliation and what "just screwing around to force others to quit"?

If they get farmed or screwed with set after set for years on end (e.g. by RD), why is it somehow not legit for them to return the favor now that the game actually has active cheat detection?

People are telling Fazer to tag up with an accepted and legitimate tag and learn the game and grow his group. They could have their own site and everything. Then go on his own. He has been given plenty of advice.

Warster Game profile

Member
4172

Nov 3rd 2012, 2:08:59

fazer has been told to leave already because he has said he is quitting about 20 times now
FFA- TKO Leader
Alliance- Monsters

MSN
ICQ 28629332

Requiem Game profile

Member
EE Patron
9474

Nov 3rd 2012, 2:16:57

TLDR:

Qz, Pang, and Co believe that suciders have a right to be in this game.

Whether that is right or wrong is up for debate.

I only grouped Pang and Co in there because even if they are "against it" they do very little to take that stance in a way that would actually have an impact.
I financially support this game; what do you do?

Warster Game profile

Member
4172

Nov 3rd 2012, 2:34:55

some staff are against suiciders :) namely me due to the fact in ffa my alliance kills 150-200 suiciders a reset and we don't grab outside our own tag most of the time.
FFA- TKO Leader
Alliance- Monsters

MSN
ICQ 28629332

Mr Charcoal Game profile

Member
993

Nov 3rd 2012, 3:55:23

I understand KJ hitting RD. You'll never find me crying that he hits us. No one has more reason to suicide RD than KJ does. In all honesty, he owes us a few more. We're ALMOST even.

You WILL see me complaining that his wife hits us. It bothers me that the admins allow him to use the "alliance safe list" KNOWING what he does with it. If he used multis and wasn't caught, I wouldnt care. The fact that he abuses a nicety provided by the admins bothers me.

*edit* - My statement that i wouldnt care if he used mutlis is not correct, Im just not allowed to be a hypocrite. *End of edit*

On the other hand:

PP - Whiney fluff, no real reason to suicide other than the need to regain toughness he lost while being bullied in high school. You keep suiciding, we'll keep taking the top spot!

Edge - No hair, don't care.

Edited By: Mr Charcoal on Nov 3rd 2012, 4:00:50
See Original Post
Originally posted by NOW3P:
Religion is like a penis - it's perfectly fine to have one, but you're best served not whipping it out in public and waving it in people's faces.

Requiem Game profile

Member
EE Patron
9474

Nov 3rd 2012, 4:08:17

Originally posted by MrCharcoal:
I understand KJ hitting RD. You'll never find me crying that he hits us. No one has more reason to suicide RD than KJ does. In all honesty, he owes us a few more. We're ALMOST even.

You WILL see me complaining that his wife hits us. It bothers me that the admins allow him to use the "alliance safe list" KNOWING what he does with it. If he used multis and wasn't caught, I wouldnt care. The fact that he abuses a nicety provided by the admins bothers me.

*edit* - My statement that i wouldnt care if he used mutlis is not correct, Im just not allowed to be a hypocrite. *End of edit*

On the other hand:

PP - Whiney fluff, no real reason to suicide other than the need to regain toughness he lost while being bullied in high school. You keep suiciding, we'll keep taking the top spot!

Edge - No hair, don't care.


Wow I agree with almost all of your post, good job!

Originally posted by Warster:
some staff are against suiciders :) namely me due to the fact in ffa my alliance kills 150-200 suiciders a reset and we don't grab outside our own tag most of the time.


Then what is the road block here? Who individually is blocking progress on this subject? Learning your opinion here I know more than one staffer with a similar opinion. Who is in the way?
I financially support this game; what do you do?

aten Game profile

New Member
7

Nov 3rd 2012, 4:12:45

Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by iScode:

So netters actions of farming untageds and small alliances is not trying to get them to quit?

You cant have your cake and eat it to.

Not even remotely. Netters do not want people to quit otherwise why would we play this game? War clans do not want people to quit for the same reason. Laf does not want Evo out of the game and I doubt Evo wants Laf gone. Same with Sol and Sof. I am sure every group would like some changes made by the others but none are currently trying to force anyone out of the game. Certain individuals are however trying to do so.


So you are arguing motivation as an excuse for banning? If, instead of saying "we want to suicide tag X until they quit", they just state "we want to suicide tag x to make it impossible for them to get a t10/100 but we want them to stay around and keep trying so we can keep screwing them over", would that be all rainbows and sunshine for you then?

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 3rd 2012, 4:56:39

Originally posted by aten:
Originally posted by locket:
Originally posted by iScode:

So netters actions of farming untageds and small alliances is not trying to get them to quit?

You cant have your cake and eat it to.

Not even remotely. Netters do not want people to quit otherwise why would we play this game? War clans do not want people to quit for the same reason. Laf does not want Evo out of the game and I doubt Evo wants Laf gone. Same with Sol and Sof. I am sure every group would like some changes made by the others but none are currently trying to force anyone out of the game. Certain individuals are however trying to do so.


So you are arguing motivation as an excuse for banning? If, instead of saying "we want to suicide tag X until they quit", they just state "we want to suicide tag x to make it impossible for them to get a t10/100 but we want them to stay around and keep trying so we can keep screwing them over", would that be all rainbows and sunshine for you then?


Why don't you post under your real account name instead of hiding? Or have you suddenly joined the game and joined in on discussions like this?

You are good at twisting words to say nothing that was said though.

I do not believe that people who are only here to ensure that other people can not play the way they want should be playing the game. No alliance does that.

Eeyore

New Member
7

Nov 3rd 2012, 5:50:12

No alliance does what? Hinder people from playing the way they want?

It would be more accurate to say that *every* alliance does if they can.

Warring tags ensure netting tags cannot net in peace. Ditto netting tags refusing "friendlies". Same with "veterans" demanding newbs accept the current political norms.

Heck, witness PDM threatening Llaar.

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 3rd 2012, 6:02:16

New members everywhere apparently?

Look at Monsters. Monsters has taken on some wars recently. Clearly your point is too generalized. Alliances do the things they do to benefit themselves. They are not doing it to simply make sure that their opponents have a bad time no matter the consequences to themselves.

Eeyore

New Member
7

Nov 3rd 2012, 6:11:24

Ban new members! They drive away players, oh wait.

Yes, Monsters were jumped. If any of them stopped playing, should those who jumped them be banned? Especially given the consequences that have accrued to them?

Everyone, alliances or individuals do things to benefit themselves.

Some play to get the top net because they like being "winners".

Some play for a team because they find enjoyment in supporting their friends.

Others suicide because it makes them happy to see their "enemies" fail.

Just as there are those who play to kill others' efforts (warring tags anyone?) because it makes them happy.

Yet others, of course, resort to petitioning for bans to take out those hindering their play.

Warster Game profile

Member
4172

Nov 3rd 2012, 6:13:44

ummmmm when was monsters jumped????
FFA- TKO Leader
Alliance- Monsters

MSN
ICQ 28629332

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 3rd 2012, 6:23:54

Monsters has picked their own wars in my memory.

War tags don't kill to see their enemies not enjoy themselves. They kill because they find it fun. More fun than netting anyways.

You should post on your real account.

Eeyore

New Member
7

Nov 3rd 2012, 6:33:04

And yet if people like kj or PP suicide because they find it fun, more fun than netting, they should be banned?

Double standards much?

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 3rd 2012, 7:59:28

They are doing it simply to ruin other players experiences. There are no double standards. War clans also have repercussions if they get out of line. Any clan does. Even Imag can be demoralized.

I have no double standards in this issue. You are searching and twisting words.

Eeyore

New Member
7

Nov 3rd 2012, 8:37:19

If they do not find it fun, why would they be doing it? So war clans can screw over netting sets "for fun", as netting tags can farm the living daylights out of new players because "bottomfeeding is their playstyle", but suiciders should be banned?

How is that not a double standard?

"Though boys throw stones at frogs in sport, the frogs do not die in sport, but in earnest."

Just because you don't do it to "ruin other players experience" but to "win and have fun", does not mean their experiences are not ruined or they would not be provoked into reataliating the best they can. By, yes, getting repercussions and being demoralized by suiciders.

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 3rd 2012, 8:46:30

You don't understand what I am saying and that is fine. Making multiple accounts is stupid though.

Pontius Pirate

Member
EE Patron
1907

Nov 3rd 2012, 9:02:18

this thread is still going on? lol
Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

Eeyore

New Member
7

Nov 3rd 2012, 9:52:22

Ooops, wrong account!

Pontius Pirate

Member
EE Patron
1907

Nov 3rd 2012, 14:09:13

well he has a point, it's inconceivable that anyone other than a suicider might disagree with him and since there are only 4 suiciders in this game (myself, KJ, KJ's wife and Edge), you must be me
Originally posted by Cerberus:

This guy is destroying the U.S. Dollars position as the preferred exchange for international trade. The Chinese Ruan is going to replace it soon, then the U.S. will not have control of the IMF

dagga Game profile

Member
1560

Nov 4th 2012, 8:59:49

Wow look at all the LAF/SOF types complaining like little pussies.

I can run a very good suicider country, KJ - PM me.

Maybe hlw will have 100K acres with 1m turrets again? Let me go and find the news feed for that hit! :)
signatures are stupid.
Months since LaF netgained: 22

anoniem Game profile

Member
2881

Nov 4th 2012, 21:00:31

im pretty sure edge has been in a tag for at least the last year.

lol
re(ally)tired

bertz Game profile

Member
1638

Nov 5th 2012, 6:32:27

If a country suddenly suicides a tag without the tag provoking him to do so, this country should be deleted IMHO.
If a player continues to suicide a tag the tag provoking him, the player should be banned too.

With this, you're not actually taking the right of the player to play as an untagged.

And come on, where's the fun if just get the high risk in bottom feeding and stocking?

qzjul Game profile

Administrator
Game Development
10,263

Nov 5th 2012, 6:42:19

Originally posted by Requiem:
Qz, Pang, and Co believe that suciders have a right to be in this game.


Wrong.

The problem is a matter of drawing lines and defining things. (also what of alliances suiciding ("warring") netting alliances?)

Should we make it so you can't unload on a country/alliance that has farmed you?
Maybe we should make it so you can't attack if you are untagged?
Or make it so you can't be untagged, and have to be in a tag?
But then you get individual tags; perhaps we should make it so you have to be tagged in a tag with more than 10 people before you can come OOP?


It just becomes really really complicated and game-breaking whenever you entertain notions of making certain types of play verboten.
Finally did the signature thing.

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 5th 2012, 6:53:42

Pang has told me some of his suggestions I strongly suggest you implement something. Making people tagged isnt a bad idea but an alternative might be that if you are not in a tag of at least 5 people then your special attacks are severely weakened except against countries who are hitting you a certain number of times. Grabbing could go the same way but maybe to a lesser extent.

Imo that would allow untagged people to suicide those who farm them to a certain extent and maybe fully at a certain number of hits and protect people who are not provoking them from it. It would not stop a player from playing untagged successfully either since retals wouldnt be affected.

Also.. please adjust your formulas for building destruction... CS disappear too quick.. I'm just gonna keep mentioning this.

anoniem Game profile

Member
2881

Nov 5th 2012, 8:12:31

according to some ("one") of you KJ has made 9 ppl quit. according to fazer we've all destroyed his clan 10 times over due to relentless farming. where's the difference between suiciding and farming a clan into absolute oblivion? is one ok because you're not intentionally trying to ruin someone's fun? but if the end result is the same.. then there is no difference.


give me a break. double standards as usual from the same people.
re(ally)tired

anoniem Game profile

Member
2881

Nov 5th 2012, 8:18:28

not that im supporting suiciders, but where does it stop?

like i said before why dont we ban war clans too? they can destroy a whole netting alliance in a few days, whereas 1 suicider can only do so much damage.

i think i'd rather be suicided by some idiot than get FSed.
re(ally)tired

crest23 Game profile

Member
4666

Nov 5th 2012, 15:20:21

If a clan declares on another for no concrete reason, every member of the clan should be banned.
The Nigerian Nightmare.

crest23 Game profile

Member
4666

Nov 5th 2012, 15:23:38

I wouldn't say locket has double standard as much as I would say he lacks intelligent thought on this matter.
The Nigerian Nightmare.

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 5th 2012, 18:01:37

Yes Crest. Your thoughts have been so well put and eloquent. I have felt my inferiority so much more strongly as time has gone on.

@anon I am only talking about longtime griefers.. they tend to be very obvious. Warster posted some guys FFA account who has basically just played to suicide every single set and is number one in deaths by a decent bit. He would be an example imo. Otherwise a change to adjust their power is an alternative if the first can't work.

crest23 Game profile

Member
4666

Nov 5th 2012, 18:17:45

I don't know what alliance you play for, but I'm pretty sure your clan approves, endorses, and actively participates in farming untags and/or small alliances. I'm willing to beg that You, locket, also participates in farming them to oblivion. Do you think the owners of those countries just love to log in to see their countries in tatters? Do you think these acts negatively affects the enjoyment such players get from the game? Or you think they love to log in everyday to find carnage in their lands? Why are you not for banning countries that set after set for no reason choose to 'suicide' on untags?

You will be the 1st to clain that this is a war game. Some people like to get land while totally wrecking a country others choose to just wreck a country.

**Waits for your double standard albeit, retarded excuse as to why it is not the same thing.**
The Nigerian Nightmare.

locket Game profile

Member
6176

Nov 5th 2012, 18:19:02

You never did get what I was talking about so I'm not going to waste time with you. Nice assumptions btw.

crest23 Game profile

Member
4666

Nov 5th 2012, 18:24:22

Thanks ;-)
The Nigerian Nightmare.

anoniem Game profile

Member
2881

Nov 5th 2012, 18:50:22

Originally posted by locket:
Pang has told me some of his suggestions I strongly suggest you implement something. Making people tagged isnt a bad idea but an alternative might be that if you are not in a tag of at least 5 people then your special attacks are severely weakened except against countries who are hitting you a certain number of times. Grabbing could go the same way but maybe to a lesser extent.


there's your double standard.

sure ban suiciders, but while you're at it you can also ban all special attacks/FSes on alliances that have done nothing/very little in-game to another alliance to warrant an FS (blind-side) on them.
re(ally)tired

Pain Game profile

Member
4849

Nov 5th 2012, 18:53:45

its easy to sit on the sidelines and call people whiners when you dont have to deal with multiple suiciders every set all set. if evo got hit with 3-4 suiciders next set i bet youd be complaining about it also, not to mention qzjul would make it a priority to fix all the issues with attacks that give suiciders way too much power, which he hasnt done yet even though he knows about said issues because it hasnt affected evo yet.
Your mother is a nice woman

Zoomer Game profile

Member
60

Nov 5th 2012, 19:00:31

Originally posted by locket:
Pang has told me some of his suggestions I strongly suggest you implement something. Making people tagged isnt a bad idea but an alternative might be that if you are not in a tag of at least 5 people then your special attacks are severely weakened except against countries who are hitting you a certain number of times. Grabbing could go the same way but maybe to a lesser extent.

Imo that would allow untagged people to suicide those who farm them to a certain extent and maybe fully at a certain number of hits and protect people who are not provoking them from it. It would not stop a player from playing untagged successfully either since retals wouldnt be affected.

Also.. please adjust your formulas for building destruction... CS disappear too quick.. I'm just gonna keep mentioning this.


Will you do samething for people farm set after set? Will you decrease power of tags bigger than 20 (why not?) to reduce excessif farm? This idea is totally ridiculous. As i claim from the start.... Alliance leaders have to think about their "rules" and "policies". We had more fun before those special retals policies. Before it was easier to take a chance to win a land exchange, we saw more attacks btw alliances and untagged was not that much farmed. Now you have only that solution to have lands... Untagged are the only "safe" choice. So its normal that you create frustrated players and suiciders. Bring back the old policies (1:1 escalating) and you will see a difference.

Servant Game profile

Member
EE Patron
1250

Nov 5th 2012, 19:05:38

Anon- There's a diffeernce between Fazer and KJ

KJ is competent and can get stuff done.

Fazer has had issues brought upon himself, and rejected all offers of help/changes to learn what to do to move forward.

KJ= highly competant and skilled
Fazer= ultimate definition of chronic NOOB
Z is #1

anoniem Game profile

Member
2881

Nov 5th 2012, 19:38:35

i didn't complain when there were 3-4 suiciders every set or so in the past, and by god i won't complain in the future. who am i gonna complain to? if somebody/some people want to suicide my clan for the actions of a past member or something said by my alliance or my alliance's in-game actions then so be it. big deal.

it's a game. half the suiciders in this game wouldn't even bother if people stopped creating a drama about the whole thing. suiciders are looking for attention, and by acknowledging publicly that they are annoying you only serves to feed their egos.
re(ally)tired

anoniem Game profile

Member
2881

Nov 5th 2012, 19:42:29

but let's face it at least half the clans in this game have declared war on another alliance with to no reason at all. just because they are in a tag you are justifying it as ok?

the only point i'm trying to make it that if you ban one thing, then you have to start banning other things that are seen in a similar light.
re(ally)tired