World setup changes

Higher cost for fort battle or bans for those not attending

  • Higher cost

    Votes: 8 33.3%
  • Ban players when not showing up

    Votes: 16 66.7%

  • Total voters
    24
Status
Not open for further replies.

Poker Alice

Well-Known Member
Can we stop now with the personal attacks thank you.
Did RaiderTr stop with the personal attacking?

He does not know me and I don't want to know him! Commenting on how a game functions is one thing but even suggesting that a person might be "mentally unstable" is unacceptable on most forum's on the internet as it is a personal slur.

Obviously, RaiderTr is not going to listen to you Hr.Hyborg.
 

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
> God hates lies
> proceeds to write a bunch of lies and personal attacks

Yeah I now believe you're a troll account :no:
Maybe you should take a bite from the apple and actually see for yourself how colorado alliances function exclusively to have the highest quality fort battles we can.
Keep living in ignorance if you wish. But please dont spread it.
 
Last edited:

Poker Alice

Well-Known Member
> God hates lies
> proceeds to write a bunch of lies and personal attacks

Yeah I now believe you're a troll account :no:
Interesting how you label but have nothing to back it up. Only another agreement in the buddy system of the common forum gang. I wrote the truth. You just can't handle it. I'm not God.

I'm more interested in player motivation and on forum internet behavior. I do enjoy playing this cute little game in the world of my choice, in the way I want to play the game.

I certainly don't mind crazy little arguments about the mechanics of the game. I never claimed I was an expert on the algorithm of an internet game but when arguments stretch to personal insults then that is two different things. What could be more insulting than suggesting someone is mentally challenged like Raider does? That isn't arguing over game stuff.

According to this logic anyone who might be new to the game and doesn't understand the mathematics of the game as much as another person shouldn't post because they are ignorant? That is a very sad disposition to maintain in my book!



You write, "how come every time I write about things I am in complete ignorance of, people argue with me?"

Indeed I think you don't understand human interaction as well as you would like. Keep working on it and it might improve.
 
Last edited:

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
Think for a second - "how come every time I write about things I am in complete ignorance of, people argue with me?"

Keep living in ignorance if you wish. But please dont spread it.

Is this not all about power tripping inside a old incomplete video game
That's what you took away from 6 pages of conversation about how the majority of the community are being prevented from enjoying the game?
but about the all so powerful becoming annoyed by the less powerful
What makes then "all powerful"? the fact that it's 99.999% of the players who are interested in fort battles in those two alliances? Players have no power in this game.
If they are so powerful and loose a fort to some rogue why not just take the tiny little fort dot on the western map back later?
This is a clear indication if your absolute ignorance in these matters.
No they are just annoyed and ha ha like a mob boss have been disrespected!
They are annoyed that the stability of the ONLY surviving fort world is being impacted by multiple digs designed to create chaos for the fort community.
Disrespected really? Because they have played this small little insignificant game for too many years actually think they are the rulers of the whole world with their shallow ego's
A personal attack
This fighting over forts is not about fair game play.
Another showing of your complete ignorance of what Colorado does.
It is not a game function at all but a people function.
You are actually right here, it is an 8 year old agreement between human players that has let Colorado survive as an active Fort World for 10 years, we would LOVE for these players to join in and lead battles, but all they want to do is dig 1-3 battles every day and not even compete for them.
It is the behavior of a bunch of spoiled adult children.
another personal attack, although you may be talking about the multi-ers here
If you have played this silly game for too many years and still fighting over it you should be pitied not admired.
another personal attack
I also know what I am talking about.
your ignorance extends to self-awareness.
What gives you the right to tell me how and when I can write on this forum?
Nothing, but I will ask again, please keep your ignorance to yourself, why write with authority on matters you do now know anything about?
I am not against everyone
You are against anyone who enjoys PvP in this game.
I am not convinced that members being called trolls are trolls just because some member says they are.
if trolling 140 people every day for over a year is not a troll, then I'm a brexit voting Englishman.
 
Last edited:

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
According to this logic anyone who might be new to the game and doesn't understand the mathematics of the game as much as another person shouldn't post because they are ignorant? That is a very sad disposition to maintain in my book!



You write, "how come every time I write about things I am in complete ignorance of, people argue with me?"

Indeed I think you don't understand human interaction as well as you would like. Keep working on it and it might improve.
Maybe I didn't write it well, maybe you lack comprehension skills because you often get upset at misunderstandings, but I will clarify this point,

You write with authority on matters of which you do not understand, you de-rail the conversation with your own anti-PvP agenda and personal attacks on the players who love(d) these aspects of this game, you comment on agreements you have never read and you distort their purpose to fit your anti-PvP agenda, you presume that all fort fighters are malicious with their intentions for some reason, and you purposefully pretend that for the last year, Colorado hasn't been being griefed.

You are ignorant of what we do but you presume to tell us how to conduct our business anyway. You can't help but get involved, much like myself. We are two obsessed people on opposite sides of the PvP spectrum, but only one of us ever engages in good faith, and it's not you.
 
Last edited:

Reino Eno

Member
There's no god. If there were, that genocidal, rapey monster would be tried in Hague.

Now, with eyes on the post. Guys, please stop engaging with a person who has zero connection to anything Colorado, and by the looks of it not all that much understanding when it comes to FF either. At least Roffo has the claim of being involved, no matter how misguided and bullheaded the approach he has decided to take.
 

Poker Alice

Well-Known Member
@Reino Eno As a member I can at anytime join any world I wish and play the game as I wish. I will agree these threads sometime go off topic but it is not the far off topic because what applies in rules in one world applies in another? I have every right to post here as you do. Maybe someone should ignore you. I think I will ignore your attempt to create a religious argument. Atheism is a fools journey. Exactly how much knowledge is a requirement to play the game, whether it be in building, crafting, dueling, adventures or fort fighting. I might be forgetting this but I don't remember receiving a test at the beginning of the west game that I must pass in order to play it!

@lulumcnoob

News flash: This is not your business. It is INNO's business. Forts can be played by any player not just a few. What matters here. Hummm.

Sorry not to agree with ever single thing you write but I might not be as ignorant of what you do as you might think. I do reject your statement that I deem all fort fighters as malicious. I don't think that at all. But I do think there are some leaders who overstep their boundaries. Perhaps you just don't like that I will stand up for myself and not be bullied? - not by you so much. I don't know where you got the idea that I was telling you what to do. Perhaps that was someone else's words. I do question things though. Am I not allowed to?
 
Last edited:

Pankreas PorFavor

Well-Known Member
you know how when you drive by a crashed car, and you see the flashing lights of the police and ambulance even from far away, and you know you should look the other way when you come close, jut keep your eyes on the road in front of you, there's nothing good that can happen if you look - but there's that primitive part of your brain that turns on and makes you look anyway? and then you regret it...

that's the exact same thing that happens when you see Alice posted something on this forum.
 

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
News flash: This is not your business. It is INNO's business. Forts can be played by any player not just a few. What matters here. Hummm.
I meant our "business" as in participating in fort fighting, but again, your ignorance of this game as a business amazes me, so for the last time I will try to explain two points.

No individual, town or alliance gains a single advantage for owning a fort, their only purpose is to have fort fights with - to play a game,
and that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, many fort fighters (140 customers) outweigh a few attempting to make the customers stop playing by impacting their ability to participate in and enjoy the major PvP aspect of the game (3 griefers).

That is why InnoGames, through the CoMa, have taken actions to stop the griefers, and not only on Colorado or Kansas.
 
Last edited:

Poker Alice

Well-Known Member
I don't know what I wrote that makes me ignorant of this game. It is INNO's business. Is that not true?

You wrote lulumcnoob that no alliance gains advantage. Is it not logical to presume that if you have a very large alliance on one side and very small one on another the large one will win more battles therefore allowing the ownership of a fort. Am I missing some important piece of information here?

Indeed everyone wants to play a game and the 3 meanies as you point out have a much different game strategy.

I can accept the rules set forth by the moderation. What I find difficult to accept is the impact that 3 tiny so called grief a be's have against ONE HUNDRED and FORTY players. Explain to me once again the concept of having to get out of bed and take back your silly little fort just ruins the whole game boo hoo ?
 
Last edited:

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
Is it not logic to presume that if you have a very large alliance on one side and very small one on another the large one will win more battles therefore allowing the ownership of fort. Am I missing some important piece of information here?
Yes, that is why the fort alliances of Colorado have an agreement to keep the number of active fighters as equal as possible on both sides voluntarily. This is also why, in my opinion, the fort scene on all of the other worlds has collapsed (or will) to non-full small forts, if at all. No one is willing to play for longevity and everyone generally just wants to dominate and own all of the forts.
And perhaps that should be the programmed endgame for new event worlds to be opened in the future.

I can accept the rules set forth by the moderation. What I find difficult to accept is the impact 3 tiny people have against ONE HUNDRED and FORTY players. Explain to me once again the concept of having to get out of bed and take back your silly little fort please?
Well, random low quality battles are not a problem, if anything they just pad the achievements stats of our players, the protocol for those is to defend or ignore them, and sometimes they get taken by the flag then taken back, if you own a fort you must then defend it, of course.

If the multi battle occurs in what is called "prime time", when the timezones overlap so that the peak number of players are online at once (bigger battles are better battles), there is an inevitable draw of a few fighters to the "wrong" battle, which impacts the quality of the one battle per day at the peak time for the around 140 fighters and all of the planning that went into it.
So it creates a sense that the quality and competitiveness of the game is lowered because someone is digging an uncompetitive, low-quality, frankly pointless battle, and won't engage with anyone to find a way to include and accommodate their battles, or to own some forts if that's what they want for some unknown and unadvantageous reason.
 
Last edited:
Paying a higher fee will accomplish the same as the ban but you should know that the ban works for you and against you, I would be LMAO when some of the 'leaders" got themselves banned
 

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
Paying a higher fee will accomplish the same as the ban but you should know that the ban works for you and against you, I would be LMAO when some of the 'leaders" got themselves banned
SO from today and forward, i will (now) give 5 ban points. Especially if you declare a battle, and not even bother putting your self on the battle map.
Let's hope no one gets banned... or unfairly treated.
A "leader" would at least show up to lead, or through the cooperative environment that forts dictate - because no one town can fill a medium or large fort, and no one-man army can take on an alliance - arrange for someone else to lead on their behalf, which does happen because it's in everyone's best interest for the battle to have a leader, or at least some mechanism of cooperation.
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
No one is getting a Ban right away.
Read his message again.
SO from today and forward, i will nok give 5 ban points. Especially if you declare a battle, and not even bother putting your self on the battle map.
(Think he meant "Now" instead of "Nok)

So you get 5 points (which is not enough for 5 days ban) and that only happens if the 'conditions' are met.
 

Hr.Nyborg

Ex-Team Member
Okay then. I think this topic is done.

Thank you ALL who have participated here and with all the ideas and talk this is now the way we do it.
IF you call a battle, you will need to be there, with your character AND be online for what ever rounds the battle takes. - Simple as that.
If not, a very VERY good excuse, should be made to not have this happen, and even then, 5 points ban will be given in most cases.
IF this behavior is repeated. A higher ban point will be giving for each new battle that are made, and the battle caller is not showing up.

So behave ;-)

The battle cost is back to the normal world settings, so "everyone" should have a chance to call a battle.
I will close this topic now. But again, glad we could have this civilized-ish talk :p
 

Hr.Nyborg

Ex-Team Member
Since naughty pumpkin wanted to join in on the talk since he had been mentioned. *sigh* ;-)

I will open op this post, one last time, for a day or two. So talk it out and vent, but BEHAVE.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.