Jump to content

  •     

Photo

Ban These Dictators Please


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

Poll: Ban hese dictators for sabotaging their countries n the resource wars

They should be

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 03 June 2016 - 10:28 AM

These players apparently sabotaged their countries and is in a process of denying in most cases their countries any decent resources. if its illegal to damage your country by changing the welcome message it should also be illegal to sabotage your country.

 

https://www.erepubli...ce-wars/India/1
leader pizzarayne : https://www.erepubli...profile/3159628

https://www.erepubli...wars/Malaysia/1
leader Phaidoncoolhttps://www.erepubli...profile/1217030
*temp banned for noticed suspicious activities

https://www.erepubli...s/North-Korea/1
leader gongpoyi https://www.erepubli...profile/5727446


Edited by Releasethe Krakken, 05 June 2016 - 10:23 AM.

mh4l.png

 


#2 NoOnexRO

NoOnexRO

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts

Posted 03 June 2016 - 10:49 AM

Still trolling?


Posted Image


#3 n0s3

n0s3

    Senior Ladybug

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts

Posted 03 June 2016 - 11:27 AM

if its illegal to damage your country

... then you should be banned because you're damaging your country's reputation?



#4 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 03 June 2016 - 01:27 PM

Still trolling?

why do you assume this is a troll a cp gets banned if he attacks his nation in their welcome message why should he be allowed to continue playing the game if he forsakes his own duties or deliberately sabotage them. for example the netherlands could have gotten 4 unique resources from this morning .  how loud should one scream wakey wakey.  i am certain that some of them was banned already for this .

 

there was 4 resources left but only 1 fruit so not only are they keeping all of us hanging and waiting on for further updates and the event to end but they have forsaken their nations.

 

i guess there is pizzarayne supporters but even she has left eIndia llie'ing in a ditch.


mh4l.png

 


#5 NoOnexRO

NoOnexRO

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 137 posts

Posted 03 June 2016 - 01:29 PM

Yeap. Still trolling. 


Posted Image


#6 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 03 June 2016 - 01:53 PM

Yeap. Still trolling. 

poor romanian if this game didnt spoon fed you Romanians you might have gotten this.  

 

 

dont let me keep you , you will be late for your date with your sister. (thats trolling btw)


mh4l.png

 


#7 tommot

tommot

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1542 posts
  • LocationBelgium

Posted 03 June 2016 - 03:31 PM

why do you assume this is a troll a cp gets banned if he attacks his nation in their welcome message why should he be allowed to continue playing the game if he forsakes his own duties or deliberately sabotage them. for example the netherlands could have gotten 4 unique resources from this morning .  how loud should one scream wakey wakey.  i am certain that some of them was banned already for this .

did you take a close look at the eNL situation?

Just because they didn't get the resources they could have taken, doesn't mean that there leaders are deliberately causing harm.


18 times Congress member

1° time Country President
Party President of the Belgium for Belgians party (1X) and the All TOgethers party (5X)
The BoDi award for media - day 1840 - 3 December 2012

The BoDi award for media - day 2813 - 3 August 2015
Immigration Officer - day 1806 - 30 October 2012 Until day 1849 - 12 December 2012
Minister of Foreign Affairs - day 1874 - 06 January 2013 Until day 1905 - 06 February 2013
Secretary of Media & FUN - day 1994 - 6 May 2013 until day 2055 - 6 July 2013

former Minister of Home Affairs 
Belgium Forum administrator - day 2058 - 9 July 2013 until(still appointed)

For more info, look at my wikipage


#8 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 03 June 2016 - 05:17 PM

did you take a close look at the eNL situation?

Just because they didn't get the resources they could have taken, doesn't mean that there leaders are deliberately causing harm.

well i assume any temporary problem could have been resolved by now. because your time is not really running out.  but one never know who wakes up.

 

actually pizzarayne is active and refuses to prio any regions for some reason of her own.


mh4l.png

 


#9 gudzwabofer

gudzwabofer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts
  • LocationMerry old land of Oz

Posted 03 June 2016 - 05:33 PM

How can a CP of Dictator change the resource priorities to ones still available if they are banned? Aren't staff sabotaging these countries by leaving the country under the control of someone who can do nothing. Surely if the Dictator or CP is banned, there should be a game mechanic which defaults control of the MU to the next in command, or the CP position to the one with the next highest vote.



#10 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 03 June 2016 - 11:17 PM

impeachment in the case of a cp gudswabofer oh and a dictator will lose command of his mu after 40 days the 2nd commander can then petition them to appoint him as commander and effective dictator.  im certain this could have been resolved by the admins seems they also dont really care


mh4l.png

 


#11 n0s3

n0s3

    Senior Ladybug

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 12:41 AM

dont let me keep you , you will be late for your date with your sister. (thats trolling btw)

146499954619652x95.jpg


  • Alex.L and Dio Eraclea like this

#12 Zordacz

Zordacz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:10 AM

Has it ever crossed your brilliant mind that a weak country may be protecting itself from turning into a colony by becoming a resourceless land?


Edited by Zordacz, 04 June 2016 - 08:12 AM.


#13 gudzwabofer

gudzwabofer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts
  • LocationMerry old land of Oz

Posted 04 June 2016 - 08:56 AM

Who's going to want to colonise someone for iron, fish, or sand? They aren't even placing any of those. This is the problem with allocating the resource like this, not only does it lead to a lack of realism and balance from a strategy game point of view, and probably concentrate more power to the larger countries (unless that pollution formula is heavily weighed), but also future players from these smaller or currently inactive countries will be at a disadvantage due to the actions or lack of actions of one dictator. Also, if pollution is heavily weighed, large countries may colonise empty territory anyway, just to spread their pollution load, and without existing companies there will be less people with incentive to fight it. Also once the colonisation is in place, company owners will fight to keep it colonised, rather than lose all bonuses.

Edited by gudzwabofer, 04 June 2016 - 09:22 AM.


#14 Zordacz

Zordacz

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 437 posts

Posted 04 June 2016 - 09:54 AM

Who's going to want to colonise someone for iron, fish, or sand? They aren't even placing any of those. This is the problem with allocating the resource like this, not only does it lead to a lack of realism and balance from a strategy game point of view, and probably concentrate more power to the larger countries (unless that pollution formula is heavily weighed), but also future players from these smaller or currently inactive countries will be at a disadvantage due to the actions or lack of actions of one dictator. Also, if pollution is heavily weighed, large countries may colonise empty territory anyway, just to spread their pollution load, and without existing companies there will be less people with incentive to fight it. Also once the colonisation is in place, company owners will fight to keep it colonised, rather than lose all bonuses.

 

Strong countries aren't placing poor resources simply because they haven't got enough slots. Instead, they're trying to place those resources at their weak neighbours. Good point on the pollution spread, though.



#15 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 04 June 2016 - 04:54 PM

Who's going to want to colonise someone for iron, fish, or sand? They aren't even placing any of those. This is the problem with allocating the resource like this, not only does it lead to a lack of realism and balance from a strategy game point of view, and probably concentrate more power to the larger countries (unless that pollution formula is heavily weighed), but also future players from these smaller or currently inactive countries will be at a disadvantage due to the actions or lack of actions of one dictator. Also, if pollution is heavily weighed, large countries may colonise empty territory anyway, just to spread their pollution load, and without existing companies there will be less people with incentive to fight it. Also once the colonisation is in place, company owners will fight to keep it colonised, rather than lose all bonuses.

many big countries did place the lower level stuff because they were locked out of rare and very rare resources in entire eastern europe about.  so i agree no one really would go for these resources. players wont place factories in resource empty locations. we still do not know whether plato's view of at war require a NE or just a physical battle within a timeframe of you working. depending on that most big countries may have lost out already.

 

Strong countries aren't placing poor resources simply because they haven't got enough slots. Instead, they're trying to place those resources at their weak neighbours. Good point on the pollution spread, though.

 

eejit all strong countries competed for the rare and very rare. the fact that they did not get it does not mean it was strategy on their part it just means they sucked .

 

Has it ever crossed your brilliant mind that a weak country may be protecting itself from turning into a colony by becoming a resourceless land?

 stupid arguments like that seldom cross my mind.  mmm so your saying rather than having any resources they chose to get none so that big countries wont colonise them leaving them with just say 75% of the taxes of the region and also 0% resources.

 

remember you can nerf all production by just a NE declaration so therefore the better resources you have the better because all occupation will involve deal making or the small partner can just eff up the production.

 

actually if one are not good at strategy and games one just should just stay quit.


mh4l.png

 


#16 tommot

tommot

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1542 posts
  • LocationBelgium

Posted 04 June 2016 - 06:12 PM

...

you are funny.

 

Just because you disagree with other players decisions, doesn't mean they are bad guys.

Maybe you haven't payed attention to what the others said.... having long term security is sometimes more important to a country then a short term economic advantage.

So..... just because you don't see the full details of someones strategic decision, doesn't mean they are sabotaging their own country.

 

 

actually if one are not good at strategy and games one just should just stay quit.

Could you please let the player itself decide whether or not they should play.

you don't even give them a chance to learn from a bad decision... you just tell them to quit because you disagree???!!!

 

That's probably a far worse statement then the one they made.


18 times Congress member

1° time Country President
Party President of the Belgium for Belgians party (1X) and the All TOgethers party (5X)
The BoDi award for media - day 1840 - 3 December 2012

The BoDi award for media - day 2813 - 3 August 2015
Immigration Officer - day 1806 - 30 October 2012 Until day 1849 - 12 December 2012
Minister of Foreign Affairs - day 1874 - 06 January 2013 Until day 1905 - 06 February 2013
Secretary of Media & FUN - day 1994 - 6 May 2013 until day 2055 - 6 July 2013

former Minister of Home Affairs 
Belgium Forum administrator - day 2058 - 9 July 2013 until(still appointed)

For more info, look at my wikipage


#17 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 05 June 2016 - 10:09 AM

you are funny.

 

Just because you disagree with other players decisions, doesn't mean they are bad guys.

Maybe you haven't payed attention to what the others said.... having long term security is sometimes more important to a country then a short term economic advantage.

So..... just because you don't see the full details of someones strategic decision, doesn't mean they are sabotaging their own country.

 

Could you please let the player itself decide whether or not they should play.

you don't even give them a chance to learn from a bad decision... you just tell them to quit because you disagree???!!!

 

That's probably a far worse statement then the one they made.

quite not quit as in silence not end their game.

 

 

actually like i said tommot if you have zero resources you have zero resources for ever. i dont see the fun in that. or the strategy. whereas if you have good regions you can nerf the occupier by a NE declaration.

 

your arguments fails math with all due respect if you have a 90 bonus and its occupied for 50/75 months you still have 90% production for 25 months whereas if you zero resource regions you have 0% bonuses for 75 months.

 

and we still do not know how the new calculations will work since there is a tax split.

 

and we still do not know how placing factories will work. so we even may have the case where one have the choice to place your resources anywhere in the world.


mh4l.png

 


#18 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 05 June 2016 - 10:26 AM

you are funny.

 

Just because you disagree with other players decisions, doesn't mean they are bad guys.

Maybe you haven't payed attention to what the others said.... having long term security is sometimes more important to a country then a short term economic advantage.

So..... just because you don't see the full details of someones strategic decision, doesn't mean they are sabotaging their own country.

 

Could you please let the player itself decide whether or not they should play.

you don't even give them a chance to learn from a bad decision... you just tell them to quit because you disagree???!!!

 

That's probably a far worse statement then the one they made.

also i have removed 2 nations new zealand and the netherlands they headed the call and is now  getting the max they can .

 

india pizzarayne really are an arrogant noob so india is basically f* and will only get 3/17 resources (food) all placed in 3 different :P


mh4l.png

 


#19 mun4oo

mun4oo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 34 posts

Posted 08 June 2016 - 11:35 AM

revolution (and then new dictatorship if desired) is a solution. It is implemented long ago.

why should the admins ban players if they play by the rules? don't get your point.

do you think 250 players defending 17 regions with resources is fun?



#20 Releasethe Krakken

Releasethe Krakken

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • LocationSouth of the clouds and north of the wind

Posted 09 June 2016 - 09:04 AM

revolution (and then new dictatorship if desired) is a solution. It is implemented long ago.

why should the admins ban players if they play by the rules? don't get your point.

do you think 250 players defending 17 regions with resources is fun?

YOU COULD have rented them out but its ok others countries will be rewarded in spades for their diligence. you lose out permanently.

 

ok this topic is irrelevant please close it so that we can discuss my other thread here.

 

and i did give you the option to decide on a action majority said no action so no action won.


mh4l.png

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users