• 112 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#101 Posted by Charlemagne (6969 posts) - - Show Bio

Proposing a discussion about something before it potentially gets out of control is not ridiculous or sad, if this discussion took place years ago we all may still be in Prime. (no guarantee)

Things changing from a team based to an Empire based direction has a lot of implications. That and I see very few claims every being defeated for a multitude of reasons.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I'm wrong, but doing something of this scale warrants discussion before moving forward.

I'm not against the discussion I'm against the use of past failures as a reason not to do something. I'm against you always being paranoid about an attempted Empire (big or small you're always anti-empire attempting). These things arent exclusively evil and destined to fail. You accused the Monarchs of stock piling villains to get an Empire and how that was the blueprint EVERYONE was going to use now. No one did. Your first post in this thread wasnt advocating for civil discussion it was a slight ribbing (flashbacks of the Age of Empires). You're bias, anti-empire, which is fine but lets not play games and pretend you're simply trying to invoke discussion. He's already done that with this thread per the rules and his questions were answered.

  • You can try if you want but you have to take each country one at a time with separate threads repeating the entire process.

Everything else is just Empire paranoia and personal bias. Lets be honest. One person trying to conquer something isnt an epidemic. It isnt even a problem cause the CvnU isnt Anti-Empire. Its suppose to be hard to achieve, not impossible. Its not suppose to be forbidden cause people can exploit the system. Guess what, its already being exploited. I'm doing it with the Yard. Thats an Empire. Cleo's Australian thread. Empire. Keijijo Monastery. The First Empire. Empires are here, they have been.

#102 Edited by Charlemagne (6969 posts) - - Show Bio

@armistice: Works for me lol I gotta go anyway. But good talk.

#103 Posted by _Titan (3362 posts) - - Show Bio

@flucks said:

@the_last_arashikage: I actually agree with that. My whole point isn't 'Don't do it.' Its 'Don;t do it if it's unnecessary '

If he needs Africa to sell an event than go for it. So long as the motive justifies the direction I always wanna see somebody go for it. The time and energy wasted on a plot that'll collapse anyway doesn't just factor in that one person though. Now that we've got the Nu and the new rules and the way people view them one persons effect on a location will effect anyone else who tries to even visit that location. Venezuela is a clear sign of how that works. Picture the country like currency, say africa is a 20 piece. Now I lend you that twenty piece and you don't flip it, instead you waste it and I see no return. Now I'm assed out money, and your no poorer, meanwhile I've got to work to earn back that twenty that I'm short on if I need it later when I could have just kept it in my pocket. It's a long metaphor but I figure you get it.

But again the "currency" metaphor is one based off from projected failure. I'm not entirely clear on what has failed in this scenario, whether or not he's actually done multiple rpgs, conquered the whole of Africa, and then done nothing with the Empire, or attempted and failed to conquer Africa. Nether of which would effect anyone beyond any other rpg. The Statue of Liberty was destroyed and not only did the majority not even realize, the ones who did didnt care. Its altered nothing in terms of the way people have proceeded with things. Venz is actually an example of how to turn a failure into a success. None of this, the empires, the failure or successes, are things that cant be glossed over, tweaked, fixed, etc. We just have to act mature enough to do it(by we I mean the collective). What I'm afraid I'm seeing here in alot of the responses are projections of failure being used as reasons not to do something. If he goes for it and things get f'd up you're not out a 20 cause its make believe. Bamf, here, brand new 20. You're not out of pocket anything. It could fail, it could get heated, but it will pass, we'll compromise, and we'll set things back in order. But I'm willing to bet it would be a mixture of both. Some confusion, some fun, some ignored canon, some memorable moments, a couple spats, etc. The great thing about the nU and Empire paranoia is that there will always be a line of users to appose someone looking to conquer some sh!t no matter how big or small.

lol yeah it's make believe but you're more solidifying my point then disproving it.

20 given = Africa owned

It could fail = 20 lost with no actual gain on my ( a title for the collective) end

we'll compromise and we'll set it back in order = Working to get back that 20, when it could have just been kept in pocket.

Or you could have just asked for the extra five (Metaphorical for one country or even city)I had instead of taking the other 15 that I broke even with. (The entire continent)

Now I'm not a hundred on what you mean by projection of failure. My point isn't dissuading him from doing what he wants, my point is to make sure he's aware of the effect taking over an entire continent will no doubt have once it's done, and whether it's really, really what he needs to do to further an idea or plan. Whether it's really, a mass of land and government or military power necesary to further what ever idea he has. That's all. I've never been the guy to talk somebody out of an idea, so long as that idea is built on and worked towards. When I made GC, I made it a location. I took the time out to earn being a city wide kingpin with a character so i know the gratification that comes with that, and think anybody who makes a similar move on any scale to put it short

1. Makes sure the output of effort equals the return of the goal

2. Earns the right to take on an empire instead of going from street rat to fat cat

That's all I'm throwing out, a philosophy not a set of rules.

#104 Posted by Charlemagne (6969 posts) - - Show Bio

@flucks: Gotta rush this. If I understand your currency analogy its about time and how if it fails you've wasted time? If not I'm sorry I dont really get it. But if it is equal to time then thats a metaphor for every single rpg, event, and character interaction. We've all lent out metaphorical currency and seen no return. Its the nature of the beast. If you think an rp is ultimately going to fail dont join, or join and regardless of what happens go above and beyond and make it a personal success. I see AZ and newer users do it all the time. They dont care if the collective have viewed it as a flop of failure, they play on.

What I meant by projection of failure is that your previous post was all about the "If if fails I'm out of pocket." Thats a projection of failure. Its a scenario based off the lowest outcome/failure. It could be a huge success and that 20 you invested was tripled. That would be a projection of success.

I got you though on the rest. The philosophy aspect.

(sorry for the short response gotta bounce. Peace)

#105 Edited by _Titan (3362 posts) - - Show Bio

@armistice said:

Proposing a discussion about something before it potentially gets out of control is not ridiculous or sad, if this discussion took place years ago we all may still be in Prime. (no guarantee)

Things changing from a team based to an Empire based direction has a lot of implications. That and I see very few claims every being defeated for a multitude of reasons.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I'm wrong, but doing something of this scale warrants discussion before moving forward.

I'm not against the discussion I'm against the use of past failures as a reason not to do something. I'm against you always being paranoid about an attempted Empire (big or small you're always anti-empire attempting). These things arent exclusively evil and destined to fail. You accused the Monarchs of stock piling villains to get an Empire and how that was the blueprint EVERYONE was going to use now. No one did. Your first post in this thread wasnt advocating for civil discussion it was a slight ribbing (flashbacks of the Age of Empires). You're bias, anti-empire, which is fine but lets not play games and pretend you're simply trying to invoke discussion. He's already done that with this thread per the rules and his questions were answered.

  • You can try if you want but you have to take each country one at a time with separate threads repeating the entire process.

Everything else is just Empire paranoia and personal bias. Lets be honest. One person trying to conquer something isnt an epidemic. It isnt even a problem cause the CvnU isnt Anti-Empire. Its suppose to be hard to achieve, not impossible. Its not suppose to be forbidden cause people can exploit the system. Guess what, its already being exploited. I'm doing it with the Yard. Thats an Empire. Cleo's Australian thread. Empire. Keijijo Monastery. The First Empire. Empires are here, they have been.

Your like RPG Rush Limbaugh haha

#106 Edited by Armistice (4034 posts) - - Show Bio

I fully admit to being anti-Empire, they hold no appeal to me whatsoever, so your claim of bias is completely valid. IMO they are more detrimental than beneficial. I stated my opinion and others agreed, when others disagreed or offered their point I responded. I'm not intended to represent myself as anything.

At the time of my comment on the Monarchs the Vine was completely Red, there was not an opposing force as far as the eye could see. I will admit to being wrong and shocked it was not exploited at the time, the lack of activity helped avert it IMO.

The size and restrictions of an Empire do matter IMO, and effect my opinion, it is not a one-size fits all. You can ask Z, I defended and even gave some input towards her Australian thread because of restrictions discussed in a PM that made abuse a non-factor. Also I have never made a peep about any of the smaller and location based ones.

#107 Posted by Charlemagne (6969 posts) - - Show Bio

@flucks said:

@the_last_arashikage said:

@armistice said:

Proposing a discussion about something before it potentially gets out of control is not ridiculous or sad, if this discussion took place years ago we all may still be in Prime. (no guarantee)

Things changing from a team based to an Empire based direction has a lot of implications. That and I see very few claims every being defeated for a multitude of reasons.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I'm wrong, but doing something of this scale warrants discussion before moving forward.

I'm not against the discussion I'm against the use of past failures as a reason not to do something. I'm against you always being paranoid about an attempted Empire (big or small you're always anti-empire attempting). These things arent exclusively evil and destined to fail. You accused the Monarchs of stock piling villains to get an Empire and how that was the blueprint EVERYONE was going to use now. No one did. Your first post in this thread wasnt advocating for civil discussion it was a slight ribbing (flashbacks of the Age of Empires). You're bias, anti-empire, which is fine but lets not play games and pretend you're simply trying to invoke discussion. He's already done that with this thread per the rules and his questions were answered.

  • You can try if you want but you have to take each country one at a time with separate threads repeating the entire process.

Everything else is just Empire paranoia and personal bias. Lets be honest. One person trying to conquer something isnt an epidemic. It isnt even a problem cause the CvnU isnt Anti-Empire. Its suppose to be hard to achieve, not impossible. Its not suppose to be forbidden cause people can exploit the system. Guess what, its already being exploited. I'm doing it with the Yard. Thats an Empire. Cleo's Australian thread. Empire. Keijijo Monastery. The First Empire. Empires are here, they have been.

Your like RPG Rush Limbaugh haha

Ah man and we were getting along so well :P

#108 Posted by _Titan (3362 posts) - - Show Bio

@flucks: Gotta rush this. If I understand your currency analogy its about time and how if it fails you've wasted time? If not I'm sorry I dont really get it. But if it is equal to time then thats a metaphor for every single rpg, event, and character interaction. We've all lent out metaphorical currency and seen no return. Its the nature of the beast. If you think an rp is ultimately going to fail dont join, or join and regardless of what happens go above and beyond and make it a personal success. I see AZ and newer users do it all the time. They dont care if the collective have viewed it as a flop of failure, they play on.

What I meant by projection of failure is that your previous post was all about the "If if fails I'm out of pocket." Thats a projection of failure. Its a scenario based off the lowest outcome/failure. It could be a huge success and that 20 you invested was tripled. That would be a projection of success.

I got you though on the rest. The philosophy aspect.

(sorry for the short response gotta bounce. Peace)

Bruce said it best

In the end I'm talking about limitation being made without any real purpose for it than someone saying 'I own this. You do things my way because of it. Here's the way' In other words you're turning water into ice when you take a part of the planet's land, 1/7 of it, that means what was once everybody's is now yours. That means I can't be as malleable, as free flowing with it because it doesn't OOC belong to the collective, but the owner.

Now OOC, the collective allowed this to pass, let's be real. If anybody but you accepts that canon it's not on bent knee with a head down saying yes sir. It's a conscious choice. So if you want me, at least in my personal perspective to accept your taking the continent you better make me believe you deserve it first, because you having it limits my overall ability to use that land in more free flowing ways. So your use of it better be worth that overall loss.

If a man borrowed money from me to start a bar, and he got upa t six, opened up for the wino's, didn't close until 3 am, and in the end ended up with it going belly up...? I'd tell him no hard feelings. It comes back full circle to being willing to put out the necessary effort to make it work for not only you but the collective, which in turn does just that, helps you by bringing people back to your empire to keep it alive and fresh.

boiling it down, I just want to see this guy do everything he can do, his absolute best effort at a great move with the entire continent of Africa, and if it doesn;t work out I'll give him a pat on the back and say nice try. But if he gets it and just nest eggs it, that's the sh!t that I call a waste.

#109 Posted by _Titan (3362 posts) - - Show Bio

@flucks said:

@the_last_arashikage said:

@armistice said:

Proposing a discussion about something before it potentially gets out of control is not ridiculous or sad, if this discussion took place years ago we all may still be in Prime. (no guarantee)

Things changing from a team based to an Empire based direction has a lot of implications. That and I see very few claims every being defeated for a multitude of reasons.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I'm wrong, but doing something of this scale warrants discussion before moving forward.

I'm not against the discussion I'm against the use of past failures as a reason not to do something. I'm against you always being paranoid about an attempted Empire (big or small you're always anti-empire attempting). These things arent exclusively evil and destined to fail. You accused the Monarchs of stock piling villains to get an Empire and how that was the blueprint EVERYONE was going to use now. No one did. Your first post in this thread wasnt advocating for civil discussion it was a slight ribbing (flashbacks of the Age of Empires). You're bias, anti-empire, which is fine but lets not play games and pretend you're simply trying to invoke discussion. He's already done that with this thread per the rules and his questions were answered.

  • You can try if you want but you have to take each country one at a time with separate threads repeating the entire process.

Everything else is just Empire paranoia and personal bias. Lets be honest. One person trying to conquer something isnt an epidemic. It isnt even a problem cause the CvnU isnt Anti-Empire. Its suppose to be hard to achieve, not impossible. Its not suppose to be forbidden cause people can exploit the system. Guess what, its already being exploited. I'm doing it with the Yard. Thats an Empire. Cleo's Australian thread. Empire. Keijijo Monastery. The First Empire. Empires are here, they have been.

Your like RPG Rush Limbaugh haha

Ah man and we were getting along so well :P

You like to hide knives in your posts, lil quick jabs surrounded by respectable perspectives lol

#110 Posted by Lord_Johnathan (3216 posts) - - Show Bio

Me and Kratesis will be using Kenya for an event or two. That is all.

#111 Posted by Charlemagne (6969 posts) - - Show Bio

@flucks said:

@the_last_arashikage said:

@flucks said:

@the_last_arashikage said:

@armistice said:

Proposing a discussion about something before it potentially gets out of control is not ridiculous or sad, if this discussion took place years ago we all may still be in Prime. (no guarantee)

Things changing from a team based to an Empire based direction has a lot of implications. That and I see very few claims every being defeated for a multitude of reasons.

I'm not saying I'm right, I'm not saying I'm wrong, but doing something of this scale warrants discussion before moving forward.

I'm not against the discussion I'm against the use of past failures as a reason not to do something. I'm against you always being paranoid about an attempted Empire (big or small you're always anti-empire attempting). These things arent exclusively evil and destined to fail. You accused the Monarchs of stock piling villains to get an Empire and how that was the blueprint EVERYONE was going to use now. No one did. Your first post in this thread wasnt advocating for civil discussion it was a slight ribbing (flashbacks of the Age of Empires). You're bias, anti-empire, which is fine but lets not play games and pretend you're simply trying to invoke discussion. He's already done that with this thread per the rules and his questions were answered.

  • You can try if you want but you have to take each country one at a time with separate threads repeating the entire process.

Everything else is just Empire paranoia and personal bias. Lets be honest. One person trying to conquer something isnt an epidemic. It isnt even a problem cause the CvnU isnt Anti-Empire. Its suppose to be hard to achieve, not impossible. Its not suppose to be forbidden cause people can exploit the system. Guess what, its already being exploited. I'm doing it with the Yard. Thats an Empire. Cleo's Australian thread. Empire. Keijijo Monastery. The First Empire. Empires are here, they have been.

Your like RPG Rush Limbaugh haha

Ah man and we were getting along so well :P

You like to hide knives in your posts, lil quick jabs surrounded by respectable perspectives lol

They're not meant to be hidden knives thats just the way I talk. Sometimes you gotta put some hot sauce on it.

#112 Posted by Fukuro_Zoku (4694 posts) - - Show Bio

There's a joke in there, related to race.

#113 Posted by Supreme_Maj (255 posts) - - Show Bio

Before going to conquer Africa do you know the number of country which compose this continent? Do you know most of the time the documents they are showing in western country about it are not so accurate. Trees every where, a lion for neighbor people dress with a small piece of cloth for dress so good luck with that .