the state of this game.

[Apogryph]

True, game is just an excuse for many of us to be part of the community!

hence the get together's/ conventions that have evolved because of the community spirit that exist threw out this game, forum, community...whatever term fits best for each of us.


P.S.

the offer to help Psi rebuild still stands, so PM me ingame if you need help in rebuilding.

no offence mate but he only lost a 50 bill def... didn't touch anything else... he is just attention seeking if your that sore about it ill give ya the naq for it

[[KMA]Avenger]

no offense taken mate, i wasn't aware it was so little

still, the offer stands.

[Apogryph]

no offense taken mate, i wasn't aware it was so little

still, the offer stands.

thats why i find this post lollable

[Psi Kiya Trist]

True, game is just an excuse for many of us to be part of the community!

hence the get together's/ conventions that have evolved because of the community spirit that exist threw out this game, forum, community...whatever term fits best for each of us.


P.S.

the offer to help Psi rebuild still stands, so PM me ingame if you need help in rebuilding.

no offence mate but he only lost a 50 bill def... didn't touch anything else... he is just attention seeking if your that sore about it ill give ya the naq for it

i was rebuilding.

viewtopic.php?f=68&t=126671&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=145

-.-Psi Kiya Trist-.-

[Wolf359]

Even though i see several people state that this game is a war game i sort of have to correct em. This game is indeed based on wars however as u play with a real community things change over the years. Back in the old days there wasnt an awfull lot of wars in StarGateWARS. Indeed back then it took planning and skill to take out your opponent however diplomatic relations were also a daily routine. Since the start a lot has changed and it became way easier to make "war". This still didnt mean that eveyrhting in this game revolves around wars. The intention of the game is to have fun and play with friends in a team effort.

For some the fun is gone and the game has just become a game to kill time with but with a nice community around it (most of the times). Heck even i notice that the major fun there was back in the old dayds has dissapeared mostly. But i am still here cause i got to meet great people aswell on my friends as on my enemy list ingame and with them i have experienced a lot over the past few years. I can understand Psi's reasoning to quit the game and i agree that if u drive someone away from the game ur killing the game. However personally i woudnt let people drive me from the game as i simply are more into the community then the game itself. For me the game is just a sideshow.

Psi i hope u reconsider ur quitting and even though my alliance member is in combat with u you will sitll be a friend for me

Agree to a point - but to say there were less wars previously is wrong. I'd say there were relatively the same amount of wars back at the beginning as there are now. The difference is that they they were more difficult to co-ordinate. People couldn't just simply buy thousands of AT and then post about massing an entire alliance on the forum, while simultaneously dumping their defence so they can't get hurt - which people can now do on a whim. Another difference back then is that wars were generally for a reason or purpose - unlike today where we get a lot of them just simply because people are bored of the monotony that the game has become. It's happened because of certain updates, which have in turn bred arrogance.

Can we do a lot about it, probably not. The reason I first left was because of an increase in my real life responsibilities, but also because the game had degenerated to a poor shadow of its former self. I've been back a year and although much has been added, nothing has really been improved. I remain around because of the friends I've made, and because of a waning hope that myself, and others like me, can actually force a change by showing people how and why the game has degenerated and what needs to be done to improve it.

[FreeSpirit]

Even though i see several people state that this game is a war game i sort of have to correct em. This game is indeed based on wars however as u play with a real community things change over the years. Back in the old days there wasnt an awfull lot of wars in StarGateWARS. Indeed back then it took planning and skill to take out your opponent however diplomatic relations were also a daily routine. Since the start a lot has changed and it became way easier to make "war". This still didnt mean that eveyrhting in this game revolves around wars. The intention of the game is to have fun and play with friends in a team effort.

For some the fun is gone and the game has just become a game to kill time with but with a nice community around it (most of the times). Heck even i notice that the major fun there was back in the old dayds has dissapeared mostly. But i am still here cause i got to meet great people aswell on my friends as on my enemy list ingame and with them i have experienced a lot over the past few years. I can understand Psi's reasoning to quit the game and i agree that if u drive someone away from the game ur killing the game. However personally i woudnt let people drive me from the game as i simply are more into the community then the game itself. For me the game is just a sideshow.

Psi i hope u reconsider ur quitting and even though my alliance member is in combat with u you will sitll be a friend for me

Agree to a point - but to say there were less wars previously is wrong. I'd say there were relatively the same amount of wars back at the beginning as there are now. The difference is that they they were more difficult to co-ordinate. People couldn't just simply buy thousands of AT and then post about massing an entire alliance on the forum, while simultaneously dumping their defence so they can't get hurt - which people can now do on a whim. Another difference back then is that wars were generally for a reason or purpose - unlike today where we get a lot of them just simply because people are bored of the monotony that the game has become. It's happened because of certain updates, which have in turn bred arrogance.

Can we do a lot about it, probably not. The reason I first left was because of an increase in my real life responsibilities, but also because the game had degenerated to a poor shadow of its former self. I've been back a year and although much has been added, nothing has really been improved. I remain around because of the friends I've made, and because of a waning hope that myself, and others like me, can actually force a change by showing people how and why the game has degenerated and what needs to be done to improve it.

Agreed but the purpose of the post is stil lthe same

[Azarak]

when you farm members of our alliances that have low / no deff because of our war, that actually IS vulturing.

Stop throwing words around that mean pretty much nothing. haha is all I have to say to your post.

Anyone can hit/mass anyone else they want simple as that.

[teesdale]

ol, so ur in a alliance...

ur alliance leader reflects the image of said alliance
ur alliance leader pisses on the wrong tree stump
a war is declared on your alliance because of it

theres a legit reason, end of story.

[Juliette]

ol, so ur in a alliance...

ur alliance leader reflects the image of said alliance
ur alliance leader **Filtered** on the wrong tree stump
a war is declared on your alliance because of it

theres a legit reason, end of story.

You fail to see there is a principle behind the example; while this particular example may not be correct, the principle behind it is still very much a reality.
I am sure you understand.

[Azarak]

You fail to see there is a principle behind the example; while this particular example may not be correct, the principle behind it is still very much a reality.
I am sure you understand.

While that is true like you say it does not apply here so the point of this thread would be? Oh I got it there is not one.

Alliance goes to war (good reason/or one at all is beside the point) and then people claim random massing. Umm hello.... Even if the alliance massing was random the massing of that person was not as they were in the alliance which gave a reason to the massing.

--

Random massings do happen - quite often now it is a shame but it happens if you can't get over that then perhaps people should considering whether you continue to play the game or not.

[Wolf359]

when you farm members of our alliances that have low / no deff because of our war, that actually IS vulturing.

Stop throwing words around that mean pretty much nothing. haha is all I have to say to your post.

Anyone can hit/mass anyone else they want simple as that.

Agree!

The term 'Vulturing' is a croc - full stop! And those that persistently use it are somewhat pathetic.

The term vulture was invented because certain big alliances didn't like it when they were attacked during war by many other people they had previously intimidated. Because of the poor way in which players have demanded the game be developed, you enter a war and you automatically drop your defence to minimise damage - if that happens then of course people will attack you.

At one time it couldn't happen, because you couldn't simply drop your defence without other severe consequences.

Bottom line to all the people who cry about vultures - keep a defence if you don't want it to happen!

[disturbed_one]

AMEN!

[Tekki]

How'd we get on to Vulturing? lol

Fact of the matter is that every alliance deals with hits on them differently. If you hit someone who is in a war and they mass you, that's their choice to do that, whether it is vulturing or not, just as it was your choice to hit them for naq.

Vulturing is just a word used to define hitting while someone's at war but being at war doesn't mean you shouldn't be hit by outside parties, just means you need to define what your response to it in advance.

[GeneralChaos]

Wolf359 come out of perg please

[Wolf359]

How'd we get on to Vulturing? lol

Fact of the matter is that every alliance deals with hits on them differently. If you hit someone who is in a war and they mass you, that's their choice to do that, whether it is vulturing or not, just as it was your choice to hit them for naq.

Vulturing is just a word used to define hitting while someone's at war but being at war doesn't mean you shouldn't be hit by outside parties, just means you need to define what your response to it in advance.

Agree with most of that - people can deal with any attack however they like - but alliances/players who intimidate others should expect that if they have 0 def, they will get hit. I just hate seeing the term 'vulture' used as either/both a rallying call for support, or justification for massing smaller accounts to death once their own war is over.

And I'd say that 9 out of 10 of those people who accuse people of being vultures are a complete joke. They seem to think that it is okay for them to be in a war and hit everyone that isn't in it, but as soon as they are hit they cry 'I'm in a war, you shouldn't attack me, you're a vulture, that's not fair, I'm gonna get my alliance to mass you."

Double standards? I think so.

Man-up!