im going to make you carry out your threat to kill all untags.

i know you werent serious and just said it bc you all are a bunch of whiners when you arent fluff talking ungracious winners but if you want to go down the road of ruining SPAL and cd s you best be ready to kill every untagged.

oh also req you dont get to say your not an asshole thats for others.

koh learn what a mic drop is.

syko, cant wait till laf kills you for being a 1 man tag.

done with at besides bonus

i aint no joey or bayrock

LaF isn't suggesting nuking CDs. It's part of a group of suggestions regarding SPAL that has been posted over and over again in various threads over the years. I understand that making poorly built countries with restart bonus is to your advantage but many of the people supporting this have been warring for the last few years while you were retired. We know the mechanics and the why's behind the push to change them. I haven't seen many LaF even posting there besides Gerdler, I've seen people from several different clans contributing to the discussion.

Furthermore, the suggestion of killing all untags is an old one that did not originate with LaF. I think I was the one that brought it up most recently in several IRC and discord channels. I am most definitely not LaF. It comes from official FFA policy which we implemented for years (which someone in your 1a clan was the first to implement btw and it was very effectively done and to great success), and I am most definitely, deadly serious about it. I would love to see it enacted in this server.

It's kind of weird that you are trying to push for a gigantic handicap for fighting wars given to people that can't build proper countries unless you're admitting that you can't compete without it. Either way, no need to blame LaF for a push to change SPAL that neither originates with nor congregates around LaF.

So you make a new thread, pretty much like the last one that I closed, but in different wording and topic....
Come on now Neil. Drop it.

Thats the odd thing. On the UI forum there's basically only two laf people talking. Hawk being opposed to changes and Gerdler being for changes.

Virtually everyone else is monsters or elder family. Ugo suggested some changes that me and sin and gerdy all agree with but expenses for high spal high land change....

But thats basically monsters and elders talking about changes and someome in laf agreeing while someone else in laf is disagreeing. Elders and monsters seem to have the most succinct and congruent message, not laf.

I think it's just a product of them wanting to not have to get good to pound on better players after years away. They want to troll the game, not become good at it. Taking away griefer abilities sorta flies in the face of their current methods the last 2 sets so naturally they are opposed.

Tho I'm curious to know if they are aware that these formulas, esp CD, were already changed from their earth 2025 state...we're improving on an already changed thing, not changing from how it originally was...

I think neil just thinks everyone who is not in sof must be in laf or something.

I messaged Dragon yesterday on it. I'm extremely curious of his opinion. Or maki or other players who have actually been warring with us the last few years. Im also fairly certain the discussion the the UI forum was started by an SOL player, and would likely be programmed in by said SOL player. I don't need to ask Jabroni (SOL) his opinion tho, as he made a post about 2 sets ago that he thought it was dumb you could build a country 5x better than any of your opponents and still die in 8 seconds due to problems with the current CD formula and SPAL.

Retarded much?

I understand the current formulas, we have made a play style that fits the current formulas and you can't deny that we are good at it. So we have no problem abusing the current game formulas in our favor, we understand how to win, we understand why we are winning and we are exploiting your lack of understanding of those same game formulas. If anyone should want the game to change it's you just to have a chance at a new balance where you can come out on top.

Further, there are people from Monsters, Elders and SOL advocating the same view of the problem and similar solutions as I have. There are also other threads from before on other forums that people from Evo and Omega has had similar veiws on what the issues are and how to solve them. In that thread LaF is 50/50 split for or against the changes that we are proposing.

Secondly, SoF has always been against changes and been very much against any changes at all that could force them to change their play style. And you have the same tactics; instead of argueing your case you threaten to suicide LaF, which you do now, and another SoFer did last time there were talks of changes.
I'm paraphrasing; 'If Gerdler don't stop talking to QZ about these changes I am going to send *** ********** to suicide LaF'
Why don't you argue why the game should remain just as it is and use the breadth of your game knowledge to make your case instead of this losertalk?

Yet at the same time you are the ones who say the game is a shell of its old self. The changes we are suggesting would bring spies in EE closer to the effectiveness they used to have in E2025, as has been pointed out in that thread by non-LaFers.

Yep. Pang, a laffer at the time, programmed spal differently than e2025 and seemingly caused an issue that could be resolved by returning to something closer to Mehul's game.

Jabroni, an SOL player, will likely at least have a hand in programming the change that is closer to the old game.

While laf is seemingly split 50/50 on the issue, a solid majority of people who understand the formulas and have been playing the last few years are not.

Neil's understanding of these facts is clearly about in line with his understanding of the formulas themselves.

I pretty much guarantee he doesn't umderstand that the proposed "nuking" of CDs would only raise the break from 32% of original to 38%. No way in hell he'd be freaking like this if he spent any time with the math.

Thinking the spal thing must also have something to do with complete ignorance of what is being proposed as well. I'm seriously doubting he put any of these formulas in a calculator because he's clearly not understanding how subtle they are.

Something like lowering the expenses of spies as you get more of them definitely benefits wardogs and does nothing for netters at all lol.

3 posts back to back, a new record? Let's table all these changes, I propose a "Derrick Talk" forum be created immediately for you to have a safe space to talk to yourself.

Let me translate: I want to be able to CD all your troops away so my inferior country(ies) so I can still kill your top countries. Am I missing anything?

How does it not benefit netters? It benefits both. Lower expenses means u can carry more to = same amount of penalty how much more fluff do netters need? U have land bots that don't retal. U have same bots buying tech mid to late set for atleast 5k. U can buy private military with oil. Like seriously? How much more do they need?

3 is not my record. Just trying to get my post count up bro. I value the stats lol

The reason why it wont affect them is because with the proposed formula, the price only drops about 1/3 on the top end. Meaning spies will still be expensive for your first million or so.

In short, spies will still be too expensive for the best netters to carry and win, thus they will be unaffected.

Then they should have weigh the positives and negatives. Survive and maybe win. Or die and definitely don't win this was never a game where the system was changed to make so u didn't have to play responsibly and have a little bit of luck

Winning has always required extremes, and luck, to go with a base amount of skill to get into the conversation.

Winning should require extremes, tha require sacrficies, that create vulnerabilities, that's part of going all out for the win.

bottom line I don't think a winning country quality should be a great war country without a few days to convert to one.

I agree with all that. But I also feel the system shouldn't be changed so there is no risk involved or very minimum

It won't be. Like i said no netter is going to have 100 spal all of a sudden easily. That wont be the case. First because a 100k acre country would need like 20k indies to achieve that, distracting from their main strat and costing piles of nw. Secondly because the reduction does not lower the expense of spies that much, a 100k acre country carrying 10m spies will absolutely have no shot of winning the server with that level of expenses.

You should be able to buy and sell spies

Y you're a moron go jump off of a cliff

A few days? Have you warred in EE, lol?

You are talking like if a good netting country can spend a week and be ready for war with someone who spent all set to prepare for it? That wont be true regardless of changes to SPAL. Do the math on how long it takes to get to 100 spal for a non-indy with a normal netting-amount of ICs. 100 SPAL can still be CDed to 15-20% the break(not by a spy country, just by normal prepped war countries) but at least it will cause a few fails along the way. You are not getting there in "a few days", tho. Two weeks maybe, possibly three.

gl hf getting 250+ spal in a few days as a netter with 100+k acres.



Please can you explain your thinking here?
How will it benefit netters that run with close to 0 spies? You think i care about the cost when i have 100-500k spies on 200k acres? For this change to be better for netters i suggest we make the upkeep of spies 100 times higher, that would reduce the SPAL requirements and my 200k acres country can keep up with the war builds better.
Some examples, drinks had 500k spies last set. My previous 2 top 10 endings i had below 400k spies.

Then CD 32 or 38% or whatever. Its the same anyway my 100k troops country will die in 10 seconds anyway. Do you think i give a fluff what % CD does when its not even worth it to spend the turns to CD me until the last day of the set?

These changes may benefit netters on other servers but hardly anything on the alliance server.

Just start allowing the sale of spies on the market again. WTF?

Yeah it's not supposed to benefit you unfortunately. Or else I'd be opposed to it :p

It benefits both in the case a netter decides to carry spies for once they won't have to pay as much for them

The reason netters don't carry spies is because it's a waste of production buildings and certain strategies are based on the percentage of your land covered with certain buildings. It has some but realistically little to do with expenses. These suggestions are literally in a vacuum free from influencing netting countries, nor do they weaken war countries. They literally just make good war countries better than bad war countries that will still be better than net countries at warring. So if Neil's only purpose in this game is to suicide LaF, he will still be able to.

I'm aware of why they don't carry spies. All I said was it benefits both. It might benefit 1 more then the other but both benefit if u choose to use spies while netting and if u don't that's on u. That's what I was talking about for risk/reward. U know what lowish spies does to ur country good and bad. Be held accountable for it. Good or bad there's nothing wrong with taking responsibility for ones actions or inactions

I would argue it mostly has to do with expenses, spies are the most expensive unit. A netter can have a lot of ICs if they do not destroy them while grabbing and instead of destroying them build jets. If jets are expensive it would be worth it to keep IC. So it’s not necessarily the buildings that are the issue unless you are a teacher. Just my opinion.

The thing is.. if spies were the cheapest unit, netters still wouldn't carry enough of them to do anything because they'd offer no utility. How many spy ops does a netter do in a set? I do close to zero. Netters don't carry an absurd amount of troops just because they're cheap units. The amount of IC required to put a netter on par with the SPAL of a war country even with the most liberal of these changes is prohibitive. It would go beyond just keeping the ICs from grabs, ICs would need to be built in large quantities

Yep, you're still going to need 80-100 spal to hang with even the worst wardogs which you'd need thousands of indies for on high acreage. Just never gonna happen.

You simply cannot fix stupid.