In that case Sov, maybe war clans should try warring other war clans instead of netting clans?

That's what I said in another thread. lol SoL vs SoF etc. :)

imag would be high on warsets but otherwise big tags would dominate that list too unless there's wars lost category and imag would be high on that list too.

You seem to be under the impression I care about where iMag ranks on such a list. I don't. I just want a way to show my guys where we stand on the server with something official backing it up.

i know imag doesn't care.

the only ranking Soviet cares about is this one:

Worst Alliance Leaders
1. Soviet

;) haha just kidding

in all seriousness though i do agree we need more ingame war achievement recognition

Definitely, more war stuff :)

don't hold your breath we all have been waiting for that one - but i guess both sides are scarred who would win

Take your own advice.

lol @ zip

it's true - both are strong fighters and the outcome could go either way, but if they did fight, and there was a winner ( how to decide is also up in the air ) then think of the loss of trolling speculation.

i don't want to see them fight on second thought- more food for dagga

For those of you fluffing about not enough war rankings, what exactly is it you'd like to see that you can't currently obtain through the site itself and EE stats? Or are you just fluffing because the game is not set up the way you personally would like to see it set up?

Seems to me, this thread is full of folks who think selfishly enough that they consider the only "proper" way to play/record info is the way they want it done, despite what the larger appeal of the game may be...

from my perspective the warring people already claim this is a "war game" (even though the only form on in game stats are netting related), the last thing we need is to add more ammunition for this view.

Warring is already a means to potentially increasing NW, while at the same time consuming NW. There's that dichotomy again.

NW is the objective measure of a country, and has been since the beginning. What dagga suggests is akin to learning basketball, playing basketball for a long time, and then complaining because you'd rather win a basketball game by kicking a ball in a net.

Also, "biased" is not typically defined as "disagreeing with dagga" 8)

I love you!

Possibly the dumbest analogy I've ever seen.

Bu, I think it would be more like wanting to win by mercilessly attacking your opponents on the court with knives and bats until there is nothing left and you got to jail for life so neither side wins. Thats what Dagga wants.

The problem is that certain clans are so fixed in playing the game in a way that it never was intended to be played. Its clear the goal of earth:2025 was networth, that's how rank is measured, the war room is there to aid this goal, the destructive attacks are there to help you achieve this goal by protecting yourself by removing threats, its not a goal in itself...

"War" clans should use their willingness to war as political leverage against netting clans, as a way to try and enforce policies that benefit them or outright demanding things.
They could also attempt to secure top spots by playing in a way that netting alliances deem non-legit, FA'ing and land trading.. that should create some real friction in the game.

The ability to take stats like HPK, HPM, KDR etc etc from set to set and then be able to average them speaks more about the clan than the one they FSed.

Would also like to know if it would be possible to count harmful spy ops in rankings, as I think it would be interesting to see which clan better utilizes those.

zaka for president!

buttman for bonus points!

I quite like UBer Bu's analogy - go figure dagga wouldn't....

Zaka - that's more or less what happens.

I still haven't seen any sort of response to what the war monger crowd would like to see for stats that is not currently available in game or via 3rd party sites. Since PBPT (pointless fluffing per thread) is not a measurable statistic, you guys are gonna have to at least give folks something to build on if you want the conversation to be taken seriously...

the guy writing things with his penis is preaching about serious conversation????????!

I"m pretty involved with game mechanics and changes.

I don't think I've ever played in a netting tag...?

In any case I've been involved with much of the game development, including testing formulas from day 1. There is no plan/design to make the game favor netting over warring and many of the changes I could easily see to be adapted to war using a little creativity. Most of the rules change the flavor of the game but don't make netting/warring any better or worse and are aimed at improving the overall user experience. The admins are not making changes to benefit one tag over the other and there is a lot of discussion between people involved in testing in terms of the impact of the changes on the experience as a whole.
There are more changes being discussed or that have been agreed to but not implemented yet that will impact warring more than netting however the admins have limited time on their hands and things can only get done at a certain speed. Unlike Mehul, game changes are thought through a little better and tested carefully prior to going main stream.

Making constructive rule suggestions is always welcome and should be done on the B&S board (we all read it). imo hurling accusations at the admins is counterproductive and is not going to make anything better.