Mo re th an 2 le tt er s at a ti me a bi t to o ha rd fo r ya?

Ah ha. It is a conspiracy... a conspiracy that there is no conspiracy! And Spawn is in on it! Motive... probably to put Nicolas Cage, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon and Tom Cruise all in the same movie, it'll probably be entitled: "The Conspiracy: A Fate worse than Death"... the few who see it by accident will turn into schadenfreude craving zombies, driving hordes of people into the screens and forcing people to watch. The world will be enslaved. It's a bit much but as long as I'm one of the last to be turned it might be worth it for a netting set.

In that case it's maybe just a couple of folks with friends in WoG who play in those tags. I hope I'm not inadvertently uncovering spies here. If anyone gets the death penalty I'll pitch in to cook their last meal and mop up after.

Don't take this the wrong way WoG peeps but personally I don't trust you.

However, that said, I'll play where ever my fellow Fist Of Odin members do... this game or otherwise.

I've been led to believe from countries in game that I've messaged; that you guys have connections with some of the folks in 'The Morgue Clan' who decided to hit us for no reason this set (along with many untagged countries) - only for your tags to graciously come in and kill select countries afterwards (though interestingly not some folks claiming to be your friends who hit us in the first place). Going by the missing tags/numbers that led from one set to the next, it's not the only option but for myself, being out of the inner loop of the politics on this server, I'll reserve my judgement and go with whatever our group decides.

I love you all really ;)

Messages and language you say. OK :)

Being destructive is easy - like knocking down a house of cards - it only takes a second and little effort compared to building the tower. Being constructive is the real challenge in this game, for me, it is a shame so many shy away from that challenge.

All the best for the rest of the set and with learning some humility and restraint.

You were given this message because you're talking a load of meow mix meow mix please deliver.

Simply put and covered in fluff.

I personally think tipping is fine as long as that is what it is, a voluntary tip. Giving an extra sum of money for someone doing a good job for you because you feel it is worth paying more for what they gave.

American tipping however seems to have, in some situations, become something of a mentality, an assumed income and a way to keep wages low and to place that extra cost on the customer and get around taxation.

Take a hotel in NYC, you are expected to use and tip the staff even if you didn't want their services like a porter, saying no to help is frowned upon.

In the rooms you are supposed to leave a tip out each day for the cleaning staff but how on earth do you know if they have done a good job that warrants the tip, in this instance it is a bribe to give a level of service you expect to receive. If you don't give the tip are they not going to do their job properly for you, if not what are they employed for?

In these instances it might be just the scenario as you don't always expect to meet the maid as they would work when you're not there but maybe if this is expected the hotel should allow the staff to have areas they cover so tips could be left for a good service rather than assuming people will subsides their overheads for them in advance of receiving anything. Sure if it is to say well done, why don't they leave a name and have a box in reception where you can give a tip directly to the person(s) who provided the service.

The mentality in the US in the food industry is that you will be tipped. That if you provide a bad service you'll get a lower tip but a tip never the less and that the tip will go up should you do something right. The European or 'outside the US' view is that tipping is given for going above and beyond rather than just doing the job you are paid to do satisfactorily.

If you got a shocking service in an Cafe, say the food was very slow, the food was just dropped on the table and maybe they got the bill wrong so you had to get them to change it and they were fussy about it. In this occasion in the UK at least they're likely to give you money off the bill.
In the US if didn't tip even a poor service you'd get a funny look and should you ever go back and be recognised you would get a basic or even intentionally bad service. Yet you paid full price for something where you didn't get the basic product and service you were led to believe you would be provided with.

Tipping has become more than a thank you for giving me good service, it has become a payment to ensure you get what you actually paid for the next time. The threat of bad service fuels the mentality that a tip is compulsory. Tipping to encourage good service still exists so it has positives but those positives exist everywhere else in the world too, its just everywhere else you'd expect to get what you paid for at the actual price advertised without having to pay extra.

It might not be a bribe but it's not a 'tip' either. Like the American way of not having prices stated including tax, its all psychological. If you added the price of a service and then add the expected tax then add the tip you're paying a good 20% on what the advertised price was. What cultures who don't expect to be tipped for doing their job don't like about that is that is the psychological deception involved.

I don't much mind as I just work it out as a given price and if its bad service never give them custom again. However what I do hate about tipping culture is what does get a tip.

Ambulance driver - expected to get there on time and save your life = no tip

Pizza delivery boy - shows up 5 minutes late = put money in his hand or never use the place again.

Tube driver - arrives on time and transports you to where you want to go directly = no tip

Porter - grabs your bags and expects you to let him take them to your room when you don't need his help... after all you made it all the way to the other side of the world with them and packed them specifically so you could carry them! = put money in his hand.

Expected to tip culture = capitalist excuse to save money.
Not expected to tip culture = still give tips, they just mean more when they're given and usually more deserving.

Both encourage a good service, just one expects the person providing the service to do their job to a high standard as a given. The other only to give a good service for the sake of being encouraged (could call it a bribe if you like) to keep it up.

No?

Soviet, who said you could leave the naughty step? Get you back to that step and think about what you've done.

You'll get an extra time out for every time you guide your clan to pick a fight like a 7 year old.

I love a lame excuse for a war. Also the most cowardly pre-amble to it - you get one country to multi grab us in the hopes we respond by killing it - thereby giving you the lame excuse. We don't (because we gave you the benefit of the doubt) and take back the land.

So you then string as many lame excuses together as you can find kicking about.

No doubt about it now, Imag are a spam tag.

And like spam tags, at least you gave us all a laugh :)

I don't get why people would want to but they do. I don't farm and neither does my clan as we don't allow it, most of the 10 ten in land in Alliance do though - that's probably a question for them but the ideas would be to try and stop enabling it to happen (as a better alternative to exploring for those with the mind set that its fine) within the game mechanics.

It might have been said before but in the clan severs but this is just a thought...

Could it be made so that in game tags are more like in game allies, once you enter into the pact/clan you can't those people until you leave? This would go a little way to preventing self-farming/land distribution and abuse of ghost acres like a couple of people have already started in Alliance.

Some would say if that could be the case then a clan could just form 2 tags, have no defence and hit each other all set but to counter that maybe we could also use the following change (which would also to try and stop people farming in the solo games like Primary, Tourney and Express...)

So the 2nd suggested change I would make is making it so SS/PS's would give pretty much next to nothing after the 1st hit by one specific country on another... for that set - basically so that farming someone wasn't feasible.

It would make the game a lot more skilful and more about picking when to hit a target rather than just farming someone because it brings more returns than an explore. It might not have as much of an effect in the alliance games as politics dictate the use of SS/PS's a lot, but in the single games, since people abuse being able to farm, it would help new players and slower strats and re-even the playing field so that people aren't picked on.

If a change like that was introduced into the likes of Alliance, people would have to find lots of new targets and clans would have to co-ordinate better to retal if they want to enforce land/land which would hopefully prevent clans treating all hits as land:land and encourage single grabs on different countries/clans.

Sure, even if someone made their clan split into two tags and had one grab the other they wouldn't be able to do it more than the amount of countries on each side without it becoming not worth it any more. Thus hopefully putting an end to self farming or people running land farms.

As I said, its just a thought but I think it would make for a more enjoyable game for most. Except obviously for those who enjoy getting a quick kick from doing the farming/self farming

I think it should work even if it doesn't break all records and take the world by storm. It has to be kept in perspective and it won't hurt to gain the exposure. To me, gamers on facebook seem to be mainly focused on the convenience of playing games from an interface they're already involved in. A game that has some depth and is free will have a great chance and I think going to them with a single player experience they are used is the right idea (to begin with).

It'll probably bring a few into the social side of the game but its more likely to do so if we (the players/alliances) set up more of a presence on FB to draw them in....

I get the feeling FB tends to think having games will keep people using the site and making more connections. In reality it probably does keep people logging in but they don't really make many more friendships as most games are geared to only sending in game updates and bonuses for having more 'friends' play as they can then use paid for perks to make money from the game.

Though I think its right to start off in the whole FB way of gaming for the exposure and a single player experience as its what Facebook gamers are used to... I like the idea by torment of trying to get people eventually to play in team servers where real friendships and organisation with actual friends and family will pay off and rather than the general bonuses through vague connections (only really made for the games sake in Facebook to gain new players from the developers point of view).

In the long run if the game becomes more focused to the team side, and players encouraged to create their own alliances/groups on facebook, it'll soon spread and when they come to compete in the Alliance server they'll already be hooked and want to know how the rest of us operate. So with lots of smaller alliances, it would probably be the case many will merge into pre-existing groups/alliances. That's my hope anyway. So whether its individuals or groups, the Alliance game will probably hold the most value to play because of the social side that keeps us involved. Something FB doesn't really bring to its users with the current games on offer.

Social gaming FTW :)

Really nice, cheers DM.