What if i got 6 bucks, you have 3 bucks and burrow 5 from me. Then i get another 3 bucks and you borrow 2. In the end, what is the likelihood i will ever get any of it paid back? I keep doing the math here and i still can not figure that out. Will i see any of that money again?

300 acres is the difference from the 2k acres you are crying about. Aka if country C had never been hit prior to hitting you, you would have gained 300 more acres from your first hit.

What exactly is NA retal policy, I don't see it on the wiki? Is it just 1:1 because unless you have some clause like sanct about attacks in the last weeks of the set, I'm not sure why it matters that you were a techer and had to rebuild. Maybe you have some clause about topfeeds, but that doesn't even apply in this case for the usual percentages.

regardless, i still don't get why the intraclan hit matters at this point.

someone was hit, and was retaled. the guy who retaled got more land in the end. shouldn't he just be happy with the ghosts?

if you have an issue about intraclan hits, that's another debate.

reverse 2 stepping isn't in their terms

so we used our terms

NA has never done L:L until this reset

therefore, cases not covered by your terms, I defaulted to ours. which is 2:1 on reverse 2 stepping. had it been a more egregious case of 2 stepping, further action would have been necessary

my first hit would have gotten more, if he didnt let his clanmate take his land directly before hitting me

more than 1 hit is necessary to make up for that lost land on my retal.

retallers for a clan, that let their clan mates farm them down, arent allowed to grab are they?

this is the same case, just ld wasn't even a retaller

NA has been 1:1 ESC for over 6 years up until this reset actually. when our retal policy changed we posted it. this reset we tried to open up and accept whatever other policies were.

the only other policy we ever had was 4:1 on any hit. that only lasted 1 reset, and that was about 4 years ago.

that plus its nothing like that...

how is it that everyone here sees how your second hit and then your taking two more is out of bounds (especially without FA contact) except you?

ah i think i know what you are referring to now llaar.

in FFA, they have the policy of "reverse two stepping" where if you interhit and then grab someone else, it's 2:1. i just had to look to realize it. i don't play in FFA so i never heard of this term until today =)

the thing is no one in alliance is aware (including me) of such a thing. if you wanted to introduce this to the world you needed to tell us beforehand.

i'm basing this off your recent post about your retal policies:

http://forums.earthempires.com/...;z=na-public-announcement

i see no reference to "reverse two stepping".

i really want to take your side on this one llaar, but from casual observation i wish you told us about what reverse two stepping was beforehand =)

good to know for the future though.

Correct, I checked it myself also. I would be totally understanding of this matter if I honestly believed Llarr was cheated in some way out of land. But the hit was no different than someone else retalling me and then me making a LG. I might even be inclined to try and be a good guy and make things right IF Llarr didnt get all his land back in one hit... but it never should have mattered since we both accept a form of L:L anyway.

so if i let NA farm me down to 1k acres, and then i go around grabbing a bunch of clans right after.... thats ok?

and yes this is very standard practice in FFA of 2:1 or kill of anyone that reverse 2 steps

and i'm shocked to see that it apparently isn't to some of you here

i first learned this policy, about 8 years ago back in '04

no that would not be ok. it wouldnt be ok if ksf did that either and we dont expect it to be. but the fact of the matter is that did not happen, nor anything remotely close to it. so stop pretending it did.

1 hit or 10 hits, its still reverse two stepping

i see your point llaar. that does look like a point of abuse.

that's why i think eventually we're going to introduce reverse two-stepping clauses here also.

i think our community isn't used to interclan attacks yet. this is a relatively new topic for all of us. i even asked a few landtrading questions myself on AT since LaF has never done intra clan grabbing to this day, and i'm exploring it as an option. this is also the reason i'm interested in this debate even though my alliance isn't even involved personally. i'm not trying to take NA or KSF's side here, i'm merely trying to understand how grabbing works under these contexts for my own reference in the future. my own country did some exchanges with some other tags this reset and we both gained acres and it was amicable so i'm already poking around to see how this system would work...

i know ffa has more mature policies regards to this, and i'm happy you are telling us of the problems that can occur related to L:L and intratag clan policies. i just wished you told us beforehand and not post fact =)

regards to this though, i don't think KSF was farmed down to 1k acres and grabbed a bunch of clans right after. if they did then sure they would be ruining the intent of intratag clan grabbing and i'm sure we'd need to tweak retal policies based on that fact.

honestly the alliance server (including myself) is extremely n00b when it comes to us. give us time llaar =) i honestly never heard of that term or even thought of the abuse you just listed until now...

and actually i wouldnt care who farmed you as long as you werent in DRs because we use a form of L:L so i would get my land back regardless.

yea but Ld, the abuse i think llaar is referring to is even without being in DR if he drops all his land after grabbing you, you won't be able to finish grabbing your land back in a 48 or 72 hour window (whichever your alliance uses)

i had to retal 28k somehow off a guy with 25k land total a few resets ago. let me say it wasn't so easy, especially in a 48 hour window ;P

I'd just tell LD to screw off and kill both countries. He's being an arrogant wanker, and I know arrogant :P

but in this case you did get your land back, so i doubt ksf meant any malicious intent. and we were taught a lesson about how "reverse 2 stepping" can shaft L:L.

i'm thankful for this lesson =) thanks llaar! =)

Hanlong, that would definitely be a situation in which FAs get involved as it is an obvious abuse. Like your question about land trading, then the question is when is it unacceptable? Obviously this is not that case, and not even anywhere near the line of questioning (in my opinion) and I would guess that it wouldn't be an issue until it caused a player to not be able to get all of their land back in the retal window.

Also, it is interesting, because in that set you needed to retal all that land, you got a lot of it back from grabbing a fellow player in LaF, yet a few sentences above you said LaF has never done intra clan grabbing? I know there are other instances of LaF grabbing LaF as well, just seems strange you would say something that seems so patently untrue.

that's what i meant tertius.

and yes, it is an interesting point because of my own situation that reset was kind of similar to that hypothetical case that llaar was referring to.

when it is not feasible under normal means to get back the standard land owed, untraditional methods have to be used. LaF does not condone intratag grabbing as a standard policy.

what i'm trying to say is it sounds like L:L normally works, and in cases of abuse that's when FAs get together and do things out of the norm to resolve issues (while otherwise if they don't want to work together that's how wars start heh).

the same logic i'm trying to refer to can be applied to something like "i don't FA other alliances". but if say a LaF member suicides another tag, as part of FA negotiations, my country would be FAing other alliances even normally it would not have.

that's what FA deals are for, they create exceptions to the rule for the sake of negotiation. does that make sense?

tertius: one specific example i'm trying to say is like

one 20k country grabs another 20k country in another tag randomly and the second retals the first one, and both end up 23k. this is what we call non arranged amicable land exchanges that i see is all the rage these days.

HOWEVER, if they preplan this and hit back and forth 5x (or doing it intraclan, cuz usually its easier to coordinate like this with a clan-mate) each day to generate ungodly amounts of acres, many people in this community see this as abuse. therefore some alliances would consider this as against their policy.

but despite knowing this, such tactics can be used to get FA deals done. if someone abused the L:L retal system and did extreme "reverse two stepping" or massive grab + drop, etc. such things that normally classified as "abuse" could be agreed upon both negotiating parties as acceptable means to fix problems.

this is assume we are all in the business of netgaining and not starting wars. you can certainly be less reasonable, etc. if you are looking to pick a fight.

Absolutely, I see nothing wrong with that at all. Whats the problem?

yea scode doesn't see a problem about it, because the msg is pretty clear when you do this.

you want a fluffing war lol

The thing is, the case at hand isn't one where someone was "farmed down to 1k acres", or even close to reducing his acreage by that significant of an amount. I understand the policy question (and yes, for those of us who don't play FFA, this is a pretty new concept), but it doesn't seem like this is a particularly egregious case...

Sounds more like what happened here was there was no FA contact prior to taking what were deemed by one side "appropriate retals", when the FAs could have discussed alternative resolutions (e.g. maybe L:L plus reps for the possible ~300 acres that llaar "lost out on"), and now it's being taken to AT...

i hear itll be on maury monday...

Llaar, there is one thing that you are taking into account that you shouldn't be taking into account.

You assume he still would have hit you after his member hit him. If that hit wasn't done, perhaps LD was content with the amount of land he had. You have no way of knowing that he would hit you, so it doesn't matter how much land he had vs. how much he SHOULD have had.

You're predicting the future, which doesn't follow logical patterns. That is why your argument is invalid.

Madjs that's a bad argument, because as a techer, I am sure llaar didn't want to get grabbed either.

And I can see llaar point, but that is standard policy of ffa, and the standard in alliance is L:L, if the country was hit to a lesser acreage and is just too hard to get the land back in 48 hours, then FA contact needs to be made, or as detmer said, you just take L:L from someone else in the tag.

regardless of llaars goverment and strategy.. thats his own strat for this set.. he retaled 2:1 without FA confirmation. he sees me on mirc all the time. he knows me from e2025.. he over reacted and 2:1 a single grab.. when our policy states 80% L:L and in which case he gained 100% back in 1 hit.. and he took a 2nd hit. he didnt need to take it.. looks more like he was mad for getting grabbed and used the excuse the interclan retaling was a way to farm then hit NA.. when in fact it was a bad FA case that a KSF FA messed up and gave a retal (successful one) to another KSF member on his own country as reps... really 1 successful hit is considered farming down so the defender drops nw/land and is in DR's just to hit u llaar? thats a litte far fetched.. if that was the case. KSF woulda drove him into massive DR's for the next 48 hrs.. which we did not do..

Na not at all.

If you are the first alliance to retal you should get all your land back plus more, unless of course your a pansy netter with not enough defense for the amount of land you had.

The only problem i see here is llaar overreacting and KSF not fs'ing NA yet.

On that note, NA please contact me today regarding this issue if you want to clear it up.

I'm a little confused if its NA's policy to authorize retals without contacting FA's? if so then i will do the same.

#ksf

War? Hmmm commies will love this... Prices do suck...

http://hosting.boxcarhosting.net:8080/...?thread=174987&spec=0

http://forum.evolution2025.com/...fical-retal-policy-thread

Swords retal policy:
- 2 stepping and reverse 2 stepping: 2:1, 5:2, 9:3, 4+ = Farmed and/or Killed. This will be done at our Discretion. We reserve the right to hit any country involved as a valid retal.



Natural Born Killer Retal Policy
- Reverse two stepping, is grabbing your country within 72 hours before hitting someone. Also if really try to take advantage of that rule, we can decide what country to retal.
Our stance is we start on, country is killeable, FA contact will be done.


KA will be enforcing AND accepting the following retal policy for the Jan/Feb 2011 set.
2 stepping, land trading, reverse 2 stepping, land dropping:
1:3
2:6
3:Kill




-----

as you can see, those are the only publicly posted policies i could find anywhere for 2 stepping

and as you can see none of them ever mention L:L

its 2:1, 3:1 or kill w/contact

i went with the lowest form of retalling the reverse 2 step, the 2:1. and those policies don't require contact.

these are current policies of clans too, not like they were posted years ago. that event in '04 from the first thread might be around when i first learned of the policy. i was in sysoolae at that point in time and remember that happening.

if there were a posted policy by ANY clan in any server of L:L for reverse 2 stepping, your arguement would have more weight. but that policy simply does not, and has never, existed for any clan that i am aware of

as it stands, I do think I was well within my right to retal 2:1 on it, based off of my knowledge of retal policy, and based off of every other public policy that handles this issue.

"reverse 2 stepping"?


Sounds like something I'd find in the Kama Sutra...

hmmmm

in FFA countries that have been involved in intra tag hits are only allowed to take retals, if they make a land grab on another tag they die :/

I would say that Llaar had to contact KSF before going ahead with the retals because reverse 2 stepping has hardly ever happened in alliance server... I think only one alliance did it to me, and that was RD back in 2004.

As some of you may remember, some RD countries farmed their own countries and those countries would then proceed and make land grabs on countries with good land and fluffty defense, but those times where kind of fluffty.

Not to be a prick, But this isn't FFA. So i could really give two fluffs what swords policy is.

To be honest, I don't really give a crap about anyones policy(regarding this issue between NA and KSF) but NA's which he isn't posting.

There should be NO Ghost acres when hitting someone in your own clan.

NA policy is whatever it says in your policy, he said yours doesn't address reverse 2 stepping or 2 stepping for that matter, so he went with the way he knows people address it, again FA contact needed to be done before taking the retals.

If Llaar was going to do 2:1 then he should had made contact and tell why, then KSF would have to deny it and start a retal exchange, or settle it in another way.

ok...the point of the inter clan hitting was a FA deal, not to gain ghost acres

By that logic, our retal policy states we retal 2:1 and 3:2 4:3 on RoR

we took 1 for the first over retal
then we were hit 2 times back
so we should just take 8 retals without contacting NA?

hey hey don't pick on me, i said he had to make contact before taking 2:1, if you agreed with that or not that is another thing :o

Sorry, just a little annoyed

Communication before acting would of solved most of the issues here. Maybe FA could of been sent instead of taking a hit?

Ill be honest here, I have never heard of reverse 2 stepping before this thread. If someone acted based on this without telling me, I would be frizzled about the actions taken as well.

Before anything goes out of hand, FAs of both alliances need to sit down over a nice cup of tea and figure something out that works for both sides. Someone may have to bite the bullet, but I think its worth it to save both alliances further unneeded headaches.

Well i have not heard from any member of NA what their thoughts might be on the issue besides Llarr's. I believe he is acting president so i must assume that his words are the beliefs of NA as a whole until someone speaks otherwise. At least we can finally agree on one thing; not to agree at all.

NA policy is whatever it says in your policy, he said yours doesn't address reverse 2 stepping or 2 stepping for that matter, so he went with the way he knows people address it,


NA should be using their policy.. not grabbing another's policy when it benefits them.. and furthermore shouldnt be grabbing another servers policy where ur allowed 16 countries..

Start the turn save already, week 5 is the perfect moment to war.

< is getting screwed by the market in epic ways.

We will just take #1 in avg net and that will be our win

2 of those alliances havent been around for almost a year now, for a good reason. using their old policies is not helping to prove anything.

basically FA contact should be made regardless. if the country that retalled got back 100% L:L in the first hit there should be no reason any additional retals should be taken.

I read the first page, but am I right in thinking the issue stems from:

22:50 01/10/12 PS The Hacksaw Jim Duggan (#151) (KSF) llaar (#538) (xNAx) 4079 A (+ 1935 A)
04:45 01/10/12 PS If you smeeeellllll (#95) (KSF) The Hacksaw Jim Duggan (#151) (KSF) 2260 A (+ 1433 A)
04:43 01/10/12 PS If you smeeeellllll (#95) (KSF) The Hacksaw Jim Duggan (#151) (KSF) Defense Held

If so, wouldn't the hit on llaar have taken him out hit out of DR meaning first llaars retal was optimum? From what I see this is true as llaars 2nd grab got much lower returns.

In SoF's pacts there is a clause that people who internally farm cannot retal land:land even for topfeeds, so we could have got a 9k acre country to fluff up the sneaky grabber.

llarrs first retal was optimum. i like and agree about no L:L for internal farmers/land traders also.

so, you internally farmed, so no L:L for you, i took a 2:1

it seems like you just agreed with what i did?

no. not quite. internal farming would be more than one successful land grab. land trading would have had to have TWO parties actually TRADING land. thats not the case.