Something bad happened, Zarc is on it.

Edit: It's up now.

http://www.ly-racing.de/album_pic.php?pic_id=804

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint-Eustache,_Paris

I found it by accident and it was really impressive. Didnt show in any of the brochures etc.

Recommending the trip by boat around the city, its not super awesome mega amazing, but its worth it. I think it was about 10E per person.

The Louvre has a free day, i think thursday. Depends on what you want, one year i went then and it was way too crowded. Other year I went and payed and enjoyed it much more. Not sure if teh free day was soemthing special or if its all year around.

Versailles is about 45mins by train. It wasnt much of a hassle to get there and I dont remember the train being expensive. If you have an extra day its worth spending it on that, otherwise no.

Subway system is pretty good, didnt have much problems except for the day of the republic when it was so crowded we decided to walk an hour instead of taking it, but youre not there for it. I remember soemthing about getting a week ticket and that it was cheaper but I dont remember how much it was or where I got it.

Best ice cream is on the smaller island. Youll recognize it by a long line of people.

Edit: as for the eiffel tower, i didnt go up on it but it was a good sight from the bottom due to the metal construction thingy. I dont know if thats interesting for you but id say its worth the trip. Theres the mars field next to it which is just a big park but its nice.

240

1

x^3 - 12x^2 +36X >= 10

"She makes a profit when she sells at least 10 glasses"

That's all. :p

1

1

Nouba.

Lame.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2sf2-K8qFo

Archaic, you are obviously missing my point.

I am asking what is acceptable? I wont do retals by 'send and pray', I know what my retals will do. So I am asking all you proponents of this policy to tell me what is within the bounds of nice behavior.

All I got so far is 'if you do 79, it's war', I want to know when it's not war.

I don't see why you are mentioning iMag, this has nothing to do with iMag (at least not directly), but since you mention it, how do you know if iMag tries or doesn't try to avoid silly wars?

Either way, my question is, what can a retaler take (repeatedly) and not provoke a war. Is there a guideline better than 'not a douche' or is it a case by case thing?

H4xOr, wouldn't a range be better than a one number value? For example 70-90%? One number value only gives a minimum.

True hanlong, but I am sure the majority of clans would like to agree to a pact that will allow grabbing but not have such terms that make the other clan an enemy.

And I am sure that most leaders won't go from one member to another and tell them,
'yeah the pact says you can do another retal but please don't cuz we want to be friends with [clan]',
mainly because the member will read that as
'yeah the pact says you can do another retal but please don't cuz we are pussies and don't want to be raped by [clan]'.

And even if they do, how are they to know when to drop it? The retaled clan can say 'hey, you got 75% back, hitting more is douchebagary' and tomorrow they can say 'hey you got 70% back, hitting more is douchebagary' and tomorrow they can say... etc etc

The clan doing the retals has no way if them taking 60% back was fine or if they are to expect a war. They could come check everytime but isn't that a bit degrading?
'Hi, I'm just here to ask you if you are ok with us doing even less than what we are entitled to by the policy terms? We really dont want to upset you. Thank you so much.'

The way you (pro this policy) are putting it, it's all about common sense and etiquette and that's nice, but if you can argue that it's expected from a clan to drop a hit they are entitled to by the terms, one could argue that it's expected from a clan to drop the retal for a grab.

It can be avoided by making a clear and defined policy that is easy to read and not open to subjective interpretation.

Saying, 'you did a douchebag retal so its war, even though it was within the agreed policy rules', is no better (and not much different) than saying, 'you did a retal so its war'.

What if I take 78% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 77% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 76% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 75% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 74% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 73% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 72% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 71% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 70% repeatedly?
If the answer is the same then what if I take 69% repeatedly?
etc etc

What is an acceptable amount to get?
Whatever the answer is, how did you come to that number?
Do you think all clans that signed that pact will agree with you?
Is the number mentioned in the pact?

What I'm trying to say is that it is completely up to you to declare one action 'friendly' and another 'hostile' and another 'neutral'. The clan that does the retals has no real way of knowing (they can only guess) what the retals will be perceived as.

The policy does nothing to regulate attacks between two clans, it only serves to set a 'guideline' that can be easily abused by one side.

It is, on one hand, allowing the retaler to be lazy and not care about doing a good retal and still come out better than the attacker, and on the other hand it allows the retaler to maximize his gains within the rules set by the policy with the only repercussion being dependent on a subjective view of the retaling alliance's leaders.

Which is perfectly fine, the stronger alliance can dictate whatever they want. But it is not a policy that protects netters form 'douchebag' grabs because it labels all non-crappy grabs as 'douchebag' grabs and on top of that allows the netter (defender) to do a much worse 'douchebag' retal.

The leaders of a stronger alliance make the decision of what is 'douchebag' because it is in no way defined in the policy. It is a case by case matter and because of that the policy is incomplete and basically useless.

What it does in reality is saying 'we will retal for L:L or more' and does nothing to limit the 'more' part. It only creates the minimum. As such it inherently prevents grabbing since the grabber has no protection in this policy (unlike 1:1 where he knows he will get hit once and only once). With this policy the defender (retaler) can manipulate his NW and make numerous 'retals' for one original grab (with less gain individually yes, but in sum he would get much much more back).

I realize that the primary concern of the policy is to protect netters (non grabbers is probably a better term) but the policy is in fact reducing grabs dramatically to a point where only bottomfeeding becomes viable. Again.

If that is the goal of the policy then good, it is successful imo, but if it is not then it needs some heavy rethinking.

Personally, I can, as I am sure many other players can as well, manipulate NW ratios so that I get 75-79% of the land lost in one or more retals, and then make an optimized retal for roughly 12-15% of 'attackers' (country being retaled) land.

I really do not see the incentive for any player to be that country if he will lose so heavily in the exchange.

Why do you war someone for respecting your retal policy? It's not a legit reason.
If you warred you'd say, 'yeah, you did exactly what we said and agreed but we arbitrarily decided that it's a cause for war'. That's not legit.

Besides, where's the limit? At 78%? 75%? 70%? Who determines the limit?

What if it happens unintentionally?

Pain, you are a douchbag if you do take another retal if you got 79% already? Again, where's the limit of douchebaggery? 70%? Then why not just say 70% to begin with?

What happens if the defending country takes 79% of land back in one (or more) retals and then does a fully optimized final retal?

Welcome.

Wait wait, so are you declaring in defense of LaF or because we 'topfeeded'?

Zip the prophet. (possibly others, didnt really read)

1

1

|-i-|

But Kyatoru, you confuse me...



I was convinced you're a war tag. Honestly sorry.



TNW
UKNKSF $489,540,373
iMagNum $106,750,664

ANW
UKNKSF $28,796,492
iMagNum $3,558,355

You may be small to server standards, but we are looking up to you in every possible way.

Dear UKNKSF,

We declare war on you because we know how much you hated seeing us grab you earlier. You hated it so much that some of you decided to take the opportunity of us being tagkilled and do some grabs on us thinking we can't retal (though this didnt happen many times).

You also hated it so much one of your leaders told me he will suicide on iMag next set (or from iMag).

And then we saw you have some new members and all that, and honestly I'm very glad to see you doing well. So after some discussion we decided to admit the earlier grabs ruined your netting set and now we want to make up for it and help you take ANW.

Lots of love,
iMagNum

First number is the number of turns you have and can use right away. Once that number is up to its maximum (maximum depends on the server) your stored turns (the bracket ones) will increase.

Stored turns also have a maximum (again depends on the server) and cannot be used right away but are not wasted. The way they work is, when you use some of your turns and you are supposed to gain a new turn, you'll get that new one and a stored turn will 'transfer' from the bracket to the 'ready to use' turns.

For example, alliance server has a maximum of 120(120). If you spend 40 turns you'll have 80(120). Once it's time to gain a new turn you'll have 82(119). One fresh new one and one moved from stored to turns on hand.

Once you reach maximum in both you will waste turns, so if you have (in alliance) 120(120) and a new turn comes up it will be wasted and you'll still have 120(120).

Hope I explained it well, feel free to ask more if it's not clear.

1

1

Toma, the lol ruined it.

1

Can you explain the difference between this non evil grabbing and interclan grabbing?
Is there one?

1

If you have something to say, say it. Otherwise keep your mouth shut.

Wait wait, so grudges are no longer killing the game?

<3

1

It doesn't matter what units the ally has, only offensive/defensive power.

If country A sends all 1000 jets, that's 2k offense points meaning the max total help from ally is 2k.

Country B has 1000 Troops which is 1k off points and can help with 25% of that which is 250.

The attack will have offensive power of 2250 points which is equal to 1125 jets.

Same goes for def. It's power based, not unit based.

If you're playing anything but primary and tourny get a clan/team as soon as you can.

1

1

Collab looks very impressive.

1 000 k kilo
1 000 000 M mega
1 000 000 000 G giga

Maybe.

It's not a bug. All your units are used to give offense no matter what units your ally sends.

This means that if you have 1m troops and your ally sends 1m jets you will still aid him with 250k troops which is the equivalent of 125k jets so your ally's power will be 1.125m jets.

1

1

The fact that we are known for something doesn't mean it is true.

But maybe if you repeat it once per hour... You never know. Human mind is unexplored and all that.

Because, as this thread shows, SoL members are obsessed with iMag.

1

1

1