If you aren't an admin I don't give a fluff about your opinion just to be clear.

What is the point of this server? Are the five man teams supposed to operate independently, aside from negotiated politics, or was the five member cap put in place to make it more difficult for large alliances to operate? I am under the impression that each team is supposed to have five members and work for its own goals, as opposed to the current way many alliances play which is to just add a new tag as their current ones over flow and to act as one entity. Are teams with multiple tags against the spirit of the server?

I am clear that Detmer does not give a fluff about my opinion.

lulz oh oh watch for one of those poo colors to show up soon

This would be interesting to know. From the mods.

mwahaha i will give my opinion!

i think both pang and slag fought in teams against x-retalling? so i guess they're against it.

qz has plans to team-server to make it real team-server.

who cares about the spirit of the server or what the admins intended for the server to be. This server used to be 1A and there are a lot of residual alliances who played in 1A who were not happy about being kicked out of their home. We stayed here and continue to act as one entity. If Pang wanted a new server, he should have kept the old 1A and created Team on top of it. Then he would have a chance of creating a 5 man team server where people didn't group up.

This server has never been 1a. 1a has only existed in E2025 which this is not. If you think that is how things should have been YOU should run things. You are not admin, you do not run things, you do not set the server rules (which btw the rules explicitly include the spirit of the rules). There is a server for unlimited size groups and it is called Alliance, by my understanding. Hopefully the admins will clarify that for us (you).

I bet there are other ways to contact the admins OTHER THAN THE PUBLIC fluffING FORUM

come on demeter...whats the deal these days...

The point is for all to see.

bah...seems like stirring the pot to me :-P

I like it!

I do not go out of my way to stir the pot however I definitely don't mind stirring it. Anywhere I play will follow the rules of the game and that is it.

interesting response...My Ozzite senses are telling me you are a cheater, because you denied it for no apparent reason :-P

We'll you're quite wrong =P I think the point was actually rather clear in the context of this thread. There are game rules and then there are ways people choose to play the game. Anything I do to stir the pot will be because it is how I want to play, as long as it is within the rules of this game. Teams of greater than 5 players are not allowed in this server by my understanding thus it is something I will not do.

=]

Nah, take it private.....nobody but you cares

I think that is the problem is that a lot of people don't care that they are breaking the rules.

Perhaps, (realizing that you don't give a fluff about my opinion) the 'spirit' of the server is to be whatever the forces of evolution dictate that they will be. If that means all of the 5-player teams form up into two big coalitions that share resources and war each other each set - so be it. It it means that its an assemblage of random strangers groping around in the dark like paranoid teenagers in a horrer movie each reset - so be it. Maybe it means a series of cycles between the two, who knows. Coalitions have always been banned from Primary, but that did not keep them from forming, in fact it was the persistance of those coalitons that led to the creation of the alliance server. We are, at heart, all just honey bees.

Everyone here played that 'other game', in fact - the fact that we are here means we were probably among the core devotees of the 'other game'. Expecting the social structure that evolved on the cruise ship to not factor into the social structure on the lifeboat is pretty unrealistic. Trying to enforce an artificial spirit is likely pointless. Lets just play the lifeboat game and see where evolution takes us.

The big flaw in your argument is that there is an outlet for the desire to band into larger groups. I recognize that at times teams will come together for a common purpose and that is not against the spirit of it. There is a place for solo play, there is a place for large group play, and there is a place for small team play. People abuse the rules of this server to take advantage of those that follow them. There is no reason MKR can't go play on the alliance server. If they already play there and don't care about MKR as much as whatever alliances they already play in then they can request the admins change the rules here or start a second alliance server. Until then they are cheating by my understanding.

Perhaps. I have not played on the Team server for a while, but most of MKR do play on Alliance. To my knowledge MKR 1 and 2 don't retal for each other and they have not warred in several sets, so I don't know how much they are benefitting each other. Mostly they just share a boxcar site.

There is no way to prevent backroom deals, if all of the RD teams started using generic names they could still influence the game just as much as they do now.

Without resorting to random assignment, I don't see an easy solution to the problem of coalitions. Perhaps a couple of thousand Facebookers will change it.

If this server was never 1a, we would not be here. The fact that we are here--the fact that the first set of EE explicitly named this server "Alliance"--should tell you something. As I argued at the time, and as far as I am still concerned, I and my clan were robbed of our home, but as long as we're around we can do our best to make this replacement apartment into something that resembles it in all the ways that matter.

Pelo, thats not entirely true. Very few of the players playing on team now are remnent 1A players, there was only one set of 'alliance' and 'council' after EE started and it was a short set. MKR and Ragnarok were pretty unusual in that they were older established alliance that stayed in 1A rather than jump to EC (well RAG tried it briefly). Most of the other alliance that remained on 1A were subdivisions of EC tags.

That was really at the heart of the x-retal wars, MKR and RAG had the most to lose, so they fought the losing battle to hold onto the thread of their history because the old 1A was the only place they could exist. EE is a totally new and independant game from E2025, by continuing to pine for what was - we do a disservice to what is.

What we need to do now is figure out how to improve and build on what we have.

The question, of course, is why did those people leave?

Yes, I'm bitter.

Regardless, I swore when I came back to this game that I'd stick with MKR to the end of the clan. If the server wants that end to come more quickly than otherwise, I'll just have to deal with it and move on. To Alliance.

As I'm clearly not contributing anything meaningful at this point, I'll bow out at this point for those that have something more optimistic to say.

gwagers you weren't robbed of fluff... you never owned anything. You got to play on Mehul's and OMAC's servers... that was a free luxury...

and guess what, they changed the name apparently. Alliance is the server for unlimited size groups...

It doesn't matter what you want this server to be if it is against the rules of the server.

wow my feelings are hurt good sir....simply hurt

as far out of our way as we've gone lately to improve inter team relations with all of you i don't see the need for the name calling

that being said i wish you good day sir and a happy reset

yes he tried so hard with the 1:kill policy that only rd can enforce;)

lol


i was all for independent teams but if i gotta team up with other teams to counter teams that team up then team me up.

i've decided to support 4-man teams only

The admins already made a post about what is and isn't against the rules. They've said multiple times already in the early resets of team that the game mechanics are there and its up to the users to dictate how the political system (or lack of one) evolves.

I can try to get an admin to read this thread and answer... no promises though.:P

I spoke to Pang about it in private. I feel no need to post his place. I will say that he did not contradict the feelings I have expressed here. People can read whatever they like into it but I doubt what he said is the conclusion you will draw.

The problem with your argument there the assumption that what Pang envisioned for the server is "right".

The hard rules are in place, limit of 5 per tag, no tag jumping, etc, which limits who can ally to whom. So it is smaller teams with the opportunity to form coalitions.

MKR has not cross retalled since the x-retal war. We have crossed killed a few times when we were farmed by other alliances or had failures with FA.

MKR is happy to run its tags autonomously.

This server is like the United States. The moderators have envisioned a confederation, where each state is separate from the other, with no executive or judicial branches, or even the capability to levy taxes. Each state was nearly completely independent. Multiple teams joining under a unified banner is like an empowered United States of America after the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

So what the proponents for multiple teams need to do is to secure a position in Paris for Pang as a Minister to France and convince qzjul that he "smelt a rat in Philadelphia, tending toward the monarchy" or something like that. In the absence of the larger proponents of confederation, this server can get the Constitution it deserves.

Yes, but countries will not be deleted for teaming up outside of their tag because it's impossible to enforce that rule fairly. I explained that in length in another thread. It's also worth noting that the "spirit of the rules" clause in the rules was created after the team server, if I remember correctly.

To everyone wishing for the old alliance server back: wasn't the first set of alliance in earth empires not an authentic alliance experience because RD wasn't cheating and people weren't running landfarms? Should we let them cheat again and reopen the server under the old tag rules?

Yes? :-P

this thread makes me sing spirit in the sky everytime i read it

thanks norman

I'm not sure how the old tag rules necessarily correlate with cheating.

Gonna take me up to the spirit in the sky..that's where I wanna go when I die (when I diiiiie) I wanna go to the place thats the best

You're denying that people didn't used to cheat like crazy in the alliance server?

prepare yourself y'know its a must
gotta have a friend in jesus
so you know when you die
he's gonna recommend you
to the spirit in the sky

thanks norman

I deny nothing. I state that, if you have the ability to catch cheaters with these rules, you have the ability to catch cheaters with the other rules. Please explain how that is a poor assumption on my part, because if there will be cheating by changing the rules back, there is cheating going on right now.

I'm pointing out a flaw in logic, not making an accusation. Just to prevent the flame war from restarting.

We were extremely clear about this back when the server was first announced/started.

Thanks. All the moral justification necessary for my crusade! (that RD scooped me on!)

And H4, I wasn't playing then so I have no idea what happened when EE was first conceived.

Some people have suggested that we had an obligation to preserve the old alliance server. Preserving the server means keeping both the good and the bad, doesn't it?

Preservation of a set of rules doesn't mean that we should preserve all the times that those rules were broken.

What rules are being preserved? Are they different than the rules of alliance?

Evidently not..You may have as many as you want in your 5 man 'alliances'...tee hee.

Agreed. I do not think it would be hard for the mods to stop the excessive collusion between teams. On some level it would effectively overstep idealistic boundaries but it would practically cause teams to operate entirely independently. It may stop people from finishing each other's KRs but that really is a superior outcome than the current situation imo.

Detmer, i think if the devs would come forthright and speak their minds,that they would say that is precisely what they had in mind for this server when they made it a 'Team' server.
I personally believe they meant it to be 5 v 5 ,and the politics that has arisen have kept them mostly silent about 'the spirit of the server'

The distinction between a set of rules and those that break them is the same no matter what set of rules is discussed. Obviously you know what rules set I'm thinking of specifically, but the same distinction exists between rules and rulebreakers in any set of rules, including the one we operate under right now.

So basically you're saying that multi-tag collaboration is the same offense as running multis?