| Petra Arkanian (Little Upsilon) | Friday, March 13, 2009 - 03:51 pm 
What the hell is this any why won't Sim Country allow me to be involved in more than two wars at one time?
I cannot declare on the inactive I was planning to attack, nor a C3. |
| Gino0815 (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 12:00 am
Sorry, your country is involved in more than 1 wars against countries without a president.
This is new ... i remember having as much as 10 wars agains't C3 less than 1 week ago ...
Why this stealth change ??????????? |
| shaun (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 02:47 am
cuz of nutes plan to bring down the game didnt u guys go to the summit? gm is counter acting to part 1 of the master plan. |
| Gino0815 (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 03:08 am
This is seriously hurting my fun level in this game, Its already slow paced enough now i can only fight 1-2 C3 per day ....
And if it becomes not fun ... Well i will quit.
Shaun what summit are you talking about ? I would like to go check that out.
Thanks Gino~ |
| ikiryo Alexiel (Fearless Blue) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 05:30 am
havent taken c3s in awhile. decided to yesterday. killed 2. let me only dec on 1 more..and after wars were done..still message saying im at war and cant dec on more... i was made to wait a month.
boo-urns |
| Pathetic Sheep (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 10:15 am
Rather than blocking more than 1 war declaration w3c should have allowed other presidents to declare on CCCs that are in a war if and only if the other president is in more than 1 war. That would have opened up lots of fun instead of restricting the game. |
| FarmerBob | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 12:43 pm
Restricting the game?
W3C's "solution" to all problems and non-problems.
P.S. I had to edit this post upon discovering that there has been a recent change, assuming it is not a bug. We seem to be able to deactivate more than 10% of off forces at one time. Thank you for this increase in flexibility. It's a refreshing change.
2nd Edit. Nope. Only works in secured countries. Too bad. |
| shaun (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 01:07 pm
really fb? how about an option to reactivate up to the number of eligible soldiers you have that would be cool... |
| Romeo Vicardi | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 02:34 pm
Thanks to Nute the idiot and some other loosers who decided to start 700 wars on C3 countries hoping to block that world for new players.
you can see the list of wars on GR.
now, we are unable to start wars on C3s.
2 a too few.
they will not be able to block any world even if the limit was 5 or 10.
so Tom or Jozi:
please increase the limit. |
| Petra Arkanian (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 03:05 pm
As taking C3s remains a vital part or warfare, despite recent changes, I also request that the limit be raised. Why not make the limit 15? The same as the decs that can be declared against us. 10 would be okay too, I suppose...
Or you could just ban anyone who tries something like that. I never think players should be banned except for overt cheating, but that's just a bonehead thing to do.
Where are the simcommandments? Isn't one of them never piss off the GMs for they wield the almighty IP ban? |
| Laguna | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 03:11 pm
See, when you know enough...
/me stares at Romeo
Go back from your came.
Thanks to Romeo, Midget Muldoon left the game because she didn't tolerate being harassed on the forum by a short-sighted savage - my words, not hers -, who loved to jump on her on every little occasion.
I have a problem with short-sighted people, you see, so I have a problem with you.
In other words, Romeo, consider yourself my in-game target for now and for the future.
As it is elections years in my country, I have been rather busy lately, but I assure you I will find time for you.
On the forum, however, I will treat you with the same dignity that I treats other and with the manners you refused to use on Muldoon. Follow suit. |
| FarmerBob | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 03:47 pm
There comes a point, Wild, when the gods need to be spanked, particularly when they behave like arrogant, petulant little children.
Many players are very annoyed with the asinine directions W3C is taking this game with so much unrealized potential.
Of course, the aplogists say "if you, don't like it, quit."
Perhaps some of us are not quitters. Perhaps some us will continue to push and harp for intelligent, constructive change and developement until we are forced out.
Some of us will continue to point out arrogant stupidity for what it is.
The treatment of Laguna and Q has earned my total disgust with W3C. They deserve nothing but contempt, exactly what they have shown us. I will happily pay $4 a month to harrass them until they IP Ban me. |
| Pathetic Sheep (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 05:22 pm
We were always able to deactivate 100% of a weapon type. You have to have a high index to do it. It still reactivates at 10%. I remember getting stuck when I first started playing the game. |
| FarmerBob (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 05:33 pm
Really, Sheep?
That's curious. I have been deactivating these fleets for a few days and this was the first time I could do more than 10% at one time.
So was the bug before or now? |
| Romeo Vicardi | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 05:56 pm
Ha ha .
No chance Laguna. I know you hate the truth.
I have been here since 2002 and plan to stay.
It is curious, that you are so angry when these guys are exposed with their little scheme.
you said nothing for days and now this.
you want me to stop saying the truth. Shame on you.
Maybe you participated in this fine action to block GR. The plan was probably to block everything.
I also think 10 will be fine but with these people having so many countries, and maybe Laguna too, x 10 = ???
FarmerBob
you are not a leader. You are kissing ass of anyone who is aggressive. You are nothing at all if there is nowhere to hide. |
| Petra Arkanian (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 06:16 pm
Mmm. Now I dislike Romeo as well. Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou so fucktarded?
@Bob, I agree with you about the GM's attitude and recent actions; however the idea to block all the open C3s is obviously a little half baked and a BAD idea.
To the credit of the GMs, costs have been going down on a lot of products and is finally catching up with the reduction in profits. I'm sure I'm not the only one ordering oa2a and bombs in 50k and 60k clumps these days. Where they need to really follow through is reducing GC base price again to make everything truly proportional.
I'm waiting these changes out. I don't like them or agree with them since nothing was all that broken to begin with; however, hindsight will show the degree they enhance or detract from my gameplay experience. |
| FarmerBob (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 06:17 pm
I am on LU, Auriga Bella, Great Liberty.
Come play with me, sychophantic apologist for gross incompetence, blatant lying, and childish bully tactics.
The day I roll over for a bunch of Dutch computer programmers, I hope someone does me the kindness of putting a 240 grain hollowpoint through my brain.
Tell me, Romeo, are you the "great player" with whom our lords and masters have threatened to punish us? |
| FarmerBob (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 06:44 pm
You play an excellent game, Wild. Your grasp of the nuances of the economic model coupled with a realistic attitude towards conflict make you, in my mind, one of the elite players. However, Nute and other players are attemtimg to send a message:
"Stop. You are screwing this up!"
Despite Willards claims that player complaint is the impetus for the war aginst numbers, I really have no issue with the scaling down, not in principle or practice.
My complaint arises from the continual flow of control to W3C's automated and arbitrary hands.
The game is becoming little more than we build, economize, and stockpile; whilst, they create new ways to destroy, waste, and rob.
New Disasters? Really? Some new player is going to say "Cool. Earthquakes, Hurricanes, Blizards, Plagues, and Tornadoes. That's a great idea."
Perhaps one will until their 10th or 20th or 100th disaster, and they realize that this adds nothing to the game. Just a day of logging in and saying "Well, no point in doing anything to day or tommorrow."
Is it too much to ask for a little freedom?
Must my corps really transfer out cash without my permission?
Is W3C, the IRS now? Are we "hiding" money from Uncle Jozzi?
Maybe we want to IPO? But that's right. No actions without W3C permission. W3C decides what is successful, not us lowly players who pay the bills.
May I please contract within my common market with prices I decide are acceptably profitable to the corporations throughout my supply chain?
Who am I stealing from? Myself?
Or is it too embarrassing that players set up functioning internal economies in a few weeks that are beyond the reach of the W3C hand of control?
Is it too much to ask for the simple admission of "Yes. We screwed up and created a quality system that served no purpose and now we don't want to subsidize it anymore. But since the entire economy is built around the high quality, we don't know how to fix it. Any Ideas?"
When a player like Laguna, who has forgotten more about this Sim, than most will ever know, has his posts deleted....
When a good kid like Q tries for weeks to point out a problem that could have been resolved with a few simple, honest sentences, but rather was denied repeatedly in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and then gets banned....
When a timesless vet like Ms.Claws, a paragon of the virtue of patience, starts dropping snide comments in the forums...
This is about attitude and direction of the game.
W3C is creating a game that makes targets of new players, not competitors.
Go ahead, little nooby, spend those level awards on pop and MIB's without ammo to defend yourself.
My Grandson is a WOW afficionado. I do not see their management attempting to make a level 1 character competitive with a level 80. Perhaps they have a different idea of competition.
After how many years, we still have two militaries? Can't figure out what to do with the "light" corporations if forces can attack and defend? How about light is airmobile, and heavy isn't. Problem solved.
Want the noobies to survive? How about one booster buys a year of war protection? Or five? Or are the accusations of creating a haven for Visa warriors accurate?
There are so many features of this game begging to be matured into something interesting, and what are we getting? More disasters. Literally and figuratively.
You want to apologize for this abysmal management, Romeo? Go right ahead.
I will demand better. |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 07:25 pm
Tell me, Romeo, are you the "great player" with whom our lords and masters have threatened to punish us?
Now I would like to know that one.
Also I would like to warn Mister Romeo to calm the Nute bashing. It has been known to have adverse consequences on your empire indexes. With Laguna after you, it shouldn't be long. |
| Laguna | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 07:37 pm
Don't try to be a bigger fool than you already are, Romeo. That is a nearly impossible endeavor. Not to mention a laborious and fruitless one.
In case your reading abilities have diminished again (another nearly-impossibly feat), I am unhappy at you for two things: your untactful behavior and for Muldoon.
You can do what you wish and stay, but expect to stick as many needles as I can buy underneath your nails.
Never make assumptions on what I think, do or say. You always failed at reading even an evident truth on what open people think and say.
I have not been posting, because I have not been here. I have been busy with my academic career and civil duties. I'm only here today, because a matter of my concern needed my attention.
This plan to "block GR" would never have worked and I'm not the kind of person to transfer frustration around. So no, I did not participate in it.
I will tell you very clearly what I want and why once again:
I want you gone, because you are unnecessary, counter-productive, a fool, short-sighted, out of place and rude. And also as retribution in Muldoon's name. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 07:54 pm
Farm Bob. great surprise.
I am sure part of what you say is true, the question is: why do you stay?
I stayed because the game evolved and it is much better now than ever before and most of the time when I knew, I believed in where they were going.
I also see errors.
They always made some errors but the difference in the way we see it is that you think they are after you and I think that they are trying to move their model from where it was to a different place and there are things that do not move as they hoped for.
I trust them. You don't.
I have been successful in the past in getting things done.
not by swearing but by making a good point and LISTENING to the answer.
I read the answers in the past weeks and they tried to explain.
Shouting never helped with these guys and as far as I remember, Jozi and the bunch do not depend on this to make a living.
They invested a lot, and I do trust they will make it better.
so you can continue to fight them.
If I had to fight them all the time, I would not be here.
I plan to make some points with them and try to find out where it goes.
I understand the deflation point but how far will it go and does it really go proportionally?
They promissed to fix the contract pricing. When?
and much more. but I do plan to listen to their answers.
There are many limitations indeed and many should be lifted.
I remember their argument inthe past that they had to do so because people were trading on both sides (same person). someone would start a second account, loaned a lot, moved it to the other account by smart trading and cancelled the losing account.
We should show them that some of these limitations are nonsense and that there is no danger of cheating and they can remove them.
if you just tell them to remove the limit, and you don't know why it is there in the first place, it just will not happen.
One person started several hundreds wars against C3s.
There was no limit. look where it got us. Now it is 2.
I remeber many of the limits starting exactly in this way. first someone tried to cheat, then the feature was limited.
There was time I was mailing with them a lot and they used to answer.
I don't know how it is these days but I sure plan to try.
I would love to be the one who beats you up but unfortunately for now, I was neglecting my country and specially my army.
maybe in some time we will have a good fight.
I had the biggest wars ever in the game at a time where you could have 1.000.000 weapons destroyed in an hour. Maybe we ask for these numbers to come back. |
| Laguna | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 07:57 pm
Your opinion is biased, thus it is worthless.
Your words, not mine. They apply much better in your case too. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 08:04 pm
Laguna.
Bad news.
Calling me names is a clear frustration and your frustration is not going anywhere.
Get ready for more of it because your days of spreading nonsense around, unanswered and un challenged are over.
I understand your frustration but that's life. go if you can't stand it.
I remember Muldoon. She was a complete fool who claimed the most outragous nonsese as fact, invented al kinds of ideas about game functions that never existed and had people go in all the wrong directions.
Well I told her so. I remember I told her that she should ask, not claim nonsense for truth because people on the forum listen and take it seriously then they make serious errors themselves.
The game is not very easy, true but also not very difficult. Maldoon could not play it.
The truth is not always pleasant and you seem to have a problem with that. |
| FarmerBob | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 08:04 pm
1. Quitters don't effect changes.
2. Honesty is a prerequisite to being treated with respect.
3. Bullying makes me very, very angry.
4. Arrogance in the face of plain fact makes me very, very, very angry.
I listened patiently and with an open mind until Bravo Sierra answers were given and players were banned for calling them on it.
You really need to come play with me, Romeo. I remember the million jeep armies too and 30mil pop c3's.
Call it trial by combat if you want to be their champion. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 08:07 pm
Words Laguna.
no content what so ever.
Try some constructive content. It may help many around here.
your nonsense in my direction is not getting us anywhere.
I just tried to be constructive and find ways to make these guys move.
It does not seem to be a priority for you. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 08:09 pm
Think of something constructive. I will have dinner. |
| Laguna | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 08:35 pm
Careful, Romeo.
Muldoon was rather quick to see you.
I'm certain there are others equally perspicacious.
Again, as if the sunrise were a surprise, you don't see what is evident and you don't hesitate to deviate the subject to your opponent's character and insult him in the way.
Can't you speak in anyother manner?
And are you crying about me? Again!? What I am doing to you is the same you do all others, but a lighter, gentler way. Even in this tune, you cannot endure what I say.
I'm quite certain that Dollard's explanation for aggression is in serious disuse, as it fails to explain many situations of aggression. If you are unaware, he explains aggression as the expression of frustration.
I am being... well, what you are to others... not because of frustration, quite far from it, but because... read the post above.
I too remember Muldoon. She spread more life around these forums than you ever have in your 7 years. And in much brighter lights.
She had doubts regarding the game. Do you know what I do when a player has doubts? I explain him the game.
What do you do? You insult them. An approved method by every psychologist.
She advanced with a hypothesis on things worked. If it is wrong, emended.
If you don't want to emend it, ignore it. I see many things around here that give me a huge urge to smack the poster, but I stay calm and ignore it. Or, in certain cases, just tell them, in private and gently, to avoid posting certain questions on the forum.
I don't need to think of "something constructive". I already have more than enough time ago.
I will write them down, once you apologize to me and everyone else.
Enjoy your dinner, that I will enjoy my life. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 10:52 pm
Thanks for your more constructive mail although not everything you say is clear to me. Might be my English.
On Maldoon and more than that we will differ. I tried to answer her and nothing helped. She was able to confuse much faster than any of us could set straight.
I have seen much better players leave for all the wrong reasons and they could play.
Some returned.
I don't think it is bad if people leave. After some time, many are not interested in the game anymore but just in attention and for that, you have to kick dirt.
I will stay. Sometimes my job is too demanding. Sometimes I have lots of free time.
You for one were very constructive once. In the past months however, when I looked, you were not.
Fed up maybe and just joining the noises and unreasonable clatter.
This is where communication broke. Not blaming you alone. These Simcountry guys are now gone from the forum and we lost any possibility to make any point at all.
You would say we lost the possibility to force them to make changes. I think we have no such possibility.
You cannot force them and you are stupid if you think you can. The only things these "forcing" bunch can do is either to find a new game or make a better one.
You all seem to know how it should run. Why don't you just make a better game. I remember Tom suggesting it several times. "Put your money where your mouth is and launch a better game."
I think that if 10 of these unhappy players will put $ 250 K each, they might be able to pull it.
This game is built by these guys and paid by them. The best we can do is to try to understand what they do and decide if we are interested or not and we can try to make a point with them and hope they do it.
Today, they cut 200 issues from the voting info page. Why is that?
The page should have been 10% of what it is and keeping 1500 items is stupid but why did they cut 200? They also changed the text at the beginning of this page saying they will remove items.
It seems like they are fed up with the notion that they need to give us a voice. I wonder why. I might be wrong.
I just asked Tom and Jossi two questions by mail:
1. Execution price of contracts. Tom promised to look into it. There was no action.
2. The C3 wars. The limit is too low.
Lets see if I get an answer.
In the past I got things done and maybe it was because I did not try to tell them what to do and did not pretend to own the game.
I thought Laguna got things done some time ago. So what changed? |
| jason (Little Upsilon) | Monday, March 16, 2009 - 11:52 pm
Romeo, 2002 hum you sound like a mouthy noob to me. you really need to stfu be for you get stomped. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 12:42 am
Jason: did your contribution add anything to the discussion? Thanks anyway. |
| jason (White Giant) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 12:44 am
killing time. :P |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 12:45 am
He's only secured.  |
| jason (White Giant) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 12:50 am
|
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 01:12 am
My rank is 1541+7.
give me some time.
we will talk again when I am back in the top 10. |
| Zdeněk Pavlovský | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 01:20 am
wow
Lots of empty phrases and emotions instead of rational arguments everywhere.
Romeo Vicardi = Ginger? one of the first of the so called credit card warriors? Romeo Vicardi, Sliver - the fist SC terrorist fought back in 2004?
I agree that restricting many because of (actions of) few is giving up to the dictate of minority, while democracy is the exact opposite. It's also clear to me that such measures are often taken because those who use them are not able to come up with anything else, and/or are unwilling/unable to solve the issues minorities have.
Few blow up themselves, because this and that, so we will do anal search to everyone to prevent those few from smuggling explosives in their ass. Great!
I've been around, on and off, since 2002 also and I wonder what following statement means:
I stayed because the game evolved and it is much better now than ever before and most of the time when I knew, I believed in where they were going. - Romeo Vicardi
?
If I was to judge by the world I am most active on, Fearless Blue, if I was to judge by the forums with 20-30 regular posters, I would have to conclude the game is not going anywhere.
This game has few 100s of active players at best, which is about the same as 7 years ago. And no, the game is growing, we are getting emails expressing appreciation, we see the positive effects of the changes we make which tells us that we are doing the right direction .. does not cut it for me. I want to see some numbers, not just empty words.
Would you be so kind and tell me how the game evolved since 2002? Some practical examples would be nice.
From where I sit, the so called evolution mostly consists of adding more and more restrictions and cosmetic changes, while the fundamental what makes the game, what makes people to play it and pay for it, remains the same, and in this case broken.
Too bad I know nothing about coding and thus cannot claim that W3C spent on coding of this game few weekends in the past 7 years, yet we are told there is a team of coders working on improvements.
So tell me how the game evolved. Give me a couple of examples, fundamental to game play, which lead to increase of the player-base, which lead to greater enjoyment to those who play, which lead to some progress.
My opinion is that the best and one of the very few improvements to the game over the past 7 year were automatic upgrades, and thats not a whole lot. |
| ShcyzMattiCa (Golden Rainbow) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 02:37 am
"Silence is Golden" - ??? . . .
. . . on that note I refrain to comment. |
| 117000 (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 03:38 am
"My rank is 1541+7"
"I have been here since 2002 and plan to stay"
It took that long to reach rank 1510? What have u been doing this whole time? By the way, did u start w/ your current country? |
| nix001 (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 04:19 am
In the short time I've been here (1 year) I've seen some measurable improvements with accessing the parts of the game and the way the war engine works. I'm sure that without pressure from players these changes might not have been thought of or implemented as quick as they were, but I seen no point in bad mouthing the game in public. Criticize it and voice new ideas. But don't bad mouth it.
117000. I think thats Romeo's war ranking? If it is it looks like he's been making some money  |
| Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 04:40 am
Any change can be called improvement. Measurable is matter of point of view.
Would you mind to give examples nix001? Which feature or improvement in particular made the game more fun for you in the past year. Which feature of improvement to the game you believe could have positive influence on making current players happier or/and gaining new players?
The bottom line, to me, based on my observations as I do not have any data, is the game stagnates or grows very slowly at best.
How is that evolution of a game I do not understand. Any game, any business should have prime goal to grow. This is not to be questioned.
One can have the best game in the world, the most sophisticated, refined, efficient, innovative, insert superlative of choice, business, but if it does not have customers, in this case players, it's good for nothing.
Bad mouthing does not help anything I agree, but so do not help empty phrases of a type: game evolved and is much better.
I'm willing to admit my view does not describe reality accurately. I believe I'm able of self-reflection, but I need to see evidence.
The evidence to me is, as I do not have anything else to go by, number of posters here, number of people in SC chat/mIRC channel, number of players in-game, number of complaints, and recently this whole fuss about (some) players trying to, in my opinion foolishly but with good intent, boycott the game. |
| shaun (Kebir Blue) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 05:24 am
eh if your rank is less than 100 i hope its because u just started or that you claimed a gc prize and are thus not ranked properly or have the wrong country as leader...but i dont think ranking means much other than you have relative high welfare related indexes like EI HI TI etc etc
why do good threads get side tracked into a personal beef between guys anyway im not even bothering to read all that |
| Romeo Vicardi | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 08:40 am
Excellent.
You have all observed that I am very low in the ranks. If I am not mistaken, I have put my rank here for everyone to see, last night.
We will talk again in a while. Obviously, I was not very active.
As to improvements, I have seen many, including a whole new war game and you may want to look at the 100 to 150 pages of game news, partly cleaned up and see what exactly happened.
But all this is not helping us.
we need to take the issues one for one, without bad language and without pretending we own it, and present these points to W3C.
I hope they will answer the two questions from yesterday. |
| jason (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 01:36 pm
"we need to take the issues one for one, without bad language and without pretending we own it, and present these points to W3C." ok you are right about that Ginger. |
| Petra Arkanian (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 03:25 pm
3. Wars against C3 Countries [ top ]
The number of wars a country could start against countries with no president used to be unlimited. This was recently misused by some players who tried to be destructive. The number was reduced to 2 wars per country and the problems was solved.
Several players now requested the number to be increased. Two is very limiting while even a larger number will not allow for any destructive action. We have now increased the number to 5. This is sufficient for now. These wars are short and thus end quickly and new ones can be started. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 05:00 pm
One down.
5 is low but we probably can live with that.
No answer yet on the contracts. |
| Laguna | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 09:50 pm
Quote:your days of spreading nonsense around, unanswered and un challenged are over.
You are mistaken. Your days of spreading nonsense and harassing the users of this forum are over.
I would like to know what you understand as nonsense. To this date, nonsense has been definite as "what I don't want to hear."
Quote:You for one were very constructive once. In the past months however, when I looked, you were not.
I have been as fair and thoughtful as ever. If I differ in opinion, I don't lose virtue.
You wish to speak of polls, of polls we shall speak.
The poll page is a list long in a page. That is a problem. It is a long list in a single page that takes a long time to load.
To fix it, it would be wise to split it by x pages, each with y polls.
To help organizing and search, assuring each group of suggestions is addressed properly, the polls should be categorized and tagged. They aren't.
I don't even need ten seconds to see the problem and definite it; offer and exclude solutions and prioritize actions. For the designers, it should be more intuitive. As shown in the result, it clearly isn't.
But that is a minor problem. The light in which the polls are seen and judge has never been clear. Some pass and those that do, we never know what influence they will have or how they will be understood. The ephemeral character of some polls is more than underestimated; the same can be said for fairness, coherence and goal.
But, this is, afterall, a consequence of Simcountry's largest flaw: this is a projected without definite limits, methods and goals. Until that is more than evident and said with confidence, this project will not be going far.
Quote:I thought Laguna got things done some time ago. So what changed?
What changed... Nothing. What happened?
I had been very busy with some things, stressful things. Fate weaved her will and I suffered a heart arrest. I then decided to relegate Simcountry to a lower status. I posted seldom and didn't intervene in many things. Things went bad, Willard came to the forum to explain. I, among many others, explained why things were going bad. I differed with Willard's opinion, therefore I was worthy of slander in the forum. I now do nothing as punishment.
If W3C ever wants my help again, they will have to apologize and unban those who were banned this last month. |
| Romeo Vicardi (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 10:11 pm
Laguna.
I am sorry to hear you had a health problem.
I hope that this is not getting to you.
It remains a game and we should enjoy and not stress about it.
get it out of your system. punishing them, you are punishing yourself too. if you think they are stupid, this is no reason to get upset. Its a game and I think you do hope for the best.
What W3C is doing or not, they will decide. I would like to see some problems solved and we have some.
I did get an answer from Tom on the contracts. he said that he already promised to look into it. He did and it seems that there is a problem.
They want to finish something on the home page next week and he said this will be one of the first things they will fix after that.
FarmerBob had an angry message to me where he listed some limitations. I don't really know why he waved them in my face but there are valid issues in that message.
I will pick up one of them and mail w3c again.
My experience is that they do answer. |
| Zdeněk Pavlovský (Little Upsilon) | Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 11:01 pm
Quote:Simcountry's largest flaw: this is a projected without definite limits, methods and goals.
/me nods
Till today I cannot figure where the game is going, whats the goal of the developers.
If anything is to be accomplished, be it in business, personal life or any other activity, goal is set first, then means of achieving it determined.
Since the goal does not seem to me to be pleasing players, nor its to grow and prosper, I am left with nothing else but to come up with hypothesis of the weird kind that this project is a personal "toy" to someone. |
| Stuart Taylor (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 12:47 am
Romeo Vicardi, you want Laguna - you gotta get past me and Valde first. |
| Romeo Vicardi | Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 12:55 am
Stuart:
You for one have no clue what we are talking about.
is this your conclusion of what you have read here?
waste of time. |
| Johanas Bilderburg (Little Upsilon) | Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 02:52 am
Quote: 3. Wars against C3 Countries
The number of wars a country could start against countries with no president used to be unlimited. This was recently misused by some players who tried to be destructive. The number was reduced to 2 wars per country and the problems was solved.
Several players now requested the number to be increased. Two is very limiting while even a larger number will not allow for any destructive action. We have now increased the number to 5. This is sufficient for now. These wars are short and thus end quickly and new ones can be started.
/me smacks the Economic summit. |
| Laguna | Saturday, March 21, 2009 - 11:17 pm
I really don't know what's more amusing... But I take confort in fact there's plenty of stuff to laugh at around here. |
| Open Sesame (Little Upsilon) | Saturday, July 2, 2011 - 10:23 pm
lol'd @ the plan to 'block GR' |
