Raiding active players (Little Upsilon)

With all the game changes going on at the moment, I have today searched the whole world looking for inactive countries to raid that aren't in a load of debt to suppliment my income.

There are none.

I have just one possible target. It is cash rich and has around 40T in total assets. The country is a member of a federation with only his countries in it and the same for the common market. He has never been active on the forums from my searches.

One problem; This player is currently active.

I really don't want to start taking assets of other players, but with the current changes to the game, I feel that this may become common practice in the coming weeks or months as players try to suppliment their emipres income due to losses or shortenend profits.

The question is; What would you do? Would you raid an active player for no other reason apart from the fact that you want what he has got?

I think that is commonly called "greed." Most people frown upon it.

DAMN Stuart .... I Agree with ZENTRINO

that would be paramount to Robbery,
Strong Armed Robbery.
I just hope that someone wasn't me

I know guys. And I feel bad about even thinking about it.

But the fact remains - income across SC as a whole is down so people will look for different ways to make more. Being as there are no decent inactives to raid, people will look as to what is actually available and I do think that this course of action will be more commonplace.

I am not going to attack this guy, but I was very tempted to do so for a short while. However, I bet someone else with less scruples than me will.

Stuart... Sadly I know this target and I had probed him a while back to make sure he was active.


With Regards,
Dragoon

I know Stuart is not talking about me as I have not been making very much profits these days. Besides I think we are nuetral with eachother. But I suppose that you might want to warn that "rich" player Stuart, and even invite him to your fed for protection. After all I have meet some players who would go for the greed.


Nute Gunray

lol Nute. Its not you man. I have sent him an IGM and a fed invite, so I will give him a week or so to respond. If he dosn't - then he's fair game as far as I'm concerned.

How much are people on average making a game month? Are things getting that bad?

Aqua Rainbow II

"making"? lol...errr, oh...*sobs*

My CEO's Total Profit with 99 corporatios is Total Profit 13.44B SC$

My main for this month: Profit 39,394.08M SC$

My first Slave 4 the month: Shortage 17,197.01M SC$

my second Slave 4 the month:Profit 12,091.94M SC$

My last Slave 4 the month:Profit 9,601.57M SC$

but I have NOT bought Anything except the necessitys.
................................................

Hummm ,
Grayson wonders at the wisDUM of telling Stuart HE made a profit.now that he's thought about it

All wars is honestly considered fair game. the thing is you will then be known as.... Stuart Taylor The Pirate : ). Also Politically you won't hold as much ground as you did, you've brokered quite a few peace treaties as well as created institutions of peace and communications. Your credibility will be lower.

I understand that Loki, and that is my major concern. As I have said though, I have messaged him and invited him to our federation. As with many other players on here, if they don't get a response after a while, they will take it as being inactive.

If however, he is active as his countries suggest and he responds - he will be more than welcome to join Valde Subsidium in one of my branches and will be free to make this choice. He will not be strong armed into joining us.

As mentionend previously, the thought of attacking an active player repulses me but I think that we will find this kind of thing happening more and more often as presidents look to subsidise their income. Perhaps I am the first to bring this subject up, but I can almost guarantee that I won't be the last.

I am basically a peaceful president who will not go to war without a good reason, and then I will still allow the president to keep their country after it.

Peace, prosperity and Justice was the motto for CIS, and is still the motto for my branches in Valde now - and that motto sumarises how I like to play this game.

Even when it has come to attacking inactives in the past, I have felt bad about that. The fact of the matter is that I do not like war without a good cause, and in this instance I do not have a good cause, but I have followed others rules where it comes to attacking inactives.

And I hate the thought of being known as stuart the pirate!!!

It seems to me that a player who is building an obviously nice little empire and not looking for war should just be left alone. So what if he isn't in a Fed. Maybe he doesn't want to bebothered with it. The fact the doesn't come to the forums only means he is not interested in the petty politics of this game. Some of us (myself included) enjoy the forums while other do not. I send messages to nearly every president in my region when they first sart. I get maybe 1 response for every 10 messages sent. So what if he does not reply. If he continues to play, maybe he just didn't like your message or wasn't interested in your offer. I ignore messages.
If we begin to tolerate even for a moment that wars against active, peaceful players are justified only to satsify a player's greed, then we have begun to unravel that which makes the game fun. I daresay it makes us hypocrites all as well.
Have we forgotten what we were taught as new players? Don't play the war game. Focus on the economy. Build a strong infrastructure of education, health care, and transportation. Expand your population and build several good slave countries. Then, and only then, should you work on the war game. This comes with time, work, and dedication. How many RL months did many of us play before building a strong army and preparing for wars? As new players, who among us could have withstood an attack from one of the largest armies in the world? And now, we sit here today to entertain attacking those players who have heeded the advice we gave them? Advice we once took oursleves.
For shame! Shame for thinking it. Shame for speaking it. Shame for doing it.

Profits:

CEO 95 Corps: 40B - 50B
Main: 220B
Slave 1: 160B
Slave 2: 120B
Slave 3: 60B

Stuart must be horrible at the Economic side of the game as 2/3 of my slaves are war slaves.


With Regards,
Dragoon

lol dude - i'm ok with it but I WAS running fully activated. Things are starting to level out a bit more now I have started do deactivate some weapons.

But, i'm still way down on what I was making

I would consider attacking an active player, if I thought that I could win and that I could turn a nice profit by doing so.

However, due to Valde Subsidium's stance on attacking players, I will not do so on Little Upsilon.

People who are calling it theft should take a step back and consider that SimCountry is a strategy game and that defensive armies exist for a reason.

Remember the recent changes to the war engine. Raiding will prove to be much more expensive than in the past.

It is a valid tactic, however. Every player is responsible for their own security.

Farmerbob,

Unless the engine changed again without my noticing it the cost will not go up, at least not very much. The way you go about it will have to change.

Stuart,

Simcounty is a competitive game. Prizes are given to countries with strong economies and high indexes. When a player scores high without a military he/she is taking a shortcut at the expense of other players. You can not get into the top 50 without bumping someone else out of the top 50. The markets, cash market and in game markets are competitive. You take profits that someone else could take.

A country which advances without buying a military could be called a cheater. I do not believe it is cheating. It is gambling. He/she decided to take a risk. There is a chance that no one will notice the lack of military. That chance was taken and you noticed.

Obviously you are also taking a risk. The target may recover and get even. He/she might have friends. If you raid an active player and it goes poorly you should not expect help from your friends. Calculate your risks and rewards. Expect a violent response and grudges.

There is nothing unethical about making an attack in a war game. I suspect the programmers will continue making changes until it becomes common.

Stuart, he/she could be an experienced player who his ticked off at the GM, as are a number of Vets, who decided to lay back for awhile to see how the game turns out after a few RL months, with all the recent changes.
I can think of a player recently who was inactive because of RL personal issues, who returned to find a few countries taken from him by another member. How do you think he felt?

"The question is; What would you do? Would you raid an active player for no other reason apart from the fact that you want what he has got? "


Let me tell you the story of Badmudder...

my 2 cents not that it matters tis a game we pay to play and should all do what we want to enjoy it whatever that means and thats why we can purchase war protection and are assured 1 secure mode nation and have a community of other players who can help us boycott and financially hurt war mongers

but i personaly feel economic strategy comes first in this strategy game, war is another strategy that comes 2nd as in real life wars should not be common but huge long costly and more for status and politics than anything else.

these war engine changes are to get some of the older players to disarm a bit to put them on a more even footing with all us newer players. they have had time as much as 2 years more than us for stockpiling ammo that takes hundreds of trillions of in game dollars not to mention real life time to order in small quantities for us.

ammo is ridiculous expensive and having large active armies takes up a lot of workers who could otherwise be making money... so ya i have weapons for defense but i aint gonna keep them all active all the time and it would be no problem for anyone with a 20m army to take a country from me other than the cost of ammo and time needed but thats why i am in a fed for a little added protection hopefully if the time comes they will come to my aide and if they need me i can toss in whatever they need.

but heres the kicker the income produced from another 20m employees would be 300b per game month ie another countrys income basicly...so if your active and use your army all the time profitably ya its worth it otherwise for most of us we are better off just making more money and using that money to stockpile weapons and ammo for revenge should we be attacked... you can really harass even larger players with a bunch of little c3s and use economic means hostile bidding get the game community on your side and boycott etc etc

Economic players can't really "cheat" their way to the top and into rewards. Your level is calculated into your score. In the top 20, only 1 person is a level 1 and only 2 are level 2. In fact, 8 of the top 12 are level 5, which requires an overall DI of 100. Only 2 of the top 15 are level 3. I happen to be one. It is not, however, because I have "cheated" on the military. In fact, it is because I still sit at 84% employment after taking 3 new countries 2 weeks ago. I estimate I have had 20 private corps added to my empire in the past week and my employment percent has not budged. If someone could figure that out, I would be happy!

Heres a FEW things the Warmongers amoung us SHOULD consider Proir to Armed conflict..
True the WAR end of this Games there however,

War is the reciprocal and violent application of force between hostile political entities aimed at bringing about a desired political end-state via armed conflict.......

..at bringing about a desired political end-state .....
{Whats the desired Political End}

War is not considered to be the same as occupation, murder, or genocide because of the reciprocal nature of the violent struggle, and the organized nature of the units involved.

the reciprocal nature
{ Do they Have a Military to Resist you? if not then it maybe Immoral of you to Attack }

War is also a cultural entity, and its practice is not linked to any single type of political organization or society....war is a universal phenomenon whose form and scope is defined by the society that wages it.

war...is defined by the society that wages it.
{the peoples you associate with's mind set would determine wheather this is acceptable}

Not meaning any Fouls here..

But as a whole the world thought Japan during WW2 was Wrong, while they thought they were Right.
so theres some who will say yes to Attacking another with out any real reason other than this is a Tactic or this is a part of the Game should step back and review themselves.
and ask prior to declaring it ok .. whats my political reasoning,is it a normal Behaviour in the eyes of the people I associate with.

Tradeoff analysis theories

Wars happen when a group of people or an organization perceives the benefits that can be obtained to be greater than the cost. This can happen for a variety of reasons:

To protect national pride by preventing the loss of territory

To protect livelihood by preventing the loss of resources or by declaring independence

To inflict punishment on the "wrongdoer", especially when one country is stronger than the other and can effectively deal out the punishment.

While this violence is repressed in normal society, it needs the occasional outlet provided by war.

Sociology has long been very concerned with the origins of war, and many thousands of theories have been advanced, many of them contradictory. Sociology has thus divided into a number of schools. One, the Primat der Innenpolitik (Primacy of Domestic Politics) school sees war as the product of domestic conditions, with only the target of aggression being determined by international realities.

Thus World War I was not a product of international disputes, secret treaties, or the balance of power but a product of the economic, social, and political situation within each of the states involved.

@Petra, I recall the name Badmudder but but whats his story?

SimConsiderations for warfare:

Is it profitable?
Will I get away without retaliation?

That was a nice discourse, Grayson, but SC tends to be a bit less collegiate and a little more prison yard.