> Maybe you just meant this as good-natured ribbing, but I hope you can see how it might be interpreted as condescending. Not only is it possible, it is likely. If you can't see that, then I propose that this is the root of the problem. You should probably ask yourself why it keeps happening for you.
Very fortunately for me, the incidence with you is the first time I've encountered it. I've explained things, jokes and otherwise, to vvr numerous times. Ask him.
> Not everyone gets the same story about what's happening, even when everyone involved communicates as clearly and openly as they know how
I just want to highlight on what bovius has said here, as I think it is an important point. Communication _is_ hard, and even with the best of intentions, mishaps exist. The best online communities I've seen tend to have an unwritten rule of asking members to be charitable to one another. That is, to presume everyone is acting in good faith, and miscommunication should be the first line of assumption, rather than malicious or dishonest intents.
I'd like to ask that to apply to all of us here. As it happens, saying enough things and we are bound to make fun of ourselves a couple of times. It is then fairly meaningless to pick on individual sentences/ phrases/ wordings as a justification for others' wrongdoing. Words are a meant to deliver intentions, as necessary as they are, they are not an end to itself.
Just as an example, and I don't mean to be picking on bonzai here. It's just the easiest one I can find an example of - it could have been another quote had I found one in this thread:
> With the sacking of so many rooms, each player’s sense of sportsmanship is put to the test.
Most of the most damaged players: Skorp, DT, vvr are all acting in exceptionally good sport. It probably can't be overstated that these guys had a cool head (I'd make a joke about vvr here, but then he wouldn't understand and I have to explain it to him again). The specific statement is therefore of questionable truth. But that is hardly irrelevant to the point bonzai was making: that was a shitty weekends for us.
From the principle of charitable reading above, I'd call for everyone to stop he-said she-said, as it is evidently not productive. With the latest development today, it's safe to say that we are all pretty confused. I know I do.
And this is a bit out there. But even though I called bonzai's quoted statement "of questionable truth" because of specific circumstances, it is in fact a safe prior for normal cases: as the war goes on, it is likely to be more salty (this thread by itself isn't enough to be resolving it, unfortunately). If at all possible, I'd like to have a cease-fire for 7 days for all fronts. This is, after all, a week of gratitude. And this is unrelated to any potential strategic implication in the war. In fact if anyone want (and the ceasefire is reached), you would have my words that I will not work on a single line of code related to any war plan during the week.
Yes, some might benefit from it, and some might lose some advantage. At this rate, this war is gonna end with several players leaving the game. This is coming from my experience playing other cutthroat games. And yes, that would include myself -- I take great care in interacting with others, and being called "toxic ramblings" does, in fact, bother me.
At this point, I'm more interested in still having a place to chat, and a game to play, rather than the consequence of the war. The war did expose some strange (not just in balance, but enjoyment) mechanics in the game, and that is on top of the apparent degrading in community's mood
I don't have any suggestion right now, but I would like to emphasize what heggico has said.
> What I would like to see is that its easier to take single rooms, but way harder to completely wipe a player.
Artem: thanks for the reply. I thought so about using the market too.
Realistically speaking, I can envision both case where the mechanic works out or fails. I don't think there is any way to know for sure except having it in place -- success or failure would depend on how the players adapt to it. The main risk is that being a big change affecting everyone, you really don't have much place to test it much (of course you already knew that).
So from now on, explicitly you are supposed to grow your empire together, and any lone room will just be a liability (broadly speaking) ?
@coteyr: you got your reasoning a bit backward: if there are too many limits and everyone is doing the samething, you will never catch up. Variety is how someone can gain some advantages and catch up.
Andhard: The room data can be downloaded here: http://www.leagueofautomatednations.com/map/rooms.js . It's updated daily. And if you haven't seen it yet, I'd recommend to check out http://www.leagueofautomatednations.com/map :-).
No. Containers, roads and walls are neutral structures, no one owns them.
To add on to my previous comment, I don't mind if you make all rooms having 2-source AND nerfing their energy + reservation limit to GCL*3. My concern was more on the fact there would be a lot of rooms unused otherwise, which I dislike (it would limit some kind of room design/ game play). You can tweak the energy output to get to the number that you like.