Trial TIE + Other Signatories Policy

Kenzu, 2 things:

1.) The policy you said we agreed to was the "6% army size in defence excessive clause one". That is a complete load of BS. You were made aware of the changes, and you posted on the forum AFTER the excessive clauses were changed to reflect daily economic generation saying it looked better etc... etc...

2.) If you have an issue with the 250million profit for excessive clauses... well by all means why didn't you just say THAT. Rather than then go onto argue The Imperium changed the policy completely?

SO in summary: You accused me of changing the policy from being based on % of army size to economic generation without consulting anyone - when the reality is Lord Ishurue was consulted, and you yourself were told of those changes and the new changed discussed in the msn conversation - with the link being sent to you of the edited post with the new changes, afterwhich you then post on this topic saying the changes looked "already better".

As for the 400million profit for excessive clauses being changed. That was changed at 6.18pm. At 7.52 Pm you posted the response you did - claiming TIE changed the policy from % of army size to economic generation, and that what we agreed on was % of army size... which is a complete load of BS.

By all means raise issue with the 400million to 250million change for the excessive military's bit... thats why I even posted on this topic mentioning the changes (check my response to Nomad, and the quote made by Nimras which confirms I d posted I d changed the excessive profit requirement before you started having a go at myself & TIE for trying to secretly change the policy" - to give you the opportunity to be made aware of that change.

But don't go then saying we changed other things when we haven't.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, I ll keep it simple:

Do you agree to the below policy - which is the one which WAS the final draft finished and the link sent to everyone in that msn conversation including yourself:

ian wrote:Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement (non excessive). Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.

Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.

Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.

Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need a 400million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:

3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

Yes or No.

I ll however, point out, 2 more things:

1.) As noone had signed the policy at the point we changed the 400million profit for excessive clauses to 250million profit for excessive clauses, we actually did nothing wrong. We can change the policy however we like until someone else commits to it, or makes known their intention to commit to it (which if you remember, there had been no confirmation whether you i.e. WR would or would not accept the policy).

2.) If you do sign this, in 7 days time when we "review" the trial policy, TIE will make known our desire for the profit to be changed from 400million to 250million for excessive clauses.

I ll give you 2 reasons why this is the case:

1.) We only agreed to extending the profit to 400million to grant your newer members (who generally will lack the necessary military) additional protection. It seemed the right thing to do. However if someone has an excessive military.. by definition they have excessive protection, and the reason for a 400million profit requirement no longer applies.

2.) Someone who has an excessive military is generally very hard to farm already. Therefore, we d like it to be slightly easier to farm them.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for that proposal I sent you in-game... the msn conversation we had continued AFTER it was sent... and more changes were made during that msn conversation. The link was then sent to you, and it was mentioned in the msn conversation that more changes had taken place. You then visited the forum after those changes and posted you thought they were better etc...

I ll be frank with you, there are now only 3 courses of options open to you:

1.) World Republic signs the above quoted policy. We can then worry about discussing the 400million to 250million profit drop for excessive clauses in a weeks time when we review it (untill then it would be 400million profit)

2.) World Republic can refuse to sign it... in which case The Imperium will just ignore World Republic's policy anyway, and farm you within the above policy. You can then mass The Imperium members and start a 3rd TIE-WR war, or start a 2nd TIE-TOC war.

3.) 2.) World Republic can refuse to sign it... in which case The Imperium will just ignore World Republic's policy anyway, and farm you within the above policy. You can then choose to not enforce your policy... in which case peaceful relations would continue.

Either way.. since I ve informed The Imperium members we may well be at war within a week with WR/TOC, many have responded back saying "good" or "yay, peace is boring!" etc... So please don't doubt TIE's resolve to defend ourselves in the event you do refuse to sign, and then try and force a unfair and out-dated TOC policy on us via force.

We either have this policy and be able to farm more... or WR can start massing TIE members for breaking their old policy, and we have war... and we can then farm a LOT more and kill a lot more. Either way... we ll be able to farm WR a lot more, which is what generally we want - the added benefit of another TIE-TOC war being generally TIE will easily outfarm TOC (our farming on you vs. your farming on us), and almost certainly kill a lot more, causing TOC to suffer even more (some of your members have made next to no growth since the end of the last TIE-TOC war). The choice is yours at the end of the day. I m certainly not asking you to mass TIE members who break your policy... merely telling you we ll ignore your policy untill a better one is agreed.

Any war which starts will be by your hand, not TIE's... just as if this policy is extended to encompass TOC AND TIE, now rests upon your decision. The ball is entirely in your court...

I may have missed this, but did anyone answer why miners and workers are excluded as income units?

all i see is this

ian wrote:

Nomad wrote:do workers and miners count as farmers?

No. Minimum profit is 400million though - so equivalent to them having 2.3million farmers. So even a player with 0 farmers and say... 1.5million miners will get "protection" equivalent to them having 2.3million farmers lol.

I thought it just meant the workers and miners income were just re calculated to farmers, but re reading it that seems to only be only up to the "400 mill" mark.

So if someone had lets say 5 mill miners, 5 mill workers and, 5 mill miners only their farmers would be counted it seems,,,, but honestly, whos going to have more then 500K miners and maybe 1 mill worker anyway since they can be killed.

But I don't understand the "farmers only" vesus all income units (farmers, workers, and miners)

ian wrote:Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement (non excessive). Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.

Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.

Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.

Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 250million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:

3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

ian no subject [26 Sep] 10:11

Keinutnai Wrote
if thats what has been agreed to, then we can try it out for a week and see how it works out

but I dont recall 250 million minimum profit at all.
was it decided in the msn convo as well?


ian wrote:
No, I already posted on the forum concerning the 250million part - I edited that BEFORE you posted, and posted saying I d changed that bit in my response to Nomad... I wasn't trying to hide it, and thats why I posted it - so you & anyone else would see it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As it is, we ll stick with the 400million profit margin. In a weeks time, when the policy is up for review... TIE will ask for the profit margin for only those with excessive clauses to be dropped to 250million. Those with "normal" defences will still be minimum 400million profit.

So.. for now, 400million profit. That acceptable?


ian no subject [26 Sep] 17:14
Keinutnai Wrote
yes, with 400 million minimum profit margin it is acceptable and we can have the policy on trial for 1 week.

ian wrote:
Cool. Sounds like a plan. Wanna make it known on the AW forum?

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hereby I announce that ian and I agreed on a minimum profit margin of 400 million for the trial of 1 week, which I accept, however this farming policy will go into effect only after Ishurue posts here that he also accepts this policy

Then this policy will be used by TOC and TIE for the duration of 1 week and afterwards negotiated further.

Just posting to confirm TIE is happy to try out the below policy for a 7 day period once Lord Ishurue accepts as Kenzu has said above.

ian wrote:Hey.

The Imperium's policy:

Farmers x 170 = Required Profit Margin. 400million Minimum profit requirement (non excessive). Max Profit Requirement = 2.720billion.

Excessive Military Clause:

Max Defence = 12 Days Economic Generation for Defence investments. Untrained Units valued at 175,000 rate.

Max Military = 36 Days Economic Generation for ALL Military investments. Military Investments = Value of Attack & Defence supers, Value of spies & assassins, Value of weapons.

Daily Economic Generation = (Turn Income x 48)+(Total U.P x 175,000).

Those with excessive Military's = need only a 250million profit.

This would apply to farming done against TIE & Non TIE members.

Breaches:

If the breacher contacts the person they breached before being contacted - they need only compensate 100% of the damage.

Compensation will be rewarded based on the breacher being contacted by the victim/ by another on the victims behalf within the below time-zones:

3 days after a breach = 130% compensation of the damage inflicted
4 to 7 days after a breach = 100% Compensation of the damage inflicted
After 7 days = 0 compensation.

Those contacting a breacher on behalf of another (I.e. alliance leader contacting a breacher) need to verify the victim's activity. I.e. screen shot of the last-activity log. Those who haven't logged in for 48hours at the time of the breacher being contacted will be deemed inactive, no compensation needing to be given.

In essence... a breach on a inactive player isn't a breach at all.

Oh yeah... anyone who wants to sign up to this is welcome to - including WR.

My thanks to Lord Ishurue & Lurant Maximus for their input in helping with the creation of the above trial policy.

Lord Ishurue wrote:TIE & TOC's new trial farming policy:

Population x 145 = Required Profit Margin.

Minimum & Maximum profit

Spoiler:

Excessive Military Clause:

Spoiler:

Breaches:

Spoiler:

This policy will be reviewed in 7 days . saturday october 9th 2010 .

Signed on behalf of TOC .

Signed on behalf of TIE.

ian wrote:

Lord Ishurue wrote:TIE & TOC's new trial farming policy:

Population x 145 = Required Profit Margin.

Minimum & Maximum profit

Spoiler:

Excessive Military Clause:

Spoiler:

Breaches:

Spoiler:

This policy will be reviewed in 7 days . saturday october 9th 2010 .

Signed on behalf of TOC .

Signed on behalf of TIE.

confirmed

@ian
1 week is almost over, we need to discuss changes, because there are a couple things World Republic cannot accept on long term.

There are 2 main reasons why the new farming policy cannot be accepted by World Republic:
-Policy is too long and complicated. Not only is it 1 page long, it also requires complicated calculations to be done on each person you want to to figure out if hit will be ok, especially if you want to make a hit with a profit less than 145xpopulation. Figuring out income itself is complicated because you have to consider not only how many farmers, workers and miners someone has, but also his AE, and even more complicated: how much he pays to his officers and gets paid by his commander.
-And the most important reason: Because this policy doesn't allow all players who log in 2 times a day to build a defense which will protect them from all profitable farm hits, while still having enough spies and assassins to defend the defense, and having an equal amount of strike units. Each player should have the possibility to be within the farming policy and not be farmed, if he builds enough defense and has his military balanced in all 4 categories.

Example:
october_17
population: 3,666,170
AE: 100%
Turn Income: 129,586,619 Kuwal
Daily Income: 6.220.157.712

His Defense: 2,502,844,218

He never gets farmed, but he logs in more than 2 times each day. 4 times a day I would assume.
A player with his stats, who has only time to log in 2 times a day can be farmed 2 times each day.

With 3.1 billion out and only 2.5 billion defense, farmers would farm him for 600 mill-900 mill profit.

A busy player logging in 2 times a day would need a defense of over 3.1 billion kuwal to defend 3.1 billion kuwal.

October_17 fulfills the current farming policy, but his strike is practically 0. If he built a strike as big as any of his other stats (population wise), he would not be within farming policy.

Same applies to a person with october_17 stats, who logged in 2 times a day and had to have increased defense and thus also increase covert and assassin power.

--------------------------------------------------------

Therefore I suggest we will agree on one of 3 possible policies:

1) TIE signs the old TOC-TIE policy again and it will be used again

2) We use a simple & reasonable farming policy with a % profit requirement, for example 25% is minimum required profit. (A absolute minimum profit can be of course added too). Because all that matters in farming is how much profit you make, not not what someones armysize is, because it's the strike, defense and kuwal stolen that determines how successful my hit is, and population only indirectly and inaccurately determines that.

3) You will propose a new farming policy, which is not 1 page long, and which allows players who log in 2 times a day to have a defense that protects them while they can also have a strike with the same power as defense.
-----------------------------------

If someone has 2.9 million income units, and needs 250k def supers to defend his income, he also needs roughly 275k-300k spies and 275-300k assassins. And if he wants a strike, he should be able to have also 250k strike forces. thus someone who has 4 million population should be able to have 250k AS, 250k DS, 275k-300k spies and 275k-300k assassins.

You should not force your style of playing, namely the way of being extremely active on everyone in the server. It's simply wrong.

Spoiler:

Trying to protect someone who logs in twice a day is dumb. All that is doing is killing the server. If everyone was protected like that then how would anyone make anything? All they would do is grow, and AE would kick that in the nuts too. Besides that makes this a barbie game, then again we have a doll with your name anyways, so why not find it a wife.

I have honestly considered leaving, due to AE, Trade Ratio, limits on paying officers, all of these complex farm policies. The game has become more complex and not really all that fun. When I have to save 500b to beable to mass someone, or I can just take it up the rear and save that 500b and put it into something a bit more useful.

Kenzu, regardless of whether Ties style of play is wrong, we want to profitably farm less active players such as those who only log in twice a day. You shouldn't force your style of protecting barely active players on the server - and to try to force it on TIE would be fatal.

ian wrote:Kenzu, regardless of whether Ties style of play is wrong, we want to profitably farm less active players such as those who only log in twice a day. You shouldn't force your style of protecting barely active players on the server - and to try to force it on TIE would be fatal.

All I know is I keep getting handed a pile of rules and formulas that must be used to farm someone. When I have to bust out a calculator to figure out if there will be repercussions for farming then the game is no longer fun.

navblue wrote:When I have to bust out a calculator to figure out if there will be repercussions for farming then the game is no longer fun.

True That...

navblue wrote:All I know is I keep getting handed a pile of rules and formulas that must be used to farm someone. When I have to bust out a calculator to figure out if there will be repercussions for farming then the game is no longer fun.

They are not rules and you do not need a calculator.

All they are are a set of guidelines that some players want to have so that they can play the game the way that they want to.
They tell you what is permissible and what the repercussions will be if you don't follow them when taking action against them.

And yes they are stupid and totally unnecessary because if they built their accounts in line with the game mechanics then they would not have to worry about farming. However they are perfectly entitled to play the game this way if they can get along with it and the only one who let them do this are other players

tie, i understand your desire to farm our less active members (twice a day or less ) if thats the case why cant we abolish the excesive military clause and stick with a simple, minimum profit rule


short sweet and to the point,

no mater your style of play or how often you log in this would work for everyone, and if they left a profitable hit (above that guidline) take it and be done with it,


this is my openion

minus the excesive military it works for me, though im shure no one will agree with me on that point

october_17 wrote:tie, i understand your desire to farm our less active members (twice a day or less ) if thats the case why cant we abolish the excesive military clause and stick with a simple, minimum profit rule


short sweet and to the point,

no mater your style of play or how often you log in this would work for everyone, and if they left a profitable hit (above that guidline) take it and be done with it,


this is my openion

Lol. I think I ve made TIE's stance on protecting inactive/barely active members clear: We won't tolerate it. Given we ve stated this to the point of exhaustion and made it completely 100% clear.... I have to question the motives of restarting the argument. My conclusion is thus:

This attempt by Kenzu to restart a argument (protection of inactive members) which has been done over and over to the point of exhaustion has nothing to do with the farming policy... and everything to do with Kenzu trying to find more "evidence" (resulting from these discussions) to twist, manipulate and then drip-feed to the smaller & neutral alliances in the hope of persuading them that they have lots to fear from The Imperium and therefore should jump into bed with World Republic and be prepared to fight The Imperium.

We already know about the messages being sent out to some of the alliances a couple of weeks ago by Kenzu to try and recruit them against TIE. We also know this is a ongoing effort to recruit allies via slandering The Imperium and inciting violence and hatred towards us from alliances & player's we ve done absolutely nothing to via drip-feeding them with a careful diet of propaganda, lies, manipulations and half-truths. Kenzu knows we know... and he assumes he can get away with it given we ve tolerated it so far.

Whether that assumption is correct remains to be seen.....

ian define "inactive" i hardly see someone who logs in once or twicea day inactive, but at the same time if there income is so high in relation to there def, i realy dont blame you for taking the excess

now if there mising days here and there i REALY dont lame anyone for taking the excess

october_17 wrote:ian define "inactive" i hardly see someone who logs in once or twicea day inactive, but at the same time if there income is so high in relation to there def, i realy dont blame you for taking the excess

now if there mising days here and there i REALY dont lame anyone for taking the excess

Which is why I included "barely active" in the statement - the definition being someone who only logs in twice a day....

ok, why the excessive military clause, some people cant be on alot like others let them have the defense they need to play fairly

Kenzu, no person with 4m army size needs 250.000 DS OR AS!!

I have 5.3m army size and I manage very very very well with 150k DS and 100k AS.

4.5m+ is income units.

If they don't want to get farmed, tell them to get more active or of that's no an option to increase techs.

Simple really

Steveanaya wrote:Kenzu, no person with 4m army size needs 250.000 DS OR AS!!

I have 5.3m army size and I manage very very very well with 150k DS and 100k AS.

4.5m+ is income units.

If they don't want to get farmed, tell them to get more active or of that's no an option to increase techs.

Simple really

Try logging in only 2 times a day.
You will be farmed each day.

Kenzu wrote:

Steveanaya wrote:Kenzu, no person with 4m army size needs 250.000 DS OR AS!!

I have 5.3m army size and I manage very very very well with 150k DS and 100k AS.

4.5m+ is income units.

If they don't want to get farmed, tell them to get more active or of that's no an option to increase techs.

Simple really

Try logging in only 2 times a day.
You will be farmed each day.

If you only log in 2 times a day, you deserve to be farmed.

Do I smell smoke? Cuz somebody just got burned!!!

But seriously, I go over 12 hours without logging in and don't get farmed.
Do the math!