• Posts: 1,599

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

After reading the forum recently I have realised a lot of debate is being formed over the right and wrongs in attacking.  I can honestly admit I have done everything right, and everything wrong during my time in IC,  so who better than me to review. 

I don't have time to write a really long post, so this may become more of a progressional piece as time allows me to add.  Please don't use this topic to debate, just listen to what I write, agree or disagree but just keep your evaluation to youself. 

Everyone knows the attackers role is to gain planets for their family but at what cost;

Todays Topic - Early Raiding

Early Raiding - Lets hit this one out first,  early raiding is becoming more frequent, and its a consequence of the family bank, too much effort is being pumped into econ and its leaving players, especially those who have not been trained correctly with real weaknesses.  Early raiding is fine for me as long as its justified.  Attackers have to pay the cost for the fleet, so if they spot a weakness and go for it, all power to them. 

Small fams get raided too often, and i disgree with it,  but I do feel they need to protect themselves better against it, and without paying for protection.  All good players know how to defend better against raids, and they need to train their players to protect themselves, and i mean themselves, not the fam bank telling them how many lasers they need per p.  IC is a continuous game, and every player has to keep up with it,  being told what to do once a week is utterly useless.

Now although early raiding is in my opinion good, its not the most efficient way of taking planets.  So is it unfair to pick on a small family for a raid just for no gain?  Technically, yes, And this is where attackers are committing a wrong.  Unprovoked raids on small families for no other reason but to make their round a nightmare is A) totally stupid and B) a low move. 

It's stupid because your crushing your weakest opposition, while your strongest opposition thrives.  It's like growing a field of vegetables, and then picking them too early.  This family could become a nice target later. 

Early raiding is a act of full scale war,  whereas ping pong is just normal routine,  so are you focrcing yourself into too many naps by raiding early?  absolutely, and at the same time your reducing your possibilities.  Having too many naps is not ideal.

In my opinion small fams that are close to you should be left alone, I would not nap them, I would advise them to keep away from our core, and I would keep them there without attacking,  because having small fams near you, that you DO NOT attack, without a NAP is so rewarding.  Its a grace of keeping a friendly relationship, without it being formal, in which you respect each others grounds.  They have no fear of being cancelled on, and all they need to do is be cautious of where they expand, and in return the larger fam has a useful buffer, and bait to draw in other enemies. 

Conclusion, early raids are ok if its against a strong opponent, it can weaken their infra and shake them up, and gives you the chance to gain some economic ground. 

But remember raiding is not a certainty, and some families can recover fast from them, so make sure you are sure its your best option. 

Verdict

Raid a small family - Wrong
Raid a close family - Wrong
Raid a stronger family if weaknesses are found - Right
Raid a family to force a nap - Wrong
Raid a family if provoked - Right

Discuss if you will but please keep this thread friendly and respectful.    Tomorrow I will post about attackers and NAPS

"It's very quiet on the political arena. I wish someone would stir up some trouble!"

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,202

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

hardcode it?  if a fam a % of attacking famely's nw takes more then % planets in * hours = penalty
10% infra destroyed throughout the fam
or something else to motivate people not to raid. make the costs to do so more then the gain of getting those planets imho. nuke and destroy 150% of the taken planets from the attacking fams planets.

several option, but the question is do we want these changes, and how much should the penalty be and it must not be lightly.

so in short set a hard limit people wont dare to cross, could also be dependable on the period of the round, first week rl if u take more then 20%? later up the numbers.
we got several option to work out if we choose to pick such system

Colorado: even in the 11/01 war i made more hits.
Colorado: 447 blow jobs.
Big Gary:  Only a fool cannot admit when he's wrong...
AW:    i love rim jobs
RisingDown: I know you do

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,236
  • Tag points: 27

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

Orbit is talking about attacking from a bigger family. Keep in mind that if you are in a small family that raiding to force a NAP very well could be the right move to make. Just be sure to get a NAP that will leave you protected and not give them a chance to rape you later in the round for doing the raid in the first place.

Solis - #7872

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,944
  • Tag points: 16

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

Raiding small fams around is not only wrong for question of honour but I think also for strategy.
Big white sharks have their following small fishes that clean all their parasites, I see relation between big fams and small fams around as the same.
You could have a small meal with these small fams but they won't be able or want to clean ur parasites later...
Just tell them to stay away from the zone you may bite and they will remove all small intruders you can't attack and when a bigger fish will come for them later, it will be a nice meal for you...

Doing early raids on other fams has become a strategy, it can work on a fam having something to lose. But I don't understand that small fams often fall into this trap giving free plts as payment, when they just have to build 20 trannies and 40 soldiers and take the next expo wave the big bully fam will send within few hours...

Early raids are often a trap for the ones doing them:
-You put ur resources into bombers when the eco would have given a better payback, and during this time another fam took a big lead.
-You raid then what else? You force a fam to sign a NAP that isn't even good startegicly, since the other fam will have free access to shares when you could have kept it away all round or took 200 plts instead of the 20 you had for your early raid.

-Preparing an early raid costs a lot. Bombers, but also a good position that you need to portal and laser heavily.
Building these lasers close to a fam can be a trap for yourself. Spend your bank to build 300 early lasers and your ennemy will spend his bank to take them. And if he succeeds he won't keep them in portal waiting for your ping pong but will send his 3200 bombers on your biggest banker that is unportalled.

I think early raids are only good if you surprise target a big family taking risks on it's defense, that is at least 8-10 camaar ticks, that u can up defenses during their time of travel. To slow them, or get a nap you WANT or just stay without nap with them as it's often the best choice.
-

'Success! The realm of Genesis has been reduced to dust! Our forces are leaving the planet though, as it is scheduled for demolition to make way for a new hyperspace bypass.'

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,599

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

Agreed,  Hydro is correct,  a smaller family can and should raid a bigger family to try and force and NAP,  however this is a risky move so they must be very prepared to face the consequences. Ideally the larger fam should not be close, otherwise they are digging their own grave.  If the small fam is lucky to force the nap, they need to be sure its not setting them up for a fall later on. 

Kollop is absolutely right as usual, glad you listened to your master kollop.

So next it only seems right to talk about Naps,  a largely debated topic,  whats right, whats wrong.

Large families are always demanding planets for naps, and now it seems small families are happy to offer them to as a payment for peace.   

So when is paying for a nap right?
Its a strategy for a smaller family to offer a larger family some planets for a nap,  and in my opinion this is fair enough as long as there is no conflict happening between the 2 families. 
So if S(Small) fam is concerned about B(Big) fam making them there next target and S fam has another target in mind, they can offer B fam 25 planets for a nap. 

The reason this should be done outside of conflict is because as soon as conflict begins, B fam is going to demand your soul for a nap,  a massive core, stupid terms and conditions, and you lose all control of the situation.  So if you want to pay for a nap,  do it before conflict happens,  keep your payment small, and make sure the terms are equal between the 2 fams.

As a larger family demanding planets is a sign of weakness, lazyness and cowardice,  if you hit a small family and they ask for a nap, you do not need to demand planets,  instead make a good relationship, either formal or non formal.  When hitting a family smaller than you, you should make it clear of your intentions, and explain why you are hitting this target.  Because there should be no reason to take planets without an excuse.  If they have spread too close, fine, if they have explored poorly, fine,  if you are hitting in their core,  wrong.

So what do you do if a small family offers you planets for peace?  sometimes it happens that at the start of a conflict, the family will immediately offer planets.  This is a core reaction a small family leader will make, its not a generous offering to your might.  its because they are concerned for their players wellbeing, and want them to keep their focus.  Do not accept this payment,  explain your actions and create a good relationship,  napping isnt necessary, this game is ruined by naps, just create a peaceful environment that lets both families have a exciting round.

How about share wars?  If you have cancelled a nap, and the enemy offers planets instead of fighting, I agree you can take this agreement,  keep it fair though,  10% is acceptable.  However this is not fun, it may be that the family has another target in mind, and see's a bigger benefit than a 10% loss. 

If the war begins and after tick 1 or tick 2, the losing family fears the worst and offers planets for a nap, I would refuse,  you have used your savings and the war has begun,  continue the war until you have taken 10/20% of the families planets, but do not push them too hard.  Coming to an agreement is acceptable, but be very weary of other families waiting to pounce, and also look at the share possibilities you can gain. 

Demanding planets in a share war is wrong.  in all accounts, Share wars are the top conflict zones in this game, and therefore its not right to look for a easy way out.  every player new or old can learn a lot from share wars when the time to think is ripe.  Do not demand planets for peace,  do not demand planets pre or post conflict, and if victorious be fair with the amount you take.  crippling an opponent is wrong. 


Tomorrow I will discuss making naps.

"It's very quiet on the political arena. I wish someone would stir up some trouble!"

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

6 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

*me waits unpatiently

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,599

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

Sorry Render!

My life is so hectic at the moment.  And after the kick in the teeth from PW I lost a little motivation, but I will push on !! 

Making Naps, er wow i could talk forever on this subject because having been apart of so many nap making processes both good and bad its apparent that very few players have any clue about them.  I personally have made both good and bad naps,  i've been nice and i've been horrible.  That was in the heat of the game, which is why attackers make terrible leaders. 

Anywho..

The great TNT nap is a fundamentally old and outdated version of the basic nap and although its long winded and a bit dramatic it is a good guideline to follow.  Best thing to remember about naps is keep them simple.  If you need to string out new guidelines and start drawing lines and being picky, your not a good IC player, you lack confidence in your decisions or your trust of the opponent is not good enough to be napping in the first place.

So how do we keep naps simple?

Well firstly, think long and hard about who your napping, lately they are being thrown around like protein bars at a fat camp and its diluting the fundamentals of the game.  The only feasible reason to need a nap is after a long hard war, or to provide a small close fam with some reassurance that they are not your target.  Anything else is not necessary.  In IC you take control of an area, you protect it, you fill it, you economise from it, your shell should be unbreachable and from their you push on hard into enemy zones.  What you do not do - is throw your spread out portal, laser, go after fams near your spread and then as soon as they hit back you realise your too thinly defended and you end up napping to save your own arse from embarrassment.  PP always said to me, 3/4 ticks of your nearest portal, defend your space, find weaknesses from enemies and attack them in force,  fight for space, dont fight for reputation and you will always find a fun round.   

So a simple nap consists of a few things,  time - 48 is standard, 72 is a new concept, ignore it, its like waiting for a bus on sunday, its never going to come.  keep it at 48 hours always.  Never make a permanent nap straight up.  If you wanna cut a small fam a break, throw them a 48 hour nap, tell them to keep out of your hair and if they abide after a week upgrade them to a pnap.  Fair.  Dont pnap immediately for them to spread all over your area and then get spanked by your rivals,  then you have a mess to clear up.  Or maybe they start to outgrow you and become a more sizeable target. 

After time, core- Keep it small and round, like a tennis ball, not like a pencil or a picture of mona lisa.  Theres no reason to draw lines, create boxes, just 30 systems MAX and a core, around your HS with your HS included.  Players are so nervous these days they try to protect themselves too much,  its boring and shows lack of grit.  just be smart about enemy movements.  keep the fun flowing.  remember its all about learning, you cant learn anything with a core the shape of a giraffe and your opponent cant enter S1 and your nap cancellation time is 500 hours. 

Cancellation - simple, send to leader and 2 VL. 

Intrusions?  - again simple, trade outs.  Dont pick the dont enter our core option.  Napped enemies can be like a gekko in your hotel room, eats all the spiders, why prevent them from not debugging your core of other intruders?  just so you can swap them out afterwards.

Each round you should look at having 3 naps maximum,  the more you have the less fun your going to have.  the unpredictability that makes this game excited is lost.  Learn how to hold a strong core and learn how to coordinate attacks on areas of space, its how it was done before and it was magical to watch.  Now i fall asleep at my laptop. 

Share wars are awesome dont get me wrong, but there needs to be a story and a passion to them, or they are not interesting at all.  just napping several fams and having share wars is not fun.  you need to grind out results, create and control conflicts, tug of war, grow strong, fight wars, create that tension in the galaxy between several fams not just 2, and then when the round nears its end, you have 4 or 5 families fighting for control, share wars can loom,  and there is fun once more in IC. 

Next i will discuss cancellations

"It's very quiet on the political arena. I wish someone would stir up some trouble!"

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

8 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

a question about honour related with naps:
We have a NAP with fam X with core clause, they have explored a lot of planets in our core (around 100) and I ask their leader to remove defenses and accept the proposition in the planetary agreements at relations, so we can trade em out as they are core breaches.

Now fam X leader answer this:

Week 47, 12Reply Save
You need to send expos b4 and when sent we will trade out. Thanks.
Signed, [Asshole] of [fatass] (#zzzz)

Is this correct?? when his fam is the one not honouring the nap, he expects me to send 100 explos in his core and then do the planets trades??  what if I send those explos, I agree, he takes them and he does not accept to surrender those planets in my core?? 

pls I need advice, notice this player I have hidden the name is known by having NO HONOUR at all

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,734
  • Tag points: 34

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

So...you signed nap ingame...then they sent into core AFTER nap was in place? Those shouldn't be traded out, per nap terms, unless the nap says that future violations would be traded out.

Modestus Experitus

Arby: A very strict mod, reminds me of a fat redneck who drives a truck around all day with a beer in one hand. I hated this guy at the start, however, I played a round in PW with him where he went as an anonymous player. Our fam got smashed up and everyone pretty much left. Arby stayed around and helped out the remaining family. At the end of the round he revealed himself.... My views on him have changed since. Your a good guy.....

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

10 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

"Any planets in each others cores presently will be traded out."

you're right Arby not a word about future violations .... he's trolling me! yikes

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 410

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

I heard that Orbit is a noob, so nobody should listen to him big_smile

Failure is just delayed success

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,599

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

Render, your nap says presently, so these planets should all be removed without trade-outs,  the other fam should learn to respect a core. 
BTW render if they have 100 p's in ur core im presuming your core is way too big. 

so your both noobs smile

"It's very quiet on the political arena. I wish someone would stir up some trouble!"

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,555
  • Tag points: 90

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

wow! Canderous! smile

~*✠ ]PW[ Forever ✠*~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

14 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

well we signed with 60 core systems each, yea maybe too much tongue

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

15 Reply by Fudgeh (edited by Loth 11-Aug-2012 04:01:50)

  • Posts: 3,681
  • Tag points: 3

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

Warning for trolling and spamming

" If the world flips you a Jeffrey, stroke a furry wall.. "

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

-1 Tag Points

  • Posts: 1,799
  • Tag points: 6

Re: Attacker Right & Wrongs

> Kollop wrote:

> Doing early raids on other fams has become a strategy, it can work on a fam having something to lose. But I don't understand that small fams often fall into this trap giving free plts as payment, when they just have to build 20 trannies and 40 soldiers and take the next expo wave the big bully fam will send within few hours...





WORD!

DH (ave/\/\an

0 Dislike 0 Post Points