Francis Tabernac
-
Posts
312 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Francis Tabernac
-
-
I take that for a compliment!
And yet it's everyone else that's the troll, the griefer, and the one trying to ruin the game for others. Naturally.
Like I said, folks: the community has brought this on themselves, and here's yet another shining example of how.
-
1
-
-
You might actually be the most obnoxious of the lot, which I have to say is quite impressive. Keep up the good work, I guess?
-
4
-
-
I'll miss this part of the NN forum, even if half of it is people begging to have bounties placed on them to feel important
Bloody Hound is the real victim of this, people!
-
I have to admit, I've gotten a sort of perverse kind of entertainment from watching the worst offenders show up in here to lament how everyone else has brought about the ruin of the NN forums.
You people have had all the time needed to smarten up and, surprise surprise, it just went further and further downhill. The community brought this upon themselves by being so immature that they couldn't handle a barely-semi-moderated forum without bickering like children. I guess you'll have to stick to patting yourselves on the back in absurd Suggestion posts where you accuse those you constantly troll of being the trolls themselves, and trying to grief players with inexcusable Tribunal threads to get them punished for not breaking any rules.
This is what happens when mommy and daddy get fed up with the mess and take away your toys, because you won't clean up after yourself. Congratulations, folks; you have nobody to blame but yourselves.
-
1
-
-
and because your french KuroNyra ill put 50,000 on ye as i need some more blue names fer me list! (Plus i don't like the french)
To be fair, though, who does?
-
1
-
-
I like the idea in general - yes, Navy ships would be well-maintained daily but there's only so much that can be done - but the idea of weathering slowly increasing with the 'days at sea' function is what I like most. Just a nice little cosmetic addition.
-
2
-
-
Im probably an extreme minority here, but i haven't heard a word of english in voice chat or seen any in battle chat during major engagements in months and i don't speak spanish. I don't mind as its fairly easy to see and react to whats happening around me, but waay down the road it may not be a bad idea. At the very least it would give a player some idea of who to follow and potentially what tack to sustain if that player does not speak the language. Its not something i would expect in the near future.
Indeed, I'm surprised there's not more support for this from nations with heavily mixed languages spoken. It's not a perfect system, obviously, but then "not being perfect" isn't a good reason not to test it out since that's precisely why we're here in the first place. If it turns out to cause more grief than help then it's easy enough to remove later.
-
1
-
-
That map also demonstrates why Australia, being so far north of the UK and the Scandinavian countries, is known for its bitterly cold climate and rich arctic ecology. It's also the last safe habitat for polar bears, who are otherwise suffering from the effects of global warming.
-
3
-
-
And don't even try to defend yourself, everybody know you LOVE to use Renomee and fast ship to stay away from the ennemy even if they are cutter.
You really ought to stop throwing this out there as if it's some dire accusation. For one, raiding with fast ships is not only a valid tactic, it's a sensible one; there's really nothing wrong with it. For another, some of your very favourite fellow nationals have used this tactic extensively (to the point of refusing to group with anyone whose Renommee was not kitted out only for speed and nothing else because they may not be able to escape otherwise), and used them almost exclusively for mission-ganking (usually Snows and Mercuries) while France was still fighting the Dutch. That was the least underhanded thing done back then, in fact
So really, save your adorable tears and find another ridiculous reason to criticise people you disagree with. That one probably hits pretty close to home for some of your very own allies
-
Trader Snow vs Frigate & Bellona.
Good fight tonight to British GNF clan. I thought my bounty was up. After a long chase, and being severely demasted, my Trader Snow "Stern Camped" the Frigate (Bellona was left downwind...the escape-o-meter does not yet have the Frigate or Bellona on it...so I guessed upwind incorrectly). Due to inactivity, the fight was broken off (The frigate forgot to fire I guess, after chasing me for 15 minutes...so I exited).
None the less, good fight GNF ... good fight.
GRIM
PS - France, all this happened right outside Grand Anse
The Brits are HERE!How can this be? I read on here that we're British lapdogs and working directly for them! Somebody get the Ombudsman on the horn!
-
Every time you write a comment, I spend 5 minutes just watching your avatar. It's.. calming.. for some odd reason...
Do I need counseling? :s
Hah, I've used it for years, because it never fails to at least mildly amuse. It comes from a brilliant animated short film by Don Hertzfeldt called "Rejected". Glad you enjoy it, sir!
-
Okay, let's play the "burden of proof" game, lol
Where do I tell anyone to play by my invented rules or leave? I am not even Danish or Swedish
Full quotes, please, if you will.The argument is that the only limitation placed on the few (just do not attack ports of a nation that your nation has negotiated a peace with) is acceptable given that doing so is an infringement of the right of 600 other players to play the (diplomacy) game the way that THEY want. It is a classic case of the interest of the many outweighing the interest of the few.
You're welcome. But as you said, cute attempt. Something something dark side something hypocrisy.
-
1
-
-
privateers worked for the nation. not against it.
They worked for the government, in whatever form that took, which you are not.
-
As many others already have stated, not up to us to do so. It's your job.
Hey man, don't go feeding him that burden of proof cake! You no-good troll, you!
-
CAPITAL LETTERS MAKE MY POINT FOR ME.
I made a whole page worth of arguments why the "We just want to play the game whatever way we see fit" argument and the "the majority is dictating us how to enjoy the game! we just want some PvP!" arguments are unfounded, because there ARE plenty of ways to enjoy the game at its fullest without pissing off the entire player community.
The counter argument was "any concession I have to make (such as turning Pirate if you are playing as one) is unacceptable, because I am right and oppression and .... well... because oppression"
So do not feed me the "burden of proof" cake
Your argument was that if everyone just did as you wanted then they wouldn't be restricted except in the ways you'd restrict them, and they could do whatever they wanted except for some of the things they may want. That's not logic. It's also ridiculous.
Let me explain, for the kids in the audience, what logic actually is, since so many of you clearly don't understand: Logic does not make something right or wrong, correct or incorrect. Logic does not support an argument in that way. Logic is merely a tool to prove internal consistency within an argument. The fact that you contradict yourself repeatedly says nothing about whether or not it's correct either, though logic proves that it's an invalid argument. See how that works? You're welcome.
The "burden of proof cake" is entirely separate, as I'm sure you're bright enough to understand. See, this ridiculous level of argumentation is why I stopped responding in the first place.
-
Can you provide proof that it isn't?
You're the one making the accusation, so the burden of proof is on you.
"You stole that ham!"
"No I didn't."
"Prove that you didn't!"
....
I stopped commenting a while ago, saying that this is basically shouting into the wind. It's quite clear that this hasn't changed. If you don't obey the wishes of the self-proclaimed "majority leaders" then you're immediately a troll and out to only ruin the fun for everyone. Ignore the fact that this has been going on for over a month and the world hasn't ended for these darlings, no, that's immaterial! You're still ruining the game for them! Somehow, because reasons! Nevermind that the ones employing trollish tactics to make you play the way they want are the self-proclaimed "majority leaders" themselves, while they accuse you of doing it instead. No, also immaterial! Because logic!
One thing this thread has certainly taught me, at least: the vast majority of you don't actually know how logic works
-
Yeah, without spoken tone it can be tricky, to be sure. And I could be wrong, but judging from his usual posts I think he was kidding around with ya.
Edit: Ah there you go, he beat me to it while I was responding!
-
So what do you want me to do?
Be rude, curse and insult people?
I think he was joking and pointing out that you've actually been clear and polite despite the non-stop accusations of the opposite, no worries. Kind of a "if you're going to be accused of it, you may as well just do it, ha ha" thing. If I'm wrong then nevermind
-
....a game of guessing each other's port timers, and about as exciting as peeling potatoes for a living.
Mmmm, potatoes.
-
So you are saying that if the smaller nations would just give up all their ports away, they would have more fun?
And that's the level of argumentation we've come to expect on this forum. Not trying to point you out in particular Dumu, whoever you are, you're just a recent example of a much larger problem of people arraying armies of strawmen about them to burn down rather than actually engage questions. Why respond to what was said when you can twist it into almost its opposite and then argue badly against that instead?
At this point it's just shouting into the wind, so I'm done. Good luck, folks.
-
It's just lovely how he argued himself into this corner
The Brits are the last of several reasons France got beaten so badly so quickly. You just became a convenient excuse to try to disguise shame.
-
5
-
-
Naval Action is a game that pits nations against nation, not clan vs clan. Upon choosing a nation to serve you are automatically placed on a "team" that has members that you did not choose. Unlike Eve, where all "nations" are simply conglomerations of allied clans, the nation system of NA puts you immediately into a team that you can't control. Its hard to respect those clans that want to go do their own thing, caring little about the hard work that the nation as a whole has put into its progress and defense and showing little respect for the months of behind the scenes negotiations, friendship development, strategy organization, and alliance decisions that have been made. The nation doesn't benefit from of these "rogue" clans.
Councils are often blamed for being controlling but how are rogue clans not? Councils at least can point to a cooperation between most clans within the nation. Rogue clans, by being disinterested in cooperation essentially force the change of national policy by countering it whenever able and therefore forcing their idea on others by getting in the way of all agreements.
On the other hand, a council that tries to order instead of persuade is equally as guilty. As the OP said, councils have no official authority. They have no right to order one group to do something. Any councils mission is to unite players by persuasion and to get as many people involved as possible so that the country can be united which ultimately makes the country stronger. The nation doesn't benefit from a group that assumes that because it is bigger than any other organization that the nation has to listen without question to what they are told to do.
A few points in this to address:
"It's hard to respect those clans that want to go do their own thing..." why? Actually the real question should probably be "why should I give a damn that you don't?" but really, why would it be hard to? Because they "[care] little about the hard work that the nation as a whole..." ah, so you can't respect them because they're not grateful enough to you for all of your hard work? Would you respect these clans more if they made sure to give you the proper tip o' the hat and tug o' the forelock? Bear in mind here, I'm not speaking only about you specifically, but generally about the folks on that side of this little debate. It comes across as astoundingly arrogant. "I've done all of this work for the nation, and you don't respect it by playing a different way."
"Councils are often blamed for being controlling but how are rogue clans not?" For starters, no member of DRUNK, or RNON, or even my clan has ever come here and told every other player of the faction that they're vile, terrible people out to ruin the game for everyone *stomps foot* for trying to make peace. When France decided that defending its ports was just too darned hard I agitated to continue fighting, and was roundly condemned for it. So what? I chose to do so anyway, and guess what; the Dane-Norwegians didn't say "oh, sweet Jesus, those guys are still fighting us? STEAMROLL AWAY BOYS!" No instead they've thanked us as we actually continued to engage in PvP. We've never demanded that everyone else play our way. We've never tried dragging unwilling participants into fights by proximity-tagging. We've never gone and trolled them across multiple forums, including their recruiting threads, though lord knows there's plenty of dirt to throw out there. We've certainly never started actual goddamn Tribunal posts to get them punished for breaking no rules. I'd say that's a pretty good start on how they're different.
"On the other hand, a council that tries to order instead of persuade is equally as guilty. As the OP said, councils have no official authority. They have no right to order one group to do something. Any councils mission is to unite players by persuasion and to get as many people involved as possible so that the country can be united which ultimately makes the country stronger. The nation doesn't benefit from a group that assumes that because it is bigger than any other organization that the nation has to listen without question to what they are told to do." I could not more thoroughly agree. You know what's actually quite sad? I'd have gone along with the peace and made the best of it, at least for a time, while enjoying playing the role of agitator if the immediate response hadn't been so vehement and vitriolic that I decided I no longer wished to be associated with that particular bunch. Most of us in this current situation are here because the "we want peace" bunch are just so wildly, unbelievably poor at actual discussion. Between the petty name-calling, the mind-boggling hypocrisy and the shamefully poor attempts at engaging one another in civil bloody conversation, the whole thing's become quite an embarrassment.
At the end of the day though, Vllad summed things up quite accurately when he noted that this is not, in fact, a diplomacy game. In its current state it is a game of pure action, with all nations permanently at war with one another. While players are welcome to play the meta-game to whatever extent they please, they need to bear in mind that they're playing by rules they're inventing only for themselves when they do so, and they're in no way binding for anyone else. If some other player doesn't feel like stepping in line and following your orders then tough luck, sweetheart. Move on. As I've mentioned before (and I speak generally here, not specifically to Johnny Reb), if you're enjoyment of the game rests on whether other players do as you say, then I pity you.
Edited for formatting.
-
2
-
-
Entire nations? I don't know, honestly. Maybe the Spaniards? They're kind of a silly bunch on the whole, who knows. It's generally just a couple of clans here and there.
-
Eh, I can certainly see the appeal of that, having played EVE for ages too. I think a lot of the appeal to this is to sail under the historical flavour and auspices of these particular nations, though. What people fail to realise is that we're just ship captains. When it comes to the actual National diplomatic situations of the historical setting we're nobodies. What would make the most sense to me is that the Devs would occasionally say "the King of X and the Queen of Y have declared war" and then we fight it out, because that's how things would have really gone. Nobody would have given a damn if Captain Soandso of the HMS Carebear wanted peace.
Edit to add: Just to reiterate the appeal of Dev/Admin-run diplomatic standings. It would solve the whole issue of "oh my God we're gonna lose all of our ports don't ruin the game for everyone!" because once a nation gets hammered, the show-runners just say "Well, King X has sued for peace, you're no longer at war." and then turn around and have two other countries declare war against a nation that's gotten too big for its britches. Takes the ego out of it for our adorable little wanna-be Kings in the game, which can only help. It takes away the ability to fight against great odds that a lot of people are also after, to some extent, but there's no reason separate mechanics for that can't be added to. OW combat but no possibility to attack ports for X amount of time because of peace accord, etc etc. I'm gonna stop editing the same post to add little bits now
-
1
-
The Brits are HERE!
National news reforms - Important
in National news
Posted · Edited by Francis Tabernac
I was upset, because this forum has so much great content, but yeah I was probably more condescending than necessary. Fair enough. Believe me, I wasn't gloating; it's a shame that it had to go this way.