Seriously?

Shame on our Husaga aka Bosnia Soldier. He is the main key in this attack !!!

I am failing to understand what is the issue? All small/dead countries are conquered by some strong countries, so why attacking Ireland is so different? The way i understand these games is to increase your population and this task is depended on citizens of that country, if you are fail in that task there is nothing to blame anyone. The primary structure of the game is build for wars, which is supported by economical and political module. So why there is always buzz when something goes wrong with Albania or Ireland or any Small country like that?

Maybe St0L3n one way to build a country is to improve it first?... something I have been doing over time. Despite the Admins best efforts to destroy it with Missions and Tournaments.

Join Japan, Join NOW !!!

Common dude now we gonna blame that too on Admins? Seriously?

lol @ Tatsuo

My issue is that parts of Missions etc destroy small countries not that Missions in themselves are bad. eg RW medals... now will I start a RW in a Romanian colony or an Irish one? anyway you clearly have a different outlook imho from the security of citz of the top country, I suppose we could leave Ireland and other small countries and we end up with what 5 maybe 6 countries? or space can be made to help smaller countries develop and grow. We disagree on this I know and thats fine but I can still make our case.

Obviously every game has it own structure, the task are meant to completed and equivalent for each player and community. Now if the argument is only that you or me or our community were unable to complete those task it does not mean that the game plan is wrong it simply means we are fail to achieve it due to x/y/z reason and all we can do is work it around. The task and missions are the reason of good wars and healthy competitions.

However this structure can be changed and as I said it is the type of mission that is my issue but yes missions are important to keep interest.

The Great, shame on You.

@St0L3n Some players like to play a part of loyalty to there country... and not being able to employ people to produce and not having a capital at all is very devastating on a country.

Ironically, both of you, Winston and St0L3n are right. Small countries have right to exist, bigger countries have right to attack every other country in the game. Ireland and USA (and many other small countries in the game) have similar issue - how to survive in the game of big countries. But, there is a solution. First step, we need to adopt more revolutionary way of thinking, limit our motivation to play in old style and try to be more pragmatic. Second, we should stop ourselves to depend of the mercy of bigger countries and rely on our strength. In the end, we should be able to understand that we can together play much important role in the game, and abandon previous role of statists and observers. I am inviting you to discuss about our opportunities in the game, if you are interested.

I would like to see an e-something game where war is not the center, but the political and social module. In that game war could be something costly and destructive as it is in RL, so most players would not profit from it. a thing like an UN or diplomatic sanctions could be interesting too. In that game structure there will be fewer incentives for attacking smaller countries. Or at least the wars would be more interesting, since its effects will be more impacting than bonus losses and gold from medals

Hey Pony that is an awesome suggestion but unfortunately not helpful to me now