Jump to content

Oktavia

Banned
  • Posts

    469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Oktavia

  • Birthday 10/23/1986

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Oktavia
  • Alliance Name
    The International
  • Resource 1
    Gems
  • Resource 2
    Iron

Recent Profile Visitors

682 profile views

Oktavia's Achievements

  1. [quote name='JimKongIl' date='16 February 2010 - 11:12 PM' timestamp='1266379937' post='2186997'] Yeah lets punish those who get beat down in war. That will teach them. [/quote] The point is, you should be beaten if you have no more infrastructure. Instead you can just sit on 1,000 infra and rebuy it back for $3mil to launch nukes. You deal significantly more damage than you take and its kind of tiresome seeing alliances that have 5-8 nations like this. You're just throwing corpses at them.
  2. [quote name='Haflinger' date='16 February 2010 - 02:03 PM' timestamp='1266346990' post='2185913'] We're throwing ourselves in the fire for principles. When we sign treaties, we honour them. Valhalla is honorbound to defend IRON against FAN per their treaty with IRON. The Valhalla-IRON treaty has a non-chaining clause, so all the other attackers who are only honouring treaties are optional for Valhalla. FAN's not. Your word may not matter much to you, but around here we value it really highly. [/quote] I would say FAN has good (honorable) reasons to be fighting IRON, considering what 1V did to them in the past.
  3. [quote name='Haflinger' date='16 February 2010 - 01:56 PM' timestamp='1266346574' post='2185896'] Well no, it's pretty clear that The International isn't out to destroy Purple. I mean, you've only launched 2 wars on Invicta. [i]Sure.[/i] Everyone knows that FAN is just pulling an OFS; the difference is IRON's even more hated now than GATO was back then, so people think it's OK. [/quote] FAN off IRON doesn't stop the alliances that IRON DOW'd offensively on or were counter DOW'd by from continuing to hammer away. You want FAN off IRON, but that doesn't change the end result even if they do get off and that's what I don't understand. You're just throwing yourselves in the fire when it makes no difference on the TOP & IRON fronts.
  4. You guys are silly to think that our agenda is to destroy the entire Purple Bloc. You're destroying it by yourselves by dragging it on when you're beyond hope and the end result is just more pain. I mean, it's your choice if you want to see your members get ZI'd / bill locked / surrender, and that's nothing to be proud about.
  5. I don't get how instead of losing when you get to ZI, your nation becomes basically god mode. I hate to point fingers, but check out this guys nation here: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=141164 19,000 tech and 1,000 infra.
  6. [quote name='Geoffron X' date='15 February 2010 - 11:51 PM' timestamp='1266295865' post='2184531'] I of course assume that, despite being embroiled in war against the other two Orders, the Global Order of Darkness will continue to protect us from rogues if they do not feel that they need to suspend reparation payments. http://www.cybernations.net/search_wars.asp?searchstring=Declaring_Alliance%2CReceiving_Alliance&search=New%20Pacific%20Order&anyallexact=exact There are quite a few we've either completed reparations with or weren't collecting reparations in the first place. [/quote] Yet their signatures are still on the documents?
  7. Not sure where you came up with 14 out of 15 agreed cause I'm quite some only a handful actually did.
  8. Doe's anyone else feel that after every GW, that the overall battle front is becoming unbalanced because of nations getting beat down? Right now there's literally dozens of nations that sit between 20-40K NS with 1000 infra and 5000-8000 tech plus a WRC. Literally you're bombing an open desert whenever you attack because they simply re-buy themselves up to 1000 infra for less than $3mil. All they do launch nukes, send aircraft, take defeat alerts, and then repeat while dealing massive amounts of damage because of their high tech levels, while taking no lasting damage, and they also sit below 1,000 land so you can't even use Navies on them. You can't win against these kind of nations because they dish out about 2 times the amount of damage they take and their NS doesn't go down because there's nothing left to destroy but tech. I really think there should be harsh penalty for high tech / no infra or tech should be lost at a rate equal to infra / land at high values. What's your guys thoughts about this?
  9. [quote name='Cairna' date='13 February 2010 - 03:14 PM' timestamp='1266092042' post='2179602'] Seriously, everybody saying that GLOF is a great alliance and that they may have made a mistake here, top. GLOF you're a horrible alliance, and a horrible ally. But god is it ever funny. [/quote] They're a bunch of whiners on top of that and likely one of the worst alliances I've had to deal with.
  10. The majority of alliances aren't surrendering unless x alliance surrenders with them as well.
  11. [quote name='ligolski' date='12 February 2010 - 11:23 AM' timestamp='1265991836' post='2177698'] Oh but that's not true! This is the most fun I've had in some time in CN!!! I'll go down fighting, for while our pixels and infras may be destroyed, our hearts stand resolute and our heads held high! [/quote] So how much fun that you only chose the nation fighting four at once?
  12. [quote name='Dontasemebro' date='11 February 2010 - 11:23 PM' timestamp='1265948629' post='2176517'] I think Tyga did it first actually, in GWI. See here: http://spamtheweb.com/ul/upload/270909/11082_Episode3.php [/quote] No way. MK and their "nuclear rogue" policy on NPO started the nuclear revolution.
×
×
  • Create New...