Velocity111

This is not a technical bug, you've (presumably, since you say you're at war with 2 people and have spied on them both) spied 4 times and are in 2 wars. 4 times is the maximum for 2 wars, regardless of whether or not you're in war with the nations you're spying on. If this is a bug at all, it's bad wording in the error message

You can't upload a custom flag unless 1) you win Cyberrnations tournament edition or 2) you're the leader of an alliance that's large enough (don't recall how large right now) to be able to upload a custom flag

[quote name='Captain Nathan Brittles' timestamp='1341106499' post='3000877'] Actually self-anarchy does explain the spies. You had 800. You then performed a spy op and lost 20 spies. When you went to replace the lost spies you see the game indicates you've lost 32 not 20 spies. That leaves 12 spies unaccounted for which is within the range possible from a defeat alert. Where are you reading you razed the land and not captured it? Just asking since at your level it's unusual to raze the land when capturing is possible and because many players read the reports sent to their opponent for information at their leisure over reading the reports given the player at the time of receiving the result since they're usually in the midst of running a number of attacks. Your opponent's report will always read the land was razed whether you razed or captured it. Even if the land was razed, it's still possible if you were close to the line to go under from your GAs. Soldiers cost you citizens when you buy them (for example, 1 citizen per 100 soldiers). When you dismiss soldiers or in your case lose them in battle, you regain those citizens back. Your losses at your level were likely to be in the 10's of thousands meaning you could have regained several hundred hundred citizens. It's still looking like a self anarchy from here. [/quote] Gaining citizens (by buying infra, stealing land, or otherwise) will not cause you to self-anarchy.... But yeah, it does seem like a self-anarchy or defeat alert from the description. If you hit "confirm deployment," it should tell you whether or not you'll self-anarchy (although if you hit "submit deployment" right away it will not).

Sparta's 30 minute pre-update blitz consisted of 4 wars declared by 2 members. I... is this a war?

[quote name='berbers' timestamp='1340228239' post='2990543'] Hopefully another AA stronger than you doesn't let her on their applicant AA... [/quote] Actually, I am quite looking forward to such an event

The primary takeaway from this thread is that zoom is a superior rogue

Vox Populi

This is amazing and I have to rewrite my view of Umbrella somewhat 3 front war right off the bat let's goooooooooo

[quote name='dejarue' timestamp='1339645411' post='2982755'] That's pretty much just what they did... [/quote] No, I'm pretty sure you would've seen a war much earlier if they did that.

[quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1339644694' post='2982726'] There are only two purposes to a [i]casus belli[/i]: (1) To promote the war in the realm of public opinion. (2) To state the grounds for which the war has been launched. A CB must be one, the other, or both. A CB that is neither is without purpose and we therefore wouldn't do it. You've already agreed that we don't care about the first purpose, so it must be the second. [/quote] The point is if a CB that catered to public opinion was not needed, you could have started a war with "we don't like you." The upside to this style of CB is that you could have declared on CSN whenever you felt like it and the CB would still be relevant, and (presumably) fewer CSN would have escaped into PM. And if there was a leak in OpSec, you could simply call off the attack until later and let them stew in PM for a while. After they came back out, the CB would still be there for you to use.

Article 3: Cancellation Either Party may cancel this agreement. Once one party notifies the other with their intent to cancel, the Pact stays in effect for 10 days. If either party breaks the pact, it is considered null and void.

I recommend Bal Masque

[quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680648' post='2976277'] Check the aid that just came in, sweets. That hasn't updated yet. Unfortunately that % is still near NG's level. [/quote] If you couldn't do better than a 200+ member alliance with your micro I'd be shocked.

[quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680335' post='2976273'] Recently ive left this thread, but the issue came up in #Sovrana so I thought id leave this here to wrap up the WHOLE thread. [/quote] Gee I wonder why you've left the thread Sovrana: 10 / 49 (20.41%)

[quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1337991552' post='2972490'] Yeah but you can nuke every attacking slot at least once a day, IIRC and he has nuked many Deinos nations but no MK nations. Also, with all the rumours saying how well MK is at war, you'd think he'd nuke them rather then deinos. JS. If you only knew... [/quote] How do you nuke every attacking slot at least once a day with 0 nukes? And Deinos was his target, not MK, so I'm not seeing why you'd assume he'd nuke them.