Cirrus

Hi. I want to give some foreign aid to someone. It used to be that there was a $3 million max limit for such gifts, but when I go to input a number the system will let me put whatever I want - even up to several hundred million, and when I click "confirm" it will tell me all is OK. I checked the update log but didn't see anything about removing the limit. Perhaps I didn't check back far enough. Has the $3m limit on aid per transaction gone away?

Haven't read any of the comments, so apologies if I'm repeating what's already been said, but... [quote]In such a context, going after alliances we've never heard of, regardless of size, can be justifiable, if only to get them into the game the rest of us are playing.[/quote] Those folks are playing a different game than you. You have no more moral authority to force them into your version of it than they have to force you to sit in peace mode collecting pixels. Some people just want to see where the nation-building aspects of the game take them. They want to play SimCity, not Civilization. And that's OK. There isn't anything wrong with that. Those people should be allowed to play that game if that's why they're here. The whole point of the neutrality movement was to make it possible for those people to have a place to play their version of the game without being harassed by people interested in a different kind of game. Just pretend that those who play the game differently from you don't exist.

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1280835295' post='2399389'] The same thing will happen with this map. The hard figure of X NS = 1 territory is the flaw. Make it something like a percentage of the total territory instead[/quote] Personally, I think the diagram map I made in 2007 is the most accurate to have been created. I created circle "continents" for each color sphere and then divided each circle into wedge "countries" for each alliance. Circle size was based on the overall NS of the color sphere, and wedge size based on the percentage of the color sphere that each alliance contained. The main problem was that it didn't look much like a map - although this problem could have been solved with some creative artistic license. A secondary problem is that it assumes everyone in a given alliance is on their color, which is obviously not true. [img]http://beyonddc.com/nonweb/mad/MapOfDigiterra-Dec07-600.png[/img]

In honor of the Prism Protection Front's many glorious contributions to robertocivilization, my nation hereby presents as a gift to the PPF this magnificent new national wonder, to be constructed in the heart of Pittsburghistan: [img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4841802574_ea947e707e_b.jpg[/img] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dan-lem2001/4841802574/in/set-72157624610310762/]source[/url] [img]http://farm1.static.flickr.com/61/198348285_a99723b4db_b.jpg[/img] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/scattered/198348285/]source[/url] [img]http://farm1.static.flickr.com/62/201401024_7fba3bbbc5_o.jpg[/img] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/outtacontext/201401024/]source[/url] [img]http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4124/4841786918_393d423c06_b.jpg[/img] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/dan-lem2001/4841786918/]source[/url]

[quote name='Locke' date='19 February 2010 - 11:01 AM' timestamp='1266595284' post='2192076'] White peace is another word for "ceasefire." It has nothing to do with victory or defeat; that is determined statistically, politically, and by whatever other terms may be imposed on top of it. [/quote] This is correct. White peace does NOT NOT NOT mean there wasn't a winner.

Updated. Rok's color is fixed.

Tromp: The real reason for the chart is to see who *isn't* involved, but might still become so.

[quote]Most of those people are not allied to C&G or to TOP[/quote]Just a handy way to ID the sides. We don't seem to have cute catch-all names for the coalitions this time around. SuperComplaints does seem to be starting to catch on for the one, but what about the other? [quote]Why is RoK green again?[/quote]What do you mean?

Nothing too substantial here. Just a quick chart showing the top 50 or so alliances, along with what side they've joined in the current war (if at all). A couple of notes: 1. This is for the TOP front of the war only. For example, RnR is listed as a non-participant even though they are still active on the NSO front. 2. You may notice that alliances are not exactly listed in the correct nation strength order. This is because I did not transcribe any decimal places into the spreadsheet. The purpose is not to list alliances in exact order, but merely to give the list some vague sense of organization. Please do not feel insulted if your alliance is a spot or two below where it should be. 3. Obviously, alliances listed in blue are allied to [b]Complaints & Grievances[/b], while those in red are allied to [b]TOP[/b]. White means they are not in the war as of this writing. (updated Fed 5) [img]http://beyonddc.com/nonweb/mad/CNwarparticipants.png[/img]

Merely a statement of fact. I've nothing else to say.

[quote]Fark refused to give us peace[/quote]My how the tables have turned since GW2.

Opethian's last two are very good.

Fair point. However if NPO will not accept the sort of terms I mentioned nor allow sufficient damage to be caused to its power base (via staying in peace mode), that may still be the best option. However, even then the point wouldn't be permanent war; the point would be to sufficiently weaken NPO's power base. Once that goal was achieved, peace (even white peace) might be granted. The real point is that regardless of whether the means are a negotiated settlement, an active war, or a long campaign of attrition, NPO cannot be allowed to escape this war in any state that allows it continue as a world power.

I'm not going to register on your forum just to post a flag, but here is a quick concept. CN needs moar checkerboard. Hi-res available, etc. It resizes well.

tl;dr - You have to win if you want to make policy.