Virillus

Surprisingly enough, I didn't mean that to be a jab. I just picked a random alliance in that area of the sanction race;)

In less than a full month, GR will be able to shake hands with NATO on our way by, mark my words.

Oh, there will be.

Unless you're Vox, that is. Then they take it every day. Ba dum, tsh.

I wonder if the NPO still recognizes GPA as the official green team alliance.

I'm using the latest version of I.E. And no, I haven't been able to recreate the error, I'll report back if it happens again - Thank you.

I clicked on the "alliance affiliation" button in the "View my nation" screen in Cybernations Tournament edition. What ussually happens is a single window opens at the "Alliance" section of the help index. This time however, literally hundreds of windows opened up, several more opening up every second. I was forced to kill the process in task manager.

I always liked Kaos on a personal level, we were fairly good friends OOC. He did however had a ego the size of a small planet, and he would unilaterally deny any overture that came from another person, be it friend or foe. Working with him as an ally was near impossible, because if his specific ideas were not the ones being implemented he threw a fit. GW2 and GW3 was almost impossible because he and Walford struck down and interefered with any idea that didn't stem from them. And when we at the NAAC tried to teach other alliances how to improve their military, Walford and Kaos would laugh at us and try to put a stop to it, as GATO's methods were "Superior." As for the "Other side." Of course they disliked him, he was the enemy. His personallity and charachter was simply an aside.

Not true. The Pacific Order had that power at one point. When it struck down the NAAC's sanction and replaced it with the Polar Order in a matter of days.

Yeah I do, actually;) Considering I led an 800 man alliance with no anti-ghost programs whatsoever, I might have a wee bit of insight into what you're talking about. The fact is, if your alliance doesn't have the man power to easily deal with minor rogue issues from ghosts then you have far, far bigger issues to deal with then whether or not your score is inflated. And they're not empty score, they take hits for real, active members. And I must be honest here, if you haven't figured out by now that an integral part of inter-alliance warfare is identifying their active/priority nations as targets (something that ghosts make much more difficult) than I don't think you ever will. Do you really know what you're talking about? Also: This race has gotten very interesting. It seems all the alliances are grouping at a mid-strength range and spreading apart very much. It will be excited to see if this changes in the future.

What's wrong with ghosts? They're easier to recruit than unaligned players, and if push comes to shove they make a great meat shield. As long as you're realistic with yourself about your alliances' abilities, they really don't detract at all.

I remember the end of the citrus war. I remember getting pissed at the NPO for attacking the ICSN for only a few members spying;) I remember PWII and LUE Punking everybody by their Declaration of War against... The lack of Fiestas. I remember GWII and GWIII and how much fun it was to orchestrate war with more than 2 thousand people. And how nobody believed us when we said we really were attacking GOONS because we wanted FARK to be free.

Hey Bros, it's been pretty real, all in all.

Edit: Nothing to see here, move along.

You hurt my feelings

Fixed for accuracy;)

As I was typing that I thought to myself: The answer would probably be obvious if I just double-checked. Oh well, getting somebody else to do the work for me is so much more satisfying;)

Out of curiousity. Is the "net gains by colour" Section calculated based on actual gains in each respective colour, or the gains of the alliances in the race within each sphere?

If you're happy - That's all that matters. Doesn't mean we won't still tease you, though:P

Atlantis had excellent growth. In terms of finance programs and recruitment, etc. I don't think anyone would argue that. What we sucked at(and this is an understatement), was internal unity and foreign policy. If you (and the rest of NATO) are happy with your growth, and your achievments in this game, then that's all you need. I (and others) may rag on you from time to time, but the truth is it's only because we're bored and you're an easy target. (And let's be honest, a little back and forth is fun;)) I am honestly glad to hear that you're content with NATO's performance. Atlantis strengths and weaknessess were completely opposite to that of NATO's. (part of the reason for our split) The fact is, NATO played the game better then Atlantis did, well done - I congratulate you. There are many things you can use to hit Chickenzilla with, but using Atlantis doesn't really make much sense.

Chickenzilla's never been one for promptness, he'll get the message eventually;) Where R = Angry Response, and B = Bash 3RX=2B+3 - Solve for X There won`t be anyone who disagrees that Atlantis had issues, that`s not what we`re debating here. I don`t think I`m alone in wondering what Atlantis`diplomatic shortcomings have to do with Chickenzilla`s oberservations on NATO`s stellar growth.

Atlantis has been disbanded for more than 8 months, actually. I'm surprised you didn't notice.

And paypers.

I don't think words can describe how far above your head his comment was.

And they've been delivering.