rsoxbronco1

You won't be missed.

Declaring eternal victory over CSN, even in disbandment.

Well there's a complete lack of MI6 in the top 20 alliances by tech... EDIT: I'd like to take this moment to declare Doom House victory over the forces of Anarchy Inc WE DID IT GUYS!

Every time someone puts Duncan King as their all time FA choice, a small helpless alliance is extorted for tech.

The fix is in!

Any alliance that refuses to accept terms doesn't deserve peace anyway. It's a system, and all systems are open to abuse. The current system is imperfect, but unless a new system is guaranteed to improve things, any change is likely an unnecessary one. MI6 just came out of nowhere because they had well known leadership and a half-way catchy theme. They shouldn't have to pay for the privilege that we all enjoy because we got here first.

I'll use a historical example of viceroys: Say I'm the leader of the NPO AA. I'm just wrapping up my war on Legion and I want to exert control over them. In this version, admin has already outlawed viceroys, so I can't control their forums, but their ingame alliance is fair game because it's entirely IC and run through cybernations.net Instead of sending Zha (was it zha?) to their forums, I have zha running their AA. Someone gets out of line on the boards while they're under terms? Expelled and open to attack. Just some really basic thinking, but entirely believable.

The original intent was to stop people from demanding control of a non-CN property. You run into all sorts of legal issues when you demand access and control over something paid for IRL. In-game AAs have no costs associated with them and, despite their control by players, are (for all intents and purposes) the property of whatever company or person(s) own Cyber Nations. As they are owned by the game, they are technically part of the game. Not to say it will be allowed, but it's an entirely different animal. I know admin originally expected this game to be a fight over senate seats and I would not be at all surprised if this is an attempt to add a new variable to the reasons alliances go to war.

It's not giving up control of something you own, so absolutely. Just wait till "send forged message to entire AA" making it look like a leader is saying something becomes a spy op.

hahahaha PLEASE allow the control of an AA to be achieved through military conquest. Imagine it: Umbrella's AA under the administration of queenhailee edit: CSN under my administration. The Bronies under NG's administration. Now we're getting somewhere

The only real benefit I see from this move is the drama and chaos it will cause. It will certainly be entertaining, but, respectfully, I don't think that ingame drama should be the direct result of something admin does. If people lose their AA? They're going to be tech/land raided. 13 days inactive? Probably still gonna get hit because Christmas only comes once a year. Some people enjoy building and farming tech/infra, some people enjoy destroying and farming tears. (and wow will there be tears) Playing devil's advocate, say I'm a 15k tech nation and there's some inactive infra cow from a neutral alliance currently off AA. Maybe they have a warchest, maybe they don't. One nuke at 20+ days and I've successfully bill-locked them. Not saying it WILL happen, but it's a potential risk. I definitely buy the AA seniority case. I've lost too many nations for it to bother me, and most of MK couldn't care less (AA hopping etc) but for the people who play this game for the stats? They're losing something that makes their nation truly unique. Plenty of nations have tech, or land, or infra, but seniority is different. To have been in an alliance since 2008? It's hard to quantify loyalty, but AA seniority is as close as it gets. I will say, things could get... interesting with ingame leaders in SE. AI's recent drama would have been even juicier if ingame AA leadership was at stake. Are long term, and relatively rare moments drama worth the short term headache? meh (Apologies if I misunderstand something about the change or TE leadership system, I don't play it)

italics don't make your sarcasm more clever.

It's just a MDoAP between two alliances...

It's actually a Mood House.

Can we though? Can we?

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

I wonder if mik checked with QH for a reference. Just think about how the application might have gone if we had actually had access to these references

Congrats! Happy to see this finally come to fruition!

Courtesy of the Oatmeal

tiger please.

I agree, CoJ are a bumbling band of idiots.

I can list the number of alliances that weren't a discredit to eQ on one hand.

How do you manage to tie your shoes in the morning?

Now I'm defending NPO and GATO in the same topic. GATO attacked select targets with careful precision and decisive follow through in the eQuilibrium war. Their wars were methodical, exacting, and tactically well thought out. Their astute strategy of using their strengths and avoiding eQ's strengths was classically well developed. If GATO had shirked some agreements and sided with eQ (something that was hoped for by some parties, thought they'll likely deny it now) they would be basking in the praises and adulation of the same OWF masses who now denigrate them.

credentials please