Jump to content

BringMeTheHorizon

Members
  • Content Count

    1,746
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BringMeTheHorizon

  • Rank
    Cool Beans, Bro
  • Birthday 09/20/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Cool
  • Alliance Name
    Society
  • Resource 1
    Furs
  • Resource 2
    Pigs

Recent Profile Visitors

2,258 profile views
  1. I here by surrender to the forces arrayed against us. Simple, sweet, and not heartfelt at all. You lost in all but saying it. Even if the war stopped tomorrow, you lost. Nothing is at stake here, not even pride. Stubbornness. I applaud you for being stubborn, but being stubborn while surrender, and then working to beat your enemies at a different time is different then being stubborn, and not being able to do anything about it.
  2. I was banned back in 08-12 for having multi nations, but I also had five nations from 07-09. Even on the same network, you could have multi nations. It's a joke that moderation even considers banning people for multi nations, as it's so easy to multi. Have a phone? a gaming system with access to internet? Tablet? Desktop? Laptop? There's five nations right there. Moderation can not stop anyone from multi'ing. That they think they can is sad, see Rota, War Pigs, FFC, and other AA's throughout the history of the game that have been years old before they were deleted for multi's.
  3. Two of our members attacked SWF on 4/11 . Now our charter says "if a raid goes bad you forfeit your right to be defended, or you must deal with the consequences." If SWF had come to us, sent a PM, or anything we'd have said alright there yours have at it. Or had some other talk about restitution. That was not that case. I went to be proactive, and mentioned to him about our attacks, with theirs in kind, and what we could do to stop it. He responded with well stop this with reps for your initial attacks. That I shouldn't be surprised they attacked in return. I told him if he came to us before attacking our other members that could have been a viable option. Then I said we can have peace for all nations involved with reps to the two nations attacked, and our nations that were attacked, then we can have peace. That offer was thrown back at me without any new offer. Though we understand that every AA has the right to defend their members from a raid as they see fit, we have no qualms with that. So SWF should have no qualms with or decision to attack them as an alliance on the while, just as they attacked our members in return. We here by declare war on SWF http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/We_f822d2_366710.jpg
  4. GTA 5 is a very forgettable game, CN is not. It takes more than picking up a controller and moving a joystick around, shooting guns with a button, and stealing cars by pressing Y. CN takes more time to learn than five seconds, you can pick it up, get intrigued in the history of the game, or how to even grow your nation. Of course you can click a view buttons to buy tech, land, and infra. Then a few improvements, now if you don't know which order or even the cost of things it'll take you a long time to get anywhere. Now we can also shoot guns, but takes a little bit more than a few buttons, especially if you compare wonders, and improvements. It takes a lot more to figure out if you can win a GA one on one, instead of looking at someone on the road, and shooting. We don't steal cars in this game, but we do steal tech, and land. Which comes off a lot harder for us if we get caught, or the other person fights back. In most games now-a-days you can try to steal something, get killed you start off with 99% of what you left when you died. If you attack someone, or raid to steal the person fights back you lose a lot more than 1% of your accruals. I'm glad you can take our you immaturity here, and try to mature in real life, but the reasons you are playing are probably in the lowest percentile of all the reasons. As well as the reason why you think other people play.
  5. Franz, and I are polar opposites in how we handle our business, but I wouldn't change the merging of Riot, and Lavender. For about a year I don't think anyone can say that we weren't the most active from disbanding an AA, being nuked by Kaskus a month straight, or forcing NSF to pay us reps. Being attacked by AZTEC was fun in and of itself, though i'm not sure if we actually out damaged Aztec in the first round of wars or not. We definitely had the nuke advantage in our NS ranges. I've always maintained that raiding does not force players out of the game, it's being in large AA's that do nothing, that have more of an impact on player retention. Having one global war every year is still doing nothing for the vast majority of the AA's out there. That's not even to say we need a war every month, three or six months. Just something more than running, and hiding from playing the game.
  6. In real life I would never go to someones house, break in, steal a phone or a tv, then walk out after they saw me. In this game I (used to) raid all the time, as an extra means of tech/land/money. Articulate enough? How are you different from your OCC to your IC persona? There is a line we can't really see when we have a nation that is an extension of ourselves. If we run it how we want to then how can we ever say we are Rping. Unless the ruler name, and nation name are used to play a different character that the person can actually disseminate between themselves, and the character we will never have true RP in this world. It will always be a divide between IC/OCC that we see. Actually I think irc/skype/facebook is the problem for the game, and how the game was played. Sure it made things faster, but it also makes it a little too close to the real word as Instant Messaging/Texts. How I post on forums, and other written platforms that need to be posted is a lot different than irc, or skype. It creates, and fosters friendships based on your real world self. If you start talking about hey I just played this game, or I want this game, any suggestions? Oh the weather here in New Jersey sucks, very cold. It takes away from you talking about, we were raided, attacked, or finding trade circles. It's like texting a friend IRL. Skype is just as worse, I use my full real name on skype, because I also use it to talk to family members states away. I also have three friends on facebook from this game, that i've meet in real life, it's nice to keep up with them. Though if I ever needed I could still attack them, which I feel like i'm one of the few from the masses that can put aside real world friendships over a game. At least on the CN Forums you can be warned for bringing stuff up that relates to the real world, which is great. But unless that follows over to irc (self imposed or alliance culture imposed) we will keep losing the IC divide. I mean even here we have a section where we can post what we're listening to etcetc, and on alliance forums it's more informal, and there are large portions dedicated to Spam, and real world activities. Then aa's want to get people on irc for better communication, which leads to getting to know people. We live in a world where instant communication, and our personal lives are always on show (at least younger generations, and slightly older generations) where we're ok with letting other people know we're doing. It's a culture as society that we have that makes it ok to show our personal life, and to get to know people over electronic communications. Why should CN/IRC/Forums be any different just because we have a username? If we are to truly think of ourselves as leading a nation, and doing what's best for our nation/alliance, we can't also have a huge real world culture brewing on our forums, or lines of communication. Until that happens, which it never will, we keep having this divide between players.
  7. I actually think it wouldn't lead to what your advocating, and has lead to what it would lead to now. This is a game, and I think most people know this, so even when we RP anything remotely close to an RP, in the back of our heads is "this is a game". In any game you can run forward start shooting, die then respawn. IE go nuke rogue go to ZI, then come back up again. If people say this as real life, or an extension of themselves (then we wouldn't really be RPing) then maybe we can have something like what you are saying. But then... Even if we Rp'd on a set of real world beliefs; I'm an anti-gun, liberal, who is accepting to subcultures of varying views. Even if I RP in CN what I believe in real life, do I stay away from FAN? Do I stay away from small government AA's with only a few installed (non-elected) governments? Or do I accept them, as I accept others in real life? We are all taught to be accepting in real life, or most of us are. Unless you are to completely suspend what you believe in real life to be acceptable just to RP a game, it doesn't really work what you want to see. Because if that was the case none of my friends would own guns, non of my friends would be conservative, and none of my friends would have disdain for subcultures. That is not true at all. My friends fall on the scale from communists, to new-age hippies, to gun totting wanna-be red necks. Even if I RP'd with an ideal to be an idealist that I follow closely, such as tech raiding, or freedom of choice / freedom over your nation to do what you want. So that means tech raid if you want, but what if we become friends, as well as share the same path/situation in the game do I say no i'm sorry you have your nations offer peace after every GA. Just because someone doesn't follow a strict moral, idealist guide line that my AA was founded upon doesn't mean I shouldn't interact or ally them. Which in turn doesn't bring down the level of discourse, politics, or game play. It's just simply not attainable to have something like that in this game, to have absolute moral, and ideal set guidelines for you to RP. Or even loose morals/ideals to RP. Or no morals to RP. I have a question. In your example of speech. Would you ever talk to, look at, help, or hold open a door for a person from that country that disallowed free speech? What if you were talking to them one day because you bumped into them on the subway, train, or store; then found out that they were from that country. Would you be like 'or nah', and walk away from them forever once you became friends? What if that happened on irc, or a forum. That when you were a diplomat sent over to a random AA's forum, and started making friendships not really looking into their ideals, morals, or out look in the game/life. Then what if you became FA gov, then high gov. Would you suspend those friendships you made before you knew what they were all about? Or would you look past that, and say hey I like you, you are good people, let's defend each other should someone come attack you. Even if it's over you having gag orders on the OWF.
  8. You have a decent idea, which many AA's used to do. Though I think it falls flat especially when we don't all have the same definition of role-play. Are we supposed to RP like all the folks do in the sub-sections of these forums? Or are we simply RPing by default once we make a nation? What's the difference from RPing yourself in a cyber game, or RPing some fictional character. Even if we take the definition of role-play, albeit searched on google, "participation in a role-playing game.". Aren't we, as i've always felt, automatically RPing as soon as we make a nation? I'd like to think that i'm not alone in saying i've never played another "RP" game except cybernations, so how can we expect people who don't RP to RP at someone else's definition. Also, while we're at it, does aligning yourself (if you don't tech raid) with all those who don't tech raid make your alliance more secure or less secure? Just because you have morals, doesn't mean you can't, or don't have to ally yourself to someone who doesn't share the same morals. As long as you are keeping your alliance safe, secure, and growing; is that really wrong?
  9. That's what I was talking about. If I get my roommates to join, and they help spy on an alliance for me. Or they tell me that their alliance is attacking someone etcetera. How is that policeable by mods? If it were my friends. We'd spy on people and get !@#$ $%&@ed up.
  10. With the new rules, how long do you think it'll take for someone to get to the "Same network nations, shared information with each other" CB? Does this change anything about how your alliance will vet people, or how they allow people into their AA?
  11. I would, but people are to afraid of saying the wrong thing, and getting their alliance attacked, or allies to drop them. I think I post enough, and fall into the category of people not liking when I post on the OWF, or people think i'm an attention whore. I don't think that at all, and use the OWF as it should be, to tell the world that doesn't know what's going on that they should.
  12. I wouldn't say the quality of of topics has gone down, more-so stayed the same. The amount of topics has changed, so at least you'd be able to get the gem of a topic, or thread back a few years ago, even if it was surrounded by a lot of other threads. Now-a-days you just have them far and few in between, but you have the same amount of other topics, because that's what the OWF has always been. The culture of the OWF has changed as well, you have less, and less people posting because everyone deigns the thread irrelevant, and unimportant, especially if they have no idea what is going on. The forums are for everyone to use, not just a select few, or just for a select few to make announcements. If you look at the other areas of the forums, they're alive, and well, though the (what we deem as the OWF) has slowly been dying.
  13. Being shown logs, and putting them onto a blog in a community that he plays in showing him that he wont associate or join a apart of this community because of his feelings towards people with autism? Yes, i'm bullying him.
  14. Calls and texts? Lolwut? No one tried to get you z-lined either, but keep trying to down play your hate for autistic people
×
×
  • Create New...