Moridin

He didn't leave it out, the radius is half the diameter, which he said to find, square, and multiply by pi.

I think it used to be capped at 1 million, but my memory is a bit fuzzy so if another old player can correct me please do so.

When I joined the NPO in August 2006, getting your harbor aid was a big deal. That was really the only aid you expect to get. There later was an aid fall where I got $90,000! I was blown away.

[quote name='Tiberius C Nero' date='06 June 2010 - 01:32 AM' timestamp='1275813112' post='2326070'] In the swine flu log with Hizzy I gave him my IP address, I also gave Moridin and Voytek my email address. and Bros2 told me I was PZI. after the app was denied he denied it. [/quote] I don't recall you ever giving me your email address. At any rate, just to be sure, I looked over the logs I shared with MK and there's nothing in there about your email.

Congratulations [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/happy.gif[/img] You already appear to have a moose infestation though.

I was expecting the flag to be more like [url=http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a110/Numenorean5/800px-Ww.jpg]this[/url], instead of something that looks like the NPO flag. Either way, congratulations.

I'm curious why so many evidently think this is a new low for GGA, when just days ago Brookbank's leadership was being criticized from every corner of the world. While I confess I would not shed any tears over a GGA disbandment, it seems that with anything short of that, the GGA will always receive flak no matter what they do. Far be it from me to [i]defend[/i] the GGA, but a little more consistency in the criticism of the alliance would be good to see.

As much as we disagreed, I still have a great deal of respect for you, so farewell and good luck man. You will be missed.

Given how the OP expounds the virtues of IRC, I am curious why IRC was deemed an unsuitable medium for asking UPN these questions.

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='15 May 2010 - 02:20 AM' timestamp='1273915220' post='2298537'] Maybe i should rephrase or add a disclaimer that it is a trait i find admirable, instead of it sounding like i wanted everyone to find it admirable. Apart from that, i get uncomfortable with the idea of people trying to set the standards as regards someone else's actions, specially in a world like ours. To tell someone that they ought to act in a particular manner just because everyone is doing it that way, is not acceptable to me. Which is more of a problem for me than it would seem, since in a way that is exactly what the Grämlins are doing as well. And so are the rest of us to them, by calling them names like insane or whatever since they are not acting in a fashion that we deem to be the normal one. What one would refer to as unreasonable behavior, might seem to be entirely reasonable to the one committing it, depending on the frame of reference and weightage assigned to the various parameters in the decision making processes. Edit 2 : Just to be fair, IRON is being steadfast and stubborn too so admire that as well. heh Edit 3: and DAWN as well . [/quote] I am not telling the Grämlins that they ought to act in a particular manner on the basis that the rest of us act in that way; rather, I am telling the Grämlins that they ought [i]not[/i] to act in a particular manner. There is a spectrum of acceptable patterns of behavior and the manner in which Grämlins is acting is not on this spectrum. I recognize that this spectrum is one of my own creation and that Grämlins (clearly) believes their own actions to be acceptable, but anyone who finds Grämlins' behavior unacceptable should have no reason to praise the alliance simply for having its own moral compass and following where the needle points. There is nothing wrong with setting standards to which we hold both ourselves and others. In determining what courses of action are worthy of admiration and respect, the only option is to use a single set of values about what is just and what is not; if we judged a person's actions by their own moral compass, inevitably we would arrive at the conclusion that everyone's actions are worthy of praise because everyone believes that what they are doing is right.

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='15 May 2010 - 01:59 AM' timestamp='1273913928' post='2298510'] That what we may think of their current direction and methods is not a concern to them is also part of their identity. That they are sticking to it whether out of belief, sheer cussedness or stubbornness is something that can be respected, regardless of what one's declared political position might be. [/quote] Why? Why is stubbornness something to be respected when their stubbornness amounts to a refusal to act in a fashion that even remotely resembles reasonable behavior? It reminds me of the [url=http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_TRcQCuP2b5A/R6vug7mgzPI/AAAAAAAABDI/bo6ZwwAMh_c/s400/consistency.jpg]phrase[/url] "consistency is only a virtue if you're not a screw-up". 'Staying the course' is only admirable when there is something admirable about the course itself.

Yeah, I remember Count da Silva. Maybe he stopped coming to CN once there was no longer a Vox to complain about.

Oh god no.

Thanks for posting those Schattenmann. I've lost my logs from 2008 and prior, so it's nice to be able to take a trip down memory lane once in a while. Also, man, we were really dumb to let Doppelganger into the channel.

Same as Cheyenne, I didn't sign up exactly. I was one of the (admittedly less prominent) people that quit the game in early August, most of whom ended up helping found Vox. One evening, someone (I think it was either Chickenzilla or Doitzel) told me to join a channel which had Doitzel, Starfox, etc., in it, at which point I was informed they were going to declare war on GGA and Valhalla the next day. So I said what the hell, sounds like fun, and climbed aboard. I don't think anybody at the time had any belief that it was some sort of righteous crusade or that it would turn into something meaningful, it was just a way to go out of the game with a bang.

[quote name='F15pilotX' date='24 April 2010 - 09:41 PM' timestamp='1272170486' post='2273893'] Doesn't look like you did either, from your first post. [/quote] You're right, I didn't. As I said, I shouldn't have assumed that the NPO member had checked to see if the person was an actual applicant.

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='24 April 2010 - 09:03 PM' timestamp='1272168171' post='2273823'] I talked to NPO before I did a thing. Check that nation's seniority on "New Pacific Order aplicant" btw. He's not actually an applicant. [/quote] My apologies then. I suppose I shouldn't have assumed the NPO would do any rudimentary research before rushing to the boards to publicize this.

Strictly speaking, I think they're only obligated to protect "New Pacific Order Applicant", not "New Pacific Order Aplicant". Someone with the Instrument of Surrender handy can feel free to correct me. Still, poor showing by Athens.

[quote name='Fallen_Fool' date='23 April 2010 - 02:26 AM' timestamp='1272014760' post='2271870'] 700 tech from FAR represents a +7% increase in damage without a WRC or a 14% increase in damage with a WRC. That is, of course, if the technology is lumped in to a single nation, which I find highly unlikely. Instead it was probably scattered into several different nations engaged in nuclear war, all of whom will probably lose it fairly quickly given the fact that every nuke knocks out a base 50 tech. So basically what is my point? 700 tech from FAR is neglible amount which will do little to turn back the floodgate of damage inherent nuclear warfare or somehow turn the tide. Hell, even if you add in the 500 tech from DAWN/IRON et al's cobelligerents (MCXA: 150, NATO: 100, League of Soviet Nations: 100, Invicta: 50, Legion: 50, and Nusantara Elite Warriors: 50 ), then Gremlins still won't have a sizable advantage. [/quote] Actually, you overstate the value of the tech. The tech is not even all going to nations engaged in war (I don't care to look through the aid screen to see just how much of it is), and besides that, even if it were all lumped into a single nation (which is impossible from one round of aid) that 700 tech from FAR equates only to an extra 21 infra and 7 tech in damage per nuke, amounting to a grand total of less than 50 extra infra and 16 tech per day - a 14% increase from the [i]base[/i] damage but far from 14% of the real damage. A round of $3 mil aid packages would recoup that loss. Still, I agree with your overall argument; while I wouldn't personally sell to the Grämlins if I were a tech seller, people are making way too big an issue out of something that really doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of things.

My \m/ target at the start of the war was inactive (and eventually was deleted), so I assume that isn't representative of the entire alliance. PC nation I fought never actually did anything, despite being active (didn't even nuke me, despite the fact that there wasn't anyone else nuking me at the time), so that was a major disappointment. The FOK guys I went up against were alright, they were bigger but lacked coordination so by war's end they were about at a level with me. Same goes for the VE guys, and the one Kronos nation. Later in the war, I had one TOP target that fought back pretty damn well despite being significantly smaller, so kudos there. The other TOP target I had was hopelessly outnumbered so I don't hold it against him/her. I feel like I somehow accidentally missed all the best fighters in the game when choosing my targets, and they missed me. Sort of disappointing war in terms of actual combat, all in all. I should note, however, that everyone I fought was respectful and enjoyable to talk to (at least, those opponents with whom I exchanged messages). It's good to see the quality of people in these wars has not gone down even if the difficulty of combat is something less than I had hoped for.

[quote name='Londo Mollari' date='14 April 2010 - 10:37 PM' timestamp='1271309851' post='2260998'] You mean like how GDA kept the NPO propped up for years by being allied to them when NPO was holding FAN hostage? Yeah... cry me a river. [/quote] I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying that because GDA made the wrong decision three years ago, they should again make the wrong decision today? Making the right choice is laudable, even if I am skeptical of how much of an effect it will have on the Grämlins.

[quote name='Starfox101' date='13 April 2010 - 02:44 AM' timestamp='1271151864' post='2258564'] Boo hoo. All of you whining about Gramlins keeping IRON at war supported the NPO doing the same thing. What we can all assure though, is that this war won't last near as long as the one you supported. [/quote] Hi Starfox. As a fellow Vox founder I like to think my anti-NPO credentials are pretty solid. I, too, have a problem with how the Grämlins are keeping IRON at war. Do you care to actually address those concerns or are you just desperately trying to throw any character attacks you can find at people with whom you disagree?

[quote name='supercoolyellow' date='11 April 2010 - 06:34 PM' timestamp='1271036049' post='2256831'] I [i]think[/i] Janova is going back to the before WoTC days to when hegemony was made up of NPO and NpO. [/quote] That still doesn't make any sense... why define sides by how they were two years ago?

[quote name='TheNeverender' date='11 April 2010 - 02:02 PM' timestamp='1271019747' post='2256574'] Interesting putting Blue on the ex-Hegemony side of things, given where they were fighting in the last war. [/quote] If you draw the line right through Polar it should be reasonably accurate, except for NSO. And to those observing NSO's proximity to STA and NpO, I would say that is more out of coincidence than anything else given the lack of a treaty between NSO and anyone else in that area.

[quote name='Shamshir' date='11 April 2010 - 03:53 PM' timestamp='1271026368' post='2256654'] If you choose to believe the worst assumptions of those on the OWF then that's your call. I would have hoped people would know the actual member of my alliance a little better and not let their view be clouded by those who shout the loudest on this stage who will come to the certain conclusion that if you do surrender only the above terms i stated are what we will give. [/quote] No matter what you believe the final terms Ramirus would put down after an unconditional surrender are, Ramirus and your alliance as a whole are still behaving in a bizarre and irrational fashion, and the fact that IRON is not inclined to agree to an unconditional surrender is not something anyone can hold against them. There are two possibilities for the terms that your alliance will give to IRON after an unconditional surrender; either terms they would not accept if offered up front, or terms they would accept if offered up front. In the case of the former, Ramirus is trying to disguise harsh terms as something other than it is and IRON is justified in not surrendering. In the case of the latter, there is no rational explanation for why Ramirus wants an unconditional surrender before laying out the terms, assuming he actually wants to end the war. That assumption may be an erroneous one, in which case the explanation is that Ramirus wants to keep fighting IRON for a little while longer before peace and is using his peace offer as political cover so he cannot be criticized for keeping IRON in perpetual war. To summarize, either Ramirus wants IRON to submit to overly harsh terms, Ramirus is crazy, or Ramirus doesn't want IRON to get peace for a while longer. Take your pick, no matter the explanation IRON cannot be criticized for refusing to give in yet. Unless you have another explanation, which I would love to hear.