jerdge
-
Posts
5,860 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by jerdge
-
-
[OOC]
I've been thinking on it for a while (but, I admit I didn't read the thread)...
My opinion is that Role Playing - an essential requisite to fully enjoy a game like this - is becoming increasingly difficult in this environment. Role Playing without participating in the OWF is poor, and participating in the OWF is dangerous for most Rulers/Nations, for two reasons:
- Even the mildest criticism is almost always seen as "trolling that deserves the ZI-ing of your Nation/little Alliance/whatever" - this isn't that new, however.
- The simple fact of posting attracts "unwanted" attention, that may lead to Tech raids - and, Tech Raids are becoming more rampant every day.
Thus, only Nations in extremely big Alliances, or backed up by extremely big Alliances (or a few brave "fools") dare post here. The remaining shut up and are more likely to Role Playing poorly, eventually leaving the game.
[/OOC]
- Even the mildest criticism is almost always seen as "trolling that deserves the ZI-ing of your Nation/little Alliance/whatever" - this isn't that new, however.
-
I wish alliances would've just stayed with esper, it makes things a lot more convenient
[OOC]
Considering that Esper uses SORBS lists to ban dynamic IPs for e-mail spam... Not.
Banning on IRC because of e-mails[1] = bad.
E-mail bans are for e-mail.
Dynamic IPs bans are for [imagine here a word you could be warned for].
[1] E-mails that you're pretty sure didn't originate from the guys that you're then keeping out of IRC...
[/OOC]
-
#41 no longer exists
I believe this is correct. Q 41 is outdated and it should be removed.
-
Funny thing is, if you hadn't made this pretty *pointless* announcement, you probably wouldn't have gotten any trouble at all from "NPO and their kin".Co- Founder and Leader of BSF Those who bleed with me shall be my brother. Interested in joining BSF, message me, if will be fullfilling. ALSO I DO NOT HAVE A CN FORUM ACCOUNT.I'm convinced that the OP is not actually who he purports to be. I think this is likely somebody impersonating another trying to cause them problems, and it seems to be working out perfectly. No rational person would deliberately paint himself as a target in this manner.
(OOC: I realize that I arrive on this too late, but... All of above should suggest something. If you find this post of mine useless, sorry for taking your time.)
-
AHEAD wishes to join the GGA in condemning any behaviour that involves OOC personal attacks, like the one that started the GGA-GPA "incident".
This is posted in good will, as a response to the implicit invite that appears at time ~1:15 of the excellent video the OP linked.
(OOC: let's hope this can continue to be "just" a game...)
-
-
Of course, each colour can be changed to anything else (like, a colder shade of green, etc.) I'm glad you like them, anyway.
An example done in 3 minutes: link
-
Well done! The yellow seems a bit heavy in some parts, though, espcecially the signature banner. Besides that, they're great!
Of course, each colour can be changed to anything else (like, a colder shade of green, etc.) I'm glad you like them, anyway.
-
To: jerdge From: scorchx 10/11/2007 5:20:12 AM Subject: RE: Your Invitation Code
Thanks, but i've been acepted into the NADC. Peace bro.
Well, this ends our involvment with scorchx...
-
I guess you would like it to be in green?
Well, I hope I guessed right, lol... Or I wasted a lot of time.
Anyway, here are my proposals:
1. flag #1 (600x350, 24 kB)
-. banner (800x80, 22 kB)
-. signature (450x150, 49 kB)
Note that I have a 2400x1400 "original" of the (any) flag. The banner and sig were instead made directly at that size.
Now, the explanations:
- I kept the original base colour: green; quite a dark shade of it, but hopefully not too much dark. Yellow has been chosen for good contrast.
- For the flag, I thought it had to be "simple"; also, only plain colours.
- The banner isn't much elaborated (to keep it little in size and save bandwidth). It's the same size of my Alliance's (and ours seems to do well on our IF forums).
- For the sig I used a little bit more of "imagination", as you can see. It can be done more similar to the flag, but I think it's cooler like it is!
- I can of course give you the HTML code for each colour (to adjust your forum skin; I'm a nub at skinning forums, but I may be even able to help you with it, anyway.)
- A version of the sig without the name is also available. I could make you a tutorial about inserting other names.
- All of this has been made with The Gimp (and with google...); to update the sig using my tutorial you will need to use it (anyway, it's free to download).
Here I add other flags I tried for you, before ending with the one above; if you don't like the one I chose, maybe we can elaborate on some of these (each one is again 600x350):
2. direct inspiration from your current flag (30 kB)
3. similar, but more insects (38 kB)
4. a bit of elaboration on insects' mouths (36 kB)
5. further elaboration, a bit pshychedelic (60 kB)
6. most complex (too much?) (61 kB)
Please let me know if you like my work.
Cheers.
- I kept the original base colour: green; quite a dark shade of it, but hopefully not too much dark. Yellow has been chosen for good contrast.
-
I never quite understood how one can define trolling in a game in which we roleplay politics. I mean, OOC flaming/trolling are easy to spot, but shouldn't I be allowed to be inflammatory in character without being called a troll? Such statements are a part of politics. Hell I would say making a statement with the explicit intent of getting a bad reaction from a political opponent is a legitimate and somewhat common tactic.
Don't take this as trolling but...
What you wrote of may be "legitimate tactic", but is also in some way poor tactic, IMHO. in RL international politics you (almost) always see rulers being courteous and playing the "good guy" part, not being aggressive and threatening (this despite the actual things they may be up to, by the way).
-
Also, sorry Jerdge, you'll find my application on your forums.
We will be glad to try help you; you can find our Applications forum here. Look also in your in-game inbox for your Invitation Code.
We see that your current AA is "none": good. Feel free to set your AA as "TUPA Applicant", if you wish; please do not set it as "The Universal Protection Agency" (or your application will be automatically denied).
If you actually opened an application at any other Alliance (e.g.: NADC), out of courtesy, notify them that you changed your mind.
Also, stay in Peace Mode until you get TUPA membership: if you go out and get attacked, your chances of being accepted will likely (completely) fade.
Last (but not least), please stop posting on these board from now on (or your application will likely be denied); the only exception to this rule being "answering to others' posts that directly require an answer from you". Anyway, consider yourself ordered to ignore any post that you feel is "flaming" on you, and take as a duty to be polite and courteous with everybody, including (and especially) the ones you feel shouldn't be treated politely.
You must understand that you've done many mistakes in this thread, and that pointing out what you think are others' errors is fail.
With some luck we will be able to help you to improve your diplomatic skills, and to become a useful member of the CN community!
(At least, we will be able to put an end to this thread...)
-
This deserves being pinned.
-
I feel that a lot of luck is what you will need after accepting him in your alliance.
Well... You're probably right. Since he's flying an almost-NADC AA I feel his first move should be sorting it with NADC.
It has to be clear that scorchx not in my Alliance right now. I say this just to make clear that, should he start flying my Alliance Affiliation anytime soon, he would be doing it illegally...
There's a lot of work that has to be done before he could!
-
(OOC post.)
I'm in a new AA nowThe "The North Atlantic Defense Coalition" AA is wrong, probably you meant "North Atlantic Defense Coalition" (without the article).
Anyway I have the feeling that you didn't really apply to the NADC, you just set your AA like that, did you? I suggest you stay in Peace Mode, you set your AA to "none" and you register here (NADC forum), properly filling an application (and maybe asking for help, if you're unsure how to do it). Don't try to hide them anything, especially about this issue/thread, but rather explain that you regret your previous mistakes.
If they refuse you membership, and if you solemnly promise you won't anymore post anything here (until authorized to do so), and if I will be able to get clearance from Wolfpack for you, I will take you into my (new and tiny) Alliance: I feel we will be able to help you to get the handle of it.
(Disclaimer: don't tell me I'm shamelessly recruiting, you all know that the kid will be a headache... It's that I'm feeling good today
. ) -
This is the history I found upon clicking the link to his alliance forums.
[...]
OOC: the OP has anyway some skill in Role Playing. Well, sorta.
-
The only really powerful thing a spy can do, in terms of alliance war, is destroy nukes and reveal trading partners. Both excellent weapons against a rival.
And, being able to destroy enemies' nukes reduces the deterrent those nukes represent. If anything, I think that spies will make wars less costly. If you add the new class of casus bellorum they represent, spies mean more wars (IMHO).
-
Its obvious that cooper is not a very experienced player, but is all the flaming really necessary?
I'm sure 'm positive hope would have sweared that everybody could have drawn their own conclusions, about what flaming a thirteen years old, asking for help kid, meant.
-
simple jokes
...That made me want go to sleep. No offence, but this video is quite boring: if there were "jokes" at all, I failed in recognizing them.
Anyway, it's also harmless: I don't see the need to flame the OP. YAWN.
[/OOC post]
-
You may have had that evidence, but since you didn't expel and ZI... Wait! Wrong thread.
Well, you may think that you will win, but considering the NS we have, the NS you have, the warring experience we have and you lack of it, and the fact that the GPA... Wait! Wrong thread again! OMG!
Oh, well... Anyway IE7 isn't that bad, compared with IE6...
-
The guys alliance is pretty laughable
[...]
I have no idea, I just have to try.
They're "pretty laughable" or you don't have idea? You're confusing us almost as much as you must be confused yourself.
-
El Bruc: outstanding and amazing, as usual
. -
Respected Ruler, scorchx, we wish to add our voice to the others supplicating you to changes your Alliance's name and colour, as soon as possible.
We made the experience of trying to unite Nations in a new Red Alliance; when we became aware of the so-called "Moldavi Doctrine", we contacted the NPO Alliance about it.
I assume that their Imperial Officer, Philosopher, being the gentleman he is, have nothing against us sharing with you his wise and kind words about it:
Unfortunately, the NPO will not support the formation of another alliance on the Red Team. There are no exceptions to this Doctrine. I understand that it seems harsh, but we believe it eliminates a lot of headaches for us down the road.I strongly suggest that you choose another color.
Additionally, I think the "***" name should be changed to reduce confusion, given that you will not be a Red Team alliance.Beware that the NPO will force you to disband or move.
We are happy that we can be of help, suggesting you to contact them now and arrange proper terms (a timeline) under which your Alliance will move to another Trading Sphere.
We're sure that they will be professional and helpful, like they were with us; of course, you're expected to use proper manners, education and tact, like every wise leader would do when it comes to diplomacy.
We also wish to invite you to contact the Wolfpack Alliance via private channels; we're afraid that - in the way you're handling this, you will risk instead the attention of the Wolfpack military. May the peoples of the Nations in your Alliance be spared the bloodshed you're now attracting over them.
Also, we're - ehm - unsure whether you're aware of what your Alliance acronym looks like. Assuming you're a honoured gentleman, you don't. Please think of it, and try to find a less offensive name. This also for the sake of your peoples.
OOC: Finally, I also back up the suggestion of requesting a lock for this thread.
Edited to make it more IC
. -
True freedom of speech means you can say what you like and not fear that someone will take action against you.
[...]
the fact that there are any consequences at all means free speech does not exist.
Maybe I don't understand you, but these two sentences alone mean to me that freedom of speech is just an imaginary thing, that can't "really" exist.
In which reality you can speak and be sure that nobody will want to take action against you?
In which reality events are guaranteed to have no consequences?
deploying max militay.
in Gameplay Discussions
Posted · Edited by jerdge
I believe you can deploy all the soldiers that are above 20% of your Citizens count without going into Anarchy.
In your case, you have 16,110 citizens, so you need at least 3,222 soldiers (look at the "efficiency" value, the one in brackets). Considering that you have 12,888 (46,100) soldiers, I believe you can deploy (46,000) - (3,222) ~ 42,000 (efficiency), that should mean about 11,740 "real" soldiers. That is, over 90% of the soldiers you currently have.