Jump to content

Velocity111

Members
  • Posts

    319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Velocity111

  1. Velocity111

    Spy bug

    This is not a technical bug, you've (presumably, since you say you're at war with 2 people and have spied on them both) spied 4 times and are in 2 wars. 4 times is the maximum for 2 wars, regardless of whether or not you're in war with the nations you're spying on. If this is a bug at all, it's bad wording in the error message
  2. You can't upload a custom flag unless 1) you win Cyberrnations tournament edition or 2) you're the leader of an alliance that's large enough (don't recall how large right now) to be able to upload a custom flag
  3. [quote name='Captain Nathan Brittles' timestamp='1341106499' post='3000877'] Actually self-anarchy does explain the spies. You had 800. You then performed a spy op and lost 20 spies. When you went to replace the lost spies you see the game indicates you've lost 32 not 20 spies. That leaves 12 spies unaccounted for which is within the range possible from a defeat alert. Where are you reading you razed the land and not captured it? Just asking since at your level it's unusual to raze the land when capturing is possible and because many players read the reports sent to their opponent for information at their leisure over reading the reports given the player at the time of receiving the result since they're usually in the midst of running a number of attacks. Your opponent's report will always read the land was razed whether you razed or captured it. Even if the land was razed, it's still possible if you were close to the line to go under from your GAs. Soldiers cost you citizens when you buy them (for example, 1 citizen per 100 soldiers). When you dismiss soldiers or in your case lose them in battle, you regain those citizens back. Your losses at your level were likely to be in the 10's of thousands meaning you could have regained several hundred hundred citizens. It's still looking like a self anarchy from here. [/quote] Gaining citizens (by buying infra, stealing land, or otherwise) will not cause you to self-anarchy.... But yeah, it does seem like a self-anarchy or defeat alert from the description. If you hit "confirm deployment," it should tell you whether or not you'll self-anarchy (although if you hit "submit deployment" right away it will not).
  4. Sparta's 30 minute pre-update blitz consisted of 4 wars declared by 2 members. I... is this a war?
  5. [quote name='berbers' timestamp='1340228239' post='2990543'] Hopefully another AA stronger than you doesn't let her on their applicant AA... [/quote] Actually, I am quite looking forward to such an event
  6. The primary takeaway from this thread is that zoom is a superior rogue
  7. This is amazing and I have to rewrite my view of Umbrella somewhat 3 front war right off the bat let's goooooooooo
  8. [quote name='dejarue' timestamp='1339645411' post='2982755'] That's pretty much just what they did... [/quote] No, I'm pretty sure you would've seen a war much earlier if they did that.
  9. [quote name='Ardus' timestamp='1339644694' post='2982726'] There are only two purposes to a [i]casus belli[/i]: (1) To promote the war in the realm of public opinion. (2) To state the grounds for which the war has been launched. A CB must be one, the other, or both. A CB that is neither is without purpose and we therefore wouldn't do it. You've already agreed that we don't care about the first purpose, so it must be the second. [/quote] The point is if a CB that catered to public opinion was not needed, you could have started a war with "we don't like you." The upside to this style of CB is that you could have declared on CSN whenever you felt like it and the CB would still be relevant, and (presumably) fewer CSN would have escaped into PM. And if there was a leak in OpSec, you could simply call off the attack until later and let them stew in PM for a while. After they came back out, the CB would still be there for you to use.
  10. Article 3: Cancellation Either Party may cancel this agreement. Once one party notifies the other with their intent to cancel, the Pact stays in effect for 10 days. If either party breaks the pact, it is considered null and void.
  11. [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680648' post='2976277'] Check the aid that just came in, sweets. That hasn't updated yet. Unfortunately that % is still near NG's level. [/quote] If you couldn't do better than a 200+ member alliance with your micro I'd be shocked.
  12. [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1338680335' post='2976273'] Recently ive left this thread, but the issue came up in #Sovrana so I thought id leave this here to wrap up the WHOLE thread. [/quote] Gee I wonder why you've left the thread Sovrana: 10 / 49 (20.41%)
  13. [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1337991552' post='2972490'] Yeah but you can nuke every attacking slot at least once a day, IIRC and he has nuked many Deinos nations but no MK nations. Also, with all the rumours saying how well MK is at war, you'd think he'd nuke them rather then deinos. JS. If you only knew... [/quote] How do you nuke every attacking slot at least once a day with 0 nukes? And Deinos was his target, not MK, so I'm not seeing why you'd assume he'd nuke them.
  14. [quote name='Rotavele' timestamp='1337983529' post='2972392'] Still, if you gotta go to peace mode after you go rogue, thats a little messed up lol P.S. why did MK never nuke you or you never nuked them. Body guards? [/quote] You think it's optimal to go rogue with 0 nukes left? Of course you do. As for nukes... zoom ran out of nukes, why would he waste them on people that weren't his targets? And zoom got nuked daily by deinos... you can't get nuked more than once per day. I'd say I'm sure you knew this, but ....
  15. That's why he put /gems there. Good luck setting up a set without uranium though, as you'll have to find a set of nations who are in need of a TC who also don't want uranium, which may be difficult.
  16. It'll come, you just need to wait for us to get bored enough
  17. [quote name='Bernkastel' timestamp='1335046788' post='2956802'] ... Roquentin, who's even more paranoid about NG, MK and a bunch of other people ... [/quote] It's not paranoia, we're actually going to roll them.
  18. Win Cybernations Tournament Edition and upload your flag. Get a new alliance sanctioned and have the alliance upload your flag. Otherwise, no
  19. (53.00000, -29.00000) is 100% lon=-29&lat=53
  20. (60.08402, -14.99634) is 92% (I haven't moved my moon base in a long while)
  21. Maximum population (+37.1% population) requires the Affluent population resources (gold, silver, gems, coal, wine, furs, fish) plus wheat, pigs, cattle, and sugar. This leaves you with one extra resource... if you want an income booster, spices, which will also give you fast food. This trade set has extremely high income, but is extremely crappy for buying infra and paying bills, not to mention it doesn't have uranium for nukes. You can replace spices with uranium for nukes or iron/marble for buying infra/paying bills, but this really isn't a good set for buying infra or paying bills. The Fast food, beer, and construction + fish set is a very popular set that gives almost as much population (+30.6% population) as the Affluent population set, but is much better for paying bills/buying infra. The set (aluminum, lumber, wheat, water, marble, iron, pigs, spices, sugar, cattle, fish) allows you to have one extra resource. Most sets include uranium for nukes, but if you don't want uranium, then gems (high income boost), lead (military bills reduction + scholar resource), and coal (infra cost reduction, land boost, soldier efficiency bonus) are good last resources. Unless you plan on swapping trades out in order to buy infra and/or pay bills, the fast food, beer, construction + fish set is probably better than the affluent population set. If you have a large nation and don't plan on buying infra or going to war, a variation of the FF/beer/construction+fish set is better than the FF/beer/construction+fish set economically: take out lumber and aluminum for gems and silver. You lose construction and beer this way, but you still end up with higher income. However, if you're not planning on buying infra, the Affluent population set might even be better than this set. You'll have to do the numbers for your nation.
  22. [quote name='denkimon' timestamp='1333037694' post='2945056'] No, we want them to pay reps for attacking us. At worst, that classifies as 'being punished for attacking us'. More practically it means 'you knew what was going to happen when you attacked us'. But as we agree on the probability of them ever actually paying, this is all academic, no? As an aside, I see now you meant reps as the punishment, where in my previous post I thought you meant the Umbrella helping out as the punishment (given that that is what this thread is about). [/quote] The probability of them ever actually paying isn't that low... I mean, they paid reps to NG :v
×
×
  • Create New...