shopt

I have also noticed that my soldier bills are at $6 each, is that supposed to be the case?

11,020 (15,710) Soldiers 13,787 Working Citizens The armed forces of Shopterden are too powerful. This is making your population extremely uncomfortable. Edit: Acutally, I'm not suffering a happiness penalty, but the message saying I am is still there.

If you can reduce your bills to a payable level (by selling infra or dismissing military), then you can get out of bill lock without aid.

@rvnrooron84:In world statistics->exposed spy operation (http://www.cybernations.net/all_spies_information.asp) @SovietNoob: Multiple spies increase your chance of success and chances of defending against spies.

I don't see what I have missed. Abandoned equipment always goes loser->winner. But if the attacker loses, they might still hit tech, land, and infra. This is common and intentional.

Every intelligence agency raises the cap by 100 spies (or $10m). So with 5 agencies, you can have 550 spies = $55m.

That is quite common, you can lose the battle but still take tech, land, and destroy infra.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=3468

You can still sell infra, but selling infra is in no way profitable.

Efficiency rating (as I said before) = Effective soldiers/real soldiers You talk about calculating battle odds, and then complain you need a maths degree to do a simple division. I don't get it. Anyway this is moot now.

spy ops were up for a while and then admin took them down because something was wrong.

Yeah, you work out how many effective soldiers you want deployed, and divide it by your efficiency ratio (ie. effective soldiers/real soldiers).

Click on the extended display tab. It is in there.

There are limits to that idea. For example, you can't ZI mods for making decisions you don't like. Just a reminder, I am not trying to debate whether it should be ok, just clarify whether it is ok.

Firstly, I would like to say that this doesn't apply to any current situation. This is a hypothetical situation. I would like to ask whether IC repercussions are allowed for breaking game rules. These are the 3 scenarios I can think of. In no cases are moderation being threatened, and in all cases the ZI is as a result of the perceived rule breaking. Personally I think B and C are okay, and A isn't, but I would like clarification. Scenario A: Party X feels party Y has broken a game rule (eg. slot filling), and instead reporting it to moderation, decides to ZI them. Okay or not? Scenario B: Party X feels party Y has broken a game rule (eg. slot filling), reports it to moderation and ZI's them without waiting for a response from moderation. Okay or not? Scenario C: Party X feels party Y has broken a game rule (eg. slot filling), reports it to moderation, feels that moderation's response was inadequate, and so decides to ZI them. Okay or not? Edit: maybe this should have been in the moderation forum.

I'm not saying they are meant to be for young nations, I'm just saying that the best thing I can do at the moment is to set threat level to low and ignore spies. As I grow, spies will become more useful for their price. And rozalia, it isn't all or nothing

For me, spying is way too expensive to be useful, and defending against spying will almost certainly cost much more than the damage spies could do to me. That will change as I get bigger though.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=309

Yeah, there comes a point that it just takes too many aid slots to pay for it, even with middle men. But a nice table. This is useful for donation buyers too.

Sure you can, just click the trash can next to the clinic.

Yeah, I've had times with an event per week, and then months without an event.

You didn't use punctuation. A 4 line sentence without any punctuation is hard to read.

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Cyber_Nations#War.2FPeace http://www.cybernations.net/about_topics.a.../War_Preference Between those 2 and the stats posted here, I'm sure the truth is there somewhere.