Jump to content

bmckenna

Members
  • Posts

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Central Coast
  • Alliance Name
    Fark
  • Resource 1
    Gems
  • Resource 2
    Uranium

Recent Profile Visitors

414 profile views

bmckenna's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  1. Looks like we're still at 100%.
  2. it is 168, confirmed not an april fool's day joke :P
  3. finally. i had a dull ache for so long...sweet release is amazing.
  4. there's some different people in gov this month and a new announcement style to boot (one that i think ranks among our top announcements ever). did someone pee in your cheerios today, or are you still pissy with us? if the former, we don't have any milk, but there's beer in the fridge, and whiskey in the cabinet (fyi: whiskey goes great with honey nut cheerios). edit: i apologize if you were being sarcastic and/or humorous. tone is hard to discern over an electronic forum, and i have had a long and crappy day. :)
  5. I'm sorry, did everyone in TPF/STA just plain forget last war? You know, the one where NPO was berated after the war was over for putting the shielding from damage of their allies on "the other side" above the goals/desires of their own coalition - namely, bailing NG out of taking a beating? The coalition comes first. You do your best to avoid distasteful situations but when direct allies are on the other side of a war, that's often very hard to do. It's only business, nothing personal. As previously mentioned, TPF in particular (and STA if they followed) had the opportunity to fight with us and our coalition in this war. We were obviously pushing for this to happen as quickly as possible as things unfolded. You decided to go another way, which is fine, but don't act like you didn't have a choice in the matter. To whoever was complaining about the egregiousness of a 3x oA and/or 4x oA treaty to hit STA earlier in this thread - I believe the one against us was either 5 or 6 long by the end of the Grudge war.
  6. anyone saying anything other than this is doing a bunch of baaawwwwwing/whargarbling for their own political spin and/or emotional self-soothing. there's been a good bit of people hitting allies of allies this war and even last war if i recall. it's becoming more and more unavoidable with the tangled treaty web and, as mentioned, dwindling number of alliances. i'm a bit tickled, though, because i don't remember 1/10th the amount of outcry when this happened many times worse over to us a few years back. edit: also, hi auctor :)
  7. HALI! o\ This is much sweeter than the last time we declared on an Order.
  8. poot, squeaker, ripper, tootr, cheek-flapper, fark. one of those doesn't belong. the "irony" in pointing this out is lost on me.
  9. agreed on both points but you take what life gives you. (just kidding, cable ;)) and of COURSE it could've been more realistic but tf905 emulating Hulk Hogan was much more worthwhile.
  10. Cable deleted my messages that weren't battle reports (the savage!) but I can assure you I ran CMs, GAs, and someone ran spy ops, and he ran air, CMs, and GAs on me (I assume he used his spy ops on someone else). http://www.cybernations.net/war_information.asp?ID=731084 funny that you're asking for nukes on the first day of war, though. later today i'm sure we'll both be glowing (once I can nuke, 1pm CST).
×
×
  • Create New...