Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About greenacres

  • Rank
    boogiedown productions

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
  • Alliance Name
    Pax Corvus

Recent Profile Visitors

817 profile views
  1. The writing's on the wall here, guys. We're all sitting in the same boat waiting to be rescued, talking into a little box or radio or what have you, hoping that someone will hear our suggestions, and in some cases our pleas. We do this because we think we're going to be heard, we assume that there's someone on the other side of that little box or radio, taking note of what the people want and are in need of, but there's no one on the other side. There's no one listening to your ideas, and it's been that way for a long, long time.
  2. The time needed to build a nation is detrimental at this point. It takes about 20x too long to build up to a decent size to keep new nations involved in the game. Older nations have the advantage of billion dollar warchests to rebuild, and people want to get involved immediately or quickly, and not necessarily through an alliance (by that I mean, even though alliances are a necessity, most people don't get involved beyond simply applying and then doing as they're told. Politics isn't an interest to most people that are left) Make infrastructure dirt cheap(1/20th what it is), make technolo
  3. [quote name='HeroofTime55' timestamp='1311467711' post='2762428'] TAA had a right to take their time and make the proper decision. They told you, as a fellow protectorate, in confidence, what they were mulling over. You then threw them under the bus by forcing the issue. I guess to suck up to NG or something. A rather pathetic move, but if you really want to be such a leech in the shadow of NG, it can't be helped. You sacrificed all trust anyone might have in you or your alliance. For what gain? Nothing. Nothing at all. Considering the speed with which NG has shown it is willing to
  4. shut the $%&@ up, and stop trying to be an e-lawyer.
  5. Congratulations to two fine alliances coming together to form what appears to be an even finer alliance.
  6. [quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300380658' post='2667815'] You post from a position that is opposite my own, therefore you are my enemy. [/quote] I'm like beanie sigel here.
  7. [quote name='Ivan Moldavi' timestamp='1300380562' post='2667810'] No one from the NPO government has stated that these terms are unfair so what is your point? Only your side has been crying about nations being in peace mode. Only your side cried about it when the NPO delivered it to FAN so long ago. FAN didn't cry about it then, just as NPO is not now. Shedding light on an apparent inconsistency in policy and fraudulent ethos isn't the same as crying. The OP is more or less an emo statement about how Pacifica broke MK's heart (and maybe read her diary or something) and how even though j
  8. [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1300379923' post='2667794'] This is silly. First of all, GOONS1 was right there sniffing NPO's butt and giggling maniacally to help disband or jump any alliance NPO asked, VE included ([19:15] <Ardus[MK]> Back when I was an enemy of GOONS, there was no Mercy Board. There was just "you're $%&@ed" [this is [u]factually incorrect[/u], there has always been a mercy board, but it illustrates the point]). [i]Polaris[/i] had NPO by the balls in the run-up to the UjW and Polaris tap-danced on GOONS's and Genmay's faces, not NPO. Besides, new GOONS li
  9. [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1300374249' post='2667722'] Eternal war one of the 2 choices you are forcing on them [/quote] You don't see how turnabout is fair play in this case? Do you forget what they did to FAN? Or the original GOONS? Or Genmay? Or NoR/NV? Or LUE? The NPO once gave terms that were strikingly similar to an alliance they were at war with, it could have been GPA, I don't remember, but the terms were literally "come out of peace mode and fight for xx time and we'll discuss peace then." This is fair play.
  10. [quote name='Alterego' timestamp='1300371087' post='2667666'] They have the moral high ground because the slate was wiped clean after karma. NPO were attacked for no reason and are to be kept in peace mode as an alliance or beat on for a month-AFTER THE END OF THE WAR. The reason they were attacked? People thought they were going to enter the war. Well the war is over and now they have been told they need to take a month long beat down for doing nothing. The war is over, there is no reason to keep them at war any longer besides personal vendettas that were apparently cleared during karma. Now
  11. [quote name='Balkan Banania' timestamp='1300366084' post='2667619'] I believe that this card has been overplayed during the Karma war; you can’t use it for ever, or if you want to try adding something original. For the matter in hand, DH propose a path for us to achieve peace, we feel that it is not in our best interest, so we (kindly ) reject it. [[i]OOC: I liked the cartoon; it seems a rather accurate description of the father – child interaction OOC[/i]] [/quote] You do realize that every alliance that's attacking you, is an alliance that the NPO either once forced to disband, for
  12. I'm not going to read the entire thread, but has it been pointed out already that the NPO once served up almost the exact same terms to someone they were at war with? I hope no one is crying about these terms and saying they're unfair/unprecedented
  13. I shouldn't be commenting, but I felt this needed to be said. During times of war, whatever you do within the confines of the game, and only within the confines of the game, is acceptable. The objective is to win, and failing that, the objective becomes "Do as much damage as you possibly can" and that is all that matters. Goldielax is missing the point entirely, and what he's saying is actually flat out wrong/a lie. Poison Clan is getting nations from other alliances, even sleeper nations from their protectorates, but that doesn't matter, because the only reason you're posting this is beca
  14. [quote name='Affluenza' timestamp='1295964840' post='2600059'] There is no end game... Everyone has said things are stale...and that certain alliances were not using their positions to effect change for the greater benefit of bob... Post-conflict a precedent will have been set and nations and alliances will once again be able to act upon their feelings of dislike for one another rather then bottling it up or trying to fabricate cb's against one another to win PR. That was essentially the problem...every war needed to have a solid cb but would have to also pass the PR test... [/quote] I
  15. On the one hand, I've been saying for years that, the best reason for war is simply something along the lines of "$%&@ you, I don't like you guys" so, I can't say anything bad about the reason for this war. I mean, that's basically what you guys are saying to the NPO. On the other hand, I can't see what your overall goal is, so it's a bit of a headscratcher. What's your end game for this? When does it stop?
  • Create New...