Jump to content

Aeternalis

Banned
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    582

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Aeternalis

  5. Epicurean Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    As I stated before, I could care less about where the members of Epicurean go. My foremost point is to highlight the irony in encouraging members to join one alliance when oneself goes elsewhere. This isn't something unique to Epicurean, it has happened in other cases of alliance disbandment.

    ok, irony highlighted. But i'll let you in on something: it's not going to stop or change

  6. Epicurean Announcement

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    Wouldn't you say the recommendation would be more credible if he was following it himself?

    My foremost point should be, "why the $%&@ does it matter where anyone in a disbanded alliance goes?" Great! You're telling a former leader of a defunct alliance that actions speak louder than words. So sue him.

    however, since you're obviously such a great judge of character, i'll let you lambaste Tailsk with comments about how he gave advice that may not necessarily be good for him, but for others

  8. Communists Forever

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted

    I believe that like myself, among more than a few others, he is confused by the paradoxical nature of signing a contract that does not demand compliance.

    Congratulations on your treaty.

    and i think we are confused why so many people seem so wronged by this particular OADP.

    I mean, i find no problem for your confusion, only with the reason this debate is in this thread.

  16. \m/ Announcement \m/

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted · Edited by Aeternalis

    Can anyone explain to \m/ why this announcement is frustrating to many on Bob without bringing past wars or current political alignments into this?

    I'll try again, a bit more honestly:

    \m/ is doing something right here, whether it is their intention or not.

    This announcement loudly asserts in simple and bold terms that after numerous wars claiming to be over fair play and decency, we still have no universally or even commonly accepted standards for our international conduct.

    \m/ reminds us yet again, underneath all of our vestiges of allied formality, treaties and wars of "precedent," what a savage and unchanged place Planet Bob remains.

    This greatly frustrates those who want to think Planet Bob is progressing.

    So let's correct this by continuing to pile all of our worldly frustrations onto \m/, right?

    Sometimes, when i play call of duty in my oval office, i just sit and wait for those darned Japanese soldiers to talk it out with me so we can all go home happy and merry, and it's best that no one DARE play differently than me, lest i tell them how much no one likes them

  20. Rage Thread

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    This is why CN is dying as a game.

    The slightest chance for a good war, and everyone backs out.

    dear god, SCM, how could you eventhink we would allow close to even sides? no one ever goes to war without knowing they will win first.

    Bolded for my opinion. This issue was never worth being the catalyst for a war and any war that came from it would have been unsatisfying for that reason.

    Too many people play this game who want the 'fun' of a war (a winning one presumably, as there's nothing fun about losing or at least the aftermath of most losses) without actually bothering to play the part of the game that generates wars, and then complain when the people who play the political game don't destroy their alliances' position for their entertainment. If you're not having fun, do something about it. Wars don't just happen for fun, they're a part of the political game, and if you don't play the political game, you have no right to complain when it doesn't fall out how you want. If you sit in an alliance as a general member, you bait and snipe and complain about the lack of wars, and you don't do anything to encourage a war, you are the problem.

    very few people in this game really have the ability to start something with global consequences. I hate that "do something about it" !@#$%^&* because if i "did something about it" it would probably just lead to my rather insignificant alliance being curb-stomped by some 100 members alliance. yawn.

  21. Rage Thread

    in Open World RP

    Posted · Edited by Aeternalis

    I'll give the platform up for all those who wish to voice their opinions about this war and how about people shouldn't start potentially epic !@#$ if they aren't going to finish. I'd post my rage now, but it would end up as an incoherent page of, full-caps, crap. So maybe if i don't kill myself in a climax of anger and disappointment over this war, I'll join you in mob-style rage.

    Let 'er rip!

    PS - this one is for you, Ejayrazz

    edit - $%&@ I SPENT TWO !@#$@#$ WEEKS ON THIS !@#$%^&* ALL FOR !@#$@#$ NOTHING!! FFFFFFFF WORST WAR EVER

  22. Peace Mode Arguments

    in Open World RP

    Posted

    Could you include the amount and percentage of nation strength in peacemode, also?

    If you made this a daily updated topic on this statistic it'd be an interesting way of tracking where the war is going, for those sitting on the sidelines.

    only if i can put in peace mode nations per offensive war.

×
×
  • Create New...