Poyplemonkeys

[quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1294623736' post='2570548'] Their cancellation on Nemesis is the stuff of legend [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/awesome.gif[/img] [/quote] Which one?

When both sides seem fairly happy that a treaty is gone I guess it shows this up to be the right decision. I don't really understand the 'we're allied to Fark so there was nothing we could do, even if we wanted to' line of reasoning for not staying out of the war. I realise you weren't obligated to defend NEW, and I'm not going to get into whether you should have done, but I just take issue with that line of reasoning so say that you couldn't even if you'd wanted to. There was more than one alliance attacking NEW, and Fark had already shown it didn't mind to much if treaty/coalition partners of an ally were attacked if the situation called for it...

[quote name='supercoolyellow' timestamp='1294621078' post='2570451'] Yes, facts are completely irrelevant [img]http://forums.cybernations.net/public/style_emoticons/default/PsyduckEmot.gif[/img] [/quote] I have 8,612.20 tech. Please inform me how this fact is relevant...

Yeah casualties are definitely the best way to measure what a man you are. Not like one nuke at his level would take him above 80% of the Cyberverse or anything. Definitely a relevant statistic.

Guess I was wrong...

Who nominated Voytek as funny? More to the point actually, 11 people have voted for him?

Do you foresee the closer working relationship you and NSO will be forced to have as they shift their entire economic focus to your sphere, developing on top of the friendship that already exists, and possibly leading to a re-emergence of that treaty? What's STA's view on individual nations acting as 'mercenaries' in an alliance wide war? If STA for whatever reason, conflicting treaties most likely, couldn't enter a war to defend a treaty partner, how would you react to individual STA members doing so off of their own back? Would they be allowed to return to the alliance after peace was attained?

So am I right in thinking this was an elaborate prank on an applicant to RIA? Because I read it as such and found it hilarious. If it's not then, damn, colour me confused.

I'd be quite interested in what the in game messages that caused VA's senator to rage and hit the sanction button said. Just because the rest of the !@#$ in this thread is boring and they must be quite funny to cause such a reaction.

[quote][13:08] <Mayz[LA]> Liberation Army is merging into Colossus because I can't be $%&@ed with CN and my !@#$@#$ head's a mess.[/quote] So what's new? Good luck Mayz

[quote name='aineshane' timestamp='1294311298' post='2565724'] Looks like all 'em VE haters are out in force today... Let the non-sinner be the first to throw a stone, e.t.c I've seen attention seeking threads from the most outraged ITT. Hypocrisy ftw i guess [/quote] Pretend someone else said it all then so you don't get to gloss over their points with 'lolomfgirony' and pretend it's not valid. [quote name='Bill Wallace' timestamp='1294325651' post='2565843'] Impero apologized to \m/ in the Wasdrogan thread which had nothing to do with the actions taken against Wasdrogan. Maybe that's not the one you're referring to. Was there another? [/quote] If I recall correctly he also apologised for charging in head first when his protectorate at the time, WF, declared a war over faked screenshots after he spent quite some time telling everyone who was pointing out the inconsistencies how stupid they were. Or something like that. If he didn't then people are owed one, that's for sure

[quote name='Penkala' timestamp='1294269394' post='2564869'] Nobody is facepalming at me here except for people who literally hate me and would find something bad to say about it even if this was an announcement of how I permanently rid the world of hunger and cancer. [/quote] I don't hate you and this thread is a massive cry for attention. You've always loved being the first guy to bring these oh so evil injustices, not even because you have some sort of issue with it going on just because you wanted to be the first to reveal it to the Cyberverse, to the forums. Just like you've done in the past when you see an opportunity to sling mud at someone you don't like. Which makes the irony of claiming only people that don't like you have something bad to say about it quite amusing. Neither you, nor your buddy in VE who charged in threatening war, even attempted to resolves this with VA before posting it here did you? Just saw an opportunity to get some of that scrummy attention thrown in your direction and ran to the forums.

Stunning number of people incapable of recognising what the word 'if' does to a sentence and asking me to point out things that I've explicitly mentioned might not even exist at this point in time. I'm just going to apologise for getting side tracked from my original point which was "you can't just take slot efficiency and give the award to the highest alliance" like people were originally doing. Now the numerous people who have brought up other facets of the economical systems in CN like trade swapping, blah and blah, particularly how Umbrella excels in these, indicates that you agree with me on some level regarding that original point. Even if you don't I am actually past caring at this point. [quote name='mrcalkin' timestamp='1294265061' post='2564734']It's like if people were voting on fastest racer and we were lapping the second place guy multiple times but someone kept saying "I'd still vote for the guy with the biggest wheels because personally, that's the most impressive to me and winning by multiple laps doesn't matter since people have been winning for years".[/quote] Everything in CN will always come back to an absolutely terrible car analogy, it really will

Again you keep talking about trade circles, temp trades, everything that I haven't taken any issue with. This has just been so distorted from my original point which was that you can't just calculate slot usage and give the award to the alliance with the highest as if that is the be all and end all of economic growth. In that very post you recognise that it isn't... I've explained why I have the opinion I do, and how I'm not trying to take away from Umbrella's achievements, many times. So like I said to mrcalkin, if you disagree with it then so be it the opinions are pretty much polar opposites, just don't come at me with all figures to show me how brilliant Umbrella is at what you do because I already know. Your level of dedication cannot be questioned, and has not been questioned either, I personally would just place greater weight elsewhere if that situation existed.

[quote name='mrcalkin' timestamp='1294261317' post='2564658'] While it should be pretty obvious that we are expanding in ways other than tech (check out our rankings on average infra and how they change over time in UE's thread, for instance), I will state that we are. I am not sure anyone has incorporated a better growth program than our alliance, as evidenced by our growth alone, but I do feel that you are vastly underestimating our ability to bring in solid amounts of tech consistently, and the difficulty and complexity of keeping those numbers always high. If it were such a simple thing, I would expect there to be other alliances out there competing with us in the slightest, but this couldn't be further from the case. For something seemingly so trivial as keeping slots full, something that's "pretty simple to grasp and has been around for an age", I would expect a few middle-weight and heavy-weight alliances to be within 10-20% of our alliance, yet that is not the case. The simplest explanations are that most alliances either don't have the activity, do not have the organization, do not have the drive to find the sellers, or are inefficiently using/not monitoring their member's slots. [/quote] I know it's impressive, I don't know how many times I have to say this before I quit getting overly defensive Umbrella members not realising that I'm not taking a pot shot at your alliance. You can't deny that tech dealing is pretty simple to grasp and has been around for an age. I really don't understand why you've put that in quotation marks as if I've said something wrong. Unless you'd care to tell me this new type of tech deal Umbrella is doing that isn't send cash -> receive tech then there is simply no way to convince me that tech dealing isn't pretty simple to grasp. Again, the level of dedication Umbrella has put into the tech deals they do is clearly impressive and you're clearly the best alliance around at doing so but what's the point in a voting system if we can just calculate slot usage percentage and give the award to the alliance with the highest? How about way back in the day, before my time so I'm fairly hazy on the details, but you're looking at giving out an award for for best military mind in the game... Do you give it to the guy did what everyone else does at a much better/higher level? Or do you give it to someone like Warrior Concept who discovered new ways (tank trick iirc? Like I said, fairly hazy) to demolish your opponents. Or to the person who pioneered having large warchests being a good idea and changed the face of warfare today with that concept? I'm [i]really[/i] not trying to take anything away from what is an undoubtedly impressive tech importation scheme Umbrella have going on, just I personally would put more weight behind a new idea that was successful and an improvement upon how we do things now than being the best at what we've already got going on. Now that might be a difference in opinion for us, and if it is so be it we'll never reconcile our opinions because they're polar opposites. Just please realise what my opinion is and why I hold it before coming back at me with statistics and numbers that I've already recognised as being the best in that area in the game.

[quote name='SpiderJerusalem' timestamp='1294258160' post='2564613'] At least I am jelly... And I miss my old land [/quote] I did warn you SpiderJ, between the sobs I told you that you'd regret going.

[quote name='AAAAAAAAAAGGGG' timestamp='1294248877' post='2564470'] Entertain me, what could be more innovative than packing your nations full of tech? The whole point of a good economic system is to build a nation that can obliterate other nations in war. If you're buying at market rate, you're not destroying your warchests for technology and will be the most efficient at destroying your enemy. As far as nation building goes, if you're not bringing in tech, there's really no point to what you're doing, because your infrastructure goes away very quickly in nuclear combat. Tech sticks with you for the long run. The only way to do that is with tech dealing.[/quote] Yeah I know the benefits of tech, I mean Umbrella is an outrageous alliance in terms of tech but compared to the average I'm hardly tech light myself... If I had innovative ideas to grow nations successfully I wouldn't be slumming it like I am now, I'd be either making my own successful alliance or be in economics of another alliance. [quote]And if you're talking about growth in general, Umbrella nearly doubled it's NS in 2010, from just a tiny bit over 4mil to just under 8mil. There's other important factors we pay attention to beside tech dealing (although that is the most important detail). [/quote] I wasn't talking about growth in general. It's been sort of side-tracked into people thinking I'm saying Umbrella don't deserve the award, which is not what I've ever claimed. I was just saying I didn't see why people were pulling up slot efficiency and saying that's it, Umbrella wins, as if it's the be all and end all of economics. I mean, has Umbrella bought 4mil NS worth of tech in the year? Or are you growing in other ways too? I've said a few times now that I'm not saying Umbrella don't deserve the award, just [b]if[/b] an alliance had created and utilised an innovative and successful new growth programme in the year I would place more value in it than being the very best at something that's pretty simple to grasp and has been around for an age.

Ask them? Various reasons can contribute to it. I've a 20% slot usage at the moment for varying reasons that I can't seem to overcome I'm not trying to take away from the fact they are undoubtedly one of the most active and efficient alliances in the game, I'm just saying buying tech isn't a difficult concept to grasp. Someone who isn't a complete idiot can create a nation and be doing what Umbrella do tomorrow (in reverse obviously, selling not buying). They've been doing the same for a long time now, and iirc have received rewards for it in the past. So while it's always going to be impressive when someone's hitting 90%+ in efficiency, I'd personally vote elsewhere if someone showed they were capable of something more innovative that had a profound economic effect on their nations/alliance.

I don't really get all these slot usage statistics being used as the be all and end all for the economic award. So you use a lot of slots? There's more to CN economics than buying in tech, and sure it's impressive that each and every one of your nations has the wherewithal to fill up all of their slots with buying delicious tech, it's hardly a difficult concept to grasp. It doesn't require much more than knocking on the door of your smaller allies and getting a list of nations to send $3mil to. I don't know about any alliance's growth programmes as I'm not in them, but I'd be far more impressed with an alliance that consistently enacts a successful growth programme for new nations to maintain a good NS before sending them on their way to buy tech at a slightly lower rate than Umbrella manages to do. If there's an alliance out there that consistently and successfully manages this they would get my vote above Umbrella. Buying tech is not difficult when you're in an alliance with hundreds of teeny tiny allied nations to get it from.

[quote]and on a lack of effort given to remaining extent on the part of one.[/quote] Does this sentence not make sense to anyone else or am I just being a 'tard this early in the morning?

[quote name='Nobody Expects' timestamp='1294143869' post='2563019'] I disagree, its more like blaming a car owner when it gets nicked cos he left the doors open, the keys in, and the engine running. [/quote] No it's not. Don't be silly.

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1294126930' post='2562878'] Are you serious? [/quote] Schatt's joke threads are usually far more wordy and long winded than this so I guess he is. Congratulations to myg0t, The Cult's guidance will prove invaluable as you grow.

Man Timeline in government, do people never, ever, learn? Edit: Turns out that while LoSS are awful at jokes ( ) they are still pretty good when it comes to not letting idiots in government. Except Amossio.

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1293652097' post='2557540'] If the government doesn't endorse it, then no, it's not a CB. I'd hope that the alliances from which they deserted won't let them back in, since they've shown that they can't follow orders and they will leave in times of crisis. [/quote] Crisis What crisis were iFOK and PC in other than being in a bit of an awkward position? There was no danger to them as alliances from this situation. To spin it as abandoning them in a time of need is utterly hilarious. Personally I applaud each and every member that put their beliefs and friendships in front of what their alliance tried to enforce upon them. The phrase 'vote with your feet' got thrown around a lot during the times of Vox and Karma, and that's exactly what they were doing.