Jump to content

grandsecretaryliang

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    61

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by grandsecretaryliang

  1. Resource effect: sugar

    in Report A Bug

    Posted

    I have sugar, and I was trying to trade with another with sugar.

    When I hover the mouse over my sugar icon, it says: +3% population, +1 happiness (same as in the help page). But over his sugar icon it has the extra +5% land.

    So is the +5% land a typo, or is it a new effect? If it is new then don't older nations get it? (His nation is only 23 days old).

  2. New environment effect

    in Gameplay Discussions

    Posted

    I like this change even though it hurt me a lot (lost 10% of my population). Without change the game would just get stale.

    That there are so much opposition to it just show how lethargic the CN community has become. It's a game; you're supposed to do your best within its mechanics, not crying foul whenever it doesn't act in your favor.

    Official Republican Announcement Regarding the Commonwealth of Sovereign Nations

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    Speaking of \m/, if we'd been offered the same terms as CSN for doing what amounted to the same thing--living up to treaty obligations 45 years ago (ok, slight exaggeration, but ancient history), I would have hugged Electron Sponge. Unfortunately the terms actually presented were designed force us into a gallows noose.

    Not to beat a dead horse, but while you could argue that the role of \m/ in the UJ war amounted to the same thing, there is still a huge different. CSN never actually got in a spat with anyone before this war, while \m/ certainly managed to tick off a fair number of people before their time was up. Whether they were in the wrong is up to you, but the bad feelings did exist (just take another look at the old forum threads before the UJ war) and no way they wouldn't have an effect on the terms \m/ got.

    A challenge

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    If you really want to have fun with war, why not challenge someone like Valhallans to a duel? I'm sure they'd be happy to oblige.

    Piling on No Vision just seems too "low-risk" for someone who wants a "challenge". :rolleyes:

    I pressed the big RED button!!

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    Barmozz:

    You have the freedom to use nukes. The others have the freedom to call you "rogue" - even though you dislike it, it's not an offensive word so it's allowed in the game and the forum. If you want, you can call them "tyrant", "thugs", "imbecile" or whatever (though "imbecile" might be considered flaming).

    Personally I have no problems with people using their nukes here - it's not like real people die because of it. But "rogue" has become a term to call people who use nukes without alliance order in this game, so if you use it you will be called that. The word is not going to go away because a few people don't like it.

    Thanks GPA

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    I can't see this in a positive light, even though I'm fighting GPA. If you truly disagreed with your alliance's actions, why did you not leave them BEFORE they went down? You might escape this war this way, but other alliances probably won't take you in if they remember your name.

    Social Darwinism in CN

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    (There was another obsever who said due to this observation nature is actually increasing in complexity, instead of just survival of the fittest... forgot the name...If anybody really is interested post and I'll search my books for the name, otherwise not worth the hassle)

    I am interested... thanks in advance.

    CIS withdraws from NoV MDP

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    The reasons are anything but trivial. I only know a little of why it happened, but I guarantee you its far more than you do. Your ignorance tends to shine through in every one of your post. Do you and your alliance a favor, whenever you get the urge to post about something you clearly have no understanding of, don't.

    I think you misunderstood his post. I got the impression that he said pretty much the same thing as you did.

    Official IRON Announcement

    in Alliance Politics

    Posted

    To IRON:

    You are justified. GPA aided your enemy and you are deserving of an answer and reparations. You have received both, just slower than it should have arrived. Your anger is understandable and indeed justifiable, but closing the embassy is not the proper course of action. You correctly resolved that this aid was an outrageous loophole in the GPA charter and your position resulted in that loophole being closed. One must ask then... what resolution do you want? What do you hope to accomplish and how can the GPA expedite a resolution? Please, IRON, outline how you would prefer the situation to be handled so that the GPA can address it publicly. Diplomacy isn't dead, you simply didn't receive the resolution you expect. Rest assured, you have the GPA's full attention now.

    It has been clear from the start that we were not after monetary reparation. Reps were accepted because it was a sign of good faith from the GPA, and up until the point it was offered our relation was not so bad that we had to decline it.

    As to what we want - If you reread our govt members' post, you will find it clear enough that we want the nation in question to face consequences for his/her actions, not a free pass in the name of formal legality.

    /a grunt's opinion

    The CN soap opera

    in Open World Forum

    Posted

    Thinking out loud...

    Wouldn't it blow everyone's mind if GPA launched a sudden attack?

    Wouldn't be a further mind-blower if they did it in conjunction with some other sanctioned alliances?

    Wouldn't it be the BIGGEST mind-blower if its allies turned out to be IRON, NPO, and NpO?

    Who need pro wrestling with speculations like these?

    But who would warrant such overkill?

×
×
  • Create New...