ponken

[quote name='Bob Sanders' date='08 March 2010 - 03:42 AM' timestamp='1268016434' post='2217491'] Wow, this is absolutely laughable, is she going to spam and photoshop you out of the war? I can't imagine that TOP has a single member less qualified to lead. [/quote] I can assure you that there are many less qualified members than Sky in this alliance, me for one. Congrats to our fine government.

VE just need to pass ODN and there will be a great orange party at the bottom of the sanction list

Nice list, but you might want to check out the sources you're linking to. from the wiki on the WoTC. "The war began when the Grand Global Alliance attacked Hyperion for allegedly aiding a reroll of a member of their Eternal-ZI list. Various alliances and blocs then entered the war for various reasons, some directly relating to the GGA-Hyperion conflict, [b]and some for other reasons, most notably the Coalition's attack of the New Polar Order for various reasons.[/b] "

I cant help to notice that on the nice picture there NPO is involved in 18 wars. Was this as high as it got? Cause if it did...

[quote name='Johnny Apocalypse' date='15 February 2010 - 12:52 PM' timestamp='1266234773' post='2182779'] Oh no it's much more simple than that. To them, this is another statistic, and we all know how they love statistics. [/quote] listen to this man, it takes a stat collector to know one seriously, when you reach this kind of number of dows one more or less doesnt really make a difference. 20 is also a nice milestone, I doubt #21 will get as much spotlight

[quote name='Chron' date='14 February 2010 - 10:47 PM' timestamp='1266184068' post='2181283'] You know, this makes me rather torn. On the one hand, I would like to see this conflict end at some point so we Sith no longer need to burn for our ideals. On the other hand, I really, [i]really[/i] want to see that. [/quote] I agree, eternal war has never seemed so intriguing..

While ViP lack protectors they still have friends. Those friends may be a bit busy with the global war and such. But while we cant protect ViP with military might we can still write angry pm's. Very angry pm's with words that hurt!

[quote name='jamesdanaher' date='13 February 2010 - 10:55 PM' timestamp='1266098148' post='2179766'] Leaving OUT was one of the ODN's best decisions. If TOP had DoWed all of C&G with the exception of the ODN (because we were stuck in OUT)- the ODN would be powerless to help our C&G MADP allies. Leaving OUT was, therefore, clearly a good decision on our behalf. [/quote] I dont know where this view that the OUT NAP trumps every other treaty comes from but I can tell you that no one in TOP would hold that NAP against you if we attacked one of your MDP partners. [quote] The Orange sphere is not hugely affected by this war. Trades are not (apart from a few exceptions) being cancelled and sanctions are not being applied. The fact it is orange v orange is largely irrelevant. [/quote] I agree, a few nations have been surprised by the fact that trades get's canceleed by dow's, but orange "stability" is in no danger. [quote] The Orange sphere was once reasonably united- but since the larger alliances drifted apart- colour unity became almost irresponsible. [/quote] I would disagree, orange has never been united, it's strength has always resided in that the alliances living there not doing stupid !@#$ as forcing other alliances away from the sphere. With the exception of WoTC every major war on planet Bob since GWII has had two of the 4 biggest alliances on orange on different sides. GWII: TOP & OPA, GWIII: TOP & ODN, UjW: FOK & IRON, Karma: IRON & FOK/TOP/ODN, Bipolar: IRON/TOP & FOK/ODN. With that said, orange is getting hit hard in this war, and I would disagree with the fact that FOK is acting "against" orange.

[quote name='KagetheSecond' date='12 February 2010 - 06:22 AM' timestamp='1265952129' post='2176785'] You'd attack us too?!?! D: [/quote] It wouldnt be the first time

I do find it interesting that there are at least 3 people who have never rerolled but yet havent kept the same name.

We've changed forums since then, I joined in may 2006

I had dongs long before GOONS joined cybernations :colbert: Actually, it wouldnt surprise me if dongs was the most common currency.

I think people are missing the real achievement here. It is not that they have declared war on 25% of TOP's membership, it's the fact that they have managed to do that in competition with 17 other alliances, whom in many cases have several times their membership. Good work John Ron

Pffft, last round I was personally at war with 10% of Aircastle

[quote name='Some-Guy' date='10 February 2010 - 09:02 PM' timestamp='1265832120' post='2173015'] Your endorsement would have no doubt swung my small defeat into a crushing embarrassment. [/quote] I would have publicly campaigned for you if I knew flak attack had endorsed you. But maybe that is what you meant by the crushing embarrasment

[quote name='That-one-place' date='09 February 2010 - 12:40 AM' timestamp='1265672410' post='2169311'] We are also accepting full surrender terms from either of these alliances. If this is your intent; please have your entire alliance change AA’s to “Nemesis Applicant”, join the black team and apply on our forums at: http://www.cn-nemesis.net/index.php . [/quote] We are discussing these terms right now. Would it be correct to assume that your whole coalition would respect these terms?

A very understandable move. Umar-love is a powerful force.

[quote name='Delta1212' date='02 February 2010 - 12:22 AM' timestamp='1265066546' post='2151342'] As of July 1st, you had 217 members. As of February 1st (aka now) you have 220 members. That's a net 3 member gain. You have 71 nations with a seniority that indicates they've joined since July 1st. To be honest, I was just looking that up because of this conversation and found that result rather surprising. I didn't realize TOP had that high of a turnover rate. [/quote] Since this surprise me I checked this against our application forum and since July 1st we've had around 40 accepted applications, and around 10 of them were old TOPpers coming back. I doubt that our ghost problem would be much worse than back then so it's probably some AA shenanigans that is responsible for that low seniority value. With that said, we've had an unusual large turnover in the latest months.

[quote name='uaciaut' date='01 February 2010 - 09:46 AM' timestamp='1265013986' post='2150170'] The only time you actually went ahead with it was when you had everything in check and you where 100% it will be an easy win on your side. [/quote] And this time is no different.

[quote name='Gopherbashi' date='01 February 2010 - 04:59 AM' timestamp='1264996792' post='2149479'] I should note that the 8,646th nation currently has a nation strength of 18,435.752. Ironically, he has nukes. Better get [i]really[/i] cracking. [/quote] Well, us and MK are on our way towards him.

[quote name='Schattenmann' date='31 January 2010 - 09:46 PM' timestamp='1264970819' post='2148206'] Really? Because in the logs Vox stole during the noCB War, when ChefJoe suggested that all the gov of MK be ZI/PZIed for taking the war nuclear, Crymson didn't say "haha, yeah lol" since that's what people always say in war. No, what he said was "noTher damn way." [/quote] I think his point was that people say these things during wars, not that they actually act upon it. There is also a distinct difference between ZI and PZI.

Wow, the return of Mr Onion hat. Now, what would you say the current DEFCON colour would be?

[quote name='junkahoolik' date='31 January 2010 - 04:51 PM' timestamp='1264953097' post='2147633'] actually, they did almost nothing to deny it. someone did call steve a coward though... and it seems for good reason... [/quote] You might want to reread the post that called him a coward then I am facing of against an ODN nation that has a 7 month war chest which surprised me a bit, if the conflict lasts and we can keep ourselves in the same NS-range that can be one long war. The FoB guy is pretty much already dead in the water.

[quote name='KingSrqt' date='31 January 2010 - 05:35 PM' timestamp='1264955746' post='2147728'] TOP's current government made it clear that they wished for the destruction of an alliance that recently merged into our own. We are simply acting on a threat much as TOP did on C&G. [/quote] You are aware of the fact that the quote in question is two years old and about the earlier instance of Universalis, not the alliance that merged into you. And if we actually wanted them destroyed during these 2 years I'm pretty sure we could have done so with very little repercussions.

just posting to point out that 0,26 is greater than 0.06