Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Longshadow

  1. I like how you conveniently change the wording to suit your needs. We aren't talking about how a member represents his/her alliance. We are talking about how an opinion held by one member in fact is the prevailing opinion of the entire Alliance (when anyone with half a brain will realize this isn't the case). You do represent Polar, but it would be foolish to say that you and your silly ideas are what Polar believes in. In NSO we have what you would call Ministers but we also have top gov't, you see the signatures there are those who are the top gov't. You don't see the ministers because they are simply that, ministers. We don't call them that in NSO but that's not the point, you're attempting to push relevance onto a position when in fact it probably doesn't hold that relevance. It really all depends on the gov't in question, trying to apply some overarching philosophy to titles/positions in a general sense is really sort of pants on head thinking, considering all these alliances have their own ways of doing things.
  2. One man in a multiperson gov't. You act as if what he believes holds bearing for the whole of TLR. That would be like saying my opinion, as a lowly officer in Inquisition (or even if I were say the head of Inquisition [our war department]) would hold a high level of bearing for NSO as a whole. It doesn't and your attempts to insinuate it does in Rush's case merely shows your grasping at straws.
  3. It was that way for most of us at war with Aftermath. It just was how the cards fell in this war, there wasn't real animosity there... Other than the fact I didn't get stomped like usual!
  4. I feel like I understand Rush's point but at the same time for myself, and I think for my Alliance at least, this was us merely stepping in to help our ally. We didn't really care about the main objectives of the war and thus imposing even the idea of "We won't talk peace till you come out of peace mode" is simply something we felt was just an "Eh" move. No reason for us to do it as far as I could tell. e: I did the thing.
  5. Yet you garner it in the droves because your mouth is filled with more crap than your butt. Maybe they are one and the same in your case.
  6. The Moldavi Doctrine is always there for everyone :ehm:
  7. This. Stay classy ODN and Fark have fun out there.
  8. I think something to consider is that the politics are pretty static lately, there hasn't been much "change" in CN politics in some time, and for me I think it stems from a lack of change in the game itself. Perhaps if we could see some more dynamic changes or gameplay things we might have more dynamic politics.
  9. I think it has more to do with several alliances either finding this war to be boring and not wanting to participate or just resigning themselves to the beat down and saving their WCs for rebuilding when the war is over. At least this is my opinion on it, I'm sure there are a host of reasons why but those probably are a factor.
  10. It isn't the nukes htat is the problem, most low level nations can make up for getting hit hard by nukes with 1 6mil aid package. The real problem is the wonders, the consistent edge those provide, especially the military wonders like WRC etc. I prefer the suggestion of having them deactivated if you fall below the Infra/Tech threshold for each (established individually for each wonder). The MP threshold for nukes is already fine.
  11. It's a shame I don't like Sativa, give me hybrids please. Does this apply to the morning as well? :D
  12. Or perhaps someone should put to admin an idea for dealing with this issue, instead of demanding they reroll.
  • Create New...