enderland

Who was the FAN guy who went back and forth with NPO for a loong time back during that time? He's the one who comes to mind. edit - can't believe I forgot alterego.

The cost of destroying 5 Labor Camps (750k) is averaged out over each day. If you collect once a day, your improvement swapping cost is 750k/day. If you collect once every 10 days, it's 75k/day - and you get the same collection benefit.

I thought MQ wasn't an alliance.

You know it wasn't until very recently in the world where nation stätes realistically had a choice of remaining neutral with respect to the rest of the world. In this sense, an alliance in CN which doesn't arm itself or take precautions against attack should not be surprised when other nation stätes/alliances prey upon it. Regarding your "no one who raids donates" - my first nation was deleted with the #1 casualty count, around 7M at that time nearly 4 years ago. I had probably close to $300 worth of donations I bought in-game for my nation at that point and trust me, I raided anything and everything that moved.

Freudian slip.

DTOM is basically an ODP with all other neutral alliances. (I don't really have a problem with this, either, but having a charter which basically says "we reserve the right to defend other alliances whenever we want" makes it hard to really be considered neutral)

I assume you will be petitioning the true gods of CN to move this thread to its proper home as it appears in his naivety, tamerlane posted in the wrong spot. ;)

If you read their charter that's... about what it seems to say, actually. Not that any alliance since 2007 has cared what their charter says.

I guess it doesn't really matter since no one in CN except a few actually care about wordings but: seems strongly to indicate the GOP's defense of neutrality to be something VE is also interested in defending.

I suppose this is the part in your charter which allows this. Interesting, I guess.

Interesting policy to basically make a protectorate treaty a MDoAP (which is what the "protectorate" treaty is). Relevant text:

Oh come on, grow up. Your alliance (CCC) has declared war against MQ. CCC has close to 40 wars with MQ nations at this point. Whether you officially acknowledge it or not is a matter of pride apparently, but acting as if you haven't coordinated or declared war makes you look incredibly foolish.

This is in the wrong subforum.

GPA is acting decidedly isolationist and neutral in this conflict. GOP is most definitely not being neutral or isolationist. In fact, GOP is fighting to defend its right to remain isolationist - which in a very real sense means they can no longer be truly neutral (since they are now attempting to uphold their CN worldview and force it on others). Fighting to spread and defend your worldview is most decidedly not neutral as indeed GOP has definitively taken sides in the MQ vs TDO war.

DOOMBIRD DOOMCAVE is going to be so happy they have targets again.

The entire political world here would have stopped existing a long time ago if people didn't try to force their will on others. MQ attacking TDO is just another facet of it (interestingly so is your post).

Someone should make a chart of which alliances are actually playing CN still. TOP is definitely on what I suspect to be a very, very, short list.

Yeah. It all gets back to being able to easily defend your alliance. If you have 100 nations all clustered around the same NS level (whether 200k or 50k) it becomes much more difficult for a single alliance to effectively attack you, because you can very easily outnumber them in that range. The 5% rule isn't the problem, here either, it's the fact that fundamentally the game mechanics prohibit someone who is new (or newer, even) from ever catching some of the 200k NS giants. Period. Doesn't matter if all the 200k person does is log in every other day and the newbie is online 5 hours a day.

Good luck. You guys will need it.

Yeah, pretty much this. My nation is nearly two years old and yet after almost perfect economic development, it is JUST now getting to the place it's almost relevant in a war.

It's been six years since VE reformed? I. Am. Old.

You should have been part of Citadel.

Oh come on you think people are voting on what is most likely or rather what they want to happen?

The problem is, with Anakin, I have no reason to like him or care what happens to him because he is solely portrayed as an emo kid. The bad-dialogue fest with Padme only serves to emphasize this. Maybe if I was an emo kid who felt like no one in the world liked me I could identify with him? I don't see an inner struggle, I don't see him Nothing which he does is remotely surprising throughout the entire movie, with the exception of the first scene where he randomly cares about some clone pilot. He's reckless and acts irresponsibly and with disdain towards the Jedi Order the entire movie. Contrast your explanations of Luke and Anakin. You give about 3 times as much explanation as to the character of Luke as you did Anakin. This is my point. Anakin's character is shallow and Luke's character is dynamic and has more of a real feel to it (though I don't know how you can claim Luke is more whiney than Anakin). Regarding CGI, maybe it's because I grew up before every single action movie was completely CGI, but I do not find CGI and green screens the only way to show grandeur and intense battle scenes. Lots of CGI aliens fighting other CGI characters in the background is cool but ultimately might add nothing to the plot of the movie - as in the opening scene of EP III. CGI might be cool to some but the effect at the beginning of A New Hope with just two ships was significant. You see the clear contrast between the might of the Empire and Rebellion in about 5 seconds. You don't need to see 500 star destroyers fighting 10 rebel ships to accomplish this. The relative might of the Empire is clear, with just one ship. My guess is you are young enough to not remember the days when plot/character development was significantly more important to movies. It was harder to make a popular movie ignoring the fundamentals of theatrical writing. It was a lot harder to cover up complete lack of either with CGI or special effects. But in the past 10 years, a lot of movies have used these to compensate for terribly screen writing...

Well, first for a movie which was dedicated to the character development of Anakin (presumably? it's hard to really see a clear theme in the movie), this was all done incredibly poorly. The original trilogy was about the characters and their development. The audience feels connected to the characters and has a reason to care about them. The action supports this, it supports their development, and the reason I care about the movies is the story/characters. How many people have you heard say that any of the prequels are wonderful because of the character depth (lol) or story? Your entire support is about individual components which were in effect the only value of the movies. There was minimal (at best) character development, the dialogue/story was boring as hell, and the only reason the movies can be considered worth watching is the action scenes and/or CGI. You see a whiney kid go through... exactly the path you expect him to go, becoming evil. Go figure, this isn't suspenseful or dramatic at all. I don't care when Anakin becomes Vader because he is never shown to have redeeming qualities whatsoever. There's no internal battle, I'm never given a "why should I care" answer about Anakin. None of the characters in any of the prequel have any depth whatsoever, which makes sense because they were pawns in the "oooh CGI is cool, I'm gonna use as much of it as possible!" production style.