Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Emperor Martin Bormann said:

 

Oh look......another worm......how does the dung corn taste worm? ūüėĄūüėĄūüėĄ

 

If you knew anything at all about NG, you would know this is a compliment. It tastes wonderful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 222
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

9 hours ago, Morphine said:

These people are not like OBR, OG, etc. They are strict on neutrality to the point where I was once kicked from GPA for hitting a rogue who attacked other GPA members. 

 

How odd. I remember Jerdge busting rogues back in the day, so that is definitely a new one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, DeathAdder said:

 

How odd. I remember Jerdge busting rogues back in the day, so that is definitely a new one.

Maybe Morphine declared without proper permission? GPA definitely does counter rogues when possible, I recall they used to have a near ZI nation with nukes/troops/wonders/improvements who they would constantly aid in order to protect their newbies.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Blackatron said:

 GPA definitely does counter rogues when possible, I recall they used to have a near ZI nation with nukes/troops/wonders/improvements who they would constantly aid in order to protect their newbies.

When possible?  What do you mean by that? When they are not all in peace mode? 

 

What I am getting from this (if correct) is that in order to inspire them to come out and actually do more than sit in peace mode, instead of actually declaring war like we decided to do, we should of  just sent a few "rogues" first. 

 

I mean, we could do that.  It is not my preference but...

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, White Chocolate said:

When possible?  What do you mean by that? When they are not all in peace mode? 

 

Few AA's will fight in the -250 range. It's cheaper to just build your newb out of it and let them pound the rogue on their own.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DeathAdder said:

 

Few AA's will fight in the -250 range. It's cheaper to just build your newb out of it and let them pound the rogue on their own.

Wonder if GPA would of if this "rogue"'s nation WAS is the -250 range.  I might just happen to know a girl who could of done that with her nation.  :P

 

If yes, then good.  If no,  free tech.

 

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Morphine said:

It's is GPA policy for only the President/VP and Minister of Foreign Affairs to speak OWF. You won't get a response from them. Their war plan is what they are doing now. If they can get to PM, sit there, for however long it takes for the other side to go away. Whether they get bored or what have you. If they weren't able to escape to PM then their war plan is to turtle, and get to PM when they can. 

 

These people are not like OBR, OG, etc. They are strict on neutrality to the point where I was once kicked from GPA for hitting a rogue who attacked other GPA members. 

If that is the long term plan for their leadership as well, I don't see how their situation would change or why anybody would be motivated to give them peace. They need to add some cost to continuing the war for those they're fighting to change their mind. Which is why everyone permanently hiding in peace mode isn't a strategy more widely used by non-neutral alliances when on the losing side of a war.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

If that is the long term plan for their leadership as well, I don't see how their situation would change or why anybody would be motivated to give them peace. They need to add some cost to continuing the war for those they're fighting to change their mind. Which is why everyone permanently hiding in peace mode isn't a strategy more widely used by non-neutral alliances when on the losing side of a war.

Well if I was GPA, I would start to fight back now while Umbrella is tied up with OBR. GPA could take on SLAP but not SLAP and Umbrella. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Noctis Lucis Caelum said:

If that is the long term plan for their leadership as well, I don't see how their situation would change or why anybody would be motivated to give them peace. They need to add some cost to continuing the war for those they're fighting to change their mind. Which is why everyone permanently hiding in peace mode isn't a strategy more widely used by non-neutral alliances when on the losing side of a war.

 

31 minutes ago, Morphine said:

Well if I was GPA, I would start to fight back now while Umbrella is tied up with OBR. GPA could take on SLAP but not SLAP and Umbrella. 

 

well, If GPA is going to take their sweet time about this, since I do not have anyone dancing with me then I'm going to fight back with comics! (maybe should start a war propaganda thread I suppose)

 

Take this, GPA:

 

Defense_Mode.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, White Chocolate said:

Wonder if GPA would of if this "rogue"'s nation WAS is the -250 range.  I might just happen to know a girl who could of done that with her nation.  :P

 

If yes, then good.  If no,  free tech.

 

 

It's not that difficult. -250 is around 500-600NS. Or was a couple months ago. Might've changed. Just gotta wreck your !@#$, declare, then buy back up.

 

To answer your question, though; probably not.

Edited by DeathAdder
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, playerwhoplays said:

He.

 

Thats ok, I am not picky. And you are very   Feminine anyway....so it's all good. It's 2017 after all. :P 

Edited by Emperor Martin Bormann
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2017 at 7:22 AM, Greater Hungary said:

 

Competition without growth is futile. You can compete and strive, only to find yourself in the same infantile mindset with the same foibles you once began with. Wanton destruction is neither competition, nor gainful. It is an act of sheer boredom and desperation in games such as these.

 

Well then, I must be the epitome of awesome, because I have achieved both. Where are you.. exactly.. ranked.. in your growth?

*Leans over.. stares.. waaaaayyyyy... ddoooowwwwnnnn.*

Oh.. I see.. you're relatively new to governing.

Edited by Maelstrom Vortex
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2017 at 7:42 PM, Maelstrom Vortex said:

 

Well then, I must be the epitome of awesome, because I have achieved both. Where are you.. exactly.. ranked.. in your growth?

*Leans over.. stares.. waaaaayyyyy... ddoooowwwwnnnn.*

Oh.. I see.. you're relatively new to governing.

 

I'm doing quite fine, thank you very much. You see, we've evolved beyond the need for petty insults. Have a nice day!

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Greater Hungary said:

 

I'm doing quite fine, thank you very much. You see, we've evolved beyond the need for petty insults. Have a nice day!

 

But clearly not the concept that you actually have to put in effort to grow, instead of just going to war and it magically happening in the post-stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me old fashioned,  but the way I grew up on Planet Bob was being taught that the entire reason to join an alliance in the first place was so that one would have other nations one could count on regardless of the situation to defend each other.

 

Son.png

 

Apparently, the Green "Protection" Agency is the exception in that regard.  Their charter says otherwise, of course.  Maybe that is the problem,  maybe GPA is so caught up in what is written down that they have come to believe that is ALL that is required.  In other words,  just because their charter states

 

http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Charter_of_the_Green_Protection_Agency

 

"Section 1, #3

Protection. The GPA, as an Alliance, has the right and duty to defend against either hostile actions directed at individual members or at the sovereignty of the GPA."

 

then their "duty" (note - the GPA charter is not an optional defense agreement)  to defend each other is done magically without any effort on their part to get off their butts (and come out from behind peace mode) to actually defend their membership who did not get into peace mode before we attacked.  

 

I have been clear from the beginning.  SLAP is attacking GPA members and GPA sovereignty.  This is without any cause.  It is the clearest example of a violation of rights possible. 

 

GPA is basically relying on "well, it's the thought that counts" to an extent that most alliances would consider not only unhealthy but missing the point of being in an alliance in the first place. 

 

Congratulations, GPA, you had good intentions - you really did. I do believe that.  What happened?  An alliance's actions speak far louder than words.  What use is an alliance "Charter" when not followed?  You might as well break apart and become a bunch of nations on none. 

 

 

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, D34th said:

You seem to be upset, don't be upset, we're fine, don't worry about us. 

Indeed.  And you would be just as fine sitting as a non-aligned nation in peace mode as you are now.  So would the other 104 out of your 122 total nations who are also in peace mode.

 

My question is why pretend you are an alliance when you're not even defending those of you being attacked in the slightest? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, D34th said:

You seem to be upset, don't be upset, we're fine, don't worry about us. 


I personally would be upset if I was a member of GPA and to know deep down that my alliance would do nothing to support me if attacked, not sure i would remain within GPA.

This is one thing i do not understand, WHY is the leader of GPA and his friends who got in to peace mode, showing such lack of respect for those hours wasted by those they leave out to die ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, White Chocolate said:

Indeed.  And you would be just as fine sitting as a non-aligned nation in peace mode as you are now.  So would the other 104 out of your 122 total nations who are also in peace mode.

 

My question is why pretend you are an alliance when you're not even defending those of you being attacked in the slightest? 

 

Why would you care about the choices we've made? As I said, if we are not worried, neither should be you. 

 

24 minutes ago, Devialance said:


I personally would be upset if I was a member of GPA and to know deep down that my alliance would do nothing to support me if attacked, not sure i would remain within GPA.

This is one thing i do not understand, WHY is the leader of GPA and his friends who got in to peace mode, showing such lack of respect for those hours wasted by those they leave out to die ?

 

Happily for both of us you aren't a member of GPA.

 

We appreciate the concern of both of you about our internal affairs and we would gladly consider your opinions about it  as soon as you join our alliance, please proceed to http://cn-gpa.com/forums/index.php to submit your application. Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, D34th said:

 

Why would you care about the choices we've made? As I said, if we are not worried, neither should be you. 

 

Who said anything about being worried.  Slightly disappointed, yes.  I mean, just in general it is somewhat sad to see  the day that the best a so called alliance can do is get into peace mode before attacked and watch their fellow alliance members burn.  Having that high infra statistic must be a key element of keeping GPA together as an alliance.  Admin forbid you should lose any and fall apart.

 

But don't give yourselves too much credit.  I'm mostly just curious how you justify not doing the one thing that makes being in an alliance with a group of people different than being non-aligned.  Friends?   I could chose to be non-aligned and sit in peace mode and maintain all the friendships I've established on Planet Bob.  Anyone could do that.  "Neutrality"?  By defending yourselves and each other GPA is not getting involved in any outside politics.  You are doing what an alliance does, defending the alliance and the people in it.  Being strategic?  Maybe if you were selectively sending people out to fight one at a time there would be an argument that it has strategic value.  To keep from giving us what we want?  How do you know we just do not want to keep you in peace mode?

Edited by White Chocolate
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...