Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Seems to have been skipped over. STA is not allied to TPF, we are allied to MK and NpO who you have as part of your yellow circle. Yep. It was an outdated wiki page. Thank you for bringing this to our attention - we will edit the map to reflect this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Thank you for this investment in the community, Blackstone. You are very welcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Seems to have been skipped over. STA is not allied to TPF, we are allied to MK and NpO who you have as part of your yellow circle. Tyga they have ODPs, economic pacts and even the MK NPO radio station as part the web. I don't imagine they really care about reality they just want to say its all NPOs fault and they should die. They don't even know what a spy is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Tyga they have ODPs, economic pacts and even the MK NPO radio station as part the web. I don't imagine they really care about reality they just want to say its all NPOs fault and they should die. They don't even know what a spy is. You're welcome? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pakkk Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 this is what we should do. On April 1st every alliance drops their treaties. Admin makes a new rule that each alliance cannot have more then 3 treaties. Proble = Solved Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyman Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Quite large. Sort of unrelated, but what do the question marks on the coat of arms represent, Windsor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Quite large. Sort of unrelated, but what do the question marks on the coat of arms represent, Windsor? Anonymity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Tyga they have ODPs, economic pacts and even the MK NPO radio station as part the web. I don't imagine they really care about reality they just want to say its all NPOs fault and they should die. They don't even know what a spy is. In that case then they missed a lot of SNOW members and still forgot our MK and NpO treaties. We have never held a treaty with TPF to my knowledge, so not sure why an old version of the CN Wiki would claim so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heyman Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) Anonymity. A simple answer; I was hoping for a long and detailed explanation so I could accuse you of taking this game far too seriously. I guess you've proven my assumptions wrong. :lol: Edited February 27, 2009 by Heyman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 MK isn't aligned with NPO. Just quoting this for future reference, and the big bad dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imhotep Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Things were so much simpler when you created an alliance/coalition one war at a time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 In that case then they missed a lot of SNOW members and still forgot our MK and NpO treaties.We have never held a treaty with TPF to my knowledge, so not sure why an old version of the CN Wiki would claim so. Yes, that was a mistake that is being corrected. Indeed, there is plenty that we left out. So for those who want to accuse us of intentionally designing this map to make it more confusing, please bear this in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 A simple answer; I was hoping for a long and detailed explanation so I could accuse you of taking this game far too seriously. I guess you've proven my assumptions wrong. :lol: It's okay. This seems to be a common occurrence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmia Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Until you give this a try, you have no idea of the true complexity that is a treaty web. We are not a spy network either. I hope this is proof of that, by your standards. This was quite the project, and just the attempt in itself shows that we are taking strides that nobody else has bothered to. How is making a giant treaty web making strides? BobJanova made a 3D one so you're not the only one making a web that shows things. If you're trying to make a point about how many treaties, that is not going to change anything. There are so many alliances these days, there are going to be that many treaties. The old mantra that "too many treaties!" has been repeated and worn out. People will sign with people because of they are friends. I still don't see how this proves anything other than making a huge web that while took a lot of effort and is impressive in that own right.. it still doesn't make any difference than the main MDP web. People are going to sign with who they want to. We all know the treaty web is a mess however it is not going to change. With as many alliances ingame and with as many people wanting friendships as they do or whatever reasons they sign, they will continue to be that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) How is making a giant treaty web making strides? BobJanova made a 3D one so you're not the only one making a web that shows things. If you're trying to make a point about how many treaties, that is not going to change anything.There are so many alliances these days, there are going to be that many treaties. The old mantra that "too many treaties!" has been repeated and worn out. People will sign with people because of they are friends. I still don't see how this proves anything other than making a huge web that while took a lot of effort and is impressive in that own right.. it still doesn't make any difference than the main MDP web. People are going to sign with who they want to. We all know the treaty web is a mess however it is not going to change. With as many alliances ingame and with as many people wanting friendships as they do or whatever reasons they sign, they will continue to be that way. At this rate, something's going to have to change if we want to "get our war on". Edited February 27, 2009 by Windsor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 In that case then they missed a lot of SNOW members and still forgot our MK and NpO treaties.We have never held a treaty with TPF to my knowledge, so not sure why an old version of the CN Wiki would claim so. Well perhaps it came from We have members that are handing us information on a silver platter or perhaps in the desperate attempt to put up as many lines as possible they just tossed every treaty they could find on Wiki. If that is the case perhaps they saw the Don't Pee in our Snow thing with STA TPF and \m/ that lasted a week to counter FAN/GOLDS thing from long ago and just tossed it in. That would be my guess. Of course how a group that can not even figure out who is treatied to who is going to take out NPO is beyond me. Also Hi Tyga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Well perhaps it came fromor perhaps in the desperate attempt to put up as many lines as possible they just tossed every treaty they could find on Wiki. If that is the case perhaps they saw the Don't Pee in our Snow thing with STA TPF and \m/ that lasted a week to counter FAN/GOLDS thing from long ago and just tossed it in. That would be my guess. Of course how a group that can not even figure out who is treatied to who is going to take out NPO is beyond me. Also Hi Tyga I don't even know where to start with your schtick. I'm not even in an alliance and I read here that STA recently signed onto a group white sphere treaty with a NAP that included your alliance. The tinfoil, it hurts me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 That's actually really cool, good work guys! at Zenith not being in the circle though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 This is pretty cool. First time I've seen MFO on any kind of web. Kinda funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirreille Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Obviously someone put in some time to do all of this; a valiant effort to untangle this modern day Gordian Knot. You put OPP in the same blue box attached to TPF as well as the members of OPP; OPP isn't an AA it's a protectorate bloc like Ragnabloc. Also, if you want to see a more easily understood web, you could try limiting the AAs on it to 1 or maybe even 2 million NS, and maybe a spot for every bloc that qualifies together as well. As fun as it is to actually see our AA on the web, it's rather pointless in the grand scheme of things. The little fishies generally school and follow the larger ones around anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Bad Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I don't even know where to start with your schtick. I'm not even in an alliance and I read here that STA recently signed onto a group white sphere treaty with a NAP that included your alliance. The tinfoil, it hurts me. Then you also read that no one else in that group was added. So I think my theory is far more likely. And why would they add NAPs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Then you also read that no one else in that group was added. So I think my theory is far more likely. And why would they add NAPs? Okay, so I am wrong in this case. Wow, I just got a tingle. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Well perhaps it came fromor perhaps in the desperate attempt to put up as many lines as possible they just tossed every treaty they could find on Wiki. If that is the case perhaps they saw the Don't Pee in our Snow thing with STA TPF and \m/ that lasted a week to counter FAN/GOLDS thing from long ago and just tossed it in. That would be my guess. Of course how a group that can not even figure out who is treatied to who is going to take out NPO is beyond me. Also Hi Tyga We did not include every treaty we could find. Obviously. This was stated here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1300989 How you can ignore everything posted in here and comment on it is beyond ME. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windsor Posted February 27, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 (edited) That's actually really cool, good work guys! at Zenith not being in the circle though. It's okay. We're turning the heat into useful data that we can use to produce a final version. We'll make sure to include Zenith next time. Thanks for the compliment. Edited February 27, 2009 by Windsor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Specific Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 We did not include every treaty we could find. Obviously. This was stated here: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1300989How you can ignore everything posted in here and comment on it is beyond ME. To continue where I was wrong, and seeing Tyga and TheBigBad protest, I dunn think STA and TPF much like each other. B) Good thing they have that non-aggression pact! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.