Kenadian Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) Greenland Republic. I'll be able to come out of peace mode Mondayish, so we can have a small 1v1 then. I promise I won't nuke you too hard. *has no nukes* Funny thing, I finally got the money required for a MP but then Justy's nation is gone (and thus my uranium) and now it's dedicated to a chest. So, I has nothing of nukes. And I guarantee you it won't be one on one for long. Is GR even at war with the GGA? I didn't bother to follow. Edited April 25, 2009 by Kenadian_2006 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Tolkien Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 GGA declared war on everyone in Karma who was at war with NPO at the time, so yes. Also: I'll make sure it's 1v1, got it? You leave that to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 GGA declared war on everyone in Karma who was at war with NPO at the time, so yes.Also: I'll make sure it's 1v1, got it? You leave that to me. I'm not complaining. Also, to the best of my knowledge we're only at war with 9 alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Tolkien Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I'm not complaining. Also, to the best of my knowledge we're only at war with 9 alliances. And Greenland Republic was one of those 9 alliances that declared war on NPO at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Death II Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I voted that CN would be better off without NPO. With NPO gone, we can finally start focusing on other alliances flaws and take them down for it so that its fair to all. Instead of it being directed on 1 alliance, many alliances will get the blame from teh public Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenadian Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 And Greenland Republic was one of those 9 alliances that declared war on NPO at the time. *shrugs* Also, if you can make the 1v1 happen, be my bloody guest. Though how you can control other alliances is beyond me. NOW WHO IS HEGEMONIC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Yes. NPO has destroyed many alliances, some deserving, some not so much. And even if a new #1 alliance like NPO is established, we would know we have the capability to topple it if it gets too out of hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morte Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I used to watch in GWII (Legion wasnt involved) Ivan's, Dilbers, Zhadums, President Pierce, everyone I could think of and get a bit of glee as their nations were destroyed. Are we thinking of the same GWII? I voted no. How many nations did the NPO bring into this game? How many nations did they drive from it? They've brought a lot to the game and they have unfortunately destroyed a lot as well. However, in the absence of the NPO it is likely these nations would have perished in another war possibly perpetrated by another 'bad' alliance. Or barring world conflict completely those nations would've died in peace and utter boredom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inquisitor Tolkien Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) *shrugs*Also, if you can make the 1v1 happen, be my bloody guest. Though how you can control other alliances is beyond me. NOW WHO IS HEGEMONIC? Great Cthulhu knows all, sees all, and does all. It's not that big a deal. I'll just go and make some personal requests with the main alliances on GGA, and put a warning for a declaration and in my bio like "No one touches Ken until after I'm done with him, or you get nuked: sides be damned". And I don't mind fighting more then 1v1, although I'd rather not. Still, more casualties are ftw. And I WILL carry out on it, if need be. )): Now I should stop this derail, shouldn't I? Anyway, back to the NPO... Edited April 25, 2009 by Tolkien Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill the great Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I have been against the NPO and its actions for roughly two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomcat Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 voted yes because cybernations would be a lot more complicated and interesting without one giant alliance bloc that just curbstomps whoever they feel like without consequences Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlev Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Gawd hell yes. CN would be like a brand new game were it rid of NPO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorgon Posted April 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Gawd hell yes. CN would be like a brand new game were it rid of NPO. off topic for a 2nd but who's the chick in ur sig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingzog Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Null vote. This poll is rather like asking a group of people if they want the Sun to rise tomorrow. (Hint: The sun rise whether you want it to or not.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerius Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Whilst I won't pretend to hide my disdain for the NPO, I don't know how interesting the game would be without them. I'd prefer a severely broken Pacifica to a dead one. And I do love cake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverHawk Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Mmmm....Caek. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paint Your Target Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Having been one of the few permanent facts of this game, it will be very interesting to see what happens in the vacuum created by NPOs fall, especially with its obvious successor in IRON fighting on the same side. This war has a long way to go, but the outcome could see a period of great and interesting change in the Cyberverse- if the victorious coalition, whoever that may be, helps make it so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ferdinand I Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Better. No doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strudeldorf Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) Oh, most definitely. I hate those eval Pacificans. Edited April 25, 2009 by Strudeldorf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machiabelly Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Bob is not better off with the loss of any alliance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elderago Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 BEEF CAKES !! ehem I wonder what planet bob would be like without planet bob... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I do not think they should be dominant but I wouldn't mind more even so I vote no, they should be here but even with other sides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boscher Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I voted No. We would be better of with a much smaller less powerfull NPO though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Skint Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 Of course planet Bob is not better without the NPO. The destruction of NPO should be wished for by nobody. A severe weakening, yes. Destruction, no. How interesting would the political world be afterwards if the "Hegemony" would be completely wiped out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ebony Wings Posted April 25, 2009 Report Share Posted April 25, 2009 I voted yes, mostly because the influential players of NPO (and a good chunk of the peasantry, as well) are generally insufferable egomaniacs. 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.