Alice Lune

Alright, so which side wants cheap steel? If you give me some quality whiskey, I may consider selling a small amount for cheap.

Or just make it so that you can only make a forum account through a link from your PnW game account. Make it so that there's no other way to make a forum account aside from the game itself. If it turns out to be a spam, just block that game account and simultaneously cause the forum account to be inactive. Alternatively, you can allow a banned game account to make appeal through a special forum section that only works as an appeal forum and nothing else.

I have joined the 'in crowd'! Yes!

Okay, now I understand why people don't like Fraggle.

I like Trump. He's quite entertaining. Nobody says "You're fired!" better than Trump. Except that one guy in a movie who blast's a guy with a gun (or was it a shotgun?) and says, "You're fired".

So... how many gasoline for a 10 man alliance?

So this is the 'in thing' now? I should start sending Impero irrelevant mails from now on.

Why is everyone dissing fraggle?

Instead of changing it to 'fuel', I'd rather that we get a choice what to name it ourselves. So if I want to rename gasoline into 'tears', I should be able to. Selling 60 tonnes of tears would be funny. It's not a necessary change, but it's a cosmetic change that doesn't hurt the game. I will say yes, simply because it makes sense. Anyway, we call it petrol here and we're not commies, you capitalist!

I shall direct you, Vincent, to another game, called Tiberium Alliances. Play for 2 weeks, you will then understand how stupid it is for a game to not have a break or deus ex machina to protect the smaller entities. I played that game for a week, I got bullied (read: constantly destroyed) by people who had played for a year, simply because I just started playing. Their justification? "You small, we big. You have strategic resource, you die. If you don't run, you die repeatedly." Even in the real world people would bully others, why do you think people won't bully others in games? The moment you fight in a war, you will know the feeling of, "Oh darn! I hope I'm too small for him to hit" Imagine this senario. I have 1000 NS, I have 500 aircrafts. My alliance mates are having trouble beating up 500 NS nations. I swoop in, destroy everything the opponent(s) have, then my alliancemates get their win. I don't lose anything. My opponents lose everything. Don't except people to play fair or be all nice. You can put a modicum of trust in people, but people are in general not trustworthy except where it's beneficial to them. Or you could've actually been joking about this suggestion and I'm making myself look stupid answering seriously.

Communist.

The church (read: me) always accepts donations. I don't mind not listed, but if you can donate 2 million of your hard earned cash. I swear I will never forget you... for month.

I can attest to this. Pornography is one of the oldest entertainment in the world. Way earlier than country music. Even the Ancient Egyptians and Greeks had porn. Ancient Greeks had a lot of porn and erotica. We only know of one Ancient Egyptian porn so far, since their porn are written on papyrus and those don't last long. Let's not talk about the Romans. And you didn't invite me?

I guess 42. BTW, I bet this is going to be moved to spam soon

I agree with the others on this thread that this should not happen. This should not happen even as an option. This move reeks of Big Brother and everyone's entitled to their own privacy in their own nation. If my leader ask me how much I have, I'll tell them. If I want to lie about it, let me lie about it. I am not obligated to be 100% truthful to my alliance leader. I signed up for what the alliance stands for. Autocratic Big Brother alliance is not what I signed up for. This move will cause alliances to have to choose whether to enable or disable surveillance on their own nations. Given such an option, surveillance will win everytime. There is no question about it. Even if it's just an option, some alliances will make 'visible inventory' a rule for their alliance. No, don't start with this, ever. I repeat. If I want to lie about what I have, I should have the ability to lie about it. If my alliance leaders are so bent on spying on me, then they're welcome to spy on me.

The only way this can be possible is if everyone on Earth are so drunk on whiskey or rum that we thought all short-haired and flat chested women are men for at least 9 months. Then we can probably see around 2 million male pregnancy perhaps.

That would work. Mike goes to the local gunstore. "I'd like a shotgun, please." The shopkeeper says, "Here, no license necessary. But I can't sell you the bullets." Mike fumes, "How the heck am I going to catch a deer without bullets?" "Use traps," the shopkeeper says as he sells another gun to another customer without selling the bullet as well. 10 years later. Everyone has a bullet making machine. I don't know, I'd really like one of those small but elegant guns. I'm currently in love with Glock 19's appearance.

Word on the street is that ISIS is US and Israel's creation to prevent 3rd World War, man. Iraqi military has complained that they received 'orders' to abandon their posts which caused those posts to be raided immediately afterwards by ISIS troops looking for military supplies. These links provide supporting arguments to this allegation: 1) http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-the-us-supports-the-islamic-state-isis-one-accidental-airdrop-vs-billions-in-covert-military-aid/5409449 2) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/10/21/u-s-accidentally-delivered-weapons-to-the-islamic-state-by-airdrop-militants-allege/ 3) http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-department-of-defense-admits-supporting-isis-buffer-zones-in-syria/5451809 4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcoA7PFTNSc 5) http://levantreport.com/2015/05/19/2012-defense-intelligence-agency-document-west-will-facilitate-rise-of-islamic-state-in-order-to-isolate-the-syrian-regime/ I agree that the individual soldiers should not be blamed for following orders. But that same government/military that you claimed to be fighting extremists are the same government/military that is assisting said extremists/terrorists and providing them military supplies. This is just politics, nothing to do with saving allies or freedom. BTW, how the heck you guys find out that was from 4chan? That post wasn't aimed at me and even I felt offended.

I'm 15. Well, I was. About 15 years ago. But hey, I've been 15 once.

Banning guns out of safety concern is just a matter of logic. The scenario: Mike has a kitchen knife. James has a Glock 17. Alice has Uzi. Henry has some kind of assault rifle. During wars: Mike will run away to the nearest refugee camp or enlist in the army. James will save his friends and family with his gun as his safety Alice will run away, probably stealing some supplies from people by aiming her Uzi at their heads. Henry will act like Rambo and try to rally his assault rifle friends for a charge. But they will die from either artillery, sniper or grenades. During periods of depression or insanity. Mike will try to stab people, and will probably succeed killing ONE before those around him run away and the cops come to arrest him. James will shoot someone, then when others try to run away, he will shoot them again, potentially causing the death of SEVERAL people. Depressed Alice will just walk into a mall or college, take out her easily concealed Uzi and opened fire without a word, causing the death of SCORES of people, if she happens to start shooting in a crowded place. Henry will likely not go to a public place but to a neighbourhood or apartment complex and start opening fire indiscriminately. Walls won't be much of a barrier. Depending on the level of insanity, A LOT of people can die in the first 10 minutes. So conclusion, guns don't kill people, but giving guns to people allows them to kill people more effectively when they do go insane, which happens a lot nowadays. Personally I like guns. My dream is to own one of those beautiful guns with silver chassis. But as to whether I think guns should be banned, I agree.

Question! Wouldn't this normally be called assimilation instead of merging?

You guys are such ass. Remember the good old days when you could survive with 2 dollars a day? I still remember, because it hadn't been that long since I was a small nation with an income of 20k a day. 42k would've been a lot of money for us back in the day. Stop dissing him, unless you have so much money you're happy to help me fund my nukes. So why would kastor steal 42k in the first place? I would've thought it would be beneath him?

The highlights looks a lot like my FUBA. How did you get my codes, Sheepy?!!! But it's a nice feature. Just one problem, I'm saving for nukes. Sheepy, please don't make me spend my money on anything other than nukes. EDITED: BTW, Sheepy, can we have a modifier in relation to nation size or GDP? As it stands, the richer nations, which is generally the bigger nations has significantly greater chance of winning since they can spend a lot more money on team training than a smaller nation. That was what I did with FUBA so it makes a size 10 nation that runs no stadium will actually lose to a size one nation with only 1 city and 2 stadiums, which makes it possible for smaller nations to win in sports against bigger nations.

Did somebody say something about crucifixion?