Grillick

This is a bad idea. If the number if troops you can send is limited by the receiving nation's build capacity, it has no utility, and if it is not so limited, it is overpowered.

Actually, it's a consequence of the war on drugs, and the vast sums of cash at the disposal of local police forces as a result of criminal forfeiture laws.

The second statement misrepresents the game policy. Players on shared networks may play, but they may not interact with one another (through alliance, trade, or war).

If Master_Blaster was the credibility of VoC, they must not have had much to begin with.

I'll donate for your nation, Adama, if you send me a negotiable bill of lading for 3 goats, CPT NYC.

TAC wasn't from Guardian. I think the other three were, though.

The colors used in traffic signals have bits of other colors mixed in so the colorblind can distinguish them. They also have a standardized orientation to assist.

I want to see that league with the same players as the NFL.

When steel was only selling for 1000, supermarkets and banks had a greater marginal utility than steel mills. Now that it is selling for around 2000, steel mills have a greater marginal utility than commerce improvements. When my infrastructure reaches 1000 or so per city, this will change again.

Yes, although their decreased effectiveness at the job for which they are designed makes them less objectionable.

The first step to changing the way we think about firearms is recognizing that they were designed for, and are really only useful for, piercing and tearing the flesh and organs of living beings.

Maybe have the color of the food icon change when you have all six?

The game won't let you sell down TO the minimum infrastructure you can have for your improvements. You need to demolish one, sell down to 450, then repurchase. I recommend a farm.

I've said it beforehand I'll say it again. I don't think alliances should be able to enforce embargoes through game mechanics. Individual nations should be able to, however.

The fact that there have been numerous tornadoes every year over the past century at least is not why we know that tornadoes in the area are likely to continue to occur. We know they are likely to continue to occur because the underlying forces that create them still persist in the area. The same is true for earthquakes in Japan. It is an error in logic to say "There have been lots of earthquakes in Japan, so we should prepare for earthquakes in Japan." This is doubly true when we know the underlying cause of earthquakes, but it remains true for things the underlying causes of which are clouded or uncertain (such as the fall of civilizations). Firstly, these are not contradictory opinions. One is merely somewhat broader than the other. To be clear, my stance remains that the former is more correct, and that nothing anyone has said to the contrary disputes that. The fact that a person may wish to collect guns does not indicate that a gun's purpose is to be collectible. Disprove the former or the latter, if you think you can. But I don't think you can. For what it's worth, I'm quite sure that one of the first two, rather than the third, reasons Bushman missed my point is the main culprit. I have long had what others perceive as a lack of clarity due to inadequate elaboration. I assume that everything that is self-evident to me is self-evident to everyone, so I tend to skip logical steps when explaining myself. (Edit to finish my paragraph)

While attempting to verify this error on my own nation, I discovered that this appears to be merely a display error. That is to say, the bonus is being applied, but it is not displayed anywhere. Using the numbers displayed, income should be slightly more than 99% of what is displayed, indicating that the 1% increase is included before the displayed revenue is shown.

Speaking about an item's original use is not the same thing as its primary purpose. A microwave's primary purpose is to heat its contents. A GPS device's primary purpose is to locate its holder. Duct tape's primary purpose is as an adhesive. As for Bushman, he obviously completely misunderstands my point. Whether this is deliberate, a result of my lack of clarity, or a result of his mental acuity is uncertain. But he still hasn't provided evidence that a gun's primary purpose is not to kill.

A gun's primary purpose is to kill. Whether the target is human or animal does not remove that fact. Using a gun to defend property is only effective because a gun's primary purpose is to kill, thus deterring would be property thieves. "Sport" shooting us nothing more than simulated killing. Someone showing off his talent at it is merely showing off his talent at shooting a gun, whose primary purpose, once again, is to kill. When one hunts for food, is it your contention that s/he is not killing?

No, it's unconstitutional. The Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. Nobody can argue that the death penalty isn't cruel, and in modern society it is clearly unusual, as well.

No, the reason the cost goes up is because executing people is unconstitutional, and right-minded advocates are doing what they can to convince the courts of that fact.

I didn't say he(she?) was wrong. I said the purported support for his (her?) conclusion was erroneous. You always accuse me if saying things I don't say. I'll try to be more clear in future.

What's the matter? You doubt my neutrality? (TeeHee)

I volunteer to hold the pot during the season. Since I won't be participating in the league, you know I'll be unbiased. Heck, I'll even throw in 10k of my own money while I'm at it.

Yes, because the hemispheres are defined slightly differently than they are in the real world, as are continents. Your nation is in Africa. Africa, South america, and Australia are the Southern Hemisphere. The winter will end, as I said, on October 1 game date. This will occur approximately 4 RL days from now.

That's not an answer at all. What you're proposing creates another source of revenue, but there's no mechanism for increasing the number of shares available that makes any sense, so there's hardly any incentive at all to ever sell the shares, since they cost nothing to maintain and will only go up in value as the number of nations increases. This proposal simply injects money into the economy without actually adding anything to the game.