Grillick

Woohoo! We're #1!

So Lambdadelta is Sheepy's son? That makes no sense. Divorced from the context of this conversation, I'd totally agree with you. But in the context where Lamdadelta was crucified at the demand of the community, Sheepy plays the role of the reluctant ruler who heeded the will of the people and executed the sentence they demanded.

Sheepy is Pontius Pilate.

Also, if your government is a Democracy, your income will be 1% higher than this figure.

Because unlike some, Ogaden says what he means.

I gave each Declaration of War the attention it deserved. Each parroted the same absurd rhetoric, woven into a thematic tapestry for its alliance. If there are three identical conversations, there's no reason not to make identical statements. Terminus Est has the honor to identify the true reason for its actions, while the other alliances cower in lies and deceit. I'll honor the former and dismiss the latter.

Say what you want about Terminus Est, but they're always honest and straightforward. I tip my hat to you, gentlemen.

This justification is absurd. I have made it abundantly clear that any alliance that came to me and said they were injured by my actions against The Candy Kingdom would receive a full apology, restitution for the damage, and my removal from office. None has ever been willing to do so. This "justification" is a transparent attempt to cover up the real reason for the war, which Terminus Est has made clear.

This justification is absurd. I have made it abundantly clear that any alliance that came to me and said they were injured by my actions against The Candy Kingdom would receive a full apology, restitution for the damage, and my removal from office. None has ever been willing to do so. This "justification" is a transparent attempt to cover up the real reason for the war, which Terminus Est has made clear.

This justification is absurd. I have made it abundantly clear that any alliance that came to me and said they were injured by my actions against The Candy Kingdom would receive a full apology, restitution for the damage, and my removal from office. None has ever been willing to do so. This "justification" is a transparent attempt to cover up the real reason for the war, which Terminus Est has made clear.

I would like to see more spy options made available when you are at war with the target nation.

I'm boycotting these awards because I have to cast a vote in each category.

Find the formula in Sheepy's recent announcement regarding the change in the formula, and plug in the numbers.

If you're out as soon as letters come in, you've never been pretty good with math.

They won't be rejoining the GPA after the war.

The color bonus displays 2 decimal places, but I understand it is calculated to 4. A rounding error in the color bonus could account for a difference of slightly under 1%

Best official government response ever.

Adorable. I love almost everything you post, bear.

Literally the only person on Orbis with a legitimate CB against us. If you were in my range, I'd let you destroy my infrastructure without a post such as this. You are on the list. Line 2, nation 2. Cody is on my list, but due to a typographical error in your target list that was provided with me, he was listed with the same URL as Zeus, so he didn't make it into this post. As for your alleged CB, it's only a legitimate basis for war if an attack on Princess Bubblegum is an attack on you. Clearly you must be taking responsibility for the actions and well-being of this beloved member of the Orbis community? Had I known Princess Bubblegum was a member of, or protected by, the Seven Kingdoms, you can be sure that my actions and demeanor would have been different. This isn't about Princess Bubblegum, though. It's about you all being annoyed that GPA nations are so large. That's it. It's because we're there, plain and simple. Check again. You don't get a notification when you are embargoed by alliance, rather than by nation.

I have to admit, underlordgc is a better troll than me.

I could see power being transferable, but not storable. And there would need to be some loss of power in the transfer, so that for, say, every 100 infrastructure-worth of power you send to another city/nation, you need to have 125 infrastructure-worth of power surplus, or some other such number. But batteries to hold the amounts of power we're dealing with in this game just don't exist, and it wouldn't make sense to be able to build up surplus power over the course of months that you then use to run your improvements during a massive war.

Not really. War right now hugely favors the first-strike. If a person is attacked, and still is able to come back and obtain a "victory" through ground attacks, they should be rewarded with a slight reprieve. It would also encourage standing ground forces, both in offense and defense, even if the attacking nation's only intent is to fire missiles at the enemy until they are reduced to rubble. The period of time in which that defensive slot is locked up could be adjusted, but the most it could last under my proposal is 4 days (it is impossible to achieve victory in war in less than 24 hours), whereas the attacking nation that is defeated gets beige protection for 5 days and suffers less damage from the ground attacks than it would from missiles/ships/planes. It would create real options that force nations to make decisions between multiple paths that could be equally viable. Where's the harm in that?

Prove me wrong. I would be thrilled to have it shown that I misjudged the information I received and we are not, in fact, under imminent attack. The hamfisted efforts of your compatriots to turn this thread into its own cassus belli make me doubt that I am mistaken, though.

A symptom of "fat finger syndrome"

No. He was ejected from the alliance for unauthorized espionage activity, and sought shelter in VE.