Vincent Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) I don't think anyone should force anyone off any colour as they should have the right to reside in any colour they like Edited November 28, 2014 by Vincent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prefontaine Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 "You should consider changing colors, it would benefit your alliance and all the other alliances on that color" and "Get of this color or I'm going to attack you until you're whole alliance is below 300 total strength and thus not affecting color stock" are two very different things. If you think they're the same, Morgan, never speak again. Ever. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Gorbachev Posted November 28, 2014 Author Share Posted November 28, 2014 Are you claiming the ownership of white ? I would say anyone would have to right to be on any colour he/she so desired . What right do you have to call or label others as squatters? … because they're not playing? If they were actually doing things, you would be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livius Clades Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) Okay everyone, first the color spheres are not that important. But I get what Morgan is trying to say, I'll explain what he is trying to say. He mean you shouldn't even be asking politely, it shouldn't be of your concern what color another nation is. It may effect your color score but it isn't that big of a deal as everyone makes it. Everyone should just leave everyone alone and end this childish argument. It's a game, boys and girls, play the game. Stop arguing over stupid things. Edited November 29, 2014 by Livius Clades 1 Quote Fire is nice eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Gorbachev Posted November 28, 2014 Author Share Posted November 28, 2014 This. As inactive nations get deleted, those alliances' score will dip lower below 300, therefore removing them from the color stock formula. Also, lol at iljohn. How is telling them there's a better money elsewhere is 'kicking them'? It's something that benefits all parties involved Ohh I didn't know that about the 300 rule. Thanks for that info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayayay Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Pssh, who cares? There is nothing inherently wrong with claiming a color. Honestly, half the alliances destroying the colorstock haven't even created a DoE yet. Y'all need to stop acting like it matters. 1 Quote Orbis Wars | CSI: UPN | B I G O O F | PW Expert Has Nerve To Tell You How To Run Your Own Goddamn Alliance | Occupy Wall Street | Sheepy Sings TheNG - My favorite part is when Steve suggests DEIC might have done something remotely successful, then gets massively shit on for proposing such a stupid idea. On 1/4/2016 at 6:37 PM, Sheepy said: This was !@#$ing gold. 10/10 possibly my favorite post on these forums yet. Sheepy said: I'm retarded, you win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurdanak Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Back on topic, I totally agree - all the alliances filled with inactivity on white bothers me, too. *implying implications* 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) Definitely nothing wrong with claiming a colour. It is a norm during Alpha. So what's the big deal doing so many pages and making new thread denying the claim? Edited November 28, 2014 by Vincent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atzuya Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Hm hm... Just checked, there's only one guy in Guardian with that flag, and he's an applicant This is an awfully humorous way to paint an alliance as the bad guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aksel Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Hm hm... Just checked, there's only one guy in Guardian with that flag, and he's an applicant This is an awfully humorous way to paint an alliance as the bad guy From the screenshot? His name does not match the name/name length.....etc of the screenshot rulername. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grillick Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) Hm hm... Just checked, there's only one guy in Guardian with that flag, and he's an applicant This is an awfully humorous way to paint an alliance as the bad guy It wasn't Guardian, you idiot. It was Rose. Specifically, it was Coach. Edited November 28, 2014 by Grillick Quote "It's hard to be a team player when you're omnipotent." - Q Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 It wasn't Guardian, you idiot. It was Rose. Specifically, it was Coach. Oh really! I never sent off any message like that in my life so how about you get your facts straight before making any accusations. How about posting that screenshot, unedited, and we'll admin verify it came from me. Nice try.....but the girl was pregnant before we even hooked up.......ask Jerry Springer......."I'm not this baby's daddy"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Alex Posted November 28, 2014 Administrators Share Posted November 28, 2014 First off all inactive nations should be deleted after a 30 day period or so. This would solve the issue. This is already the case, and alliances that are under 300 score don't affect the color stock bonus. 1 Quote Is there a bug? Report It | Not understanding game mechanics? Ask About It | Got a good idea? Suggest ItForums Rules | Game Link 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.