Talk:Future World

This is the discussion page for Future World. If you have ideas or concerns or anything else, ask and discuss here.

Information
Before asking questions, be sure to review the Rules of Future World. For each topic or question, create a new heading, to keep things organized. Be sure to sign your name by placing four tildes (~) in a row at the end of what you posted.

General Conversation
Off topic discussion goes here.

Cybernations
How many of you play Cybernations? I'm sure at least one of you has heard of it or even plays it. It's similar to Future World in the fact that you create a nation and must rule over it, develop it, go to war, join alliances, etc. It is set in current day Earth. It's kinda fun if you are frequently bored with nothing to do. It's very slow paced. United Planets 10:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I have not heard of Cybernations. Could you give me a link and I'll try it later? —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 10:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to check my CN wiki page at http://cybernations.wikia.com/wiki/Dragonial

Super Warmonkey 14:21, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

It's Cybernations. I already have my country Everett in there. I've been playing it for a year. You may only create one nation. If you create a country, I can send you monetary aid to help you boost your nation forward. Money is hard to come by in the game which is why it's so slow going. It's for serious players and alot of people get pretty into it, especially on the forums. United Planets 10:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll make Cascadia on there. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 19:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

CN players, list your countries here:

Lol my Cybernation has been deleted XD -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 18:03, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Resurrection
Welcome to Future World 2.0. Things have been changed around and altered to allow for more friendly play and ease of use. United Planets 11:39, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

Nice to see. :) —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:50, September 14, 2009 (UTC)

?
Is Future Worlds still going? I would like confirmation as I was thinking of joining --AdanRyder 13:26, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Right now there is only one active nation and that is my country Union of Everett and my other one Iraqistan.United Planets 04:07, November 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * No, there's Cascadia too. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:17, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

LOL I never see you do anything with Cascadia, especially New Greece. No new events, no new pages or articles, no development... United Planets 19:04, November 14, 2009 (UTC)


 * LOL that's cause I'm waiting for fun to kick up. But you can remove New Greece from the map. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:05, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Hello
Hello I am the mighty ruler of the newly found republic of Caucasus, bough before me! Lol, hey I was wondering if the few countries we have can all participate in a history editing project, to make sure all our histories make sence in Future Worlds, I and United Planets are going to work together with our histories. And uhm, I am more than willing to start a real forum for us, even if it is just 1 or 2 people still playing, it will make everything easier. Just let me know :)

Super Warmonkey 08:54, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

I guess we can make a Future World forum. At one point we had almost ten people playing. If you want, go ahead. What ideas do you have for editing the Everett-Russia War? United Planets 20:17, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Well, we already have an advantage, we are both on Georgia's side, what I had in mind was, you did everything you said in the Everett-Russia War, but with a change in the end. We say Russia won against the odds, and conquered Caucasus, Azerbaijan was on Russia's side, and Armenia was on Georgia's side. Russia annexed Azerbaijan to keep "order" in the region, Armenia and Georgia were completely conquered, and the Georgians and Armenians started rebellion (thats us). Now Everett can help the rebels, and by that next December, the entire Caucasus was liberated. (Just read through my history, there will be more detail)

After we did that, we can work on the Everett-Russia War II. What do you think?

Super Warmonkey 08:54, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Well if Russia is going to win, the droids would have to be removed from the incident. Outside of a nuclear EMP attack, Russia would have a long and hard time fighting off hordes of droids. That's why I said we should change it so Everett never got fully involved, never deployed droids and that's why Georgia lost.

United Planets 09:34, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Cannot you get involved with normal soldiers?

Super Warmonkey 11:15, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

I have altered the Everett-Russia War. Alter your history to match as well as possible by including Everett's involvement, etc.United Planets 12:32, December 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * A comment, it seems Russia, after its seemingly over reaction, pulled out by itself and then helped the Caucasus nations rebuild. Not Everett forced them out and then Russia didn't help. So I thought it would make some more sense if threats from everett made the russians pull out instead? Since russians are done and pulling out when Everett and rebels are killing them. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 13:36, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks I will try something.

Super Warmonkey 17:33, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Uhm, I edited my history, I wish to keep the Russia helping Caucasus part, it makes more sence for me. And I am not completely sure about whats happening in the second Everett-Russian war. If maybe you can move it to another region? Or something along that line.

Super Warmonkey 17:54, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Forum
Hey, I took the time in creating us a normal forum, please join as it will make roleplaying much easier. It is still under construction and may not work right away. http://futworld.webs.com/

Super Warmonkey 13:02, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Cool. United Planets 13:06, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

On the Homepage we have a chatbox where we can chat in real time. Your name will appear in the right of the box, click on it, then change your name to your on-forum name. Then just chat away!

Super Warmonkey 13:22, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Great idea i'm in :P --Rasmusbyg 13:38, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Is the Sovereign Communicative order of Sino-Korea in FW or does it need more? —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:34, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea whose country that is or who the owner is. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 01:42, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

From the name, I assume it's the Chinese/Korean country in South Australia. Woogers (lol what hax) 01:48, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, lol it's my friend's and my shared country. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 01:49, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

In or no? Of course there is no leader name or flag yet lol. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:02, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Put it in Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 02:05, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Okay. It is coextensive with RW South Australia. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:16, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Hey
Hey I think I'll help out. I ask for a thin strip of land along the Bay of Thailand from Ho Chi Minh City to Singapore. I'm not pro-dictatorship or anything, but there needs to be a dictatorship in the Future World. I wasn't originally planning to join FW, but it seems like a good thing that needs to be kept. Detectivekenny 01:26, December 28, 2009 (UTC) By the way, I'm a little bit confused. Are Everett and Iraqistan still part of FW? Detectivekenny 01:26, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Everett and Iraqistan are still part of Future World. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 02:01, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Everett and Iraqistan are part of FW. They have been removed twice because of inactivity of FW. I'm gonna need a name for the country before I can add it to the map. Also what is the leader's name? United Planets 05:35, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Let's see… Put the country name as Yarphei (Grand Yarphese Republic). The demonym would be Yarphese. I thought a conlang would be an apropriate national language, but I looked at the major ones and none seemed to be right in this case, so the leader conlanged his own (well, technically I did, or will). The leader's name is Tranh Chup-yar. The government is military junta. I probably won't be able to roleplay on weekdays much, but I won't desert FW. Give me a little time to prepare Yarphei and it should be up as soon as possible. Detectivekenny 23:48, December 28, 2009 (UTC)

Okay, now that I have finished Yarphei's two most important articles, Grand Yarphese Republic and Tranh Chup-yar I now want everyone's opinion on the articles. Well you could fix spelling mistakes, etc., but I want to know what your countries' leaders think of Yarphei. Here are your choices:
 * 1) Decide to become extremely good diplomatic trading partners and form some sort of alliance.
 * 2) Have relatively good relations but not do anything about it.
 * 3) Have so-so relations.
 * 4) Sorta just ignore Yarphei.
 * 5) Criticize the government and/or call Tranh some offensive name, but otherwise ignore.
 * 6) Send troops/droids/whatever in order to depose the Yarphese government.
 * 7) Declare war on Yarphei.

I'll give you permission to do any one of those things. However, please follow the FW rules. I don't want to log on and find that Bangkok has been destroyed by a nuclear bomb or Buddhist temples are ravaged with dead monks still in them. Detectivekenny 18:20, January 3, 2010 (UTC)

I left off 8) Strongly encourage Yarphei to become a democracy. Detectivekenny 22:06, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

I will take number 2). I would take 1), but I am not sure that a full-democracy and a military junta can have an "extremely good diplomacy".

Super Warmonkey 22:19, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

Cascadia's on 3. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:50, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

Everett is a 4 1/2. It criticizes the government for its human rights abuses like it does with many nations but ignores them and generally cuts off relations such as with Saudi Arabia. United Planets 08:49, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Super Warmonkey, I need to know which country you're talking about, the Allied States or Caucasus. Detectivekenny 22:37, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Both. Although relations between Yarphei and the Allied States may be a bit worse.

-Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 22:47, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Awwright
I've begun preparations for my entry to Future World. Someone explain to me how this game works. --Woogers 08:07, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Read the following to learn the rules, information and events that have occurred so far:


 * Future World
 * Rules of Future World
 * National Info of Future World
 * Future World Events 2008
 * Future World Events 2009
 * Future World Events 2010

United Planets 08:20, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

I've read all the documentation. I still don't understand what I actually have to do.--Woogers 08:28, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

It's not really much different from the NRW. Make a country and roleplay it along with the other users. United Planets 08:43, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, alrighty then. Let the games begin. --Woogers 09:08, January 7, 2010 (UTC)

I've completed the basic framework of a country. Like with Yarphei, I ask for your political stances towards the East Asian Federation. And comments and tips, since I'm new to this Future World thing :D.Woogers 05:23, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Everett does not like the fact that corporations control the nation but views the Federation as an economic ally. United Planets 09:04, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

Caucasus sees the Federation as a good trade partner. But the Allied States is still observing...

-Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 11:58, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

(This is a little late, considering we've already established AFTA, but I'll do it just for the heck of it.) The Yarphese government sees the country as another economy-oriented nation that could be a vaulable close ally. It has liker the idea of a corporate democracy since 2007. I mean, Yarphese government doesn't have anything against democracy; it just doesn't want to give up power. Detectivekenny 01:12, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Embassies
NRW went embassy crazy.

Everett
If you want embassies in Everett, write a small paragraph about your embassy here: Federal Center (Everett City) in the "International Buildings" section.


 * Okay, but lets all apply for embassies here, I would first like to apply for an embassy in all FW nations. PM me for ambassador names.

-Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 11:17, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

Antarctic Treaty
I think it's about time to revise the Antarctic Treaty to allow for settlement of Marie Byrd Land between the 90th and 150th meridians west, and the 70th and 80th parallels south. Can all leaders meet in Kuala Terengganu to discuss this? Detectivekenny 14:51, January 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Settlement? SETTLEMENT? Of ANTARTICA? I dunno if lol. Life in Antartica would be harsh without limits. I suppose there are the benefits of penguins for the zoos, and gold, iron, and coal for the factories. Woogers 15:03, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

This is the Future World. If we can have droids, anti-gravity, FTL travel, etc., etc., then Antarctica would be pretty easy to live in. Detectivekenny 16:43, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Lol, Antartica will only be another source of conflict for the imperialists on Earth. And it's too far away from my zone of control to be suitable for a colony. Argentina, Chile, and Australia would be best suited for such a thing. Woogers 16:49, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Well, if there's a treaty, then there should be little conflict. Also, I'm not necessarily talking about territory claims. I mean settlement patterns so that countries can use the resources there. Secondly, look who has territory claims: France, Norway, Britain. Don't forget the many Japanese and Korean stations dotting Antarctica. Detectivekenny 17:36, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Militarization of space
What are your thoughts on the Outer Space Treaty? Woogers 23:13, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Everett currently had SDI. It will require two nations to have SDI, though. One for all but owning nation's itself's missiles, and the pther nation's SDI for the missiles the SDI nation may launch. Not sure if this is militarization. Cascadia doesn't have any space weapons, but it has plenty of military satellites. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:39, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

You dont need two nations for SDI. SDI is an anti ballistic missile system. The PDS system is active in space, which is used for orbital bombardment, SDI and anti satellite operations. The Outer Space Treaty bans weapons of mass destruction from being placed in orbit, not defense systems. BTW, PDS stands for Planetary Defense System and is used primarily for shooting down ICBMs and ballistic missiles but in previous wars (now reversed) has been used to take out buildings, satellites and vehicles. United Planets 02:04, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, and the nation that owns the SDI won't shoot down its own missiles, another country's SDI has to do that. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 16:28, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Well, since the United Nations obviously doesn't do its job in Future World, allowing wars just like it epically failed to stop WarBush from 2003, it would appear that I need to take defense into my own hands. Woogers 16:44, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Back
The war's already over? We'll fix that. :) Detectivekenny 03:19, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

I tried my best to keep it slow, but like I said, the West was fast to jump the gun. Woogers 03:34, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

I understand. Hundred years war isn't suitable for Future World, eh? I can just imagine Winston Churchill trying to slow down WWII for some odd reason.

Does the GYR still own BIOT and Cardiff? Looking at the articles I don't see any record of them returning to the UK. Detectivekenny 04:31, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

No, combat is ongoing in those zones at last check. Chagos, actually have been unaffected since war's start. Woogers 04:33, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

What are you two going on about? The war is still in full-swing! -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 09:07, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

To my knowledge, Cascadia has liberated the Falklands, Chagos has not been liberated or fought for yet, war continues in Wales with Everett on two fronts (Wales and Yarphei homeland). NATO, the Allied States, the United States, Iraqistan, Malaysia and the Commonwealth of Nations are all at war with Yarphei, sending troops to both Wales and Yarphei. United Planets 14:44, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

I see Iraqistani/NATO/Italian/Spanish troops landed off the coast of Phuket (which is part of Thailand) at one point. Are you bringing Thailand into the war? Detectivekenny 14:50, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Malaysia has declared war so Thailand may become involved and I was possibly thinking of Vietnam as well. United Planets 14:56, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

This Might Prove Useful
I made this because I was bored and had paint in front of me. I can't really maintain it after today, but is anyone willing to maintain it?

Detectivekenny 04:41, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by "maintain it"? United Planets 04:47, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Like whenever there's a disconnection.

But it shouldn't be too much of a problem. All the countries that participated in the war except for West Africa don't show any signs of leaving, but they will be disconnected cleanly into new blanks or just left as blanks. The rest of the countries could easily be disconnected via copy-pasting from a real world map. Detectivekenny 05:39, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

There is a problem with your idea of "clean disconnections." The reason I disconnect countries that go inactive is so other future players have choices of unused land they want. If for example Everett dies out and some new guy comes in wanting to make a country where Everett was, he is now restricted to play along with our line of history instead of being able to freely design his nation without disruption. I disconnect as if they never existed in the first place to clean up historical records. It's unfair to new players in the future if at some point all the land has been previously used and now they have to design a country based on our history. Another example is, had we had such a policy in the original 2008-2009 Future World, the EAF would not exist in its current state and would be forced to be far different. So would Yarphei actually. United Planets 06:00, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

I guess... But there's dimension two for that lol. I don't really want to let the time-consuming war go to waste just because Tharnton or someone gives up their country or because someone decides to use New Zealand as a part of their country. Detectivekenny 06:06, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

I removed Dimension Two after seeing how much of a failure that idea was. This poor dude was all alone in that dimension and couldn't interact with all the Dimension One players. So I scrapped Dimension Two. United Planets 06:12, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we should just keep the war and deal with each new situation individually. Detectivekenny 06:20, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the map -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 10:30, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Could you maintain it? Also, do you think we could replace the old Future World Map with one based off of this one? If someone is willing to maintain this one, it shouldn't be much harder to maintain basically a labeled copy. Detectivekenny 05:39, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Roleplay
I don't know if some of you are actually fighting or arguing or if there has been incidents of infighting like with the 2008-2009 Future World but in case there is or someone feels offended you have to remember that Future World is a large roleplay and it involves controlling characters (Presidents, leaders, politicans, celebrities, etc) and roleplaying them. Their comments, actions, even offensive remarks agaisnt other characters are all part of the roleplay and shouldn't be taken personally IRL. United Planets 06:12, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Lol wut? Offended? I want to know who. Woogers (lol what hax) 12:03, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

No one specific I just somehow have the vibes of butthurt in the air... just a simple reminder that it's just a game. United Planets 12:05, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with this. Great example with this USA thing, its just RP, I am not going to destroy or tear up the Union IRL. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 12:56, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Foreign Relations
Need your formal foreign relations statuses with the East Asian Federation as of this moment so I can add reactions to my article. Woogers (lol what hax) 01:22, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Yarphei: Very good. The war and CEAS enforced this. Detectivekenny 01:26, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Everett on good terms, hurt from your support of Yarphei during war and doesnt like the corporate democracy thing.

Iraqistan is neutral.

4chanistan is filled with Japan fangirls and weeaboos. United Planets 01:36, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

The Allied States is kinda impressed overall with the EAF and would like them as an ally, however they can't, because you are involved with Yarphei. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 10:08, February 17, 2010 (UTC)

Limited Space Travel
If Everett still has a Mars Research Station, can everyone else have far off, but still in-system artificial space constructs and/or space vehicles, can I rent space at the Mars Research Station, and how do you get people back and forth in a timely manner?

If not, can we restart limited (in-system) space travel for similar purposes? Woogers (lol what hax) 18:07, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

It's already stated that you may create sub-light space craft capable of travel within the solar system, Pluto being a distance limit. Everett currently possesses the MRS station in Mars orbit and uses two different shuttles for space travel, the Fusion Orbiter with a distance limit of Mars and back and the Expedition-class fusion shuttle with sub-light engines capable of travel within the entire solar system.

We can add an EAF component to the MRS if you want. The Expedition shuttle travels at a maximum slingshot speed from Earth of 750,000 miles per hour (893 times slower than the speed of light). Using a fusion generator burst engine (requiring a WMD explosion) it can launch itself up to 1.25 million miles per hour (536 times slower than light). United Planets 22:38, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

That's all good. I'll get to work for building a module for add-on. Are you doing anything with Mars? Woogers (lol what hax) 23:00, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Landing dudes, exploring the ice caps and preparing Mars bases. United Planets 23:10, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Alaska
Hello I would be interested in making a new nation in your RP. I have many ideas that might benefit your website. I will be active in your game and will be involed in many of the events that go on. The name of the country is the Republic of Alaska. It will be located in what is now Alaska. The type of goverment will be parliamentary republic with meritocracy. The leader will be Joseph Lebedev. I hope that you will let me join.Zestman 23:04, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for joining. This isn't exactly a true RP and also this isn't our website (it is a wiki shared by many), and I will add your country ASAP. Have fun. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:07, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Alaska? That's awfully cold a place. Woogers (lol what hax) 23:08, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Considering the potential size (Yarphei making Falklands have a ton of people) of the population and technology, it should be fine. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:13, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

CEAS or PAFF? Welcome, btw. —detectivekenny; reply; signed 23:18, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't make him choose a side yet. And besides, we shouldn't have two alliances anyway, but for some reason everyone hates everyone else. We should be working towards world peace for when the Scrin Tiberium Harvesting Force gets here, so we can be united in repelling the invaders. Woogers (lol what hax) 23:20, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol *coughjoinCEAScough*. —detectivekenny; reply; signed 00:39, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol *coughnamedoesn'tfitlolwutcough*. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 02:22, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * What do you mean? —detectivekenny; reply; signed 02:25, February 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * It isn't an east asian state lol. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 14:04, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Why couldn't it be? Some of the islands could be considered East Asian. —detectivekenny; reply; signed 20:28, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * That is beside the point, Alaska is North American. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:18, February 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Who knows? It's not my world. Lebedev sounds Russian, also. Besides, CEAS doesn't just take East Asian Countries. It could take Comoros if it had a reason to. —detectivekenny; reply; signed 21:21, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral is also an option. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:19, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

UHHH LOLWUT IS GOIN ON GUISE??? Republic of Alaska is hereby on a lockdown list for entry into Future World until that article gets fixed up. United Planets 13:00, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Lol
In the current world state, with another huge Australasian economy appearing, it appears that I'll have to stop being protectionist and allow free trade. That being said, I would formally like to apply to the Planetary Alliance for Freedom, with the following goals: Contemplate my argument before nay-saying. Woogers (lol what hax) 02:16, March 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Doing so will make it impossible for me to participate in World War IV (most important)
 * Being on both sides of the line makes it pointless for me to spy for either side.
 * I suppose it'll boost the economy in the long run, but there'll be short term unemployment to worry about.
 * Product gets to more markets with less fees, therefore bringing more profit.
 * Thaw currently intensifying relations with the West.
 * Be able to better represent Federation interests on the national stage.
 * Do what I had intended on doing right after WWIII anyway (I was for one alliance and everyone being united, rather than this weird schism thing we have going on)
 * Gives me an excuse to build up the air force.
 * Potentially opens the door for high-level technology trading.

Welcome to PAFF good sir. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 02:19, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

AFTA remains an observing member for economic purposes. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:20, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

As for the schism, Yarphei could join only if it adheres to the UDHR. But its doesnt because of Tranh Chup-yar. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 02:22, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Yarphei would likely prefer to maintain its traditional sovereignity and anti-globalization, no matter who is ruling. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:26, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

== Chat ==

For great justice! Woogers (lol what hax) 02:03, March 9, 2010 (UTC) No. Woogers (lol what hax) 02:04, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Can you? Because I am officially leaving within fourteen hours. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 02:17, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

North American Union
Thoughts?



Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 17:19, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

My, that's a nice coin. As for the whole Union concept, I would recommend it. It's well worth the grand experience. Although cultural difference would cause division, so you need to find a unifying cultural strand, or face internal tensions later. Generally, currency unions bolster econmic power, but as is the case with the present-day European Union, one bad economy drags everyone else down. Woogers (lol what hax) 17:29, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Well if TimeMaster and Superwarmonkey agree to it, the NAU shall rise. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 17:50, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

I would support this, but, the Allied States' national bird is the Phoenix, can you in stead add something like the Statue of Liberty? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 18:10, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

I didnt make the coin. Its something I found on Google. Google "Amero". Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 18:16, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Ah... I see...


 * Super Warmonkey picks up with phone and calls Spart.*


 * "Hey man, can you make us a coin?"*

-Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 18:24, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

No. I don't want to be in the NAU because I really like Cascadia. Unless it is an alliance or something, but it doesn't seem like it. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 20:27, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

It is an alliance. An economic alliance. In the long run it'll make all the member countries richer. A similar union was predecessor of the East Asian Federation. Woogers (lol what hax) 20:42, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, its just the American version of the European Union. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 20:53, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Its the European Union of North America. All nations retain their sovereignty and independence to do as they like. We just also freer trade, economic aid, start using a currency like the Euro except its called the Amero, our borders are more open to each other, we get our citizens a continental passport/ID card for free travel within the borders of the NAU. Read about the European Union on Wikipedia. Think of it like that. If you want to keep your currency, you can use both the Amero and the Casnara. Everett is keeping its Dollar if we agree to this but will implement the Amero. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 21:03, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Ok, but I don't want the Amero be in use, well maybe as legal tender but not the official currency. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:04, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Can I not join the NAU, but adopt the Amero as a secondary currency for FedPass use abroad? It seems like a good idea, and I'll probably do the same thing with Euros. Woogers (lol what hax) 21:07, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

EAF is in Asia. Not North America. Why would you join NAU? Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 21:31, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

That's why I said NOT join the NAU. I want to use the Amero as a secondary currency. So FedPass can be accepted anywhere you want to be. Woogers (lol what hax) 22:27, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, well then sure, yes. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 22:41, March 10, 2010 (UTC)

eRepublik
You guys really should try it... at least get to level 6 then you can leave... use ONLY this link... http://www.erepublik.com/en/referrer/Martin+Warmonger

If you guys still like the game after level 6, please help eSouth Africa get its territory back from eArgentina and eBrazil...

Thanks -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 10:49, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

Chat
I would invite you all to chat, so we can discuss the next 30 days. Woogers, Ruler of (random nonsense, Koiwai, Saikyo, and some lines of text) 03:56, June 18, 2010 (UTC)

Teh Moon
Ladies and Gentlemen,

The East Asian Federation humbly requests permission as complementation to the ongoing Taoyuan Space Tether project to build a research colony on the Moon. I also would like to solicit comments, questions, and suggestions regarding this project. kthxbai. Woogers, Ruler of (random nonsense, Koiwai, Saikyo, and some lines of text) 17:20, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Can we put some stuff up for AFTA? And I don't think we have any ladies. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 18:06, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Moon research colonies are acceptable. Is it international or for East Asia only? Also, there is half a lady who is very inactive on 4chanistan. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 18:52, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

---

Can't we make this a joint program? Like the superpowers of the world have that privilege. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 21:28, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Woogers, Ruler of (random nonsense, Koiwai, Saikyo, and some lines of text) 23:57, June 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Detectivekenny - What kind of stuff, and regardless, I put ladies cause its an address to the UN General Assembly.
 * 2) United Planets - International, lol, spending my money to shine on the world stage.
 * 3) Super Warmonkey - Depends on what you mean by joint. It was my intention to administer the program, but any country is free to do anything there, barring research related to the militarization of space.
 * I mean like the current ISS, it is a joint operation between Japan(?), USA, and the UK. I just think this has to be similar. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 12:38, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not going to be joint in that sense. Woogers, Ruler of (random nonsense, Koiwai, Saikyo, and some lines of text) 14:37, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Okayz. I was thinking an AFTA-funded research station for corporations and stuff. But you always take my ideas and make them a billion times better lulz. Don't hesitate. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 04:44, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Faster-than-Light Propulsion Laboratory. Woogers, Ruler of (random nonsense, Koiwai, Saikyo, and some lines of text) 08:14, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Request for Bids
Requesting all interested bidders for assisting in the creation and operations of a shared nation in Africa. Leave messages and potential bids below. Thanks, Woogers - talk 20:43, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Specifically, where is the nation supposed to exist? And there is going to be a war or something over this place? I'd like to assist in the creation of your nation, but currently I want to focus on CA. SSS (About Me/Contact/NRW/FW) 21:08, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Well, as an IRL African (South African) I would love to help, not to mention I am bored now... -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 22:33, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

Id be interested in helping with this project. I was thinking africa would be a great testing ground for a truly unique superpower. no racism intended, but the nation-state model doesnt seem to work for africa. why dont we come up with something new and test-drive it in this proposed nation? i was thinking something like a a confederation of tribes, tribal democracy, a system constantly proposed by an independence movement in the western part of the island of papua, currently part of indonesia. i want this to be the starting point for ideas, to be improved. I cant imagine tribal democracy generating a major world power. any ideas? you may rebuttle any of my points, just please do it with a level head. Gatemonger 23:48, July 2, 2010 (UTC)

I am thinking of something more like the nation in Far Cry 2. It is getting boring for all FW nations to be perfect little superpowers and stuff. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 00:07, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Your ideas, while interesting, are not exactly what I was thinking. Read this. Any naming similarities between this an another country that may exist on this wiki are coincidental. I didn't notice it until recently, lol. Woogers - talk 00:11, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

I split Africa into conceptual regions. They include Arabic countries, Sahel and Sub-Saharan former colonies, nearby Ethiopia, East African community, Congo-ish, and southern. Not trying to be racist, just suggesting that we shouldn't take random countries that have nothing to do with each other. I'll upload a map if you want. —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 00:24, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

I love how in this world people cant say anything about africa or people of african descent without being afraid of being called racist. we should try to address this with this new nation. and i was thinking the tribal democracy's respective tribes could, while not complete anarchy like far cry 2, fight and engage in ethnic conflicts. I think we should name the nation Azania, as opposed to a second EAF, lol. It could originate from a federation attempt of a supernational entity, like how FGC formed. btw here is a link regarding tribal democracy, if anyone is interested.

and this is in response to DK's link: Tharnton- we will never forget :P

and also, when it comes to africa, nationalism is next to none in the majority of the post-colonial states, partly because there was no "great" civilization on the magnitude of ancient egypt or ethiopia. I was thinking that an archeological dig in the new nation discovers some ancient civilization the new nation can unite around and create a sense of national identity. anyone who plays halo 3 and knows the storyline knows what i am thinking about :PGatemonger 01:03, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I offer my services to create the national symbols of the future nation, when I get my computer back. This means we'll take the EAC or that's just a base idea? SSS (About Me/Contact/NRW/FW) 00:40, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

There are no plans to create another EAF. Corporate Democracy is not well applied to undeveloped economies, as there's not much competition. Rather, something along the lines of the ends of the EU, a federation where current day nations merely become subnational divisions. There will be problems, as problems in the area are rampant, but the goal here is to explore what could be, as there are no Future World nations in Africa. And being part black, on your notions of saying "not tryna be racist or anything", only makes you seem more racist, lol. Woogers - talk 01:35, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry :) And by a second EAF, i meant Eastern African Federation; the two nations would have the same abbrev. and things would be very confusing, especially since you control both East A. Federations,lol.Ive seen too many politicians Im very cautious about my public image, lol. So the nation would be Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, and Uganda, right? why not add southern Sudan, an area that wants independence from Sudan?Gatemonger 01:47, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Lol, I would understand any dividing a continent could be considered offensive depending on the purpose, so yah. Azania sounds Asian, and EAF also sounds Asian. A better country name might have geographical or historical significance. It's up to Woog where the country is, but I think we should, rather than just carving out the old British colonial belt, we should follow the contours of actual cultural regions.

Mostly I guess I'll help on geographical stuff, like random geography articles, along with my project to create an article for every Yarphese province. Neutral, factual, uncontroversial, and fun (for me). —Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 06:14, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Uhh, by the looks of it, Super Warmonkey and Detectivekenny are the contest leaders. Spart's too busy holding the world on his shoulders (oh and running a country) and Gatemonger, I dunno. I just dunno. On the flipside, Super Warmonkey has practical experience (lol) and Detectivekenny has offered neutral help. Oh and I forgot to mention, this country, which I have decided to name the United African Hegemony will be neutral. That's right. No PAFF. No OIS. No Hesperian Alliance. Woogers - talk 10:45, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

I wanna help. Im proposing ideas, because, due to the fact you had put forward very few, except that it was going to be a nation in africa, i thought you wanted to brainstorm plans for the UAH. SWH can be your official partner, especially due to the fact that he, to my knowledge, is the only member of FW that lives on the continent where the new nation will be. Id be willing to help figure out how best to make a stable nation out of, essentially, no existing political framework. Why are you reluctant to let me help out?Gatemonger 18:43, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral as in Bitarap, Garssyz neutral? <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 19:25, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, so we want more anarchy? Or more civilization? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 20:17, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

@ GM Geez, I thought I was reactionary. Just because this area fails to have an ancient civilization doesn't mean we should disencourage it. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 23:16, July 3, 2010 (UTC)

Uhh.
 * Gatemonger: I have a general idea of the direction I'd like this to go. And it isn't really what tribal democracy sounds like. And there is an existing political framework. The EC/EU model, cookie cutter'd to another location. Great success.
 * Super Warmonkey: More civilization, ethnic violence sprinkled in, national guard emergencies here and there.
 * Detectivekenny: AFRICAN SWITZERLAND.

Woogers - talk 07:08, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, so before we begin we need a few basic things:


 * Flag
 * Coat of Arms
 * Leader
 * Capital
 * Government Type

-Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 20:44, July 4, 2010 (UTC)

Unaccounted For Territory
Looking at the Future World map, there are a few anomalies I noticed that don't have documentation. The users responsible are in parentheses.


 * 1) Akimiski Island, part of the territory of Nunavut, Canada, is drawn as part of Everett. (UP)
 * 2) Bornholm, part of Denmark, is drawn as part of the Soviet Union. (Rasmusbyg or Dennisbyg)
 * 3) Thrace, part of Turkey, is drawn as part of the UKEED. (Rasmusbyg)
 * 4) Lebanon is drawn as part of Israel. This occurred unexplained at the restart of Future World. (UP)
 * 5) A mysterious hole occurred in the Allied States and Mexico of the Gulf of California after the Allied States of America joined. (UP or SW)
 * 6) The Aleutian Islands, part of the United States of America, are drawn as a part of the Soviet Union. (Rasmusbyg)

<small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 15:06, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

I don't see the gap between SC and Arizona. Can you please fix it if it is there? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 16:47, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

The Gulf of California is a body of water that seperates Baja California, which is the Mexican peninsula below California, from the rest of Mexico. It's been mysteriously enlarged, causing Arizona not to be landlocked. I was wondering if it was some plan of yours to submerge part of Mexico in order to allow yourself to have access to the Pacific, but guess not. I'll have to check with UP, as it looks like mosty a stray mark. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 18:35, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope, I know nothing about that. And now I see what you are talking about. With the next upload can someone please fix it? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 19:03, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 18:48, August 4, 2010 (UTC)
 * Akimiski Island is like... literally inside of Everetti waters and territory. I don't even know why Nunavut possesses it IRL, it's far from Nunavut mainland. I thought it belonged to Ontario.
 * Following the Iraqistan War, Hezbollah was destroyed and Lebanon was tranferred from Hezbollah control to Israeli control until a secured Lebanese government could be elected to power and ensure that this government would not once again be forced out by another terrorist organization. Lebanon remains under Israeli authority.
 * I don't know where that gap came from in Mexico, just fill it back in.

Additional note for Israel, I'm gonna reserve it until I can talk my friend into joining Future World. Hopefully she'll join. She has a thing for the IDF so keep Israel on reserve until I know. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 19:01, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

The reason Nunavut owns Akimiski is because it is an island in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. All of the Canadian Arctic Islands belong to Nunavut or the Northwest Territories. Let's keep the Canadian Arctic Archipelago Canadian, and let Canada have the islands. However, I'm sure Canada would allow Everettis to use the island for traditional and research purposes. It is only a speck, once again. Also, you might want to give back the Belcher Islands and take that speck near Rhode Island before Yarphei does. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 19:19, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

What speck near Rhode Island? Bermuda? Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 19:35, August 4, 2010 (UTC)

No, the grey pixel south of Cape Cod. There's another speck missing near Lake Melville, Newfoundland and Labrador. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 19:38, August 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * 2. Bornholm was captured by the soviet union in the end of WWII. In FW they just never left. (Deal between me and Dennisbyg)
 * 3. Thrace is a part of UKEED cause I want it to be.
 * 6. That's just a mistake I guess. --Rasmusbyg 08:22, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

3. There are several reasons you can't have Thrace:

1) You are splitting Istanbul in half.

2) It has no ties with any UKEED countries.

3) Thrace is not a single political entity, nor is it composed of whole political entities.

4) Turkey has always had full control of the Bosphorous.

5) Thrace is fully Turkish. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 16:42, August 5, 2010 (UTC)

Post-Bellum Territory Changes
Well, as I was considering what territories Yarphei would keep and which it would give back (if they were not lost during the war), I thought of something that would change the original idea that Yarphei would keep Kalmykia. I was considering that the following territories could form into something along the lines of "League of Altaic Nations":

1) Kalmykia

2) Buryatia

3) Tuva

4) Mongolia

5) Manchuria (possibly including the USSR's sparsely-populated portion)

6) Inner Mongolia

These areas have two main defining characteristics, those being traditional existence of Mongolic culture and/or language, and predominance of Buddhism. Since Mongolic areas have had quite a history, I thought it would be cool to raise their status to something higher than the country named when asked to think of a random country. I mean, seriously, these people rivaled China in their days, and they controlled practically all of Asia, even spreading into Europe. I assure you the country is to remain a democracy ("free" as you guys call it), but I'm not sure of what sort.

First of all, I would like to ask the USSR for permission to use the #2 and #4 and of the status of #5. Secondly, I'm taking any requests for those willing to share the state with me. Thanks.

By the way, for anyone curious, the status of Free Cities is unknown (by me) for now, but Arequipa Free City will most likely be assimilated into Peru if Keiko Fujimori is elected president of Peru, whether or not the war is taking place. She currently has the polls as of June. <small style="color:#7F7F6F">—Detectivekenny; (Info) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 21:33, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

I will think about this. By the way, "free" doesn't mean democracy, it means the country supports human rights. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:21, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

Peace Brokering
Now, I know the war is going to happen, but lets put on a peace show just to make it flashy and look like we tried to stop it. I'll host, in say, Tokyo, in a weekish? After its dramatic failure, I can have stock markets take a dip on speculations of wardec. Woogers - talk 15:54, August 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, but you may just as well start the article now and say it happened a week from now. No need to really wait until then. I want the A.S.A. to the the main player causing the treaty to fail because of obvious reasons. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 16:34, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

It would appear that my attempts at making a peace have failed before they've even begun in earnest. I really do want peace, though, lol. All these wars aren't the way to solve philosophical differences. Woogers - talk 21:32, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

The EAF is going to have to make a decision in its allignment with Yarphei. Being alligned with a country solely dedicated to war and provoking global conflict is not a good decision for a peaceful nation as EAF. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 21:47, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

While this is unfortunately true, there is a good amount of symbiosis between the Federation and Yarphei. They needed means of defense, and eventually, a means to win their revolution, and we needed supplies, food, and raw material. It stuck, and it sticks to this day, because of both the geographical proximity, and general unavailability of such synergy elsewhere. So until there is a drastic change in the situation, the status quo is maintained, political differences or not, this is a matter of survival at its core. Woogers - talk 21:59, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

Everett and it's allies and trade partners are willing to provide the materials, food and goods you need and at no risk for destroying your nation's reputation, dragging you into war, nor forcing your nation to aid and support a nation (Yarphei) that supports terrorist organizations and criminal activities as well as abuses its own people. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 22:38, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

I can't think of a good response, but I'll think about the offer. If there were more people in Future World, I'd accept immediately, but what kind of game is fun when you're horribly outnumbered (Yarphei), or when there's nothing to oppose (PAFF)? The game wouldn't be as fun if there weren't something to fight against, lol, which is a big reason why I am where I am. Planning and strategizing war efforts, and designing faster, better, smarter, and stronger aircraft is awesome! I wouldn't have it (almost) any other way. Woogers - talk 23:00, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

---

Peace is boring, and to help my nation building in the ASA, I need a huge war which will so-to-say let the ASA be crushed under its own weight, because ICly at the moment, the ASA is having HUGH financial problems, and its military is is chaos, not to mention it was just nuked, making the population panic. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 12:19, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Cloning
While human cloning may already be extreme, I find the current uses of the technology to be absurd including this "accelerated growth", clone soldiers (making thousands I would guess of them) and other bizarre things. This bin Laden clone thing is BS. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 13:16, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean with Bin Laden clone... however, I find clones much more realistic than droids creating cities in mere months. We all have our share of powergaming, this is mine. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 13:20, September 4, 2010 (UTC)

Okay Guys
Who's up for a co-op moon base? (i.e. the one I proposed a couple a months ago) It's time to start on that advanced interplanetary propulsion research :D. Woogers - talk 23:22, September 8, 2010 (UTC)

Count on me, I like the moon. :) I hope to start working in TBU space program in a few days. BIPU 23:32, September 8, 2010 (UTC)

Of course the ASA will be involved! :D -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 12:26, September 9, 2010 (UTC)

Well, the glass panels and steel beams are on the lunar surface, now I need help putting them together, if you all don't mind. Woogers - talk 20:11, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well I don't know much about all of this. So you can add the EcruFox Corporation to the list of helpers with assistance from the Allied States Government. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 20:14, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

I was actually hoping for droids, as they'd be cheaper and faster, but if you want to send men to the moon, I can facilitate that. We'll need construction equipment, like TBMs and some kind of bulldozer thing, though. Woogers - talk 20:16, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

EcruFox will be using clones... and droids.. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 20:27, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Counter-Incursion
I got permission from SuperWarmonkey to hit the networks in the Allied States. For a complete lolshutdown of western civilian fun, however, I request permission from the other three major American countries, Everett, Cascadia, and Central America. Please comment, and/or give permission. I hope for the festivities to commence on Wednesday. Woogers - talk 20:11, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Nope, I've got my own hackers protecting the internet lines. You might take down some individual servers though. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:28, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

That's not what I asked. I asked for permission. Woogers - talk 21:30, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

I thought you would easily infer "no, you don't have permission." —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 21:46, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

Nothing in your first sentence other than the word Nope, whose meaning is subsequently lost in the technically inaccurate rambling of "hackers protecting the internet lines", and made even more ambiguous by "You might take down some individual servers", would lead me to infer that. Woogers - talk 22:11, September 20, 2010 (UTC)

It's <no>. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 01:06, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

That's not the same thing as saying no. Thats like saying noyes. Woogers - talk 01:07, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, you may be able to take Myspace offline or something silly and obnoxious to the civilian populous but every important is safe from attack including the military, utilities, air traffic control, communications, satellites and all government offices. Anything on the civilian internet is exposed to potential attack including online payment services like PayPal, Ebay, social networks like Myspace and Facebook and civilian versions of government websites like fbi.gov.ev unlike the FBI's military network version (which contains all vital information and sekrits, fbi.gov.ue Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 15:31, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Like I said, (:/) the goal isn't to damage anything important, or harm civilians, really, but to inconvenience them. I don't want to shut off their electricity during the cold nights or cut off airport radar so they can't visit family and friends or go to work. I simply want to disable access to the most popular internet sites, and some other things. Perfectly innocuous. Woogers - talk 15:56, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Then attack the individual servers. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 22:49, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

That was the plan in the first place. You can't really attack "internet pipes" in the way you describe, anyway. It doesn't work like that. Woogers - talk 23:30, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

What? I didn't describe that. I said internet lines. They're kind of like telephone lines. —Preceding signed comment added by TimeMaster (talk • contribs) 23:40, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Pipes, lines, its the same concept. The point is, the only way you can really hack them is with an ax. Woogers - talk 23:50, September 21, 2010 (UTC)

Proposal
I can easily predict that with the end of World War III, Future World is going to collapse into silence and boredom. So, after the war is over, I propose a cool sub-game of Future World called Future World Next-Generation, taking place in 2030. I had thought of this as I wrote my most recent article on Everett's future and decided 2030 would be a good and interesting time in Future World history. Then I remembered Detectivekenny has a future timeline of Yarphei, read up on it and coincidentally, the Yarphese Confederation is founded in 2030. So... I propose Future World Next-Gen. The following changes will occur game-wide in the Next-Gen version of Future World:

Technology rules are significantly altered, allowing everything except for time travel. Shields will be allowed in the form of weak deflector barriers that weaken as further attacks commense against it, similar to Star Wars rules, eventually eliminating the barrier. The mythical rules still stand completely except for the section regarding mutant humans. I will allow genetically altered and improved humans to exist through technological intervention. Alien contact rule will also be altered. There will be the formation of a global council which is considered a blank which controls communications with extraterrestrial races to the degree of communication, trade, visitation and maybe other stuff. No single country may form secret alliances with the aliens and the aliens are only solely interested in humanity as a race and not interested in dealing with individual nations or organizations. The council will consist of a member representative from each country on Earth, representing all peoples globally and there is no security council or higher council within the organization like the United Nations. The UN is dead at this point in Future World and dissolves. PAFF and OIS may or may not exist in some shape or form. OOC, one Next-Gen week passes every 24 hours, allowing one game year to pass every 52 days. It will be 2037 after one year of IRL game play and 2044 one year after that. Wars will be written and negotiated OOC and roleplayed OOC and then added to the proper timeline at the end of the war. With time moving one week every 24 hours, wars will go by much faster and become confusing when responses to actions would happen in hours our time and days in FWNG time. Any other ideas can be negotiated if anyone is interested in my Next-Gen idea. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 07:07, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

I can understand what you want. However, I don think that the game should become silence and bored once the war was finished. There are hundreds of things we can do. We can RP new crisis, we can RPdiplomacy, we can RP economy, etc. I suppose a new game without limits (technological and real life ones) would be more atractive for some of us, but I wont play this new game. I suppose that there are players who want to RP a more realistic game and I will try to contact them and create a new one together. BIPU 08:57, September 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would be interested in pursuing something like this. Both of my nations are kind of more designed for realism. What do you think of bringing some of your ideas to the Odyssey of Fate? I don't mention it much because I've ben very busy and have only a few spare moments to work on it. But basically, its a scenario with the objective of studying how nations develop in as realistic a future scenario as I can design. The fun part is throwing the unexpceted parts in to the scenario, like an unexpected war, for instance. Any interest in doing this? I would love to have a partner helping with this project!Gatemonger 14:43, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Both Future Worlds will be played at the same time. Next-Gen gives us more to do. I notice alot of FW users are running low on ideas and things to do. Generally if there is not a war happening, things become stagnant. Next-Gen gives us alot to do on downtime on regular FW and opens up new things not possible of regular FW. I expect that everyone would continue using FW and while also joining FWNG. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 10:28, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Its a pretty good idea. However, the rule on planet destroyer weapons, I think, should either stay, or be immediately replaced with some arms control treaty. Modify your rules all you want, but have some counterbalance so that gameplay can continue without humanity being wiped out.

So go ahead, good concept idea. Gatemonger 14:38, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

Right... I forgot about the planet destroying weapons. I was going to keep that restricted. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 14:50, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

The problem is I like to make stuff up as I go along. Yarphese Confederation would not exist under current Yarphese history plans, so right now it is only an idea, and not a real world. Thus, I propose that we create entire new countries for the game, or else our FW countries will stagnate.

And as for FW stagnation, I suggest pursuit of any of the quality awards I mentioned. They are harder than they seem because they reflect Wikipedian standards (encouraging geographic and people articles), and take a long time, so it should ocuppy significant time. <small style="color:#186405">—Detectivekenny; (Info, talk) Preceding text certified by R. Xun as of 03:58, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

I think it will be difficult to play the two games with a single wikia page. There will be many articles in FW Next Gen that wont be valid for FW. I think you should use new entire countries (or wiki pages) for the new game.BIPU 08:26, September 25, 2010 (UTC)

I will give my opinion once I am back in a few days. My bandwidth is depleted so I won't be able to do anything. If a reaction is needed from the ASA, you guys can decide, you know what I'll do. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 18:47, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

Future of "Future Worlds"
Now that FWNG was launched I would like to know what do you think about "this" Future World. I have to think if I want to join FWNG becouse it is possible for me to play a futuristic game but I dont think that two different (in time and many other things) games could be played with the same wiki nation. Anyway, what I want is to continue FW and now that all we can fly our imagination in FWNG maybe we can play FW in a more realistic way. I think that we should clarify who is active in FW and what we want for the future of the game. BIPU 23:05, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

I plan on using both FW and FWNG at the same time with the same nations, Everett, Iraqistan and 4chanistan. Everything remains the same in the current FW. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 23:09, October 20, 2010 (UTC)

As confusing as it may seem, I am seconding BIPU's suggestion. We can keep Future World as it is now, but slow tech advancement down by a HUGE rate. We can do that for the FWNG. -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 15:01, October 21, 2010 (UTC)

Final arrangements
Alright guys. Now that I almost have the United States, I need to know who owns the overseas territories of the US? I am going to list them here. If you don't already own them, please don't make a bid, but if you already own them, they're yours. Don't worry about unincorporated or shizzazle now... if they are /kinda/ under the US Government and have large ties, I think they /kinda/ fall under us. So these which I can have will be incorporated states of the Allied States.

___
 * Guam (think the EAF has a base there)
 * Northern Mariana Islands
 * Puerto Rico (think UP owns it)
 * US Virgin Islands
 * American Samoa
 * Wake Island
 * Midway Islands
 * Johnston Atoll
 * Baker Island
 * Howland Island
 * Jarvis Island
 * Kingman Reef
 * Bajo Nuevo Bank
 * Serranilla Bank
 * Navassa Island
 * Guantanamo Bay (think UP owns it)

In addition to this, I need to know about all foreign US bases still under US control. Thanks.

-Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 19:26, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Time to go shopping. Lessee: Guam, Mariana, Samoa, Midway, Baker, and Wake should be fine for me. Woogers - talk 20:35, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Lol I am not putting them up for grabs, I am just asking if you already own them. If not, their mine MWAHAHAH! -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 21:12, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I own the ones listed above. Especially Guam. Also will fight to the last man to protect them. Woogers - talk 21:18, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, anyone else? -Signed by Super Warmonkey, please refer to these pages for more: Super Warmonkey (talk • contribs) 21:36, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

I own Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Navassa Island and Guantanamo Bay. Navassa is now a county in Haiti, the U.S. Virgin Islands are now a county in Puerto Rico and Guantanamo was abandoned, destroyed and given to Cuba. Ham Ham Time (User/Talk/World/WAT) 07:38, December 6, 2010 (UTC)