Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Sentinel

      Cyber Nations Forum Rules   07/03/2016

        Cyber Nations Forum Rules  
      In the process of registering on this forum, all players--including you--agreed to accept these terms and conditions and the terms and conditions of Invision Power Board. In doing so you essentially signed an electronic contract pledging to have read the rules and TOS and agreeing to follow the rules and TOS as written. It is your continued responsibility to read, follow, and keep up-to-date with the CN rules.
      The following are basic guidelines for use of the Cyber Nations community forum. Anyone caught disobeying these guidelines will be issued a warning. The forum staff works on a five warn limit policy unless the situation calls for more appropriate action ranging from a verbal warning to a double warn and suspension to an immediate ban, etc.   Just because something is not listed specifically here as illegal does not mean it's allowed. All players are expected to use common sense and are personally responsible for reading the pinned threads found in the Moderation forum. Questions regarding appropriateness or other concerns can be sent via PM to an appropriate moderator.   A permanent ban on the forums results in a game ban, and vice versa. Please note that the in-game warn system works on a "three strikes you're out" policy and that in-game actions (including warnings and deletions) may not be appealed. For more information regarding in-game rules please read the Cyber Nations Game Rules.   1.) First Warning
      2.) Second Warning
      3.) Third Warning (48 hour suspension at the forum)
      4.) Fourth Warning (120 hour suspension at the forum)
      5.) Permanent Ban   Game Bans and Forum Bans
      If you receive a 100% warn level on the forums, you will be subject to removal from the forums AND have your nation deleted and banned from the game at moderator(s) discretion.   If you are banned in the game, then you will be banned from the forums.   Process of Appeals
      Players may not appeal any in-game actions. This includes cheat flags, canceled trades, content removals, warn level increases, nation deletion, and bans from the game.   Players may appeal individual forum warnings. You may only appeal a warning if you can show with evidence that it was unwarranted or unduly harsh. If a reasonable amount of time has passed (no less than one month and preferably longer) in which you have demonstrated reformed behavior than you may request a warning level reduction. Wasting staff time with inappropriately filed reports and/or unfounded appeals will result in a warn level raise. Repeat incidences will result in a ban from the forum.   Bans are permanent. Banned players may appeal to the Senior Staff if they believe grounds exist (very, very rare) in which they state their case with evidence and why explain why they believe they deserve to be allowed back into Cyber Nations. This process is not quick and the investigation into cases may last three minutes or three weeks or more depending on the individual situation.   The only place where discussion of moderator action is acceptable is in the appropriate Moderation forum. Posting commentary on or disagreement with moderator action elsewhere will result in a warn level raise.   Posting
      All posts must be in English. Common phrases in other languages will be allowed so long as they are translated upon request. Foreign languages are permitted in signatures and avatars, however.   Certain areas of the forum require you to have a nation in either standard CN or CN:TE. If you have...   A SE and a TE nation: You get one forum account. Your forum account name must match your SE nation or ruler name. You are allowed to post in either SE or TE areas of the forum. You must have your CN:TE nation name listed in your profile to post in the CN:TE section of the forum.
      Just an SE nation: You get one forum account. Your forum account name must match your SE nation or ruler name. You are not allowed to post in any TE areas of the forum.
      Just a TE nation: You get one forum account. Your forum account name must match your TE nation name or ruler name. Your must have your CN:TE nation name listed correctly in your profile. You are not allowed to post in any of the SE areas. You are allowed to post in the water cooler, question center and the moderation forums. Other than that, all your posts need to stay in the TE area.   Flame/Flamebait/Trolling
      Flaming is expressing anger or lobbing insults at a person/player rather than a character, post, idea, etc. Flamebait are posts that are made with the aim of targeting/harassing/provoking another user into rule-breaking. Trolling is submitting posts with the aim of targeting/harassing/provoking a specific group into rule-breaking. Forum users should not be participating in any of these, and doing so will result in a warning.   Topic Hijacking
      Hijacking is forcing the current thread discussion off of the original topic and usually results in spam or flame from either side. Forum users found hijacking threads will be given a warning.   Repeat Topics
      One topic is enough. Repeat topics will be locked, removed, and the author given a warning. Users found creating repeat topics after others were locked by staff will receive a warn raise.   Joke Topics
      Topics created as a joke are prohibited. Joke topics will be locked and the author warned. This includes topics in which the author is making an announcement “for” another in-game alliance. Humorous threads are permitted; it is up to the discretion of the moderation staff to determine what is merely satire and what is actually a joke topic.   Spam
      Spam is defined as creating posts or topics containing only contentless material of any kind. Users found spamming will receive a warning. Examples include (but are in no way limited to) posts containing nothing but smilies, "+1", "QFT", "this" any other one/few-word contentless combination, joke threads, or posts containing quotes and anything that counts as spam by itself. Adding words to a post with the express intent of avoiding a spam warn will result in a warning. These posts and other similar contributions have no substance and hence are considered spam. Posts of "Ave", "Hail" or any other one word congratulatory type are acceptable as one word posts. Emoticon type posts such as "o/" without accompanying text is still not allowed. Posts containing only images are considered spam, unless the image is being used in the Alliance Politics sub-forum and then the actual text of the image be placed into spoiler tags.   Posting in All Caps
      Posting large amounts of text in capital letters is not permitted. Use discretion when using your caps lock key.   No Discussion Forums
      There are forums that are not for discussion and are used strictly for game and forum staff to address certain issues, bugs, etc. The following forums are not open to discussion: Report Game Abuse, Report Forum Abuse, and Warn/Ban Appeals. Only moderators and the original poster may post in a thread, period, with absolutely no exceptions. Users found disobeying this guideline will receive an automatic warning for each offense.   Moderation Forums
      All Moderation forums also maintain pinned threads clearly marked as required reading before posting. Failure to read and follow required reading and procedure in a Moderation forum will result in a warning. Examples include posting requests in the wrong forum, failure to include all required information in posts, etc. The standard of conduct and enforcement of rules in Moderation forums is strictly enforced and the repercussions for disregarding rules or disrespecting staff are harsh. Read the pinned threads before posting and you will be fine.   Namecalling
      Excessive or unqualified namecalling is not allowed in IC forums; namecalling should also never make up the bulk of a post. Namecalling is prohibited entirely in all OOC forums.   Filtered Words
      Any attempts to evade the word filter will result in a warning. The terms we have filtered are filtered for a reason and no excuse for evasion will be accepted. Filter evasion includes censoring or deliberately misspelling part of a filtered word.   If you link to a website, image, video, etc., containing profanity, please post a disclaimer before the link. The moderation staff may still remove links if the content is deemed too obscene.   Harassment
      Forum users should not be stalking/harassing others on the forums. Anyone found stalking players from topic to topic, etc., will be subject to a warning.   Gravedigging
      Gravedigging is not allowed anywhere on the forums. Gravedigging is "bumping" old topics which haven't been active for quite some time (four to seven days is standard depending on the nature of the thread and how many pages back it had been pushed before bump). Your warn level will be raised if you are caught doing this.   The Suggestion Box and Black Market forums are partial exceptions to this rule. Suggestions/ideas in that forum may be posted in regardless of age PROVIDING that the reviving post contains constructive, on-topic input to the original topic or discussion. Black Market threads may be bumped by the author if there is new information about the offered exchange (i.e open aid slots). In the Player Created Alliances forum it will not be considered gravedigging to bump a topic up to a year old, so long as the alliance in question still exists and it is not a duplicate thread.   Signatures
      Those who fail to read and abide by these rules will have their signatures removed and receive a warning.   You may have only one image per signature which may not exceed the maximum size of 450 pixels wide by 150 pixels tall. You may have no more than 8 lines of text and text size cannot exceed size 4. Each quote-tag, image and empty line count as a line.   Inappropriate Images and Other Disallowed Images
      Images that are sexual in nature or have sexual overtones are prohibited. It is up to the discretion of the moderation staff to determine what constitutes sexual overtones. Depictions of kissing are permissible provided there are no sexual implications. Images depicting female nipples are prohibited outright.   Making “ASCII art” is prohibited regardless of the image depicted.   Using photos or likenesses of another Cyber Nations player is also prohibited.   Drug References
      Images and posts promoting illegal drug use are prohibited. References to drugs are acceptable only if the moderation staff deems that it is not promoting the use thereof.   Obscene Content and/or "Account Suicide"
      Anyone caught posting vulgar material (including but in no way limited to pornography, "gross," "tubgirl," "lemonparty," photos depicting RL illegal acts such as violence towards humans or animals, child pornography, death photos, and any other obscene or offensive material in either text form or picture form) will have their account(s) permanently banned, and their ISP contacted along with any other applicable internet and RL authorities.   OOC Threats / Revealing Personal Information
      An OOC threat of any nature will equate to an automatic ban from the game and forums. Likewise, the publishing of personal information of any other player without their explicit permission is grounds for warning and/or a ban from the game depending on the severity of the offense.   Death Threats / Death Wishes
      A death threat or a death wish of any nature (including but not limited to telling another player to commit suicide) will result in at very least a 40% warn level increase and 2 day suspension from the forums, with harsher punishments, including a complete ban from the forums and game, up to the discretion of the moderation staff.   Quoting Rulebreaking Posts
      Do not quote any post with obscene content or any other content that has to be removed by the moderation staff. Doing so makes it more difficult for the moderation staff to find and remove all such content and will result in a warn level increase. Putting rulebreaking posts of any kind in your signature is prohibited.   Forum Names
      With the exception of moderator accounts, all forum accounts must match up exactly with the ruler name or nation name of your in-game country. Those found not matching up will be warned and banned immediately. Forum account names may not be profane or offensive.   Multiple Forum Accounts
      With the exception of moderators, if you are caught with multiple forum accounts, the multiple account(s) will be banned, warn level raised, and your identity will be announced by a moderator to the CN community so rule-abiding players can take IC action against you. Multiple forum account offenders will receive a varying percentage warn level raise and/or a permanent ban on a case-by-case basis.   Posting For Other Players
      Posting for banned or suspended players is prohibited, as is posting for any person without a nation. This includes making warn and ban appeals on their behalf.   Imitation &. Impersonation
      Imitation in terms of this forum is mimicking the posting, avatar, or signature styles of another user in an attempt to be satirical or generally humorous. Impersonation in terms of this forum is copying the posting, avatar, or signature styles of another user in order to present the illusion that the person is in fact that user. Imitation is fine and can be quite funny. Impersonation is disruptive and is warnable. Please pay attention to the subtle difference between these two concepts.   A player may not impersonate another player by emulating the characteristics of someone else's past or present account in an attempt to harass, stalk, or flamebait. Creating a new forum account in an attempt to impersonate a standing account will result in deletion and banning without notice.   Any attempt at imitation and/or impersonation of moderators and game staff is strictly prohibited and will be met with harsh repercussions.   Avatars
      Size for avatars is limited by the forum mechanics, therefore there is no size issue for a user to worry about. Avatars must be in good taste, and any avatar containing a picture that is too violent, disgusting, sexually explicit, insulting to another player or staff member, etc. will be removed. Avatars that are potentially seizure inducing will not be permitted. Players may not "borrow" the avatars of any moderator past or present without permission.   Swastikas and Nazi Imagery
      The swastika may not be used in signatures or avatars. Pictures of swastika's are acceptable for use in the In Character (IC) sections of the roleplay forums, so long as its context is In Character, and not Out Of Character. Pictures of Hitler, mentioning of the Holocaust, etc... have no place in the roleplay forums, since these people and events existed in real life, and have no bearing or place in the Cyberverse. Other Nazi or SS imagery is forbidden in all forums.   Moderation Staff
      The revealing of the private identities of any Cyber Nations staffers past or present is strictly prohibited, and thus no speculation/accusation of identity is allowed. Doing so is grounds for moderator action against your account appropriate to the offense, including a full forum/game ban.   Claims of moderator bias should be directed to the highest level of authority--the Head Game & Forum Mod/Admin, Keelah. Claims of moderator bias without supporting evidence is grounds for a warning.   Blatant disrespect of the moderator staff is strictly prohibited. This includes but is not limited to spoofing moderator accounts in any way, sig/avatar references, baiting, flaming, rude demands, mocking, attitude, and unsubstantiated claims of bias. They are volunteers hired to enforce the rules. If you have a problem with the way a moderator is enforcing the rules or the rules themselves please contact Keelah.   Attempting to use the moderation staff as a weapon by abusing the report system in an attempt to get another player warned or banned is strictly prohibited.   Do not ask about becoming or campaign to become a moderator. The moderators are drawn from CN membership but moderation positions are by invitation only. Asking to become one will substantially decrease your chances of ever being asked.   Aiding Rule Violators
      Any user found to know of a serious rule violation without reporting it to a game moderator (eg. knowledge of a user with multiple nations) will be given a warning or, in more serious cases, have their nation deleted.   Aiding Banned Players
      Any user found to be harboring, aiding or otherwise knowingly helping a banned user will be deleted. This includes knowing of their existence within the game without reporting it to the game-moderation staff.   Questionable Actions and Content
      The forum rules are not designed to cover every scenario. Any action that is seen to be counter-productive or harmful to the forum community may be met with moderator action against your account. The Cyber Nations Moderation Staff reserves the right to take action against your account without warning for any reason at any time.   Private Transactions
      Nation selling and other private transactions via such auction sites like eBay is against the Cyber Nations terms and conditions. While our moderators cannot control what people do outside of the game you are not allowed to promote such private exchanges on our forums without expressed permission from admin only. Anyone found to be engaging in such activity without permission will be banned from the game.   Advertising
      Advertising other browser games and forums is prohibited. Soliciting donations towards commercial causes is also prohibited. If you wish to ask for donations towards a charitable cause, please contact a moderator before doing so.   Extorting Donations
      Donations are excluded from any kind of IC payment. Anyone found extorting others for OOC payments will be warned in-game and/or banned.   Third Party Software
      Third party software is not allowed to be advertised on these forums by any means (post, signature, PM, etc). These programs can easily be used to put malware on the user's computer, and as such can cause huge security issues. Anybody who is caught spreading links to these will at the very least have their warning level increased.   Other Forum Terms & Rules   Please take a moment to review these rules detailed below. If you agree with them and wish to proceed with the registration, simply click the "Register" button below. To cancel this registration, simply hit the 'back' button on your browser.   Please remember that we are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. USE THE WEB SITE AT YOUR OWN RISK. We will not be liable for any damages for any reason. THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED TO YOU "AS IS," WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.   The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this bulletin board. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary.   You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this bulletin board to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law.   You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this bulletin board.
  • entries
    9
  • comments
    175
  • views
    8,803

Making Planet Bob Thrive again

Lord Hitchcock

1,282 views

Notice the title wasn't "how to save planet bob". Reasoning is that it isn't dying- in fact, it's just in a bear market. "But it's a text-based game"... sure it is, and angry birds was a big hit in 2011 (it doesn't matter) and Planet Bob will thrive again, mark my words.

First, let's get this off my chest, I find it counterproductive for older players to hold "let's save planet bob discussions" and then turn around and poke fun at "micro drama". As heard on the Apethy Report, the issue isn't about recruiting, it's about player retention. Enough nations join CN, keeping them around is hard. New Nations aren't welcome on Planet Bob.

They weren't in the GOONs 1.0 war, they weren't in the equilibrium war, they haven't conspired to 13 treaties with sanctioned alliances, they suck, 'hail pacifica'.

It isn't the new players keeping things stagnate- it's the old ones.

What's the point of a world war anyway? Most older nations have such a big war chest and they plan to fight 6 months and the world war ends in 3 months and then they go another 9 months back-collecting. The point is that there isn't any excitement. There are plenty of 4999 infra nations out there these days that have billions of dollars in their war chest. All war is to them is a couple of clicks an evening- rebuild after, rinse, repeat. World Wars are not personal.

With that being said, where is your back against the wall? The thrill of the fight? Not knowing if your nation will make it through? The comradely of your friends coming to have your back....

A bad defeat is better than a good back collect.



17 Comments


Recommended Comments

it's just in a bear market.

A bear market you say? I think perhaps you mean "bare market"? If CN was in a bear market, I want to know where to buy one.

that's all I have to say to this.

Ps. Stagnant. Apathy. Comradery/Camaraderie

Share this comment


Link to comment

Sometimes it can be possible to keep fighting even when broke. I've fought GOONS and various alliances for months just running off war loot.

Share this comment


Link to comment

While I appreciate the attempt at addressing the current issues in Cybernations, I believe you are sorely wrong.

Cybernations needs consolidation, not micro-drama. Currently on Planet bob we have realistically 40 AA's that are not only large enough, but active enough to have an independent impact on Cybernations. The rest primarily rely on the much maligned treaty web with which to cause effect on anyone else. Add to this the fact that most of the remaining 260+ small AA's and micro's only usually have one or two people actively doing anything. It's not enough to keep the rest of the AA active, however it's enough to sign a few random treaties across the web, and of course this actually creates the current environment. One where the mess of treaties forces the larger players to not only consolidate treaties with other majors, but also to meticulously plan war escalations just to avoid some random tie putting then on both sides of the conflict.

Look no further than the most recent conflict (MInc) where multiple Alliances with absolutely zero stake in the conflict were tied to both sides of it. A world war based on that would be absolutely pointless had it escalated by your own definition. At least with the Doom war, you had two roughly distinct sides with a mix-match of grievances between them. Even with the somewhat cloudy issues, enough AA's did have a stake in the fight that they actively wanted to participate, because even if they didn't get to thump the person they wanted to, at least that person was being thumped by their 'side'.

Don't even get me started on the volume of time wasted by one and two man governments keeping alliances that are dead, active enough to sign a treaty, but not active enough to notice they are engaged in a war 'alive'. The fact is, many of the larger alliances could use an extra 20 active people each, and with that kind of activity base could probably handle the bureaucracy required to actually support the more casual or inactive members.

Larger Alliances, with more active mid-tier leadership, more concentrated FA policies, and actual definable 'sides' would be far more reminiscent of pre-UJW politics which is generally regarded as a high point for CN in terms of OWF dialogue and 'drama'.

As an aside, you might notice that Pacifica itself is not exactly struggling to retain members, and our activity for a mass member alliance (79.24% Aid slot efficiency pre-update), is direct evidence that a well maintained bureaucracy can actually encourage members to participate in the game.

Share this comment


Link to comment

The thing about most micro-alliances is that they either think the big boy rules don't apply to them or they think that they are playing by the big boy rules. They want the power to drag the larger alliances around to do their bidding, and this almost never works.

"You complain about lack of war but then don't participate!" is a claim often heard, when largely the wars pumped out by micros are just weird petty !@#$ that escalated far past the point any reasonable people would let it. I say this, of course, as someone who almost declared on DRN like three times in one summer and HB at least once -- but I also didn't want any support past "if they try to stiff me when it's time to peace out". Shoutout to Kashmir and NSO for having my back even when y'all had an easy out, by the way.

As Dear Leader Junior above me pointed out, what the game needs is for all these dying alliances with leaders who have some skill but aren't "strong" leaders to merge with each other or find some other way to come together. Then, they can accomplish something of note hopefully and wake the inactive players up by being interesting.

Share this comment


Link to comment

For several years I have promoted the idea of going to war for reasons of honor or being slighted as opposed to 'our allies are at war so we should be, too' or 'let's wait until the numbers are on our side'. In each instance I have failed to garner any interest. This has been true in multiple alliances. It's not one or two. It's all of them.

Welcome to SlumberNations. We may as well go play that other game and sit there typing 'pew pew pew' at each other.

Share this comment


Link to comment

While I appreciate the attempt at addressing the current issues in Cybernations, I believe you are sorely wrong.

Cybernations needs consolidation, not micro-drama. Currently on Planet bob we have realistically 40 AA's that are not only large enough, but active enough to have an independent impact on Cybernations. The rest primarily rely on the much maligned treaty web with which to cause effect on anyone else. Add to this the fact that most of the remaining 260+ small AA's and micro's only usually have one or two people actively doing anything. It's not enough to keep the rest of the AA active, however it's enough to sign a few random treaties across the web, and of course this actually creates the current environment. One where the mess of treaties forces the larger players to not only consolidate treaties with other majors, but also to meticulously plan war escalations just to avoid some random tie putting then on both sides of the conflict.

Look no further than the most recent conflict (MInc) where multiple Alliances with absolutely zero stake in the conflict were tied to both sides of it. A world war based on that would be absolutely pointless had it escalated by your own definition. At least with the Doom war, you had two roughly distinct sides with a mix-match of grievances between them. Even with the somewhat cloudy issues, enough AA's did have a stake in the fight that they actively wanted to participate, because even if they didn't get to thump the person they wanted to, at least that person was being thumped by their 'side'.

Don't even get me started on the volume of time wasted by one and two man governments keeping alliances that are dead, active enough to sign a treaty, but not active enough to notice they are engaged in a war 'alive'. The fact is, many of the larger alliances could use an extra 20 active people each, and with that kind of activity base could probably handle the bureaucracy required to actually support the more casual or inactive members.

Larger Alliances, with more active mid-tier leadership, more concentrated FA policies, and actual definable 'sides' would be far more reminiscent of pre-UJW politics which is generally regarded as a high point for CN in terms of OWF dialogue and 'drama'.

As an aside, you might notice that Pacifica itself is not exactly struggling to retain members, and our activity for a mass member alliance (79.24% Aid slot efficiency pre-update), is direct evidence that a well maintained bureaucracy can actually encourage members to participate in the game.

This is a perfect example- I understand your concept and when you look deeper what you are actually proposing is treating the syptom rather than the actual illness.

Merging inactive alliances together to form more active alliances is not the best path.

For example, look at SuperNova X.

I understand planet bob is leaning towards forming "super AAs" and all that reminds me of is the local town getting a Wal-Mart- sure, it's going to feed more resources and focus more attention- and then you are back to square one where you are in wars that have been pre-fabricated.

There is nothing wrong with mircos- I can tell you that Monsters Inc is more active than much bigger alliances I have been in.

Per Rey

The same applies to the above statement. Joining bigger alliances to accomplish something that may wake inactive players up you have to again ask why it is those players went inactive in the first place.

Pacifica is a fine example of an active alliance- I don't agree that it's the sole model AA on planet bob. For example there are many sanctioned alliances who are extremely inactive.

Now, forgive me as my foreign affairs is subpar, however I view the world as movable spheres (not sides A and B). For example, you have the polar sphere, the doom sphere, the aztec sphere, the IRON sphere, Pacficia sphere... etc. Think of these as spheres as "super alliances" just for the sake of their entry into world wars. And look how they are playing out at the moment. These movable spheres are not longer movable, the are tied down in the treaty web more-and-more, is it because of micro alliances? No, it's because of infra huggers.

Forming Super Alliances in hopes of stream-lining activity and planet bob change will amount to the current issues we already face being a community getting smaller- and when the two sides one day align, one side will get bigger and continuously roll the other and then the discussion to the current symptoms we face will again, arise.

Alliances are like a business, for every 20 crap micros, one makes it through a year. A lot of the newer players of which the community knows are notably from smaller alliances.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I don't think the sizes of the alliance is the problem. I think the problem is that only micro and mid sized alliances are willing to take any risks whatsoever.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Well, no, the majority of micro and mid sized alliances aren't willing to step across the line either.

As for the super alliances thing, you're looking at it the wrong way; clumping up groups of !@#$ with little to no leadership qualifications isn't the way to go. You need ot find someone with strong leadership skills and an interesting personality to band together under. Being in an alliance where you'd rather look at the paint on your wall than the IRC screen isn't a very thrilling way to play CN. Interesting discussions are what move the game and what motivate people to step up into the game; being open with information towards your membership is an incredible way to promote activity, despite the risks it can pose.

Being trashed in war permanently is also an easy way to motivate people -- towards the door. That's why alliances tiptoe so carefully in diplomacy. It may be dull without a war for 9 months, but it's better than being forced to log in multiple times a day for an extended period.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I stand by the micros. In my experience being in a micro means more dynamic, more action, more fun.

I've nothing against big and powerful alliances (I need your tech money!) But everyone should have the right to try to carve out their own little piece of Bob.

Share this comment


Link to comment

I don't think the sizes of the alliance is the problem. I think the problem is that only micro and mid sized alliances are willing to take any risks whatsoever.

This is it entirely. The big 'institution' alliances are always extremely risk averse.

The best way to generate action on this planet is micro-drama. As long as the big alliances can be persuaded to stay out of it, of course. Which is not always as hard as one might think. See previous paragraph.

Share this comment


Link to comment

If alliances were willing to go to war without calling in their treaties, this could be a way of allowing many conflicts yet not involving a world war :)

Share this comment


Link to comment

Replying to OP:

What does big warchests have to do with retention of new players? Seems like that would only affect old player retention, and earlier in your post you claim old players are the problem.

Big nations do actually still worry about their nations, btw. Not many feel untouchable, especially not if you're outside of DBDC.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Nice blog post. I remember thinking similar things as a micro/small alliance leader. Not saying I agree with all your points, but they are interesting and arguable regardless of my position.

I don't necessarily agree that World Wars "aren't personal." Getting involved to help a treaty partner can be personal even IF one isn't directly tied to the initial conflict.

On the other hand, I understand your point and I've seen it in action, including complaints from membership about "why should we care about this war again?" My advice in that regard to micro's or otherwise is "don't sign M level treaties with any alliance that wouldn't motivate the membership to get involved regardless of the reason." I.E. if they aren't worth fighting for in every instance, don't promise to do so.

There are such things as "non-chaining clauses" and there are always optional military treaties. Both large and small alliances can use them. Whether or not one gives up rights for the perceived security it provides is a matter of choice. Both large and small alliances have the ability to exercise choice.

Share this comment


Link to comment

This is a perfect example- I understand your concept and when you look deeper what you are actually proposing is treating the syptom rather than the actual illness.

Merging inactive alliances together to form more active alliances is not the best path.

For example, look at SuperNova X.

I understand planet bob is leaning towards forming "super AAs" and all that reminds me of is the local town getting a Wal-Mart- sure, it's going to feed more resources and focus more attention- and then you are back to square one where you are in wars that have been pre-fabricated.

There is nothing wrong with mircos- I can tell you that Monsters Inc is more active than much bigger alliances I have been in.

Per Rey

The same applies to the above statement. Joining bigger alliances to accomplish something that may wake inactive players up you have to again ask why it is those players went inactive in the first place.

Pacifica is a fine example of an active alliance- I don't agree that it's the sole model AA on planet bob. For example there are many sanctioned alliances who are extremely inactive.

Now, forgive me as my foreign affairs is subpar, however I view the world as movable spheres (not sides A and B). For example, you have the polar sphere, the doom sphere, the aztec sphere, the IRON sphere, Pacficia sphere... etc. Think of these as spheres as "super alliances" just for the sake of their entry into world wars. And look how they are playing out at the moment. These movable spheres are not longer movable, the are tied down in the treaty web more-and-more, is it because of micro alliances? No, it's because of infra huggers.

Forming Super Alliances in hopes of stream-lining activity and planet bob change will amount to the current issues we already face being a community getting smaller- and when the two sides one day align, one side will get bigger and continuously roll the other and then the discussion to the current symptoms we face will again, arise.

Alliances are like a business, for every 20 crap micros, one makes it through a year. A lot of the newer players of which the community knows are notably from smaller alliances.

Supernova-X should not be taken as the hallmark case for super mergers, I would like you to look at TLR (in it's prime) and NG, both of which formed out of super mergers.

There are many many many many reasons why SNX failed as an alliance, a lot of them have to do with how rushed it was, and how it was really just one man's way to get a bigger epeen.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×