Jump to content

Just an idea...


LexLuthor18

Recommended Posts

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1353385826' post='3054828']
Wouldn't it be cool if a couple of people created a group of nations that are payed to deal with troublesome rogues, sort of like hit-men or mercenaries. Share your opinion and be honest.
[/quote]

In past people tried to create mercenary alliances but all attempts failed miserably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1353387298' post='3054844']
Why did they fail?
[/quote]

Because be a mercenary is impracticable with the current game mechanics, the amount of money you can send is very limited (27 millions to nations with FAC and DRA, 18m to nations with DRA and 15m to regular nations each 10 days.) and wars, mainly those who involve nukes, cost much more than that. There are others problems, like trust issues and political ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1353387828' post='3054856']
Because be a mercenary is impracticable with the current game mechanics, the amount of money you can send is very limited (27 millions to nations with FAC and DRA, 18m to nations with DRA and 15m to regular nations each 10 days.) and wars, mainly those who involve nukes, cost much more than that. There are others problems, like trust issues and political ones.
[/quote]

What if I built my nation up and charged about 3-10 mil (depending on how serious the problem is) mil to any nation or alliance that required my services to take care of a rogue? Sounds like a good idea to me.

Edited by LexLuthor18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

first off you wouldnt be making a profit. that 3-10mil would last you not even half a round of war. more like 2-3days depending max.

secondly its not "politically acceptable" and would probly prompt retaliations from those who either want to stir up some fun for themselves/those who dont agree with mercenaries/those who might be afraid the it would be used against them in the future and want to nip it in the bud earl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1353390093' post='3054871']
What if I built my nation up and charged about 3-10 mil (depending on how serious the problem is) mil to any nation or alliance that required my services to take care of a rogue? Sounds like a good idea to me.
[/quote]

Please re-read my previous post where I say that a war cost much more than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone wants to play it safe and always think of profit; they'll make you amass tons of cash for a "possible war" and make you paranoid. Play CN they way you want to. If you want to hit nations then go ahead. Stay small so you have lots of targets and only need a couple of mil to keep you afloat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1353385826' post='3054828']
Wouldn't it be cool if a couple of people created a group of nations that are payed to deal with troublesome rogues, sort of like hit-men or mercenaries. Share your opinion and be honest.
[/quote]

Most rogues hit in two quite definite ranges:
- under 5k NS, where war cost very little money;
- over 60k NS, where wars and rebuilding cost a lot.

Your kind of suggested grouping of mercenaries would be very effective in the first range, in the other one two big issues would occur:
- the cost of the war itself;
- the cost of rebuilding your nation, that would probably make the fee for your services astronomical.

I think a mercenaries-hitmen alliance would do well in the lower ranges, particularly since several they could offer a range of services (hitting rogues and techscammers, fighting techsellers in a global war, etc.), but your nations will grow so fast that they will exit that range in a couple months at most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Garion' timestamp='1353504333' post='3055538']
Most rogues hit in two quite definite ranges:
- under 5k NS, where war cost very little money;
- over 60k NS, where wars and rebuilding cost a lot.

Your kind of suggested grouping of mercenaries would be very effective in the first range, in the other one two big issues would occur:
- the cost of the war itself;
- the cost of rebuilding your nation, that would probably make the fee for your services astronomical.

I think a mercenaries-hitmen alliance would do well in the lower ranges, particularly since several they could offer a range of services (hitting rogues and techscammers, fighting techsellers in a global war, etc.), but your nations will grow so fast that they will exit that range in a couple months at most.
[/quote]

I mean I'm around 1080 NS, so I think I would be fine. Idk, this game is kinda boring for me now so it was just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1353531142' post='3055735']
GOONS are an actual alliance, what I'm suggesting is not really an alliance but a group of nations who are paid to take care of problem nations.
[/quote]

Agh... That would simply mean you would be easy meat for any alliance willing to raid you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1353558299' post='3056067']
But they will be protected by another alliance, and will only attack rogues.
[/quote]

How this alliance/group of nations will protect someone against rogues when they're the ones in need of protection?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='D34th' timestamp='1353564482' post='3056103']
How this alliance/group of nations will protect someone against rogues when they're the ones in need of protection?
[/quote]

They will only attack rogues, not other AAs. They will be protected from being raided by other alliances and the alliance will not try to control them in any way unless it involves attacking rogues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest problem with your idea etc is not so much the cost as others have suggested (although it is an important and legitimate issue) but rather that alliances already mostly have the ability to handle this themselves and don't have much need for merceneries. It's kind of their primary purpose of existence and it gives your own members experience and things to do and there's probably not a whole lot of incentive to protect a random mercenary group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Shan Revan' timestamp='1353688386' post='3056557']
The biggest problem with your idea etc is not so much the cost as others have suggested (although it is an important and legitimate issue) but rather that alliances already mostly have the ability to handle this themselves and don't have much need for merceneries. It's kind of their primary purpose of existence and it gives your own members experience and things to do and there's probably not a whole lot of incentive to protect a random mercenary group.
[/quote]

I mean a separate group, outside of all the politics and regulations of alliances. Who will look out for their own, and be paid to wreck rogues and other problem nations. There is a lot of incentive, being a mercenary group this group can also serve as sort of a reserve army for the alliance protecting them (depending on the situation), I think this will be good for CN as all the political BS is what is making this game boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Letterkenny' timestamp='1354159172' post='3057949']
The "political BS" and community of the game is the reason we have so many nations sticking around. If you want straight up war, there's other options.
[/quote]

Stick in your safe, stuck up little alliance world lol. You have your way of play I have mine, you stay in this game by knowing what you're doing, not because you're "protected" by some group of people who could care less about you and see you as cannon fodder in a war. I think this is a good idea, and I'm not the only one. If I may ask, what other options do you have?

Edited by LexLuthor18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='LexLuthor18' timestamp='1354161317' post='3057956']
Stick in your safe, stuck up little alliance world lol. You have your way of play I have mine, you stay in this game by knowing what you're doing, not because you're "protected" by some group of people who could care less about you and see you as cannon fodder in a war. I think this is a good idea, and I'm not the only one. If I may ask, what other options do you have?
[/quote]

Zero percent of that makes any sense.

NSO is not a neutral alliance, there's few of those. I'm not saying we live in a stuck up alliance world, whatever that means, I'm saying you don't understand CyberNations. This simulator has game mechanics that are fun absolutely, but users stick around (I believe this goes for most, as it's the reason I've play for the last 4 years) due to the political landscape, no matter how clustered, and the community/ friends/ alliances. Contrary to your belief, alliances do care about each other - they wouldn't be able to exist otherwise. I've made actual friends in this game that carry on outside the realm of 'in character'. You don't have a way of playing the game, you have a delusional outlook that will, fortunately, lead to your demise. And for the record, you are the only one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...