Stuff that was usual in the past and nowadays isn't.

[Dajobo]

Less pissing and moaning about the "good old days".  Seriously, this is what some of you sound like.  If you spent half as much effort on recruiting new players to the game and coaxing old players to come back and stick around as you did pissing and moaning, we'd not be off our 2007 numbers and you could have your farking Shark Week, and whatever else that gets your rocks off.

 

Now pardon me while I continue rebuilding the numbers of my alliance...again...and me and my alliance mates get ready to party...again.  The way is forward.

 

Finally someone says something I can agree with!

[Cataduanes]

As someone who fought for the losing side in the GATO-1V war I have always thought Viceroys sucked.

[Mandrivia_2]

Where is the incentive to be interesting?  You can not hold a conversation with yourself. 

 

This community gets the entertainment is deserves.   You wanted the powerful people gone and so they are.  You offered nothing in return and that is what you have, nothing.

 

Also hello cookie.

 

 

To be fair, I don't think anyone wanted the powerful people gone.  They just wanted them out of... well, power.

 

 

 

As someone who fought for the losing side in the GATO-1V war I have always thought Viceroys sucked.

 

I fought on that side of GATO-1V as well... Viceroys are terribly damaging.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Mamaev II

[Groucho Marx]

Francoism

Stop.

[Ascended Dio]

Stop.

[Rebel Virginia]

I've remembered three more things from the past that used to be quite common, but these days are obsolete. First, aid-trees. One big nation sends out three million, which was then divided by the recipient who sent it out to several more nations. At the end, nations would usually receive about $250,000. It made economics somewhat interesting back then.

 

Second, intelligence gathering. I was one the pioneers of that field. It involved many hours looking at war and aid screens looking for patterns. I had dozens of people doing that for me. Sadly, it has been replaced by computers.

 

Third, discussions about Francoism. I don't think anyone misses that last one.

[Omniscient1]

I've remembered three more things from the past that used to be quite common, but these days are obsolete. First, aid-trees. One big nation sends out three million, which was then divided by the recipient who sent it out to several more nations. At the end, nations would usually receive about $250,000. It made economics somewhat interesting back then.
 
Second, intelligence gathering. I was one the pioneers of that field. It involved many hours looking at war and aid screens looking for patterns. I had dozens of people doing that for me. Sadly, it has been replaced by computers.
 
Third, discussions about Francoism. I don't think anyone misses that last one.

Although it wasn't too long ago; everytime I see RV post I remember back when NSO had a shit ton of posters out on the OWF. I miss that. Most of the posts between Karma to 6 million were with NSOers or MKers. Why do alliances not have a large OWF presence anymore?

[Neo Uruk]

Because everybody is apathetic about the game now.

[zoskia]

Third, discussions about Francoism. I don't think anyone misses that last one.

 

LOL.... the thread you quoted is as pathetic as it gets.... !!!

But I miss the times in which there were debates about Francoism, because those debates involved a lot of other issues:

 

-CN was a political simulation game.

 

-The rise of the MK changed the way in which politics are perceived. The MK was as political as the NPO... except that the MK brought an absolute lack of depth to the politics of the game. i.e, what Mushqaeda is doing right now against TDO... it is quite funny. But I do prefer the paranoid world we had before the rise and fall of the MK... with all the Alliances trying not to make any mistake and having the need to defend their actions in a political way.

I'm not saying that the MK was "evil" or "wrong"... I'm only saying that its style destroyed the political depth of the game.

 

-The debates about Francoism brought a LOT of other political debates. Francoism was clearly fascist... but many Alliances reacted against Francoism and created alternatives. Anarchist alliances, democratic alliances, fascist alliances.... and even guerrilla-like alliances. Vox Populi! and schatenmann were epic and something absolutely new to the game. And Vox Populi! existed becase those "Francoist debates" existed too. It's not surprising that the MK never had a "Vox Populi!" fighting against them... mostly because it didn't make any kind of sense, it didn't make sense to create antti-MK political propaganda.

 

-The thread you posted about Francoism is, yeah, pathetic. Mostly because it is talking about a past that is gone and that won't come back under the same disguise that it had (i.e, "Francoism").

 

I really hope that CN will become, again, a political simulation game that has depth.

[Rebel Virginia]

Actually, MK didn't have a Vox mainly because it didn't do the PZI/EZI. Men like Doitzel, Starfox, Schattenmann, West of Eden, Cheyenne, and myself had nothing left to lose. We were already on lists without any hope of getting peace. MK had enemies just as intelligent and stubborn, but they had everything to lose from a sustain guerrilla effort. So they instead just complained from the safety of their alliances (which is what most of us would have done if we had the chance). MK also never gave people much to rail against them for. PZI was easy to rally around.

 

The few people who tried to form Vox were complete failures. Their situations were usually unsympathetic, and they also lacked any inspiring attributes.

[Tehmina]

I never really saw any alliance reach the 1000member mark. Can someone post a picture? It must have looked frightening (i got really scared as a newb in early 2011 when my alliance DoWed on a 700+ MHA.)

[Tehmina]

I never really saw any alliance reach the 1000member mark. Can someone post a picture? It must have looked frightening (i got really scared as a newb in early 2011 when my alliance DoWed on a 700+ MHA.)

[Lord GVChamp]

A lot of fun things. I remember when someone in Gramlins, Ramirus or something, said he would never buy a Manhattan Project because it was impossible for him to get knocked out of the top 5%. 

I also remember people going into war without warchests as a strategy, because it would just get looted and what's the point?

Wars also used to have no nukes. It used to be considered a BIG deal to go nuclear.

There was also a time when IRON was not really relevant in international politics.

 

This place is just downright depressing at the moment. Though pretty much every "hegemon" pissed me off at one point or another. I was quite hoping that TOP and MK would blow each other to smithereens in BiPolar.

[zoskia]

I do remember the failed attempts at creating some stuff that was like an "United Nations" of CN... or some sort of court that was going to decide stuff when there were conflicts between alliances.

 

Yeah, such thing was never created and most people never thought about it as something that made sense or could be done... but it was an idea that several people thought that was possible.

[The Zigur]

Actually, MK didn't have a Vox mainly because it didn't do the PZI/EZI. Men like Doitzel, Starfox, Schattenmann, West of Eden, Cheyenne, and myself had nothing left to lose. We were already on lists without any hope of getting peace. MK had enemies just as intelligent and stubborn, but they had everything to lose from a sustain guerrilla effort. So they instead just complained from the safety of their alliances (which is what most of us would have done if we had the chance). MK also never gave people much to rail against them for. PZI was easy to rally around.

 

The few people who tried to form Vox were complete failures. Their situations were usually unsympathetic, and they also lacked any inspiring attributes.

 

This is one thing in which we agree. You and I both served in Vox Populi and were given eternal ZI sentences. I think that was the beginning of the downfall of Pacifican influence; you cannot truly assassinate people or cut out tongues in this game, and NPO looked weak when they tried to. It is never wise to corner an enemy; one should always offer a way out.

 

I don't know if MK wouldn't have done the same though if they had the power. MK never had the power and influence to exert perma or eternal ZI sentences against her real enemies like NPO once could, and this again goes back to the philosophy and foreign affairs policy of both the kingdom's leadership and membership. If MK played the game less lulzy I have no doubt they could have achieved Pacifican heights of dominance though.

Edited September 19, 2013 by Tywin Lannister

[Ardus]

This is one thing in which we agree. You and I both served in Vox Populi and were given eternal ZI sentences. I think that was the beginning of the downfall of Pacifican influence; you cannot truly assassinate people or cut out tongues in this game, and NPO looked weak when they tried to. It is never wise to corner an enemy; one should always offer a way out.
 
I don't know if MK wouldn't have done the same though if they had the power. MK never had the power and influence to exert perma or eternal ZI sentences against her real enemies like NPO once could, and this again goes back to the philosophy and foreign affairs policy of both the kingdom's leadership and membership. If MK played the game less lulzy I have no doubt they could have achieved Pacifican heights of dominance though.

Except MK did have that power and consiously chose to not exercise it in favor of conquests less horrifying yet more ambitious. It turned the world's alignment around its finger like a ring, blew alliances it didn't like to bits on a whim, and (save for TOP) let them off with no lasting chains just so it could do it again. And its power did not wane until it plainly decided that it didn't want to play anymore. Those of us who took control of the Kingdom back from 1337 between Dave and eQ were in some respect acting contrary to the wishes of the Kingdom: the general membership was already ready to check out on top and 1337 had been working on fulfilling that wish with as big a boom as possible. IC, Azaghul, and I wanted to keep at it, but found it impossible to do so against the membership's wishes. So MK stopped playing and still the best her detractors could do was force a statistical draw.

The only force in CN history that comes close to the power MK accrued is the World Unity Treaty, and though it was possibly the greatest hyperpower bloc to have ever existed, the extent of its power is inflated by the relatively simple network of treaties during its heyday and the conentration of nations into fewer alliances. When NPO swung its weight during the post-GWIII era, it did so against totally isolated pockets that couldn't defend one another, a bloc in a world with no other bloc. When MK savaged people, it struck at the gut of intricate webs of obligation and intrigue, slashing through everything in its path.

I was pro-NPO at its height (and I do consider WUT it's height; Q doesn't even compare) and still am pro-MK: the latter simply takes the cake.

[jerdge]

I read this and it's like Umbrella never existed.

[zoskia]

Except MK did have that power and consiously chose to not exercise it in favor of conquests less horrifying yet more ambitious. It turned the world's alignment around its finger like a ring, blew alliances it didn't like to bits on a whim, and (save for TOP) let them off with no lasting chains just so it could do it again. And its power did not wane until it plainly decided that it didn't want to play anymore. Those of us who took control of the Kingdom back from 1337 between Dave and eQ were in some respect acting contrary to the wishes of the Kingdom: the general membership was already ready to check out on top and 1337 had been working on fulfilling that wish with as big a boom as possible. IC, Azaghul, and I wanted to keep at it, but found it impossible to do so against the membership's wishes. So MK stopped playing and still the best her detractors could do was force a statistical draw.

The only force in CN history that comes close to the power MK accrued is the World Unity Treaty, and though it was possibly the greatest hyperpower bloc to have ever existed, the extent of its power is inflated by the relatively simple network of treaties during its heyday and the conentration of nations into fewer alliances. When NPO swung its weight during the post-GWIII era, it did so against totally isolated pockets that couldn't defend one another, a bloc in a world with no other bloc. When MK savaged people, it struck at the gut of intricate webs of obligation and intrigue, slashing through everything in its path.

I was pro-NPO at its height (and I do consider WUT it's height; Q doesn't even compare) and still am pro-MK: the latter simply takes the cake.

 

I don't agree at all.
The amount of power that the NPO had in the peak of its power was by far bigger than the power the MK had.

 

We even had to post in the forum mostly following the NPO guidelines!!

The MK never had that power... you may say that "they had it, but they didn't use it".... to be honest, I don't think they had it.

[Ardus]

I don't agree at all.
The amount of power that the NPO had in the peak of its power was by far bigger than the power the MK had.
 
We even had to post in the forum mostly following the NPO guidelines!!

The MK never had that power... you may say that "they had it, but they didn't use it".... to be honest, I don't think they had it.

If you measure power by the egregiousness of sins committed and conclude NPO was more powerful because they were worse (doing things that even big bad MK would not do), then you have logically admitted, contrary to the efforts of a great many people, that MK was, in fact, not worse than NPO. Edited September 20, 2013 by Ardus

[zoskia]

If you measure power by the egregiousness of sins committed and conclude NPO was more powerful because they were worse (doing things that even big bad MK would not do), then you have logically admitted, contrary to the efforts of a great many people, that MK was, in fact, not worse than NPO.

 

The #1 Villain of CN was the NPO....

I don't know what you mean with MK not being "worse than NPO".

 

If I have to give it the maximum scores they reached in the peak of their glory:

Being a villain and evil from 1 to 10 with 10 being pure evil and 1 being pure goodness:
NPO = 10

MK = 6

Making the game interesting for the whole community:
NPO = 9

MK = 4

 

Being able to control everyone:

NPO = 9

MK = 6

 

I was both anti-NPO and anti-MK when both Alliances reached their peak of their power. The NPO was by far worst than the MK if "worst" means more evil, more destructive, more power hungry.

The MK wasn't specially evil, but they didn't make the game more interesting... they mostly destroyed the most political sides the game has.

I, for sure, hated the NPO by far more than I hated the MK. Same thing is probably true for most people who have been enemies of both.

But it's kinda good when an Alliance makes you hate them so much.

 

You probably know about the Godwin law... that says that people will have a tendency to compare their "internet enemies" with Hitler during a debate.

The "Hitler" of CN, for me, will always be the NPO... and I'm not comparing them with Hitler, I mean that they are the image that Planet Bob has of "pure evil"... and that's an interesting accomplishment.

[Neo Uruk]

Making the game interesting for the whole community:
NPO = 9
MK = 4

What

[zoskia]

What

 

Yeah... when the NPO had the power, the game reached its peak of fun. Specially if you were an enemy of the NPO (and I was one).

 

All the enemies of the NPO were always walking on thin ice..

 

I do remember the government of the NpO giving the membership of the NpO gag orders from time to time (but I know that several other Alliances had to do the same)... because a "wrong" word posted on the OWF could lead to a fatal war.

 

Each time Schatenmann published an issue of "This week in Pacifica"... WOW... every person on this game rushed to read it. It was incredibly dramatic and interesting!!!!

 

All those situations made the game really fun. A lot of people was getting involved in several political discussions all the time.

 

The MK never produced situations that I consider to be specially interesting. The MK mostly brought the "internet memes" to the game.

The memes are funny for 1 minute... and after that minute, they are a bore.

 

i.e, a perfect example would be MushQaeda attacking TDO.... and the fun of it is to create a parody of Al-Qaeda and praise Archon as "Allarchon".

The problem with such thing is that "Allarchon Akbar" is funny for 1 day... and after that day it is just a random war with several pages of people typing "Allarchon Akbar"... a silly meme.

And the use of a meme also involves that there are no interesting discussions. It doesn't matter what the TDO says about the attack, the only reply that they will get is "infidels, convert" Allarchon Akbar!"... and the discussion finishes there. This gives me a fun that in a scale that goes from 1 to 10 would be around 4. And the MK always did such thing.

 

So, yeah... in short... hating the NPO provided me a level of fun that equals 9... and hating the MK provided me a level of fun that equals 4.

 

And I'm not saying that the MK are worst people than the NPO... neither that the NPO are worst people than the MK. I simply mean that IC the NPO provided me with more fun.

[Azaghul]

This is one thing in which we agree. You and I both served in Vox Populi and were given eternal ZI sentences. I think that was the beginning of the downfall of Pacifican influence; you cannot truly assassinate people or cut out tongues in this game, and NPO looked weak when they tried to. It is never wise to corner an enemy; one should always offer a way out.

 

I don't know if MK wouldn't have done the same though if they had the power. MK never had the power and influence to exert perma or eternal ZI sentences against her real enemies like NPO once could, and this again goes back to the philosophy and foreign affairs policy of both the kingdom's leadership and membership. If MK played the game less lulzy I have no doubt they could have achieved Pacifican heights of dominance though.

The possibility of any alliance ever enforcing EZI or PZI after Karma was zilch.  Vox had proved its ineffectiveness, and the moralism of Karma had made it's use such a bad PR move that no sensible alliance leader would try to impose it.

 

NPO and MK both were leaders, but like all leaders, they could only go as far as those they lead would follow.  Very few alliances, even MK allies, would have supported MK if we had tried to PZI or EZI anyone.  Nor did we have the desire to.  MK in some ways really did believe in the ideals of Karma, especially when it came to that.

 

Both NPO and MK had to contend with and were restrained by what their allies wanted and were willing to do.  It was never just a one way street of influence between the "leaders" and the "followers".

[Krashnaia]

What things do you remember about the old days of CN that were very usual and nowadays they have ceased to exist.

 

 

Style.

[jerdge]

I insist: talking of what MK managed to do without even citing Umbrella isn't very reasonable (and it even sounds a bit dickish, TBH). Not to detract to GOONS and others but, without Umbrella, MK's history of power would have been way, way shorter.

Edited September 20, 2013 by jerdge