Jump to content

DBDC: Friend or Foe? LNN wants YOUR opinion!


The Zigur

DBDC  

174 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I would not worry much about dbdc until they decide it's time to insert their political will on the community by way of setting global policy and restrictions.

 

Frankly tywin you should hope they decide to politicize their collective and impose their will. That would certainly create the sort of stability you have been taking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Where is the "all of the above" option? To classify DBDC as one thing solely is pretty narrow minded. A good mix of chaos and order, might and diplomacy, enemy and friend, it is all is pretty relative and seems to change on a whim. We are DBDC, and it doesn't really matter what you think we are.

I chose "no" and "political alliances should be formed" just because that seems more fun.

Edited by CubaQuerida
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is the "all of the above" option? To classify DBDC as one thing solely is pretty narrow minded. A good mix of chaos and order, might and diplomacy, enemy and friend, it is all is pretty relative and seems to change on a whim. We are DBDC, and it doesn't really matter what you think we are.

 

How would you describe your foreign policy agenda?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

That sounds like a recipe for the #1 most damaging war EVER

 

I can dream

 

 

if i am not mistaken i am sure Valhala may have something to say on this

 

Well, we were a threat to Val before they lost their entire top tier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friends over Infra lost the war the first time it tried, too. Setbacks create the necessary preconditions for triumphs.

 

Friends > Infra is horrible for this game. It turns the game from a political nation simulator to one of high school style cliques. What sets apart CN from most online games is that we have alliances, treaties and formal politics, rather than basic clan wars. Friends > Infra represents a devolution of international politics and the worthlessness of the game as a political simulator. Of course, clique based diplomacy tends to be exploitable and self destructive as well.

Edited by Tywin Lannister
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friends > Infra is horrible for this game. It turns the game from a geopolitical simulator to one of high school style cliques. What sets apart CN from most online games is that we have alliances, treaties and formal politics, rather than basic clan wars. Friends > Infra represents a devolution of international politics and the worthlessness of the game as a political simulator. Of course, clique based diplomacy tends to be exploitable and self destructive as well.

The game is made of high school cliques anyway. Friends > Infra is just a clarification that our clique isn't made of the typical turncoat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Friends > Infra is horrible for this game. It turns the game from a geopolitical simulator to one of high school style cliques. What sets apart CN from most online games is that we have alliances, treaties and formal politics, rather than basic clan wars. Friends > Infra represents a devolution of international politics and the worthlessness of the game as a political simulator. Of course, clique based diplomacy tends to be exploitable and self destructive as well.

 

Whatever works works. Friends greater that infra works for some, others don"t like it. We're all here to have fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Friends > Infra is horrible for this game. It turns the game from a political nation simulator to one of high school style cliques. What sets apart CN from most online games is that we have alliances, treaties and formal politics, rather than basic clan wars. Friends > Infra represents a devolution of international politics and the worthlessness of the game as a political simulator. Of course, clique based diplomacy tends to be exploitable and self destructive as well.

 

In all actuality, they're pretty much the same thing. One only gains temporary virtue over the other when it's materially strongest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friends tend to change - fickle creatures we humans are, the globalscape is under no threat of stagnation in that regards. It's when useless/out-dated treaties get drug out and hung onto for posterity and "just because" then there's real problems in the area of stagnation.

Once upon a time NSO and TPF had a great relationship, then came JudgeX. And now, fuck TPF. 'Friendship' changed, and so the geoscape and alliance relations changed.

Newfound friendships brought NpO and TOP together. This massively changed the geoscape.

There's two sides to each scenario; to say "friends > infra" is killing geopolitics is extremely narrow and lacking depth; it also fails to mention where the friendships lie. If it's an alliance-to-alliance friendship then there's plenty of reason for it be considered a purely legit treaty of no danger to geopolitical stagnation while treaties where alliances don't like each other but gov-to-gov there's friends creating the bond, they're bound to fall when the gov changes (ie. NSO-TPF as mentioned above).

Change is constant, player choice is solely responsible for any stagnations - not any model we base our relations around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that friendships are bad. Friendships strengthen ties and will inevitably affect in-game politics anyway. But basing one's politics on friendships, and especially friendships over game mechanics, is inherently bad because it implies a reduction of the importance of in-game values. Thus the game becomes more about social cliques than the material values in the game itself. OOC should not heavily impact the IC game; Moo and I were OOC friends even while we were deadly IC enemies.

 

What makes CN more interesting than most games is an emphasis on political strategy and chess like playing styles. Most games have no concept of IC/OOC separation. CN is a place where we can plot and scheme against OOC friends and still shake hands over a game well played. Embracing the idea that OOC relationships should be the basis of IC actions devolves the political game, good sportsmanship, and the IC/OOC separation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could argue that what makes CN boring is that so many moves are coldly calculated and players take far too few risks. There's more things in heaven and earth than are considered in your philosophy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could argue that what makes CN boring is that so many moves are coldly calculated and players take far too few risks. There's more things in heaven and earth than are considered in your philosophy.

 

There is nothing that prevents any player from both playing in a "coldly calculated" way and also taking risks. I have done both throughout my CN experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There is nothing that prevents any player from both playing in a "coldly calculated" way and also taking risks. I have done both throughout my CN experience.

 

You're not that exciting though, tbh.

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...