Themaninthehat Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) Whats your vote? Update: I reset the polls with more options this time to be more precise Edited March 8, 2014 by Themaninthehat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crymson Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 To sum up: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Director Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Didn't Loki make this exact same poll a few months back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 With the understanding that... 1. no revolution guarantees an outcome you will like or can even live with... 2. and the need for revolution does not guarantee a revolution... ...why the hell not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Themaninthehat, I encourage you to check out the Cybernations Little Red Book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Themaninthehat Posted March 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 To sum up: Figured there would be some of this from big alliances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 A large scale invasion from offsite would be a lot of fun and make a lot of things interesting again. No one currently here could stage a really good revolution anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schad Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 A large scale invasion from offsite would be a lot of fun and make a lot of things interesting again. No one currently here could stage a really good revolution anymore. I agree, but unfortunately even a massive offsite group would be confronted with "congrats! Only two years of building and you'll be a force to be...well, considered at the least!", which makes it a little challenging to keep new people involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auctor Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 I agree, but unfortunately even a massive offsite group would be confronted with "congrats! Only two years of building and you'll be a force to be...well, considered at the least!", which makes it a little challenging to keep new people involved. Which is slightly less fruitless than the other "revolutions" around here, tbf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatguyuknow Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 A large scale invasion from offsite would be a lot of fun and make a lot of things interesting again. No one currently here could stage a really good revolution anymore. Sadly true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhizoctonia Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 There are plenty of people that come on here spouting off about a revolution, which is all grand....yet everyone decides to go all in on their own with 3 nations of 2k NS and expect somehow it will do anything. If people actually put a little effort, and showed a bit of patience besides going "Leroy Jenkins" with an army of 5...maybe the vision/idea would stand a chance. But nonetheless, it's seemingly becoming more and more prevalent that new nations to the game come on here and instantly expect to make a name for themselves and think they can bring change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatguyuknow Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 There are plenty of people that come on here spouting off about a revolution, which is all grand....yet everyone decides to go all in on their own with 3 nations of 2k NS and expect somehow it will do anything. If people actually put a little effort, and showed a bit of patience besides going "Leroy Jenkins" with an army of 5...maybe the vision/idea would stand a chance. But nonetheless, it's seemingly becoming more and more prevalent that new nations to the game come on here and instantly expect to make a name for themselves and think they can bring change If that is for me, you do understand that LCNR has 30 members. the 8 that rebelled were just to test the water. I am not even the leader of LCNR, I was just the guy that that got tasked with the revolt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarriorSoul Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 The fact that I agree with anything Crymson says should tell you just how terrible this is. :| Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 If that is for me, you do understand that LCNR has 30 members. the 8 that rebelled were just to test the water. I am not even the leader of LCNR, I was just the guy that that got tasked with the revolt30 members at 2k NS is not going to change the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Themaninthehat Posted March 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 A large scale invasion from offsite would be a lot of fun and make a lot of things interesting again. No one currently here could stage a really good revolution anymore. If it would be a lot of fun then why not vote yes? Personally I don't think a revolution will ever happen. But I still would be happy to see it happen just because it would be really fun to have something that crazy happen. To bad CN as got to the point where any major change is almost impossible. P.S: To the major alliance leaders that are going to make fun of me for posting this, I have no intention of starting a revolution or asking people to start one. I just thought that with all the drama about revolutions going on lately it would be fun to post this and see what people thought about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Zigur Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 30 members at 2k NS is not going to change the world. How do you explain Vox Populi then :v Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thatguyuknow Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) 30 members at 2k NS is not going to change the world. I didn't say anything about that. I was just stating that we knew we what we where getting yourself into. Now lets not let this turn into another pointless argument. Wish you the best of luck Neo and congratulate your alliance on achieving such power. P.S Our lowest member is above 3k, most of us are around 5-10k, and we have 5 members above 30k Edited March 6, 2014 by thatguyuknow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neo Uruk Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 How do you explain Vox Populi then :viirc it passed GOD in strength at one point. Vox was still small compared to GGA and Val, but it was by no means irrelevant in NS (at least, when it was catching on) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Hakai Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 What CN needs is 200 years of civil war let's do this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sephiroth Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yes, more revolutions are always good. o/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckao Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Sure, more people should make crap polls and start micro wars. We'll submit to the tedium in no time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caladin Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Roll the neutrals; only through this can you start your revolution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerdge Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 I interpret "CN armed revolution" as an armed conflict to topple the CN system as a whole. What would be the "system" that would be overthrown, anyway? CN functions as a set of tribes linked through personal relationships rather than interests or ideals, thus to have a real revolution - and not just to change which tribe is the most powerful - you'd need some new mass dynamics aimed at substituting the current paradigm with "something new". To get there you need a cultural revolution first, because people would have to start having new thoughts before they could accept new actions. The main obstacle I see is that most players seem to be rather casual and to like to play "Facebook Nations", i.e. they stick to their RL mindset of grouping with their friends, rather than treating CN entirely as a simulation game. In other words, it would be rather hard to have a successful cultural revolution of that kind: eight years of tribalism must mean something! Concluding, a revolution that immediately attempted to change things with armed action, even if victorious on the field, would be unable to change the base dynamics of this world, and it would thus be a false revolution. If that's what the OP alluded to, it's doomed to fail. A cultural revolution may work, though I think it's unlikely - people like the CoJ guys made really a great effort in that direction, but eventually they didn't change much either, IMHO. If it worked, it may even be that an armed conflict becomes superfluous, anyway. Another way in which CN can have dramatic change is through game dynamics. At this moment the only phenomenon I know of that is not completely unlikely to cause a significant shift in CN is "the land effect", but I doubt anyone has any certainty about where even that may bring us. Oh well, I digress, as usual. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Chocolate Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) Sure - why not - go for it. The one thing culturally I would like to see is more small scale wars happening on a regular basis between two alliances that DO NOT turn into world wars. This would, however, take the larger alliances to stop totally protecting the smaller ones on everything. Just protect them in the big wars - let the small alliances resolve their own conflicts. I The main obstacle I see is that most players seem to be rather casual and to like to play "Facebook Nations", i.e. they stick to their RL mindset of grouping with their friends, rather than treating CN entirely as a simulation game. In other words, it would be rather hard to have a successful cultural revolution of that kind: eight years of tribalism must mean something! Another way in which CN can have dramatic change is through game dynamics. At this moment the only phenomenon I know of that is not completely unlikely to cause a significant shift in CN is "the land effect", but I doubt anyone has any certainty about where even that may bring us. Regarding tribes - the only way the CN community is going to get away from tribalism is the same way it happens in the real world (i.e. increased population). In other words, we need a large influx of new nations (or old ones coming back - it doesn't matter). In terms of dramatic change through game dynamics - it's SO easy but no one REALLY wants it done (even though it's constantly brought up as a complaint during war)... get rid of peace mode! THAT will change things dramatically, create the potential for wars to actually have stronger consequences which in turn will bring back the types of conditions that really do stand a chance for a revolution - i.e. a stronger group really being able to control weaker ones through fear. come on - you all know you want it :D Edited March 6, 2014 by White Chocolate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunzzz Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 No the current alliances are doing fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.