Yerushalayim Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Yeru had a good point back on page 1. The people saying no are mostly top dogs in the game. Therefore, any change in the point system will completely change that. They do not care what's good for the community, but what is good for them. However, as much as I like the point system, there are IC issues. Like, if you change the system and the #1 nation becomes one of the worst just because of the OOC change in points, the person would have to RP a reason there nation suddenly got so weak. Oh the horror, they'd have to actually RP a storyline that isn't "i r have the power, i r the winner!" Because nations are never truly equal? The game itself already puts in place barriers to hation growth as you go larger and the caps in place prevent excessive numbers. The way the caps are now anyone who plays the game for a year can reach the highest stats. And even in a point system, nations would never be truly equal. It at least puts people on an even footing in terms of what resources they have available at the start. It also remains very easy to argue for maintaining inherent inequality in a system when you are one of the people benefiting from that inequality. Also if you think a nation can go from shit tier to top tier in a year, unless they're in the absolute right alliance (or dump donations into their nation), then you're pretty out of touch with the majority of CN. You should not need to be in a particular alliance (or set of alliances) in order to have a decent RP nation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Because nations are never truly equal? The game itself already puts in place barriers to hation growth as you go larger and the caps in place prevent excessive numbers. The way the caps are now anyone who plays the game for a year can reach the highest stats. LOLI have a better suggestion: people who read your post here and don't burst out laughing forfeit 75% of their points to be distributed among the rest of us. You realize we're playing the same game you are, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 What are the rules on mergers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Ilyich Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Oh the horror, they'd have to actually RP a storyline that isn't "i r have the power, i r the winner!" And even in a point system, nations would never be truly equal. It at least puts people on an even footing in terms of what resources they have available at the start. It also remains very easy to argue for maintaining inherent inequality in a system when you are one of the people benefiting from that inequality. Also if you think a nation can go from !@#$ tier to top tier in a year, unless they're in the absolute right alliance (or dump donations into their nation), then you're pretty out of touch with the majority of CN. You should not need to be in a particular alliance (or set of alliances) in order to have a decent RP nation. "Oh no, I am no superpower anymore! I might die!" I try to RP realisticly, not like everything is perfect. I put terrorist attacks(Like the one in CNRP40) I RP not just good things, I RP everything. And the funny thing is, those nations who say they have the power and are superpowers, THEY should be the ones RP terrorist attacks. You don't hear about nations like Switzerland, New Zealand, etc. Being hit with terrorist attacks because they are not superpowers! They do not change the world ever time they pick up a gun. Personally I find it funny how people RP so much "Optomistic" RP rather than being real and putting some bad things in it. Learn to Role-Play people! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Oh the horror, they'd have to actually RP a storyline that isn't "i r have the power, i r the winner!" And even in a point system, nations would never be truly equal. It at least puts people on an even footing in terms of what resources they have available at the start. It also remains very easy to argue for maintaining inherent inequality in a system when you are one of the people benefiting from that inequality. Also if you think a nation can go from !@#$ tier to top tier in a year, unless they're in the absolute right alliance (or dump donations into their nation), then you're pretty out of touch with the majority of CN. You should not need to be in a particular alliance (or set of alliances) in order to have a decent RP nation. That's the thing though, you don't need to be top tier, 50k is middle tier at best and as you yourself have shown being below the caps can actually give you superior numbers to those above it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yerushalayim Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 That's the thing though, you don't need to be top tier, 50k is middle tier at best and as you yourself have shown being below the caps can actually give you superior numbers to those above it. My situation is pretty unique. I doubt you'll come across many 10k infra dedicated tech farms. :P That said, yes. I do have formidable stats in RP2. And I'd happily give up my advantage in favour of the points system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yerushalayim Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 What are the rules on mergers? Not my system, so not my place to answer, and Zoot's not around right now, I don't think. So you'll probably have to wait for an answer to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 LOL I have a better suggestion: people who read your post here and don't burst out laughing forfeit 75% of their points to be distributed among the rest of us. You realize we're playing the same game you are, right? I have an even better suggestion, you get your head out of your ass and realize replacing a system that has to date not resulted in any clear problems(caps) with a system that is as of yet unproven is not a great idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Not my system, so not my place to answer, and Zoot's not around right now, I don't think. So you'll probably have to wait for an answer to this. Zoot has not provided for the occassion, so I guess it's up for the proponents in general to answer it? And whether we got the current system or points, people will always be about stats per player or stats per nation, so better to clarify it anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yerushalayim Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 You already know my position on mergers and points, Eva. Points per nation and whatnot. I'm sure others will have other opinions, and I'm sure it'd be part of a polling option if this ever moved to a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Ilyich Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 (edited) What we need is GM's that understand the proper ways to solve issues, similar to Ty/Californian. We have to many people that believe that the proper way to solve a problem is to blurt out a bunch of swear words and force everyone to agree with them. We also have some people that think the best way is to make everyone think you are the-all-powerfull-ruler, blurt out swear words, and force people to agree with them even though they are not even a GM, Which I could consider Centurius. So, how about we let Zoot answer peoples questions when he comes on again, hopefully later today. Edited September 20, 2014 by Ferdinand Foch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 I have an even better suggestion, you get your head out of your ass and realize replacing a system that has to date not resulted in any clear problems(caps) with a system that is as of yet unproven is not a great idea. Are you looking in a mirror? I know you're smart enough to not actually believe this, so I can only assume you think the rest of us are idiots. It is obvious that there are problems with our current system and they have already been listed in this thread in multiple places. Moreover, we are all part of the same RP, and we have our eyes open and can see what's going on around us.As for the other RP, the points system is just fine. Just like it has been for every other nation RP ever, because guess what, there are RPers across the interwebs who don't have CyberNations to provide their stats for them. We didn't invest the concept of RPing; the rest of the RPs all use the, uh, "unproven" points systems that you're pretending to be scared of.So go ahead and get all mad about it, because it's sort of hilarious to watch you cry because the other kids won't let you knock down their sandcastles. :rolleyes:---Now that we're done here, I think we ought to move on to discussing the actual parts of the points system that should be put up to vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 You already know my position on mergers and points, Eva. Points per nation and whatnot. I'm sure others will have other opinions, and I'm sure it'd be part of a polling option if this ever moved to a vote. Reason for this? Otherwise, fine, I'll just RP vassalage instead, if it is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yerushalayim Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 Reason for this? Otherwise, fine, I'll just RP vassalage instead, if it is needed. As I've said, to me it's a balance issue. Vassal states, or allied states, have different implications on the world stage than a single superpower. Mergers should happen for the purpose of RP, not for the purpose of getting a more powerful nation statistically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shave N Haircut Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 I'd be willing to try it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 (edited) @Hereno: If only it were that simple that I were purely motivated by self interest. Here's the facts, if there is a major IG war, I won't be big anymore. I have gone through years of CNRP rolling with the punches this game has dealt me and it's only fair we expect other players do the same. If you do not like your IG situation maybe you should look into ways of changing it rather than changing the rp to suit your personal interests? See turned that argument right around on its head. I wonder how it feels looking into that mirror and seeing me. I do not need to manipulate the rp statistics to justify my rp strength or weakness when it is based on ig stats. You do. Remember when I was the Dragon Empire? I had like 10k ns and most of the world under my thumb via my allies and allegiances. Now I can stand on my own for once which is kind of nice and has been a long time in coming. Sure as there is a war like Karma or Armageddon, I will crumble again and so it should be. And you have no loyalty to cnrp from the way you're talking. What you want is "cookie cutter cardboard cutout nation rp." I am proud of my Dragonisia.. and I am proud of her IC incarnation Druk Yul. They make me happy and why shouldn't they? I will be proud of them regardless of my rise or fall, but I need to be able to rise and fall to enjoy that. I am here to enjoy my play as much as you, am I not? But your impartiality has clearly gone out the window. I am in favor of some limitation, of some balance of powers to prevent anyone from basically lording over the entire game world, but I am not in favor of flattening the pyramid. Because once it is flattened there is nothing to ascend to.. and nothing to fall from. The world will be stale and dull ruled by arbitrary, meaningless measures. Edited September 20, 2014 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted September 21, 2014 Report Share Posted September 21, 2014 (edited) @Hereno: If only it were that simple that I were purely motivated by self interest. Here's the facts, if there is a major IG war, I won't be big anymore. I have gone through years of CNRP rolling with the punches this game has dealt me and it's only fair we expect other players do the same. If you do not like your IG situation maybe you should look into ways of changing it rather than changing the rp to suit your personal interests? See turned that argument right around on its head. I wonder how it feels looking into that mirror and seeing me. I do not need to manipulate the rp statistics to justify my rp strength or weakness when it is based on ig stats. You do. Remember when I was the Dragon Empire? I had like 10k ns and most of the world under my thumb via my allies and allegiances. Now I can stand on my own for once which is kind of nice and has been a long time in coming. Sure as there is a war like Karma or Armageddon, I will crumble again and so it should be. And you have no loyalty to cnrp from the way you're talking. What you want is "cookie cutter cardboard cutout nation rp." I am proud of my Dragonisia.. and I am proud of her IC incarnation Druk Yul. They make me happy and why shouldn't they? I will be proud of them regardless of my rise or fall, but I need to be able to rise and fall to enjoy that. I am here to enjoy my play as much as you, am I not? But your impartiality has clearly gone out the window. I am in favor of some limitation, of some balance of powers to prevent anyone from basically lording over the entire game world, but I am not in favor of flattening the pyramid. Because once it is flattened there is nothing to ascend to.. and nothing to fall from. The world will be stale and dull ruled by arbitrary, meaningless measures. You didn't turn anything on its head. You made up a bunch of !@#$%^&* and said it's my fault that my nation wasn't created in 2006. You then made reference to an event that happened back in 2006 and accused me of not being "loyal" to the RP directly after citing it with full knowledge that of course I wasn't here back then, because I was like 13 at the time. Which you know because we talked about it in a private PM conversation where you pretended that CNRP in 200X is the same as CNRP today.You want to question my loyalty? Yours is to your unduly elevated status in a meaningless forum RP. It's just dumb nonsensical swift-boating that completely ignores reality and tries to reconstruct another one entirely in one post. Which is great as RP, but as person-to-person conversation, it's just ridiculous. I'm not responding to this garbage, as I have much more important things to do. If people read this post of yours and actually see merit in it, then they deserve the current system that discriminates against them. Like I said: I'm done and am moving on so we can actually get some poll options up. You can either suggest other options and help out, or you can continue RPing in the OOC section of the forum. Edited September 21, 2014 by Hereno Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted September 21, 2014 Report Share Posted September 21, 2014 i approve of the above message due to the swiftboating reference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 (edited) @Hereno: Not to reduce your feelings of self importance, but I did not even remember your age when I wrote this post, but the reminder is refreshing. The fact you're taking this so personally or trying to make it about you or even me specifically is somewhat amusing. It is not unduly elevated. I've worked hard on my ig country. It was almost a monolithic effort just to recover from Karma, not that you'd know. Having an rp that is somewhat tied to my ig efforts is why I play.. is that so hard to wrap your mind around? Edited September 22, 2014 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 The pair of you should just get over it, and either duke it out some way like men or just let it go and move on. This squabbling between the two of you is getting tiresome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 (edited) I have kept on the topic. He is the one attacking my motives. I simply defend them and point out the flaws in his attacks. I have spelled my motives out plainly. I simply would like to keep this rp somewhat grounded in CN. Edited September 22, 2014 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 The pair of you should just get over it, and either duke it out some way like men or just let it go and move on. This squabbling between the two of you is getting tiresome. Each of them gets one pistol moves 10 paces away from the other, turns around and takes a shot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 I'd personally prefer chess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 I prefer Global Thermonuclear War, I hear it's a fun game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted September 22, 2014 Report Share Posted September 22, 2014 I'd personally prefer chess. Also decent. I prefer Global Thermonuclear War, I hear it's a fun game. Nuclear missiles are mass destruction for unskilled amateurs. Professionals just destroy their enemies' defenses and then start firebombing. 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.