45 replies to this topic

[LexLuthor18]

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.

[D34th]

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.

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

[LexLuthor18]

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

Why did they fail?

[D34th]

Why did they fail?

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.

[LexLuthor18]

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.

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, 19 November 2012 - 11:44 PM.

[Lurunin]

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.

[D34th]

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.

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

[LexLuthor18]

Nevermind you're right

[potato]

Don't worry, it doesn't happen to him that often.

[D34th]

Don't worry, it doesn't happen to him that often.

I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong

[potato]

Never said you were always wrong. Just that your being right didn't happen often.

[han fei zi]

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.

[Charles Stuart]

But GOONS get paid to fight?

[Garion]

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.

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.

[LexLuthor18]

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.

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.

[LexLuthor18]

But GOONS get paid to fight?

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.

[Garion]

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.

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

[LexLuthor18]

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

But they will be protected by another alliance, and will only attack rogues.

[D34th]

But they will be protected by another alliance, and will only attack rogues.

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

[LexLuthor18]

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

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.