WildThing Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 The game is past it's prime... Most people don't even have wonders to buy anymore, the game wasn't designed for nations to grow to the point they did. I'd love to see a reset just because I don't think the game is going to get any better from here.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azrael Alexander Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 While this will unfortunately never happen (because i know a lot of people who would leave) I would love to be there for the start of said reset. As i'm almost certain most of the major blocs today would form as massive alliances a la TE. But after the initial rush and wars to gain power it will settle down to what we have now and people forming thier own alliances up again. I would prefer a CN:SE2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperbad Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 (edited) The game is past it's prime... Most people don't even have wonders to buy anymore, the game wasn't designed for nations to grow to the point they did. I'd love to see a reset just because I don't think the game is going to get any better from here.. Basically that's a rinse and repeat just with a longer frame of time you'd be repeating relative to what wars cause one to do over again. It would be more monotonous then interesting as some the feel is anyway. Toss in the loss of every bit of work prior to a reset and we could very well see a significant number of players leaving. The way to keep it fresh is to continually make changes to the game. Adding more for players to focus on both has its benefits and disadvantages and its something admin would need to carefully consider. I don't support a reset, I do however support changes to gameplay be they modifications of what we presently have or outright additions. Edited October 5, 2009 by Hyperbad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 The game is past it's prime... Most people don't even have wonders to buy anymore, the game wasn't designed for nations to grow to the point they did. I'd love to see a reset just because I don't think the game is going to get any better from here.. Hey, remember when CN was good? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairna Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 The vast majority of people playing this game don't care about the opinions of the OWF. A large majority would just leave the game if there were a reset. These people aren't just the inactives in every alliance, they're the casual player that decide wars and are appreciated in their own alliance. Would be bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingEsus Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Erm.... YES Part of the charm of CN is the persistent world sans resets. Otherwise it woudl be CN:TE or a million and one other online games. What you do stays with you. What alliances do, stays with them. The effects are permanent, go play TE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asriel Belacqua Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I like the fact that there has been really no resets in over 3 years of this game (I believe there was one at the very extreme beginning but feel free to correct me if you know and I'm wrong), though it does create an unlevel playing field. Would I personally be upset if there was a reset? No. I've played this game for far too long to care if my nation gets destroyed again. Do I know others would be? Yes. Do I think those people would leave? Yes. Would those people leaving be worth it to create a level playing field? Probably not. My two cents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildThing Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Basically that's a rinse and repeat just with a longer frame of time you'd be repeating relative to what wars cause one to do over again. It would be more monotonous then interesting as some the feel is anyway. Toss in the loss of every bit of work prior to a reset and we could very well see a significant number of players leaving. The way to keep it fresh is to continually make changes to the game. Adding more for players to focus on both has its benefits and disadvantages and its something admin would need to carefully consider.I don't support a reset, I do however support changes to gameplay be they modifications of what we presently have or outright additions. I like rinse and repeat games with nicely set time frames. Continually making changes to the game.. Adding in new 'super wonders' every few months you mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louisa Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I wouldn't mind a reset except for the fact that I know a lot of people that I like would leave if one happened. Quoted, agreed to, and expanded with the suggestion of replacing the vanishing people with bot countries to sort out the inevitable trading mess Countries and pixels come and go, it is the people who make this place any fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallen Fool Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I wouldn't mind a reset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoiL Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 (edited) The idea of a reset is just one of the reasons I would never put $20 into a donation for anyone. (cept that once L:\) Edited October 5, 2009 by SpoiL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anenu Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 As a thought since most people who are pro reset seem to fear that nations are getting to large and are undefeatable (at least long term) we could simply have nations be more destroyable with the possibility of attacks destroying a wonder or making the wonder count proportionate to population or infra so that as a result of big wars nations actually have to focus on regrowing and don't find themselves with billions in their warchest and only out a couple of thousands of infra that they can repurchase. In short it would at least make it so that major wars cause small semi resets more than they do now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyperbad Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I like rinse and repeat games with nicely set time frames. As do I on occasion however it only works for so long without changes before you see the player base become drastically reduced out of sheer boredom. It's an issue of replayability. Let's imagine CN was a single player game for a moment with all others being AI. Speed the time up so that 3 years passes more quickly. What would keep you returning and wanting to play a new game after the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, etc. time? Continually making changes to the game.. Adding in new 'super wonders' every few months you mean? I have a great distaste for that sort of idea. It adds little to nothing new from a depth perspective and the lacking of depth in the game itself could be mentioned as a reason for the lack of interest. This isn't to say it needs to be rocket science. Some new functions or say reworking what already exists could have a profound impact on player interest while keeping the history the game presently has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I'd say yes, but a lot of people I know and enjoy talking to would quit, so no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I'd definitely quit. That's what TE is for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorponok Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I honestly can say I'd welcome it with open arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SleepiB Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I wouldn't mind a reset, as long as I get a few months of *bang* first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff Webster Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I don't think a complete reset is possible as it would be difficult to time it with agreements like peace terms. You wouldn't be able to reset friendships and prejudices, either. Resetting the ingame numbers might be exciting, but not as exciting as some may think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BamaBuc Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Opposed, because it would change next to nothing. Really, it wouldn't. It wouldn't have done anything during Pax Pacifica and it won't do anything now. Most people would still be in the same alliances. Most alliances would still have the same allies. The political structure would not change meaningfully. Obviously Citadel's NS relative to everyone else would go down, but they have enough high member count alliances connected to them that it wouldn't destroy their position. After a few days of chaos, CN would go on. But with a lot less people. -Bama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viluin Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 (edited) I don't think we need a reset.. instead I believe war should be less money-based, instead of being de facto immortal just because you managed to save up several billion dollars by.. uh, not doing anything. The sheer thought of having to deplete your warchest to really beat you would tire people. Edited October 5, 2009 by Viluin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Wally Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 If a reset was to happen I would want to see large scale game changes introduced at the same time... so the world we came back to was fresh new and even for experianced gamers challenging again. No point reseting just for the sake of it.. if you reset you need to be adding something new to the game... perhaps trial this in TE mode first if they were serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I wouldn't mind a reset except for the fact that I know a lot of people that I like would leave if one happened. This and because would change nothing in political relationship just in the power balance and for that there are wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Beck Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 No. I might approve of this if the game would be completely restructured. These are some changes that are required: 1) Make the update occur every 25 or 23 hours, so that players from all over the world would be able to be on at update at least once in their lives. 2) Make the game realistic. There's so much into this, beginning from the fact that governments don't just give bonuses like +1 happiness, it is impossible to specify all those things here. Drawing from #4 in this list, a good suggestion would be to make population counts and infra to be separate. There is also the argument that this is just a game and it doesn't need to be realistic, however no game will ever be truly realistic so adding realism will not change the fact that this is a game. 3) Add alliances to the game, so that an alliance leader or leaders can be elected and ghosts can be kicked out, etc etc. 4) Make it so the game isn't all about numbers. 5) Restructure the war part of the game so it either includes tactics, or so that soldiers don't just pop out of thin air and die instantly in wars that occur over a period of 10 minutes around the update once every day. All these things need to be done for me to consider my opinion of a reset remotely possible because implementing any of these things would require a reset. I know all these things probably shouldn't be brought up because of the "if you don't like it stop playing" but as with alliances i refuse to run from the problem and require of myself to stay and fix the problems, which is difficult as suggestions cannot be made if they have been turned down once. Perhaps what is required is even a game which one might refer to as CN2 or CN (not beta). So, in a manner of speaking, as the game mechanics lack, the time spent on it all makes up for it and makes it worth while and thus it is ridiculous to ask for a reset. Bleh i probably said some things that are very bad and sorry for that and so on and so forth but really this concerns me a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haflinger Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Reset seems silly, especially when the game is pretty young (what 3 years?) Second server sounds good though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feanor Noldorin Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 I think I would be ok with losing my nation and having to start over, however, I would be pissed on how a restart would affect my alliance's position in the world. I would much rather lose our #1 position due to war/politics (I think a perpetual nuclear war would be a blast) than having it randomly whipped out by admin. 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.