Jump to content
  • entries
    18
  • comments
    64
  • views
    7,922

More DoEs than 7-Elevens


crushtania

202 views

Ever since the fall of the Moldavi Doctrine and NPO's tightly wound dominance on Bob, the DoEs, seemingly have increased almost tenfold. Before the Karma war, new alliances weren't in short supply, but in the absence of drama and other such fears of retribution and the like, Declarations of Existence have become more frequent. But what impact does that have on the game and how others play it?

Obviously some alliances play the game radically different to others. But most alliances require manpower to enact their policies, both foreign and domestic. I am unaware of the statistics the game prior to its peak in popularity, but currently there are 204 alliance affiliations recognized by the server and approximately 27,000 players. Even if the pool of unaligned players remains static, its inevitable that some alliances will fail; both great and small, due to their inability to attract players into their ranks.

Just like Facebook, Twitter and the like, a user is almost constantly bombarded with information that has a shelf life of mere seconds. Likewise with recruitment messages, the first one with the slickest message will court the nation into the alliance. Now with literally hundreds of alliances currying for favor among few new players, alliances will merely have to increase the size of the nations in their lists to increase NS; the relative NS gains made will match the NS gains made by most others; remember when hitting 100,000 NS was a major achievement? Now an alliance requires a protectorate if they were to stay "that small." NS growth will not mean much when all others increase according to what I call the "Alliance NS Increase Index", much like the Consumer Price Index that measures inflation. If wages increase 10%, and inflation by the same rate, what gains are truly made by consumers? The currency of NS will "devalue" over time; alliances that grow at the same rate as others will not have made any advances at all.

Inevitably, there will have to be a realignment of how alliances view themselves in the order of Bob and how they approach the game. In the post-Pacifican non-Order, it seems like the mega-alliances (those Sanctioned and above 7M NS) will lose relevance as breakaway, tighter-knit communities emerge and exert their influence on how political capital is gained and spent. Alliances will not and perhaps cannot aim for sanctioned status when they decide to disassociate from their former alliance to form a new one. Although some alliances such as Athens and Mushroom Kingdom could hope to gain sanction, others unfortunately will not even have such an ambition if they can use informal power to gain the outcomes they so desire.

New alliances as well as a "cross-pollination" of players moving to different alliances more frequently shall make for a more interesting game, ties will be more tightly bound in some areas as well as unwind in others. The territory of Bob shall shift so quickly, maps will have to be constantly re-drawn. As for the glut of new alliances on Bob, every alliance will have to sharpen their recruitment and growth game to stay afloat. Flashes in the pan will be exactly that; constant and continuous improvement will be the new name of the game.

2 Comments


Recommended Comments

Guest
Add a comment...

×   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...