Jump to content

Diogenes

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,104

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Diogenes

  20. Reparations from War

    in World Affairs (IC)

    Posted · Edited by Quiziotle

    Reparations are punitive by design, and because of this are not of great benefit to an alliance victorious in war. Indeed, if they are not delivered in a timely manner, it can cause significant issues in terms of slot efficiency, and demanding them can cause a fair deal of harm to an alliance's political capital in and of itself. They also work to stagnate politics and contribute towards keeping other wars from happening. So yeah, although I wouldn't at all attribute it to "honor", I dislike reparations and feel that they are detrimental to the game.

  21. Facing a Shell Shocked World

    in Open World RP

    Posted · Edited by Quiziotle

    [quote name='jerdge' timestamp='1340963363' post='2999928']
    Not to mean that you two (Quiz and Roq) are wrong, but we're also in a prisoner's dilemma situation.
    Those seeking to "make things interesting" by taking risks generate events that make things interesting for everyone, but they're the only ones paying the cost of it.
    [/quote]

    This is true to an extent. Actions which fly in the face of community standards and beliefs have historically been frowned upon and the alliances that perpetrate them heavily penalized, such as MK standardizing the use of first-strike nukes in NoCB and TOP pioneering the use of the preemptive strike in BiPolar. While I would argue that the community needs to become more accepting of these sorts of behaviors, though, it should also be recognized that no alliance to have "broken the mold" has been destroyed because of it.

    [quote name='Hereno' timestamp='1340977339' post='2999972']
    I completely disagree. If anything, friendship is the only decent thing we have in politics. For an example of what I'm talking about, look at what I did to spark off the Legion war. I don't think anybody would argue that what I did wasn't a CB - but in any alliance where I didn't have strong IRL relationships with the others in that gov, I would not have been defended. I would've been kicked out of the alliance and promptly ZI'd, just like what happens to everybody else who does something against the CN rulebook.

    The fact of the matter is that people want a good government in their alliance. What makes a good alliance leader? Someone who grows the alliance, someone who keeps good PR and doesn't do anything too risky, someone who keeps that alliance on the winning side and away from the losing side. Well, that's exactly what we've gotten. A game full of alliances with booming internal communities who play enough politics to keep as much NS on the winning side and as little on the "other" side(s) as possible.

    Of course, the way the community acts is directly a result of the mechanics of the game itself, so I certainly don't blame people for not wanting to purposefully gimp themselves politically, economically and militarily in the name of having fun. But, doing things that lead to the opposite of fun leads to people being bored and quitting, especially when it can go a year without any major wars happening to get people excited. I can say that for myself, if the people I know and am friends with left this game, I wouldn't have any reason to stay. To crucify OOC friendships as the death of politics and the reason for stagnation is ridiculous, because there wouldn't be anybody left to play the game if those things didn't exist.
    [/quote]

    His argument is less that you shouldn't have friends and more that alliances shouldn't base their foreign policy around where their friends are located.

  22. Facing a Shell Shocked World

    in Open World RP

    Posted · Edited by Quiziotle

    [quote name='Ayatollah Bromeini' timestamp='1340908678' post='2999495']
    I think the problem is obvious. There's no real motivator to keep people interested in the political aspect.

    pre-karma was fun because there was a legitimately 'evil' empire that did legitimately $%&@ed up things. This motivated several different alliances to try and take on the role of the revolutionary, and for a good cause. It kept things interesting.

    Now the worst things that happen are random pre-empts and lulzwars that force people to try and feign moral outrage over the most petty of things and it's silly.




    Bring back the evil empire, I say. That might give people a reason to push on.
    [/quote]

    I disagree.

    I have been playing this game for a rather long time, and for the majority of that, this game has been shedding players. It was shedding players when the "evil empire" you mentioned was in power, it was shedding players when that empire was usurped, it was shedding players when the void of the empire left politics in a state of flux, and it has been shedding players since the Kingdom came to be the most influential, if not necessarily the most powerful, alliance in the game. The obvious conclusion one can draw from this is that the game itself is in a death spiral, and consequently I think effort should be directed more towards stemming that tide rather than reversing it.

    To prevent more people from leaving this game, I think two factors in particular are important: unpredictable and fluid politics, and durable communities. Essentially, during the reign of the New Pacific Order and during the subsequent reign of the Mushroom Kingdom, politics have stagnated. This is because, as numerous individuals including Roquentin have pointed out, most alliances lack the will to power or, at the very least, the courage to make risky or unprecedented decisions. Instead, the community as a whole clings to old grudges and the standards of the past, immediately rejecting anything that would conflict with them. If this game is to be made interesting, no alliance should be allowed to sit in power year after year -- whether it be Pacifica, the Kingdom, or anyone else.

    As far as communities go, alliances need to take steps towards keeping their members occupied with things other than this game for when events here grow stale. I know that we (MK) have been endeavoring to this end for a while now, and I know of several alliances, such as Pacifica, that are doing the same. In an ideal world, I would like to see established communities that are capable of playing this game (and indeed, communities which do so) but which can survive independently of it.

  24. Announcement from the Viridian Entente

    in Alliance Announcements (IC)

    Posted · Edited by Quiziotle

    [quote name='Mogar' timestamp='1340814800' post='2998422']
    you seem to think this decision was made on a Coalition level, this was squarely on Impero.
    [/quote]

    On the subject of your coalition, though, I find it interesting that, over the course of this war, elements of it have attacked the International for not opting into the IRON/Nordreich vs. LSF conflict, defended NATO when they did exactly the same thing, and demeaned VE for honoring their treaty with GOD. I'm getting some mixed messages here!

    In any case, have fun guys.

×
×
  • Create New...