Jump to content

jerdge

Members
  • Content Count

    4,666
  • Joined

Everything posted by jerdge

  1. With 2.8k people receiving the link to the survey, we'd probably (hopefully) have hundreds of replies, and aggregating hundreds of essays would be impractical. I thus imagine checkboxes, where the last one could be "other, please specify" and the encouragement not to use it if at all possible.
  2. The answers provided by those answering to them. Or maybe I didn't understand your question.
  3. While yours is indeed a question, it's remarkably ill-suited to learn what the players want. Well, I'm here trying to formulate good questions, not to have any answer. To reply to my previous suggestions, you could instead make your own proposals about what choices to list. It would help to keep in mind that we're not really interested in the development of game mechanics, or a new interface etc, as we'd then find the information useless, as acting on it would require to involve Admin and we're instead assuming that his interest faded years ago. For example: a. The devious characters you can meet. b. Plotting behind the scenes. c. Warfare. d. Role Playing / Fantasizing about my Nation. e. The friends I can hang up with. (These are maybe bad choices, they're just the first I came up with. The idea is in fact that you people can help me choose good questions with good choices as answers. Thank you.)
  4. Yawn, by any means continue off track but at least be funny - I know you can. Trolling this kind of chest-thumping was already out of fashion a decade ago, don't you see that nobody even bothers anymore? Really.
  5. Questions we could ask include: 1. If you could decide one thing to happen in Cybernations, what would you choose? (list of choices) 2. What do you most like in Cybernations? (list of choices) 3. What do you most dislike in Cybernations? (list of choices) 4. What would convince you to invite your friends to Cybernations? (list of choices) 5. What would cause you to leave the game? (list of choices) What do you think of these questions? What choices would you list for each?
  6. The Cobralition may have ridiculously won the propaganda front but RFI won the signatures battle in a landslide. Congratulations on peace for the nation builders (my heartfelt condolences extended to the warmongers). o7 Peace
  7. Thank you. As I said, the company would be awesome, I like many of you, however I'm not interested in your current crusade. I have nothing against the FTW specifically. In fact I can't think of anyone I have any specific grievance or grudge against. I can't exclude that I will undertake something new, but it has to be in character with what my persona has been this far. It's not really a moral constraint, it's an aesthetic commitment. Our paths may anyway connect in the future, I'd actually love it.
  8. I don't want to and I'm not interested into fixing the game mechanics. What I want to know is what the players want from the game. The result of such a research may then trigger or not some initiative to improve things, but at any rate no intervention in the game mechanics will be possible, as Admin is not interested. EDIT: I take advantage of this occasion to say @Johnny Apocalypse, @Lord Hitchcock, @The Zigur that, with all due respect, at this stage I'm not interested in your proposals or solutions, I'm interested in what you would ask to the other players about what they want (not their solutions either). @Mogar got it right (thank you).
  9. AFAIK this is the first time that this topic comes up. I also don't see how anyone could stop me/others from asking questions to everyone in the game (or why they would bother to do it, for that matter).
  10. I already respectfully declined (on August 1st) but thank you for your offer.
  11. I don't either. CyberNations mechanics are created and run by Admin (Praise Unto His Name) and His Mods. We're not allowed to discuss their Holy punishments but we're sure as ban allowed to discuss the mechanics as they've been decided, and the meaning they have for us. If using some feature was not allowed, and then it was allowed, there's nothing wrong in knowing about it. It's the very point behind having rules in the first place: people know about them and have a chance to follow them right.
  12. I was mildly amused as well. It's also a bit sad to again see how people go to any length to "win" in a game where they don't get any tangible meaningful reward. It's like cheating at solitaire. The one I don't blame, at this point, is Admin. He got money out of it, he surely did well not to care about exploiting the fixations and idiocy of getting validated by "winning" in a broken/rigged game. Calling people out is anyway pointless. If they don't see how stupid all of this is, they won't get your callouts either. Were said warnings before or after December 2016?
  13. Go check his recent post history, he's just trying to top his personal best of "how many people can I troll using the word 'autistic'", or something like that. When I read a post of his in the Boiler Room and he did NOT use that word I always double check that it's him... Not worth a reply. (You can report him, but as even death wishes don't get people actually punished anymore, well.)
  14. Well when I was GPA Minister of Economics I identified the possibility of doing that on a rather large scale and we studied the issue for a while. It was early January 2015. We ended up not doing it due to a combination of reasons, which involved (lack of) activity and uncertainty about the expected results... but mainly it was because it seemed questionable with respect to the spirit of the game rules, if not directly in violation of them, and it didn't look like the GPA way of doing things, anyway. I was away (nation inactive) but I know for a fact that the GPA noticed it. I wonder why nobody else did the same after the NPO did it without being sanctioned by the Mods... They're saying they had it allowed, it was a big precedent, it's impossible that nobody else but the NPO and the GPA knew about it until now. More in general, anyway: people, really, why do you still care?? Nations that had tech removed from them in the tens of thousands and that have never been held accountable for it (despite previous promises to the contrary), are the same ones that most benefited from literally years and years of refusals to fix evidently broken mechanics... the same stuff you're complaining about in this thread. Just come to terms with the idea that there's no credibility here, no actual valid-for-all set of rules, etc. Serious issues that plague CN have been allowed to go on for a decade and they're now beyond repair. At the top we have nations that can field armies two to three times bigger and powered by three to eight times higher tech levels than most other nations in their range, that will "always" win their spy ops and that will never run out of cash, as their treasury is in the tens or hundreds of billions. Whatever you want to think of it, they didn't get there by virtue of their superior ability, the game mechanics have been knowingly allowed to remain broken, to let them reach that status. Why. Do. You. Still. Care.
  15. Most of it I believe came out of Umbrella and TOP's hide. Crymson took a fairly brutal beating from me. After your reply I was curious to see how that fared for Crymson (stats before and after) vs yourself and I was surprised by what I found. According to Carnivore you last fought against Crymson in 2013 (Umbrella nations ~8 months earlier than then), but any land you might have raided at the time has long gone, as your purchased land was 0 on December, 3rd 2016. Your (purchased) land then grew rapidly and was exactly at 59,692.133 (today's exact level) 15 days later, i.e. on Dec 18th, 2016. In that short span you had 9 wars, all with NPO nations (6 of them). You had no more wars since then. You have the 4th ranked nation in the NPO (5th overall) and the three NPO nations above your one were all engaged against the same NPO nations in the same days you were. (I didn't check other NPO land heavy nations with less NS than your one). The only possible conclusion is that you didn't gain your current land in war against other alliances, you farmed land in intra-alliance wars that were most likely organized exactly to that end. Disclaimer: all of the above is exact to the best of my knowledge, as far as Carnivore's records are exact. I can't take any responsibility for the use that anyone might do with the results of my research.
  16. Admin stopped caring a decade ago and the leaders of most alliances don't seem to care either. It's time that the laymen take their destiny into their own hands­­. Activity modestly increased, why not seriously try envision the future of CN? A better moment won't come. I for one am certainly not going to be the prophet. I'd like to ask, instead... to ask to everyone what they do like, what they'd change, where they'd want that the system went. However, I'm not content with the OWF junkies alone... Seriously, I want to go out and ask to every single player out there! We're "only" ~2.8k people, it can be done. Before asking, it's crucial to understand what questions is best to ask. There, you can help (and you can help manage the survey, too). The question in this thread therefore is: What are the right question(s) to learn what the players want, and how would you formulate them? Thank you for your help. I'll post my questions later. Where does this idea come from.
  17. With the unlimited tech and money accumulation, if you win wars you become lonely, if you lose them you become hopeless. In your specific case your huge total land exacerbates your solitude (against what nations and alliances did you collect it, by the way?) You also seem to be doing the exact opposite of what would alleviate your isolation: to get war you need to sell land, give away tech for free instead of continuing to hoard it. War Is a Lie, and in your case especially so.
  18. Well the other purpose of the declaration is to make clear our intent and motives.. and I think those were fairly well specified. Is there anything more specific regarding the announcement that has you in a fog? Nothing, but thank you for asking.
  19. I don't now recall if NG is still officially an assenter to the GPA DoN, however as far as we're concerned you are a partner for that treaty anyway. It's a blanket document and the GPA should adhere to its provisions towards any other alliance (or unaligned nation, for that matter), that they explicitly signed it or not. Unfortunately this might be intended as you (or everyone) not being that special to us... While in fact it's that you're all special to us. I take the liberty of doubting that you declared proper to bend to the formalities expected by the rest of the world, you "probably" had your own reasons to do so (maybe noble ones, I'm not implying malice). Everyone... All is fine and interesting but still I don't get if there's anything more than nomenclature and/or PR. (As a player, at this stage, after all the conventions that have been jeeringly discarded by almost everyone, many posting in this thread included, I find the idea of positive PR a bit... I don't really find an adjective but... Well congrats for trying I guess.)
  20. What are the Oculus alliances doing against NG that they wouldn't or couldn't be doing against them, hadn't they declared NGers to be rogues? I am not loading my question with any implication or innuendo, I'm just trying to understand if this part of the discussion is about nomenclature or what.
  21. When and especially if I'll ever become active again (you never know), upon conquering the world (this, you know it won't happen) I will not forget my early subjects. You will have your reward. I'm pleased that everyone chose to become Neutral, at last. Everything that has transpired has done so according to my design.
  22. Those really willing to overthrow you would have to do stuff instead of complaining, IMHO. But I doubt that those complaining here, or most of them at least, really want to put their time into it. I don't blame them in the slightest, this world just isn't worth it. I know that I wouldn't. In addition, just a technical opinion: I don't know about SPATR/Mongols (IIRC they were a very small coalition compared to Oculus, anyway) but IMO "warring the Neutrals" in this age of inactivity and lack of interest doesn't really amount to "being occupied", not for a coalition comprising the vast majority of the remaining world. (Still, my point on people not having to count on the adversary intentionally sabotaging themselves remains valid.)
  23. Any theory about what caused people to lose interest is just an untested theory, i.e. a collection of ideas (maybe brilliant, don't get me wrong) with no proof whatsoever, because nobody ever made any survey or study by asking to the people that have left. All we know for certain is that Nations disappeared because their Rulers lost interest in keeping them around. We could cite people that left because of lack of (enough) war and people that left because war had been waged upon them. Others left because of the broken mechanics, because of commitments in other realms, because they had destroyed all the relationship they had, because of the rampant cheating, because they had accomplished or irredeemably failed their goals, because they had grown tired of being hunted down, or of the repetitive (social/political) dynamics, or of the lack of challenge, or of always winning, etc. Everyone here, me included, is totally oblivious about the vast majority of those that left, let alone about their reasons to leave. I've yet to see an analysis of the influence of the rate of creation of new nations - which I doubt has been stable for all these years - over the total numbers of existing nations, despite its obvious importance... In other words: research on this subject is horribly lacking. What has always been present is the attempt to put the blame on the shoulders of the political enemies of the day. While often entertaining, it has never been convincing (to me, at least). My personal take is that CN once provided more options and catered to the desires of many different players. It was less competitive, seniority and the various "inflations" weren't an issue, destruction didn't inflict an almost permanent disadvantage as it later started to do. Unaligned nations and small, unconnected groups could grow and nobody thought (or said, at least) that war was the only important dimension of the game. With time the political game became one-dimensional and all the activities that were not military or ancillary to military goals were rendered basically pointless. This happened rather quickly, with the process reaching maturity in 2008 at the latest. Then seniority started kicking in. The Citadel alliances were maybe the first to start prove on the field the decisive role of tech and money reserves, as opposed to coordination and "bank nations". Seniority and organized tech accumulation won over organized combat (alone), which meant that the newcomers were handicapped. Time started exacerbating the differences... I think that the last time an entire power cluster managed to clearly catch up (also) by superior growth was in 2009, in the leadup to Karma. After that the military-oriented people that had accumulated too many defeats, especially in the upper tiers, disappeared or effectively became puppets/satellites of the few successful groups. These last at that point had a relatively long history, had developed their experienced cliques and links in the power structure, so that the newcomers' chances to exert any influence over them was greatly reduced. The only later variation to this plot have been the Doombirds, with their extremely fast tech growth thanks to tech farms. While they have been an aberration in terms of pace (and foul play, considering the tech much later erased for having been provided by multies), they didn't really change the general model based on the preeminence of seniority, and on the permanent handicap caused by defeat. Long story short, at some point only one kind of play became viable and rising in the ranks also became virtually impossible. Not surprisingly, "everyone" lost interest and those that remain simply accepted the glass ceiling and found their fun in mini-games, while some of the old timers (fewer and fewer) continued to log in just because.
×
×
  • Create New...