Jump to content

jerdge

Members
  • Content Count

    4,998
  • Joined

Everything posted by jerdge

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.)
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.)
  10. 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.
  11. I always enjoy these readings, again I can't thank you enough for them. I even got featured! If I am not mistaken the last time was with The Tattler... which shows how irrelevant I am of course. (For you youngsters: The Tattler's times is more or less the CN equivalent of "before the dinosaurs' extinction".)
  12. My bad, I tried to avoid too much a lengthy post and I also hadn't much time to reply, hence the misunderstanding. Yes, your post was about a technicality and you were correct about it, and no, you weren't expressing your convictions about EZI. It just happens that the technical stuff you wrote about was, once upon, used to fuel the spin effectively in defence of EZI, hence my comment. I agree that your previous post, and this one, are valid, and I agree with their literal meaning. I also continue to think that my comment was relevant and warranted, with the criticism being about the past distorted use of what you've been saying, and not about you or your perceived intentions/ideas on the matter. My apology for the confusion.
  13. Thank you. Where? There's some rhetoric about stuff being burnt and salted, but that's just rhetoric. That's actually a cool concept. Pun intended, but it's really not bad. Excuse me, I know that you probably didn't intend your comment to be dickish, but what you wrote is exactly the kind of crap that was used ages ago to try spin EZI policies so that the masses could more easily swallow them. Despite the scented varnish, they remained total crap. A player isn't just an individual in the outside realm, it's someone with relationships and links in this world. Basically anyone that ever participated in CN (as it's meant to work) developed a social and political persona: effectively forcing them to hide their previous identity from all the friends and contacts they had is not fair. No other player should engage into that. Moreover, claiming that people that don't go out of their way to scramble their Internet fingerprints in a game would or could deserve to be griefed by the enemies they had in any previous reincarnation is similarly silly. Players shouldn't be forced to do anything to be allowed to play the game, other players have no authority over them. (Before the same old objections to my words are made, I clarify that, yes, it's wise not to give any personal details to strangers met on the internet; and yes, an alliance is justified in fighting against someone that rerolls to then again conspire against them. None of which is what I've been talking of.)
  14. As a player to a player: people that want to drive others from the game are near the top of the list of those that we wouldn't need here, actually. If this game still made sense at all, that's it. Pacifica also established long ago that EZI was not the way to go, contrary to your recent words in this thread, when did it change its policies about it? I'm curious.
  15. Apologies for this derail and for the self-indulging quote and content... (no guarantees on the image link continuing to work)
  16. Thanks for sharing. I'm not sure the relationship with what I had posted, though. Do you mean to add to it, to correct it, or simply to highlight another portion of the bigger picture? While post count isn't per se indication of quality, the activity around these two, simultaneously, sets a record for the last 3+ years. (TBQH it's not that incredible record, it's just that the state of global affairs has been quasi-dead for too long. What will really matter is whether this renewed interest will actually last.)
  17. NG doubled its stats circa July 18th-19th, which is when the FTW started accelerating its losses, however FTW's (mildly) accelerated NS drop quickly subsided and was back at "normal" in about a week. The FTW's NS losses between July 10th and August 3rd amount to a grand total of 6% of their NS... not exactly groundbreaking, and in fact rather normal for asymmetric nuclear warfare (where the side with more nations simply eats more nukes). I underline this not to criticize NG's war effort - aggregated war effects depend mostly on aggregated stats rather than skill (sadly) - but because I'm personally unconvinced that NG's past and present actions against the FTW caused the opening of this front. What could instead better explain this DoW is the intention to avoid that NG may create further future issues, by attracting more and more nations dissatisfied about the current lack of life in CN. NG snowballing with some, maybe lots of the most active members, and their tech, isn't a pretty sight if you're running the alliances said members emigrate from. It's not really about punishing the ones leaving, or even those "poaching" them, it's about removing an alternative place people might want to leave for. Of course I know nothing, I am just playing with ideas here and there. Feel free to consider my reasoning garbage, I know myself it might be just that. tl;dr (I really don't get why that many people don't believe DA on this. It's totally credible, even almost naive in its sincerity. IMHO you have to give credit to the man for it.)
  18. Did I write exactly that? I don't know, honestly I'm too old for this stuff! (Dajobo is terrific company anyway.) It's however true that I've always had a soft spot for you, of course mainly because of your time with the GPA, but also for your own personal merits. I've also always liked Non Grata, despite the [In Character] immense "ideological" distance which can be imagined to exist between me and you/them. Weirdly, to me NG always seemed neutral (I think I once made about it a joke propaganda gif that maybe even deserved part of the appreciation it got), meaning that, from the outside, it seemed to choose its path because of its nature and not because of its allegiances. Not that you were no true friends with your friends, but rather you didn't offer nor you asked for blind following or support; unlike many others that said the same (among your friends, too), you actually meant it. The Grämlins also come to mind, at a certain extent, but they were also very "politic" and realpolitik (Ramirus wasn't really an outlier there.) NG was to me the authentic dark side of neutrality. (Uninteresting personal digression: in hindsight, I came to the GPA mostly by chance, but I stayed because it was the free and dangerous choice. Assuming that NG would have accepted me, I would have probably been equally well there, too.) I think that this recent adventure, insurgence or resurgence, is fully in character with the NG I have always known: it's a choice for belligerent neutrality. I don't think that I'm the only one feeling its charisma and probably, without this DoW, NG could have snowballed into something much more relevant and big. When you think of that, this DoW makes a lot of sense, not because of the reasons it lists about the past, but because of the stop it imposes on the future. It creates a powerful plug to stop the leak. But now I'm digressing too much, sorry about that.
  19. thatstheplan.gif Since that above is the plan, that all-out fight won't happen. Some nations and parties will get bigger and stronger and bigger and stronger to prepare for total dominance (i.e.: nobody else is left). Before they'll have achieved it, the lights will be switched off. The meaning of life some are looking for simply isn't there.
  20. I was curious to check my intuition that the signatories in the OP comprised more than half of all alliances' NS and tech (for the curious: it does, it's almost 60% and about 64% of them, respectively). Having checked said signatories I noticed that among them there's this one: Does NATO still exist as an alliance? EDIT: IMHO you're both right, and that's because War Is a LieTM. I've been preaching this literally for years but you lot don't want to listen... jerdge leans against a non-existent table and falls down, popcorn and his umpteenth drink splattered all over... having then failed to get up, he leaves the scene on all fours, grumbling.
  21. Some people "awakening" did, some did not, at any rate the point is whether the game mechanics are or not good for the game, not whether the players are or not justified in using the game mechanics to their own advantage (question which obviously has an obvious answer). About the rest of your post, please go check Jerel's nation history on Carnivore and ask yourself why they lost about 60k tech levels on April 6th (hint), whether the illicit tech dealers involved "might" have sent tech to other nations, and what other nations might have been specifically involved, how much further illicit tech might have gone undetected, how much tech and land was robbed from other nations and/or destroyed in other competing nations thanks to that much illicit tech... Then come back here and say again with a straight face that it's all about "cleverness". As to how this is relevant to the game having been rendered pointless, I'll add that the illicit tech removed from Jerel only is more than the overall tech ever possessed by almost every other nation in this game (and not "just" the 90% or 99%, the 99.9+%). To quote Admin himself, cases where tech received from multis number in the thousands and at that level should no longer constitute a grey area, the recipient knew what they were up to. Still, at least some of them have never been really held accountable, despite assurances to the contrary. In a distorted way, nothing is true, everything is permitted, but you're there blaming those that committed to the honest building of their nations for years. It's amazing, really.
  22. The game mechanics don't stop people from "awakening" (as Thrash put it above) but they render in-game efforts meaningless. The game at this point is inherently pointless because it basically sabotaged itself through its bias in favour of seniority (not irrelevantly, in favour of senior cheaters, too). Those that still enjoy playing it are doing so by ignoring its faults, mostly by intentionally staying in the ranges where its mentioned shortcomings don't exert their full effect. It's a very stupid way of managing a game, but the game admin doesn't care and he hasn't been caring for the better part of the last ten years... I don't even know why we're recurrently just mentioning the issue at all. It's boredom, I guess. (Be it clear that I don't anyway blame Kevin: he created a great game which has always been for free, he can do with it what the freak he wants to. I just think that what he did has also been partially stupid and I'm simply saying so... But no blame on my part.)
×
×
  • Create New...