Jump to content

Monster

Members
  • Content Count

    5,003
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Monster

  • Rank
    DON'T PANIC

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Previous Fields

  • Sanctioned Alliance
    Ghuxalia
  • Nation Name
    Energy
  • Alliance Name
    Mostly Harmless Alliance/Kashmir
  • Resource 1
    Marble
  • Resource 2
    Aluminum
  • CN:TE Alliance Name
    None

Recent Profile Visitors

5,253 profile views
  1. The game has always had the issue of mechanical competition being limited because it's tedious to be mechanically competitive and requires new players joining and being dependent on a small numbers of mechanically competitive alliances that would carry the load for the rest. The lack of new players and the fact that new players can't do much on their own means it's a death cycle. Many people are just keeping the nations around and as stewie pointed out, there's a massive lack of activity in the bigger alliances, so there is no incentive to fight because it's an organizational nightmare.
  2. Except most of these inflated alliances have super low activity and offensives require people to do stuff proactively rather than just getting hit and nuking back so they have very little proportionally to commit. Unless they are ready to disband and rogue out, which they aren't, it doesn't really make sense. If people were willing to log in to fight regularly and were agitating for war, you'd see either people leaving to rogue more often or ghosting for other alliances and/or pressuring alliance leaders to change things rather than having to be begged to show up with that usually not working.
  3. Monster

    Aliens get out!

    I don't think that's what I said. I said it'd be quite some time at current rates. Also you are talking about a year+ in terms of time. I love the mentality btw. "I can't win here so I'll go somewhere where I can be on top."
  4. Monster

    Aliens get out!

    Ayy lmao. I don't know of any political grudges being brought into cn. I've just seen an alliance that people already had issues with get attacked A lot of people have been saying that, but CN had 42 players sign up yesterday. Most other games will never even reach CN's peak numbers or even half of it and usually have poor retention all on their own. CN has been declining, but alternatives have continuously failed to overtake it. At current rates, it'll be quite some time.
  5. Makes sense. Good luck with your future plans.
  6. I don't really think it's entirely on the mark in terms of the reason for the decline. Most people have limited staying power in general, hence the retention problems and most active players end up having less free time to give to the game after being around for years. No one sets out to be the bad guy for it to be a community service.they might say that's why they're doing it, but it's closer to a justification rather than the reason; people do it because it's what they see as fun. The idea of skype/irc cliques being a contributing cause for the decline is flawed since they existed as far a
  7. I don't think anyone ever denied LoSS wanted to fight NG. However, I was told the biggest component of the rush to sign and attack was they were worried about a treaty partner on the other side being hit first. Honestly, with some more effort, an actual treaty chain could have been constructed to get them to NG. I wasn't involved much yet with the coalition when it happened, so I don't know why there wasn't more of an effort to get a non-last minute treaty chain through, tbh.
  8. Last minute still isn't an accurate way to describe it and anyone of the allies we are supporting in this conflict could tell you.
  9. edit: interesting analysis. Can't really comment much due to time constraints.
  10. Monster

    You can say NO.

    No, HoT is right. The mentality that motivates OOC action is in-game gain like getting revenge on people for !@#$ from 2008 in the case he refers to. It has to be disincentivized as a tool advance in-game grudges and whatnot if you want it to stop and the only way to do it is by in-game action. If people aren't willing to impose sanctions on alliances that perform such things, then no amount of handwringing will matter. Most people who are tied to them have knowingly enabled it by reinforcing their ability to do it. A culture that is intolerant to abuse will not allow alliances who practice i
  11. Solution: invoke non-chaining clauses, explore your allies are allied to and plan accordingly. For instance, if NPO doesn't want to follow MK around, a treaty with a long-time MK ally makes zero sense as I pointed out when the TLR-NPO upgrade happened. Same thing with the other C&G treaties.
  12. Not 40 different things, more elaborations on core stuff.

  13. How do you find 40 things to talk about in a day?

×
×
  • Create New...