Tevron

I'm wondering if this will affect TACO EMPIRE at all. It's hard to say, but it could halt negotiations at any moment.

Yeah you're right, hopefully I'll get some action!

Elaborate, how am I confused.

I'm so confused, even if public postings don't list a protector, you as a raider are 100% responsible for any retribution your receive. Rushing to the defense of an aggressor and framing it as anything else is ridiculous.

Great post, I love you guys

Congrats friend

Ave Legio sniffed the air. “Friends, we’ve reached its lair, finally,” he said, reaching beneath his purple cloak to draw his longsword. The half-elf beside him hunched down. She crept ahead, turned the corner, and scanned the den for traps. Sylvia “Claws” Bundy considered shapechanging for a quicker approach, but the silver dragon within seemed alert, even in its slumber. “Is this really Argent, terror of the high tiers?” Gato Thundercloud of the Mountain Tree nodded, smiling as she licked her brown coat. “It is Argent, the fiercest dragon in all the lands,” the elderly tabaxi said, pawing at her necklace. “Will he really help us?” Ave Legio asked, pausing to inspect the shining blade in his hand......

MARA

Yeah! Congrats to both parties!

Did you order the code maroon??!

The question on everyone's mind is "Is HannaH the Minister by the Truth"?

I agree with most of what you say here, but what I was talking about is members that stimulate the activity that drives enjoyment. Small alliances like Monsters Inc. seemed to have a blast due to consolidated activity, and I think it was a mistake of Oculus to target active alliances politically or otherwise (and certainly MI6 deserved to be rolled), but rather should have focused on rolling inactive husks away. At this point, we're in an awkward situation where the game continues its normal decline, but without anyone really seeming to care. Alliance leadership still strive to do things, but you're right, many rank and file are sitting on their hands. The tier issue is partially true, but it neglects the fact that alliances such as my own are tied heavily to Oculus and want our allies to succeed. The "Oculus" problem that I have laid out is not the bloc's responsibility solely. The problem that I think is frequently understated is that very active alliances were the ones that Oculus decimated. They did not go hit the laundry list of inactive blobs (most of which have since decayed into nothingness). I do think this is a multifaceted issue, but I think that politics should not be reduced to simple likes/dislikes. Maybe that's the case for your decisions as the leader of Umbrella and Bal-Masque over the years, but in every alliance I've been in except maybe INT we would not have declared war on someone simply because we dislike them. This is no doubt true to some extent, but as I said, I agree with your overall dynamic understanding of how the game declines, I just think that our political actions have spurred on additional inactivity, and it is worth noting that we drove active members from the game instead of ones who sit around and collect every twenty days.

Even while rank and file members decreased, wars tend to create friction in internal alliances and create the actual gameplay that many "active" members thrive upon in order to have fun. When they are denied this experience, they become inactive. Maybe it has no bearing on the literal decline of the game (Oculus did not make more nations leave than would have normally?) but I think it's a sham to say they didn't murder active members (lel MI6), RIP DK, etc. through political realities that are derived from admin's unwillingness to add mechanics to change our current gamestate. Certainly I have "played" the game most actively during wars, and it was a war that got me to transfer from being an inactive member who sent his aid out sometimes to a guy who actually participated. (Thanks IRON/TOP/Valhalla). I know it's not wise to necessarily rely on anecdotal evidence, but I think that core activity is much more relevant than the literal number of nations, and the cores of many alliances that were once much stronger and more stable (ie: Polaris forums, see Dajobo's post) are being eroded by a variety of factors, one of which is the lack of revitalizing members through more dynamic political experiences.

I think that people within Oculus understate its impact in killing the game (which is large) but that the problem of individual friendships coinciding with natural decline is much worse. There is also not enough government turn-over in CN to create real moves anymore. Since I joined in 2010 Pacifica went through 6 regime changes, Polaris went through 3, and IRON went through 2. Alliances like those in CnG, as well as the other periphery and Oculus alliances also had very little shakeups. Even with mandatory terms (such as in GATO) there was little shakeup in government because of similarly minded people rising to the top. Alliances like every one Canik has led have had him at the top for as long as I can remember (Love you dude). This CAN be good, but none of the governments in top alliances are at all volatile, which means that when we do become friends even disbandment simply consolidates active leadership that we already know and respect, which leads to situations where we take no political action. If we had more upward mobility, and used those active middle management members who have faded away due to their inability to find a footing in tenured alliances, then I think the game would have a stronger community today. This does require us at the top of our alliances to give up power though, and that is not happening when a lot of us are the most competent people our alliances have left.

Our decisions are always made on our forums, since it's in our charter, but people usually talk on discord. (GATO)

Yes

OOC/Sadly quite busy IRL atm but I'll write out a few thoughts./ooc I loved CnG, and I'm sad to be leaving it.

With the return of pips, I will bump this request.

I mean, if his aggressive wars are against an alliance that is not inactive, that is not the case. He can't be a chooser and declare against inactive nations with !@#$%* tech/infra ratios.

Rumors of Dre4ms demise are greatly exaggerated

This should have been in your OP here, you missed the chance

>attacks not one, not two, but three GATO & Polaris allies >is surprised by defense of allies

That's true, that's been one of the bigger problems with many alliances though. I have only seen Polaris and Legion gain members during war times, but I haven't kept tons of track.

Come now, when did MHA ever hurt anybody. They're mostly harmless.