MOAIS

----- There are 30,000+ nations on Planet Bob at any given point in time. The Corporation, at present, represents approximately 0.001 of them. And we like it that way. No, that isn't to say that we don't wish to grow (we're already growing at a steady and respectable pace). It isn't to say that we don't intend to be strong (we're already making three-day-old nations stronger than some who've been here three MONTHS). And it isn't to say that we don't want nations to join us (we actively recruit, but only the very best nations). In The Corporation you aren't just another Nation--you're an active part of a vibrant community...but not everyone gets to enter these hallowed chambers. So what separates our member-nations from those of other Alliances? Attitude, mostly. Outlook. Perspective. Call it what you want, it always comes down to the same thing--our member-nations are ruled by true leaders. True leaders understand and possess honor, integrity, diplomacy and intelligence. True leaders don't want a free ride--they want to work for what they get and learn to earn on their own merits. True leaders don't have to be bought. Other Alliances pay you to join; if we have to pay you, we don't want you. That isn't to say you won't make money with The Corporation. On the contrary, our member-nations earn income MUCH faster than those who join other Alliances based on their "signing bonus". We teach our member-nations how to earn money, and we broker deals for them that allow them to make more on a single transaction than many Alliances are willing to pay as a one-time fee. These transactions take place with us as often as every 5 days or sooner. We expect our members to earn their keep, and in turn they enjoy the priveleges of a wealth-making formula that is unique on Planet Bob. Of course everyone wants to make money, but that doesn't mean that everyone has that chance. There are characteristics we require, and "warning signs" that we look for. If u c4n r34d this at a glance...or if "WTF, Dude!" is a regular part of your everyday communication, you're not what we seek. If CyberNations is your flavor-of-the-month, but next week you'll be back to playing your Xbox, you're not the calibre of player we require. If you believe this is a war game, or you bore too easily...well, you belong with a different Alliance. We want LEADERS. We don't want whiners, thugs, candidates for ritalin or other little boys and girls. Go somewhere else and let the grownups play here. If you're looking for an Alliance that will provide a challenge to you, an income for you, a job you can grow with and the serious opportunity to lead, The Corporation is the kind of place you want to hang your topcoat and fedora. If you're only looking for a quick cash payment, or maybe just the chance to go randomly blow people up--please sell your talents elsewhere. And for certain, if you're only interested in the highest bidder...well our bid on you is NADA. For those who think they may be the quality types we know would work well within our system, please message MOAIS of the nation Libertaire here: The Nation of Libertaire We'll put you through a short process to see if you're our kind of candidate-nation. If you succeed, and wish to join us, you'll know you're something special on Planet Bob. If you don't, well--there are plenty of Alliances out there willing to pay you to be second-best. Regards, MOAIS of the nation Libertaire Chairman of The Corporation http://z3.invisionfree.com/CNTheCorporatio...dex.php?act=idx -----

----- The problem with both of these suggestions is that they require real coding alterations and not just "quick fix" swaps of a single digit. I've come to the conclusion, unfortunately, that Admin is either too busy, too disinterested, too unimaginative or too reactionary to weigh the consequences of changes before making them; to spend the extra time to do the right calculations and the advanced coding necessary to make quality decisions work properly; and, perhaps, to admit when a change he's made isn't the right one. I hope I'm wrong on all of these thoughts, but this last week has been rather taxing on my confidence in our illustrious CN leadership. -----

----- The inactive nation change most definitely does NOT favor noobs. In fact I see that as being an ill-conceived move that will ultimately discourage new players. It's not a fatal stake to the heart, but it's a near-miss puncture of a lung. New players were already at serious risk of being attacked, active or not. Now they're far more likely to be declared upon simply for their goods. There may have been less excitement in attacking a nation that would not defend, but there was at least some honor in it (a raider of true "inactives" wasn't stealing from anyone so much as liberating assets that would have been lost anyway). This change encourages nations to actively attack newbies; they're sure not going to attack stronger, more experienced players. To a man the defenders of this silly change will say "then the new players should join an Alliance". This makes sense to those of us who have played for awhile and know what an Alliance even is; know what an ATTACK even is; know what tech or a tech raid is; know what the danger is. Have you all forgotten what it was like to be a new nation? Another point is that these recent changes to technology, as good and necessary as they are, make the need for tech even greater now. This increases the pressure on nations to engage in raiding, so not only are the admins now making the raid a more attractive proposition, they're encouraging the activity be undertaken upon their newer, smaller players! That's poor judgement. But it doesn't stop there. Time bonuses for attacks based on the game clock? This is unrealistic given that in RL a battle would occur on the same battlefield for all combatants (naturally, in the same time zone), but in CN the battle for me may be in the middle of the night while for my attacker it's the middle of the day. That was positively the most poorly thought out alteration of them all. What's worse, it gives the quad-attack advantage to players who already come into the battle with overwhelming advantages to begin with. Some of these recent changes were necessary. Some were positive. But some are downright silly. This, unfortunately, makes me believe that while the Admin(s) may have the heart in the right place, the head has taken a bit of a leave of absence. These most recent changes were reactionary, not planned. That's a bad way to go about anything. These mistakes are the result of having no concept of the bigger, long-term picture. In short, it seems to me the goose that lays the golden eggs around here may have just been sized up for the dinner pot. Without new blood, this game withers and dies on the vine. Making alterations that encourage your new players to leave after a few days or weeks--that's the death knell to your product. -----

----- I think I like Reformentia's suggestion, though I haven't completely examined any potential downsides for a formula of this nature. I agree that tech should be scaled to actually make it a realistic measure (IE tanks vs. pitchforks) and that there should be no cap to the value that tech provides because this is would not occur in real-life; tech scales there too. That same reality counters any discussion of "insta-Anarchy" as well, though. Let's face it...if for some reason the United States decided to unleash the entire might of it's military against the nation of Tuvalu, I'm gonna say there's a pretty good chance Tuvalu will be in Anarchy within minutes. Likewise Tuvalu may find itself at one-tenth its Infrastructure after just a few minutes. That's real life--why shouldn't it be CN life as well? So what does Tuvalu do to keep that from happening? They join an Alliance, just like they do in CN, and hope that protects them from attack by stronger nations until they can grow strong enough on their own. Now in game terms, this isn't entirely practical and the Admins have to guard against anything that would chase new players away before they can get something going--but we (they) still need to do as much as they can within reason to maintain reality in this reality-based game. Stronger nations are stronger. Technology is more readily available to stronger nations. Technology makes stronger nations even stronger than they already are. This is reality. So my vote, then, is to tweak (if not entirely rework) the formula in such a way that tech maintains real value throughout the entire range of availability (which means no cap of any kind), and then allow NS to reflect this new real figure. This solves everyone's problems. Well, except those who have to code the whole thing, of course. -----

----- Technology plays a massive role in real-world nation strength...this is true. However real-world nation strength isn't measured by a number that increases artificially based on the quantity of cotton candy a nation holds (which CN tech might as well be, past the 300-unit threshold). I can't understand why this point is escaping all of these posts. The issue at hand should be the actual value of tech in the CN universe, not the false value that has always been placed on it (and has now suddenly been corrected). I'm beating a dead horse here but this change, based on the (poorly conceived) real value of technology, was a necessary evil. Adding to your number based on fluff makes your number fluff. That's basic math (and simple logic). What everyone should be upset about is that technology in this game does not adequately represent the benefit that REAL burgeoning tech would have on the growth and strength of a nation. If tech was properly valued, properly scaled, properly priced and properly acquired the number it adds to your NS would be real. At that point it could be 2, 20 or 2000; it's NS value would be relative to it's true effect on a nation's strength. How about instead of arguing that it should be 5 or 50 NS, we argue that tech should represent something legitimate in the first place? -----

----- I would quote Bob Janova and idriveavw, in their posts immediately above this one, but first they're too long and secondly it would be redundant. What I will say is that they're both dead on. This is particularly true when they refute those who whine that "now nations with a lot of active military are stronger than mine!" Really? Whoda thunkit? Isn't that the real measure of a nation's strength to begin with? And if you don't want to place the proper value on military strength, then you clearly must take the backbone of a nation into account. In nation-building terms we refer to backbone as INFRASTRUCTURE. Then there are those who "play to win", but somehow believe that NS is the measure of that goal. To that I say your inflated NS, taken into battle against a TRULY strong nation, would have proven beyond doubt who was really winning! If you're truly playing to win and you want to use NS to measure your progress, you should actually be happy with this change since your yardstick now measures more accurately. This was an improperly executed change. The admins should be called on the carpet for bringing this online with no warning or explanation. They should perhaps also be brought to account for making no effort to properly compensate those nations who invested millions upon millions of dollars into technology which had a stated value at the time it was purchased, and then that value is arbitrarily changed without notice or input. That's shameful work on the part of the admins. I believe they should answer for this. However, the change was not only proper, it was NECESSARY. There should still be a closer look taken at altering the actual value of tech (there should be no cap to the benefit it offers) but bringing the NS value of tech in line with it's actual value was absolutely the right call. -----

LOL oh it's more than a little ironic...but those who know me know I believe first and foremost in justice, honor and the application of intelligence. While I reluctantly accept this change as a tech dealer, I wholeheartedly embrace it as a player. I think tech was improperly responsible for the building of our "scores" when in fact the benefit of tech was limited AT BEST. This solution is still not the right one, but it's a step in the right direction. Advanced technology makes a huge difference in the economy and military of a nation; that advancement doesn't "cap" in any way. The United States, with each new microchip, moves light years ahead of third-world countries. Likewise our military (when it's actually unleashed) would decimate even the largest army of lesser-equipped soldiers. So the problem with tech in CN is actually that it doesn't carry its correct value in real terms--but to have it carry that value in "false" terms (IE increased nation strength when in fact no increase was taking place) is actually worse. That's why I like this move--it corrects a misperception in NS. Ultimately the admins should be looking at ways to properly administer the application of technology upon real strength. People have suggested that tech's influence on NS should be scaled. I disagree. What should be scaled is tech's REAL influence (and likewise it's effect on NS as a result of it's real increase to such). There should be no cap...but at the same time, larger nations should not be able to just roll over smaller ones (for gameplay purposes) because they're older and better financed. I believe that TECH SHOULD BE SCALED IN REAL TERMS, that TECH'S EFFECT ON NATION STRENGTH SHOULD BE DIRECTLY TIED TO THIS REAL-TERM FIGURE, and that THE PRICE OF TECH SHOULD CLIMB MUCH MORE SHARPLY THAN IT DOES...and it shouldn't be a breeze to just go to a small nation and say "here, sell me some". There should be a restriction of some kind formulated for that, too. What the game needs after that, I believe, is a REAL commodities market. If the admins want to make this interesting, give us something more than just tech to work with--and make nations ASSEMBLE their technology. That would open up all kinds of new markets, and it would allow tech to carry its proper value without the loophole of tech-dealing being a loophole after all. Small nations would deal in commodities. Commodities would be used to build tech. Bringing tech online would have an additional cost to the nations doing so. In this way we all get something proper out of the deal. -----

----- For the first time since I've been involved with the game I see a change that is EXACTLY the one that should have been made. The tech modifier was not a realistic measure of the benefit of technology; it artificially increased NS in a manner that actually hurt nations in the long run (because they looked stronger than they actually were). The change hurts nations only on paper; frankly, the infra-heavy nations were always "superior" to begin with, in real-strength terms. Anyone playing this game for any length of time should by now have figured out that Infra is the lightning to technology's thunder (the thunder makes the noise but the lightning does the work). The only people this really hurts (and that's only in the short-term) are technology dealers (I know a little something about that since tech dealing is the entire principle behind the Alliance that I founded) and tech buyers who are in the middle of a deal. Still, I'm ELATED by this change. People will still buy tech. People will still need tech. Tech will still have a great benefit for nations. It just won't have the out-of-whack value that it had before. This was a good move. -----

----- I don't think it's just disappearing and reappearing accounts. I can log in, go two or three links deep, and then click on a link and "sit and spin". When I try a different link (IE with "open in new tab") it takes me back to the login screen. I try to log in, it sits and spins. Click back, click a link, it brings me to the login screen with character confirmation. I always have two or three tabs at a time open and active; this has never been an issue before. Basically I think the whole site might be a little wonky right now. Glad to hear they are aware something is up. -----