Blackatron

A Micro declared 23 wars overnight, that's more than some actual major alliances are capable of... Have fun everyone.

Mediocre announcement, I knew about this like 1 week ago!

Congratulations! Nice to see some alliances with relatively little FA putting themselves out there.

Note the "IRON" nation was an MI6 nation up until like 2 weeks ago. (Not actually insinuating anything about either IRON or MI6 here, just pointing out that Neo Ancient Greece didn't get to where it was today in IRON.)

http://www.cybernations.net/alliance_display.asp?Page=1&Order=DESC&Field=Alliance_Date&ID=10017 Is it just me or have only 6 people changed AAs, with Auctor being the only one that has been approved?

The nations fighting in that war are both less that 5K NS, down there yeah, the MONGOLS/SPATR crew are likely to have an advantage, though Oculus does have a few heavily wondered nations in that range. At 22K it is a different story altogether, to put it in perspective I am at 21K and of the 35 Pacificans in range of me at least 27 are nuclear, for IRON it is 11/14, Umbrella 3/3, VE 15/23, DT 4/5. I assume those nations mostly have SDIs as well, In that same NS range NPO have 10 nations with over 2,000 tech, IRON has 5 over 1,500, VE has 5 over 1,000 and 1 of those has over 3,000. So the former SPATR super-tier have not yet reached the NS range where they have any kind of huge dominance, they have more tech than most of those they are fighting, but at that range the tech bonus is fairly small anyway, plenty of nations at that NS and lower have a large number of war wonders. And wow, my crappy 9 month old nation now has a greater NS than those of Doombirds...

DRA may be a good choice, but only if you are sure you can fill all 6 slots, also it is quite expensive for a first wonder, which is why the stock Market may be a better choice for many new nations. FAC is only worthwhile if you can get $9/100 rate or $18/300, or if your alliance will provide large amounts of aid for various things (IE Manhattan Project aid) that you want to accept in as few packages as possible. 6/100-->9/200 is actually a downgrade, 6/200-->9/200 would be worthwhile, 6/200-->9/300 would be an improvement, but honestly that is such a poor rate anyway it is hard to even care. So yeah, go SM first in most instances I would say, DRA should be within the first handful, but probably not the first, possibly don't purchase the FAC at all depending on what rates you can get and what your motivation for selling is (either just for cash or to help strengthen an alliance/group of alliances/specific nations). You probably shouldn't think about wonders for another 2,000 infra or so anyway, until then the best way to increase your income is just to keep growing in infra.

Well Sengoku still has 20 nations, which IIRC is more than half of their membership before merging. So yeah this could be a problem for many going forward. On the other hand though TSC is down to 1 or 2 I think, so nothing outrageous there.

1) Mostly Harmless Alliance: Being the largest alliance doesn’t give you a free pass. I can’t think of anything that you add to the game so you’re out. Disband. Currently #15, -14 places2) New Pacific Order: Considering many alliances in the game define their very existence based on opposing this alliance, it goes without saying that they stay. Currently #1, +1 places 3) Green Protection Agency: I realize some players just want to be boring hippies and buy infrastructure. We only need one neutral alliance, however. GPA stays, all others should disband. Currently #3, is in the same place 4) New Polar Order: Brings drama from time to time. Starts huge wars. Definitely stays.Currently #7, -3 places 5) Sparta: Classic cookie cutter. Disband. Currently #13, -8 places 6) World Task Force: Does nothing. Disband. Currently #16, -10 places 7) Viridian Entente: Stays Currently #5, +2 places 8) Fark: Stays Currently #21, -13 places 9) The Legion: Stays Currently #9, is in the same place 12) Orange Defense Network: Followers. Not interesting. Disband. Currently #6, +6 places 13) The Order Of The Paradox: Drama occasionally revolves around them. Stays. Currently #32, -19 places 14) Global Alliance And Treaty Organization: Stays Currently #19, -5 places 16) Independent Republic Of Orange Nations: Stays Currently #2, +14 places 21) Umbrella: Stays Currently #4, +17 places 22) Random Insanity Alliance: Stay. Currently #47, -25 places 23) RnR: Boring. Disband. Currently #12, +11 places 25) Federation Of Armed Nations: Used to be interesting, but now the NPO isn’t picking on you anymore and you’re just another alliance. Disband. Currently #8, +17 places 27) Nordreich: Well even the “German Nationalists” need a home too. Stays. Currently #22, +5 places 33) The Grand Lodge Of Freemasons: Boring. Disbands. Currently #26, +7 places 34) Nusantara Elite Warriors: Everyone talks about what great fighters they are but I hear nothing from them. This game thrives on drama and intrigue. Disbands. Currently #72, -38 places 36) Guru Order: Boring. Disband. Currently #42, -6 places 38) Global Order Of Darkness: Drama bringers. Stays. Currently #63, -25 places 39) New Sith Order: Even if I wasn’t a member of this alliance I’d know enough to know that they should stay. The Cyberverse needs more alliances like us. I’m serious. Currently #27, +12 places 40) Nato: Stays Currently #10, +30 places 45) North Atlantic Defense Coalition: Boring. Disband. Currently #29, +16 places 46) The Templar Knights: Boring. Disband. Currently #20, +26 places 48) World Federation: Boring. Disband. This is listed as alive, I cannot find it 49) We Are Perth Army: Boring. Disband. Currently #55, -6 places 51) Argent: Boring. Disband. Currently #43, +12 places 56) Christian Coalition Of Countries: WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW? Disband.Currently #34, +22 places 57) Regnum Invictorum: The game would honestly be better served if you just joined NPO. Disband. Currently #38, +19 places 64) AGW Overlords: Boring. Disband. Currently #79, -15 places 67) Fellowship Of Elite Allied Republics: Boring. Disband. Currently #23, +44 places 74) The Dark Templar: Boring. Disband.Currently #14, +60 places 78) Alpha Omega: Boring. Disband. Currently #65, +13 places 79) The Order Of The Black Rose: The hardcore RPers need a home, I suppose. Stays. Currently #41, +38 places 80) Knights Of Ni!: Never heard of you before the Athens thing, haven’t heard from you since. Disband. Currently #49, +31 places I believe that is all done correctly, what to take away from this: Biggest gainers: The Dark Templar, +60 FEAR/FTW, +44 OBR, +38 Knights of Ni, +31 NATO, +30 TTK, +26 CCC, +22 Biggest losers: NEW, -38 GOD&RIA, -25 TOP, -19 AGWO, -15 MHA, -14 Smallest change: GPA&Legion, no change NPO, +1 VE, +2 NpO, -3 GATO, -5 NoR, +5

It appears that there has been a fair bit of vandalism...

This seems like a pretty serious bug, concerning that it hasn't been looked at faster. Kudos to you for not trying to exploit it BTW.

I was on the understanding that DBDC had only O level treaties? I have tried to update what I can see is wrong, other stuff I am doubtful of but not sure about so I put "???" in the next column, so that it is marked out for someone more knowledgable to either confirm or change.

It was mostly a joke comment, though we would be happy to have you or any of you guys if you want to somewhere where you won't get rolled 2+ times a year. Really at this point I think most alliances should be glad to get any new active NS.

*I

Poor Bern, it's okay, we'll adopt you. And then you'd be on the same team as NG, that could be funny.

I should attempt to get the same ID each round. Would save the trouble of changing my bookmark URL every time.

May I bump this and ask when round 41 will be beginning?

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=134818 End of the line for Pilsmania? I'm not 100% sure this counts as an announcement. But still thanks for the casualties list, and congrats getting to the top 10 I guess.

So either no cap, or a very high cap, and a fairly small percentage; maybe 1.5% so a $100 million warchest loses $1.5 million per defensive GA lost.

We were discussing this in the previous alliance membership topic, this deserves its own thread so here it is: Current situation: The people that play TE do so because they enjoy early building and war, and for some people running alliances. Most people who play SE for the long term goals have very little motivation to play as everything you do is wiped from everything but this forum and memory after 100 days. Donations are nice but only received by a very very small number of players, a person can play for years and build well and be active every day and never see any long term reward. In SE there is little motivation to log in daily and little to keep people active except during wartime. My suggestion: 1. Add more SE rewards for people who participate in TE and are active to encourage people who want to grow their SE nations optimally to play, and give some long term meaning to your activity. This should take the form of events that are applied to the SE nations of TE players who get into the top x% of nations by casualties at the end of the round. Players would enter their SE names and passwords in when creating a TE account, when the round ends and they are in the top x% they get a choice between a few different bonuses based on what portion of that x% they were in. My ideal value for x here is 30, so 30% of nations that finish TE would get a bonus event that lasts for 30 days, however these values aren't an integral part of this suggestion. Nations in the 20-30% range get access to the weakest events, those in the 10-20% range get better events, and those in the 0-10% range get the most beneficial events. In my mind these events would be custom written to provide more benefit than most of the standard events. 2. Give team events/senate proposals to the colours of the top 3 nations by casualties. I wasn't going to include this at first but rileyaddaff convinced me it could be fun. The idea of this part is to encourage wider pushing of SE players into TE by alliances. It is not dissimilar to what Caladin proposes here: except that it would be by team, and not by alliance, and it would be won by individuals, and not by alliance. I feel this distinction is important as it means that TE alliances are not based off of SE alliance, which is something that should be avoided, and because the same handful of alliance that can field large active groups would not win over again. It would simply require alliances on the same team to push their members to play TE a bit more for the benefit of the entire team. How this improves things: It encourages activity in both SE (because SE players will be more active in TE) and TE (because they need to be active to get casualties). It gives players an actual benefit that can change things long term in SE by playing TE and also means teams are a little more interesting as there is benefit to being on a large active team which fields many people in TE as they are more likely to win benefits for the entire colour. It would both increase the numbers and likely activity in TE as more people would want to play and want to play well. I have chosen to base all of this around casualties instead of NS or something else because I feel casualties correlates to activity the best, and whilst it favours larger nations it doesn't make it impossible for people with small or mid sized TE nations to gain benefits.

I would like to bump this and advocate for the limit to be increased, 1 million is too high but 100,000 is pitiful, I think it could at least be doubled.

Yeah, I'll write it up when I get around to it. The idea would be to rewards casualties (possibly just attacking casualties?) as they correlate to activity the best, and I suppose it would be measured at the end of the round. My idea with the senate proposal part was not that it would be applied to the whole colour, but rather that you would chose one that applies only to your nation, but I don't know how that would be listed other than under events, but it would be interesting if players could chose a specific proposal to be generated that would affect the whole team, senators would still have to vote on it in that case. I think top 30% is minimum needed, you want to ensure that people who are active every day and grow their nations properly reap the rewards. I agree it would help boost activity as currently all that is needed for maximum growth in SE is to log in a couple of times a week to maintain tech deals. If you want to see a small economic boost to your nation that applies 3/10ths of the time you have to work for it every day in TE else fall behind. Would only be +$2 citizen income or something along those lines for people in the top 30%, but enough to make a bit of a difference, and would obviously allow for better events if you're in the top 20/10/5%.

This thread has diversified a bit so I don't feel too bad going off topic on some of this. In response to the actual OP and Caladin, I don't think the possibility of having multiple AAs under one alliance is too much of a problem, very simply because the AAs will necessarily compete with one another in terms of stats and will have different internal communication, also the rules against intra alliance wars will not apply. So it's no different to having multiple AAs usually fighting together now, except unlike having everyone under one AA this creates the potential for conflicts involving only one part, or conflicts between the two at some point. I think a few things could be done to make it a bit more appealing. One thing I would like to see is more efficient ways to launch attacks, like if you are trying to nuke someone with an SDI make it so that you can launch multiple times from the same screen, just like how you can launch multiple naval attacks without returning to the wars and battle screen, the same thing could be done with CMs as well. Additionally it would be very nice if attacks you have already run the maximum amount of could be crossed out/in red or whatever, just so if you are attacking your opponents in an irregular order you don't have to click through 7 screens to see who hasn't been GA'd or CM'd yet. I doubt it would increase the player base but it would be nicer for those that continue to play I think. Best way to get more people involved would be to advertise additional benefits in SE from doing well in TE; not just for a handful of people but for people in the top 40-50% in casualties or something like that (with greater rewards the higher up you are). Donations are decent bonuses but there's other stuff that could be cool, maybe if you could select an event to be applied to your SE nation or a senate proposal to be applied just to you (imagine the numbers if you had a chance to get an extra aid slot for 30 days once every 100 days!). Other than that I agree that veterans have to bring more people on board and get them into the game, I assume Al does that with SE AW and I'm trying to do that with TTK this round, seems like a lot of alliances don't bother with that though, which is very sad.

Yes.

Does round 41 start at the same time?