Jump to content

Blacky

Members
  • Posts

    2,071
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Tanooki Kingdom
  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Nation Name
    Libnan
  • Alliance Name
    Tanooki Kingdom
  • Resource 1
    Aluminum
  • Resource 2
    Iron

Recent Profile Visitors

1,602 profile views

Blacky's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  1. 3BR consists of construction, beer and fast food. These are widely considered to be the best and most sought after resources for economic growth. It's an all-round set and is useful in peace and war time. Also the Uranium benefits for nuclear upkeep (something every nation will obtain after a few months). Note: X, Y, Z & A will change their resources to the listed resources when the circle is complete! (As well as team color if need be). Sign up guys! Blacky: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=164116 Iron/Aluminum Enterprize: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=78850 Lumber/Wheat Fizzydog: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=401026 Marble/Sugar Caelum: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=504688 Cattle/Water Bob: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=262199 Spice/Pigs ilselu1: http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=115034 Fish/Uranium
  2. [quote name='Schattenmann' timestamp='1340254618' post='2991411'] Man, I feel like NATO hasn't DoW'ed in a lonnnnng time (I have no idea if this is true or not). Kind of feels neat to see. [/quote] Kinda sweet that they chose us to be their last war. NATO doesn't have much left in them, so it's good that they're going out with a bang. Really, watching broken-backed alliances like this just fading into obscurity isn't the right way to go out, never was really. Have fun guys! And try to remember to send somebody my way!
  3. A bit over [b]Zeal[/b]ous there RnR. [img]http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/2488/lololxu.png[/img] edit: Also, 9pm blitz = new meta lol. The 3 hour quad.
  4. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1335224786' post='2958005'] How exactly, Letum? You are perceived as a tool. [/quote] By you maybe. I've never been the biggest fan of the NPO (anybody could attest to that), but Letum is no tool (neither of the meanings fit him).
  5. The true question is will CN stand the test of time? Thus far, one could argue that CN already has. As when compared to other spreadsheet games, CN has outlived the majority of them in terms of it's life span. Although, it would be unfair not to note that as far as member retention is concerned, following a typical bell-curve, we could expect CN to fade into obscurity in the next few years if measures aren't taken. What does this mean? Eventually, CN as all good things must come to an end. However, whether that time comes sooner or later depends solely on admin. At present, at 14,000+ players the CN community is still thriving, with new alliances being created and communities which tie into the CN community also still thriving and doing well. However, in order to prolong the life of this game certain measures MUST be taken in order to ensure player retention. A lot of these are common sense, and have been suggested by myself in the Suggestion Box in the past. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=109814 1) Give the players some lee-way. CN is one of, if not the most demanding spreadsheet game which exists. Although this has contributed to it's success in it's early days, this late in the game it's detrimental. You can not reasonably expect players to constantly maintain interest in their nation over the span of 1-10 years, players will invariably have real life circumstances which arise that would inhibit them from logging in to CN. And once years of work is lost due to nation deletion, you can expect that most of these players will not return. As it stands it would be beneficial to not delete nations who are inactive for 25 days, but rather archive their nation or leave it be, or whatever. 2) Give players a chance. As somebody who has experienced destructive war in the early phases of Nation Buildingm, I've seen that it results in players not caring about their nation any more, and as such losing motivation to tend to it. Before a player builds wonders, which usually doesn't occur till after having invested 6+ months into their nation (forgive if numbers have changed due to inflation), everything they have built can be destroyed in a single war. ie; they have nothing to show for 6+ months of building. This is why I have suggested an infrastructure water mark in the past, similar to that which we see in CN:TE. This would allow players the option of rebuilding at a cheaper price, and as such give them something to show for their months of building. This would greatly improve player retention. 3) Time zones. This is probably the most common sense problem which has existed since the creation of the "quad attack", players exist on different time zones, and as such there is no one size fits all for time zones. I don't know what constraints exist in terms of updating nations, but if it were possible for players to nominate an update time, or select from a drop-down box which update time was most convenient for them, that would give players more freedom to tend to their nations and war at their convenience. And as such, benefit the community as a whole. 4) The future NPC/RNG events, etc. Creating events in TE which provide benefits that carry over to CN standard and other great ideas such as this can influence the community to generate more activity and interest. Which as a whole benefits the community. TL;DR Yes, CN can survive 5 more years if measures are taken. Note: I apologize for the poor writing.
  6. A small alliance can cast a big shadow. However in Invicta's case, it was a small alliance in the shadow of a big alliance. Carry on.
  7. This thread was created with the best intentions. Even if you dislike reddit or any other community, that just means there is a potential for future drama. I have been, and will continue to make an effort to try and recruit new players.
  8. OOC: I believe this is the RP section, and this thread might be more suited for one of the other sub-forums. There are various factors which determine the success of an alliance. Just to list a few in point form: Membership dedication Culture Transparency & Membership process In truth there are countless factors but these in my experience are the most important. Everything else is miniscule in comparison, everything from an alliances government structure, to it's internal structures, all depends on the aforementioned criteria for their success.
  9. On The [i]Do-Nothings[/i], Evil could not occur if everybody who could do something to stop it did. That being said Dulra plays the game his way, and the nations attacking him play the game their way. Neither is more justifiable than the other.
  10. [quote name='Roquentin' timestamp='1331476337' post='2936795'] "This is a suicide pact," for instance, it's not really me pulling it out of thin air. You're just being hopelessly obtuse, such is the case most of the time when people say I am pulling things out of nowhere. Hell, you also did it earlier on the thread. [/quote] That's no more than a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you run around shouting "MK is going to roll me", even though at best you've been met with amusement and not much else, and then proceed to berate people at every opportunity you get--don't be surprised if you actually get what you're asking for. Also I didn't read the "suicide pact" line but that's a hilarious metaphor for the situation. Still, pointing out the projected shortcomings of an alliance does not a threat make.
  11. I demand Valhalla formally present me with the two medals I earned during my brief but eventful stay. Also an apology would be nice. I expect this to be done within the next few days preferably.
  12. [quote name='ChairmanHal' timestamp='1330445486' post='2930032'] Something I more or less stated previously in another thread. However, Schatt wins the point in the OP. Raids should be raids (with the risk assumed by the raiding nation(s)) and alliance wars should be alliance wars, and while alliances have sent in "reinforcements" in the past in defense of raiding nations in order to extricate them out of a serious gang bang, this is not one of those times. GOONS war declaration goes well beyond the scope of the parties involved in the raid or even those nations directly aiding the raid targets. [/quote] Somewhere in your logic risk doesn't extend to aiding nations that are fighting.
×
×
  • Create New...