geneclar

Did you or anyone from your school aid or trade each other? That is not allowed.

It's either a bug or just something that admin doesn't want us to know about. I made a topic about the same thing. Taking out everything that modifies land doesn't give you the value on the alliance stats page, either.

The forums in their last state on Invisionfree were made in January of 2006. Between the time the game started and those forums were made, they were somewhere else. I don't know where, I wasn't around. But AFAIK, the forums have been online as long as the game has. EDIT: And not all information prior to August was purged, the About info is from February 2006.

Oh, ok. Yeah, I didn't think about that. Good eye.

It shouldn't have gone up by $5.81 from the gross income going up by $10, that implies he has a 58% tax rate. I think he's looking at net income per citizen, and then something else must have changed as well.

http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/...showtopic=38525

This. I've got the happiness formula down, it's income and tech price that are currently bothering me. So I know the boat you're in.

It's also fairly random, so it can be hard to predict at times.

But we don't eat all of them.

It's been done before. But good luck with that.

Related to this: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=4067

I don't have any events.

Events are completely random. Getting a certain event is never a glitch.

Destroying $1M of the enemy's money or a nuke could be useful.

Epic. B) Also, $140M for 4000 infra is total bullcrap. Your calc must be way off.

Any other thoughts?

It still doesn't add up. Look at my nation: My nation page says I have 879.928 miles of purchased land. In the rankings page, it says I have 630.93 miles of land. I have Coal and Wheat, and I don't have Rubber, Spices, or Sugar. No other item is listed in the index as affecting land. Dividing 879.928 by 1.15 (modifier for Coal) and by 1.05 (modifier for wheat) gives 728.719. This is still wrong. Thank you for suggesting that though, because I actually was too stupid to try that first.

The amount of land listed in the nation rankings pages does not match the numbers in the nation profile, either purchased, naturally grown, or combined.

The only strange part to me is that he "lost" a negative amount of money.

From my own research, I've discovered the amount varies from person to person (and possibly from purchase to purchase). It's usually in the range of 7.5 - 8 people per level, before you add the modifiers from resources/improvements/etc.

Just bumping this to see if anyone knows anything. It's annoying. At least take it out of the info if you don't want to give out the formula.

According to the Cyber Nations Information Index, the nation strength formula is: Land Purchased * 1.5 + Tanks Deployed * .75 + Tanks Defending * 1 + Cruise Missiles * 1.5 + Nuclear Purchased * 50 + Technology Purchased * 20 + Infrastructure Purchased * 3 + Actual Military * .10 + (aircraft rating totals * 5). If I add all that up for my nation: 780.032 * 1.5 + 0 * .75 + 0 * 1 + 0 * 1.5 + 0 * 50 + 304.09 * 20 + 3469.74 * 3 + 12952 * .1 + 60 * 9 * 5 = 21,656.270 However, my actual nation strength is 21,071.250. I thought the problem might be land purchased, as the alliance ranking page shows different values than my nation page (my nation page says 780.032 miles purchased, 260.743 from natural growth, the alliance rankings shows 587.26), but none of the three available land values add up to the correct strength. The value from natural growth comes closest, but it's still off by about 200, and that doesn't match the formula anyways. So, long story short, the nation strength formula is wrong, or I'm really stupid. Which is it?

What I meant was that I personally like to see numbers, rather than lines. It gives me a better idea of where things stand, especially when the graphs have to be split because of how many lines there are. Your work is really useful and impressive, don't get me wrong. EDIT: Oh, I see what you're saying. I skipped the charts, I'm not sure why. I apologize, I can't believe I didn't see them at all.

The graphs are more difficult to read when you're trying to tell where the alliances are in respect to each other. You can get an idea, but it's nice to have numbers. Of course, I'd have no objection if you provided some.