The five stages of CN

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

A lot like Ardus.

 

I'd amend the first post to include Rush's post as a separate stage or substage, to include a neutral option and to include people who decide to understand how the game is played but simply renounce it entirely (some neutrals, some roleplayers, some of the rogues, etc.)., instead opting to do whatever it is that brings them fun.

 

Which is most definitely how everyone should play. On that, I'd agree with SoADsomething. People who stick to this game being all negative about how terrible it is and what not should most definitely consider leaving and playing another game. Games are meant to be enjoyed. If you're sticking around and you're not having any fun and consider this a chore, you're doing something wrong.

[Icewolf]

I think stage 2 is more important than is given here, and has far more of a role to play. Stage 3 cannot exist without stage 2 and is entirely dependent on it. Those that dismiss the political game tend to be the ones to get burned very quickly Because the hatred and motivations are born at stage 2 and in the way that alliances conduct themselves does have a very real consequence. Every alliance is broadly democratic in that it needs its members more than its members need it. An alliance that is wronged by another will struggle to keep its members if it shrugs that off for political expedience. If an alliance wants power it has to be willing to fight to the end. If the members say no, then that will not happen. 

 

No Alliance is immune to this. The game is not immune to it. Anyone who tried to play stage 3 without also playing stage 2 will die. Quickly. Those that scheme and flop around the treaty web cuddling whoever seems to be convenient at the time are not those that have made it to the top level of power. They tend to be the ones who most loudly advocate themselves as the true wheelers and dealers of the game, whilst generally being the middle ranked and most easily manipulated by those who have built a stronger foundation of genuine relationships and a genuine cause and aim. 

[MagicalTrevor]

I miss stage 3 being exciting. Stupid stage 4.

[WarriorConcept]

I miss stage 3 being exciting. Stupid stage 4.

 

Basically this. Everyone has been rolled already.

[Schattenmann]

they have been, and always will be, the same 5 or 6 key alliances. Never has a new one moved in . . . if you are not in NPO, NpO, TOP, MK, or Umbrella (and GOD and RoK back in the day).

:psyduck:  Right.

[hr]

 

And some try to be a 3, but are never are allowed into high gov because they alliance hop too much.

And some are allowed into high gov because/in spite they alliance hop so much :P

[hr]

 

I'm not going to lie, this is a pretty dismal and grim way to look at things. There is far more to playing the game then just this, and I'm sure some of the puppet masters of today will even agree with what I am saying. There's an awful lot of negativity about this game and it's pretty wide-spread as well. It's literally causing the game to become worse. Negativity is like a disease, it's contagious and the more you think about it, the more you talk about it, the more you embrace it, the more it becomes. However, Positivity is the same way. Both have a direct correlation over activity as well. Proof of this lies in what the "becoming" sphere is now-a-days and their emergence as a new and machine moving sphere. Many people tell me how they feel so much more revitalized and how they love the game again, like they once used too. It's a positive environment and it's changing the game. People should really follow their example in those regards.

Just my thoughts.

 

 

Ogaden's five stages are a fun read, but in the end they're too bitterly ironic and cynical to be true. The truth is that everyone here has their story and I doubt that that many player follow the path described by Ogaden.
I know that I touched a stage similar to 1, back in 2007, but the rest of my CN experience (since way before turning to the neutral side) can't be described with any of the other stages. What about people that are interested only in the internal affairs of their alliance? Those that role-play? Those that just hang around and enjoy the occasional rise of events in their otherwise easy time-killer? Those that enjoy theeconomics, or the constant low-NS warfare/raiding, or that keep their nation around to give tech away, or... Most people don't even ever "play the political game"! If anything, the people in denial are the ones that "scheme" all the time and that believe that the rest of the players are there to do the same but are just too "incompetent" to do so. CN is what you make of it, and this one-dimensional approach is not going to explain it all.

Additionally, the following is a great post on the subject:

Well said, both.

 

There's a lot of truth in the OP, but it is also written from the same narrow perspective that defines success only in terms of the global power game.  Is that what the majority of alliances are wrapped up in, sure, but it is not the only current in the water.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Schattenmann

[Ogaden]

Well said, both.
 
There's a lot of truth in the OP, but it is also written from the same narrow perspective that defines success only in terms of the global power game.  Is that what the majority of alliances are wrapped up in, sure, but it is not the only current in the water.

The ability to play the game on your own terms and not be immediately destroyed requires so much insight into things a new player has little hope of achieving such a goal. A "Stage 3" player might not be a power player in the established pecking order, but they understand the game enough that they could be if they chose to be so. This is an important distinction, the various stages are essentially ones of engagement versus boredom, and understanding versus naïveté. They are not exactly linear either as some players are savvy enough to pick up on things quickly and never experience the floundering impotence of Stage 2, while some players never get engaged at all and go straight to stage 5.

[Unknown Smurf]

I skipped 3, except in my head.

[Opethian]

I'm still saddened that I ended up at stage 5. When the original Pittsburghistan faded into the internet ether I lost all of my bearings. I'm not sure how many years my nation or alliance have been around now. Perhaps someone else does.  

[Krashnaia]

This game began to fall the day idiots outnumbered roleplayers.

 

Back in the old days, people fought in the forums and in the game to enforce their ideals and the way they thought Bob should work.

 

Today, people fight just to humilliate others, both in the forums and in the game.

 

I think that the milestone marking the transition from one style of play to the other, is the day nuke warfare was accepted as standard. Because that was the day in which hatred became so dominant that people no longer cared to destroy their own nations in order to destroy those of their enemies.

[Neo Uruk]

Do you really believe that because lol

[Krashnaia]

Ah, the old days when writting a post with more than one sentence would get you a clever reply, or perhaps even a declaration of war backed by a several pages essay.

 

Now, all you get as a reply is a bonehead one-liner and the acronym of a monkey screech.

[potato]

Ah, the old days when writting a post with more than one sentence would get you a clever reply, or perhaps even a declaration of war backed by a several pages essay.

 

Now, all you get as a reply is a bonehead one-liner and the acronym of a monkey screech.

 

Yeah, man. I hate it too when people think they are witty.

Edited September 20, 2013 by potato

[Krashnaia]

How does it feel to lose so much time looking through the archives and still fail to make a point? Edited September 20, 2013 by Krashnaia

[Neo Uruk]

He can just click on your profile, and he made a point.

Try harder.

[jerdge]

ITT Krashnaia is saying that it was common to get well-thought answers, not that there were no short/one-liner answers or that these last are sin.

[potato]

ITT Krashnaia is saying that it was common to get well-thought answers, not that there were no short/one-liner answers or that these last are sin.

ITT I'm saying he's just as guilty of trying to score cookie points with bad one-liners. He could have given well-thought answers, instead he went with bad jokes. And now he's complaining.

[Hereno]

There is a lot of similarity between stages 4 and 1 in that neither stage takes things very seriously. 2 and 3 are also alike in that those people are taking CN seriously. The difference between 4 and 1 and between 3 and 2 amount to experience.

 

Inexperience + Not giving a damn = "Stage 1"

Inexperience + Giving a damn = "Stage 2"

Experience + Giving a damn = "Stage 3"

Experience + Not giving a damn = "Stage 4"

 

Stage 5 is how we exit the cycle by moving on.

[Ogaden]

There is a lot of similarity between stages 4 and 1 in that neither stage takes things very seriously. 2 and 3 are also alike in that those people are taking CN seriously. The difference between 4 and 1 and between 3 and 2 amount to experience.

 

Inexperience + Not giving a damn = "Stage 1"

Inexperience + Giving a damn = "Stage 2"

Experience + Giving a damn = "Stage 3"

Experience + Not giving a damn = "Stage 4"

 

Stage 5 is how we exit the cycle by moving on.

 

Hereno gets it

[jerdge]

ITT I'm saying he's just as guilty of trying to score cookie points with bad one-liners. He could have given well-thought answers, instead he went with bad jokes. And now he's complaining.

I agree on this, well put.

[New Frontier]

I disagree that only a handful of people are scheming at any one time. Dozens of people are. Of course Archon and Moo's scheming affected more people than that of whoever was leading smaller alliances, but the smaller alliances (or at least some of them) were still scheming -- and even having some effect! Just much less than others were.