Jump to content

safest corner of the cyberverse?


Hereno
 Share

Recommended Posts

for the longest time, the neutrals were considered one of the safest places in the game, with many of them not even bothering to learn how to fight. the woodstock massacre became a page in the CN wiki that many of the people playing had only ever read about.

now their safety is being called into question once again.

but if the neutrals are no longer safe, what is the new safest place to be in the cyberverse?

could it be in alliances who skip wars or limit their engagement to grow mostly interrupted?

or maybe it is in the dominant sphere in the CN upper tier, who pick their battles and effectively rule the roost

of course, it is also possible that the neutrals are still the safest place for your normal CN player.

thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why seek safety if the purpose and fun lies with war?

Nobody who fears an uphill battle will find us as their allies, this is a fact. Taking that further, if you seek safety, the only thing you will find is war and defeat at the hands of those who seek battle.

That being said, I do want to emphasise before the above is taken out of context, that no actual technically neutral alliance has been touched by DBDC.

Edited by Starcraftmazter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why seek safety if the purpose and fun lies with war?

Nobody who fears an uphill battle will find us as their allies, this is a fact. Taking that further, if you seek safety, the only thing you will find is war and defeat at the hands of those who seek battle.

That being said, I do want to emphasise before the above is taken out of context, that no actual technically neutral alliance has been touched by DBDC.

 

There are various ways of experiencing fun in this game.

 

One persons idea of fun may mean constant war, anothers may be constant peace and building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically wherever you are ignored.

If you don't do something for long enough, or are notable enough for one reason or another to attract attention, you automatically get people looking at you, which means you could be targeted.

If you want to be the "safest" you need to be unnoticed, while still having the ability once you are hit to handle it (your own nation. your alliance. your allies. or the simple ability of diplomacy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One persons idea of fun may mean constant war, anothers may be constant peace and building.


I think to play the game like that, so as to build up your nation and avoid war is a challenge in itself, and I think the fact that there's always a possibility of war adds to that challenge and only makes it more fun and rewarding.

Also to add is the fact that quite often war can give your nation a leg up in it's growth and development.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody who fears an uphill battle will find us as their allies, this is a fact. Taking that further, if you seek safety, the only thing you will find is war and defeat at the hands of those who seek battle.

Sentiments like this are why I don't understand why DBDC isn't super-interested in setting things right with my alliance. >_> The RIA's entire existence has been an uphill battle, from the LUE raids to the first string of losing battles starting with GW3 to the Dave-Grudge War era to now.

 

Anyway, on topic, You will find safety in an alliance willing to fight. You will find security in combat, whether you are defeated or victorious. This is the first condition for safety, for you will find that nothing can drive you to abandon your nation faster than seeing your most beloved alliance crumble to dust. When you are willing to give your nation for the good of your comrades, you will reap the benefits of that alliance's sound leadership and good fortunes. The safest place to be is in the alliance with the best leaders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sentiments like this are why I don't understand why DBDC isn't super-interested in setting things right with my alliance. >_> The RIA's entire existence has been an uphill battle, from the LUE raids to the first string of losing battles starting with GW3 to the Dave-Grudge War era to now.


Prior to reading that statement, I had no idea things were not right between DBDC and RIA? Certainly the first I've heard of it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion there should be no known place one can hide and never be touched. Whose to say one doesn't join that, build up without any fear of being hit and then leaves to join an alliance to beat up on someone later. Don't get me wrong, I don't act as if I know what's it's like to stay neutral and do nothing but build up my nation for zero point, but I don't see how people find enjoyment out of that. Like it or not, this world revolves around war, and though it's their prerogative to stay neutral and never fight and stay out of world politics, it's others choices not to allow it. If you don't want to be hit, the only safe haven is sitting in PM for all eternity.

To answer your question, being in a micro is probably the safest with a protectorate and be basically unknown to the rest of the world. Other then that, being in a neutral alliance is still likely the safest spot if you do not want to fight at all, as besides the recent raids, the "neutral" alliances of stayed pretty safe throughout the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
There are various ways of experiencing fun in this game.
 
One persons idea of fun may mean constant war, anothers may be constant peace and building.

War is very over rated in this game. It takes me all of 5minutes to run all my ga's and air attacks on my phone at work. More if my planes keep getting shot down. And since I'll likely never be able to grow to over 50k ns I'm more than content to stay in the bitch tier and just run rampant for a month or so a year and then go back to tech farming
Link to comment
Share on other sites

for the longest time, the neutrals were considered one of the safest places in the game, with many of them not even bothering to learn how to fight. the woodstock massacre became a page in the CN wiki that many of the people playing had only ever read about.

now their safety is being called into question once again.

but if the neutrals are no longer safe, what is the new safest place to be in the cyberverse?

could it be in alliances who skip wars or limit their engagement to grow mostly interrupted?

or maybe it is in the dominant sphere in the CN upper tier, who pick their battles and effectively rule the roost

of course, it is also possible that the neutrals are still the safest place for your normal CN player.

thoughts?

The nation that trades freedom for security does not deserve, nor will it ever receive either.

I can't say about other neutrals, but I have been telling my mates since 2010 that war is coming, by now you can bet that they know. Applicants that don't sign up for ZI if need be are usually denied admittance.

Stats are transient... To be frank not knowing how far and how long we'll be able to play this gamble is the excitement that keeps me going.

 

 

safety is overrated.  If you want to be entirely safe, just enter peace mode and never leave

Peace Mode is nice only if you don't lose money and if you wouldn't be doing tech deals, anyway.

My nation entered it for strategic reasons and it was then ordered to remain there, but I still find it acceptable. It helps me save a lot of my time, and the cherry on the cake is that there's always the ignorant fool trying to sick burn with some completely unoriginal jab about cowardice or fear. Hopefully at least some will miss this post and I'll continue to get their posts coming.

 

Peace Mode isn't for everybody, anyway.

 

 

War is very over rated in this game. It takes me all of 5minutes to run all my ga's and air attacks on my phone at work. More if my planes keep getting shot down. And since I'll likely never be able to grow to over 50k ns I'm more than content to stay in the !@#$%* tier and just run rampant for a month or so a year and then go back to tech farming

War Is a Lie(tm).

 

 

The clicking of the buttons of war is over rated, the tears and moans of the people being blown up is gold.

Only if you are a self-complacent sadist with a sense of superiority. Incidentally, the former attitude excludes that the latter belief is founded (the more you know...)

Edited by jerdge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Security is a lie. And freedom is just another word for not afraid to lose stuff.

I agree on the first thing.

 

The second one is rather a narrow description of freedom... But I won't go into discussing semantics/labels! Let's just say (condensing) that wanting what you do, being aware that you're subject to many influences and nonetheless choosing to question such influences as your permanent method, brings you happiness and makes you the master of your actions. Having thus secured yourself, you're also safe where it matters.

But I must stress that it's more about choosing a method rather than setting a goal: stuff indeed becomes irrelevant, unless protecting it is what you want to be doing, in which case it's important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...