Jump to content
Margrave

Moments that Unite Us

Recommended Posts

For once Tywin you've posted something I pretty much agree with. The only addendum I would make to it is for anyone starting out in CN now it takes a whole lot longer to start to build into the upper tiers of the game than it did back before Karma. At this point right now I'm in the top 23% of nations in the game, but it has taken me almost six and a half years to build my nation to this point, and I think it's more due to attrition of players within the game than anything else. You can still build into the upper tier of CN, but it just takes a lot longer and a lot more patience than it did in the early years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Ooc)Remember when Nordreich pissed off Norway?(/ooc)

Lol good times.

Touching on the pre vs post karma debate: I think if you're into role play/interalliance politics stuff in CN, post karma is better. If you were into internal affairs/alliance/nation building and huge wars where everyone was on equal ground, pre karma.

E: forgot this is in an IC forum.

Edited by USMC123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had the same experience in Karma and the DH/NPO War.

You may think you did, but there was never a threat of NPO members being EZI'd or the alliance forced to disband.

Might've made the present more interesting had that been done, really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tywin, individual nations weren't that important up to the Equilibrium War. There's been a lot of time between the Karma War and the Equilibrium War, during which the main drive in determining an alliance's military power has been efficiency in tech deals and (and basically depending on) activity.
Your analysis is interesting, but IMO it bypasses the "elite alliances" middle era (the age of Citadel, TOP, Umbrella-MK, to cite the most known examples).
Other than that, anyway, well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have identified two key characteristics that has made our world much different today than the world of 2008 which you were born into. That would be tier mechanics and cultural shifts.
 

You are missing what I'm saying entirely.  When I was born into this world, on June 24, 2008 to help a friend of mine start his own red team alliance (the friend was also new), one of the first things we were told when seeking advice and information was that we better change our alliance team color from red to any other color because if we did not, a large alliance called the New Pacific Order would attack us because they owned the red team.  (this was from another leader of an alliance who I respect).  Note that the advice was "you should do this because otherwise you'll be attacked" and not something along the lines of "oh, go talk to NPO and see if you can work something out on a diplomatic level."  So what did we do?  We did what seemed best at the time for our own security, we had everyone change color.  But the more interesting question at this point is what impression do you think that made on a young but ambitious nation leader that I was at the time? ;)

 

Since that time I've seen one war every year almost like clockwork.  And yes, naming names does not matter because which group happens to be in power from one year to the next can change.  Doesn't matter - one group of nations beat on another until one side gives up (the winner now generally being known before the war even begins) and then rinse, build up and repeat. 

 

Since I've been here, how this world works has not changed at all.  I can't speak from experience from before June 2008, I can since and frankly White Chocolate of Lander Clan is tired of it.  If we're going to have a conversation at all, lets have a real (i.e. not propaganda - remember I'm the "smart" doombird as far as you're concerned) talk about how to  change for today and tomorrow - not look back in the past. 

Edited by White Chocolate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of agree with Tywin but not even that the ambition is to get into the top 2%, but to get a middle or upper middle tier nation that is really "relevant" takes at least a year or two.

 

I'd also point to wars lasting a lot longer because of world mechanics: bigger nations, huge warchests, and indestructible wonders means it takes a very long time to feel like you've done a lot of significant damage to an alliance.  This dynamic will exist to some degree in any universe, but is true to an even larger degree in this one because of indestructible stats as well as the availability of peace mode.  After a month or so wars lose their fun and become tedious.  And the very long rebuild time between wars (also a function of the size of nations and warchests) isn't appealing to many participants.

 

The political culture is also well established instead of a blank slate, well established alliances and ties have long term members that tend to dominate government and make it harder for new rulers to rise up the ranks of established alliances and/or build their own powerful alliances.

(OOC: and just in terms of games, the nature of the internet has changed and long term text based games have better competition.)

Edited by Azaghul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]  When I was born into this world, on June 24, 2008 to help a friend of mine start his own red team alliance (the friend was also new), one of the first things we were told when seeking advice and information was that we better change our alliance team color from red to any other color because if we did not, a large alliance called the New Pacific Order would attack us because they owned the red team.  (this was from another leader of an alliance who I respect).  Note that the advice was "you should do this because otherwise you'll be attacked" and not something along the lines of "oh, go talk to NPO and see if you can work something out on a diplomatic level."  [...]

I did the same thing in 2007. I went talk to the NPO instead of just moving away from Red. While they refused to accept even a small new micro on Red, they were absolutely understanding, professional and helpful, advising rather than threatening us. Maybe I was lucky in which one of them I talked to (Philosopher, in my case) but since then my experience has consistently been that talking with people is almost always better, and (as a rule of thumb) it's basically always worth the trouble. The exceptions exist, but they're very few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did the same thing in 2007. I went talk to the NPO instead of just moving away from Red. While they refused to accept even a small new micro on Red, they were absolutely understanding, professional and helpful, advising rather than threatening us. Maybe I was lucky in which one of them I talked to (Philosopher, in my case) but since then my experience has consistently been that talking with people is almost always better, and (as a rule of thumb) it's basically always worth the trouble. The exceptions exist, but they're very few.

Sounds like the advice that I received was valid.  Team color just wasn't an important enough issue to go through the trouble.  It's not one of these "uniting" issues that at the time was worth the trouble.   In retrospect, if I had actually cared what I probably would of done is just stayed red team regardless.  Then if NPO noticed and cared enough to do something, I would of said very politely, "so sorry, I'm new here, we will change now that I've been informed."  LOL! 

 

I'm curious, anyone else who was red team who had to switch colors back then?  What did you do? Was it worth a fight?  Why or why not?

Edited by White Chocolate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm curious, anyone else who was red team who had to switch colors back then?  What did you do? Was it worth a fight?  Why or why not?

 

CCC was originally red team. We never spoke to Pacifica about the subject and we were too small to notice, but when word of the Moldavi Doctrine came around our first Chancellor preemptively declared us "multi" to avoid stepping on toes.

 

Ironically we put up more of a fight to remain multi, as it became engrained in the culture as a freedom issue, and it took several years of color debates before we finally moved to blue. By that time the era of color spheres was on the way out, and soon enough the ability to change resources was introduced. I think I liked it better when resource scarcity was still a thing. :P

Share this post


Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...