NEW NATION strength calculations

[Viluin]

Also Viluin, why shouldn't older players have an advantage? In nearly every nation simulator or other game such as this your stats and improve as you play, and if you keep playing well newer players won't be able to catch up with you. The only way to avoid that would be for the game to reset or your nation not grow any stronger after a certain period of time.

Older players already have an advantage because they're older, that shouldn't change. However, older players are given another advantage in this game, namely free nuclear capability in the top 5%. That makes no sense when you think about it.

It's not 4k tech, it's 800 tech. If you go back and read my post you will see that a non-nuclear nation can afford 800 tech more than a nuclear one over that period.

Unfortunately the tech supply of both nations is bottlenecked by their aid slots and not their funds, so it really doesn't matter.

Oh yes, also: How would you like nukes to be exclusive if not based on rank (i.e. NS)?

Removing the top 5% thing and making a Manhattan Project the only way to become nuclear capable would be a good start. Giving free nuclear capability to those in the top 5% doesn't make sense.

Sanctioned status does give you a score bonus – by being in the dropdown you accrete ghosts. Also, this situation is different because, unlike sanction status, nukes give you a significant in game advantage. The fair NS value of the first nuke is about 15000 NS, in terms of your war strength. And also, unlike your hypothetical, holding nukes restricts your growth and allows the other nations below you to catch up relatively quickly.

If by "relatively quickly" you mean "hundreds of days", then yes. Because that's where this is going.

[sayton]

Viluin.. I dont think i agree wit hanything you said above.. i mean manhattan project being the ONLY way to get nukes seems kind of retarded.. no offense sorry.. some people should be able to work up to it.. plus for older nations... economic wonder still better than wasting 100mil on MHP..

in your first part you said older nations alreadyhave an advantage and we get more by havcing "easy" nuke capability??

i can show you over 200 nations that are old... like OLD OLD.. whoare no where near the nuke capability range.. and like 200 or so nations who definitely shouldnt be in the nuke range but are.. and arent old..

im sorry for using Veritas as an example but Latincia is literally about 300 days younger than MOST nations.. and hes alreadyin the top 5 nations..

remember that as well.. people can and HAVE grown

[Boondock]

What sayton said.

You can complain as much as you want, but people drop in and out of range ALL THE TIME. It is not really that hard to get there if you run your nation properly. It can take 2-3 months, but wheres the fun in hitting nuke range in 30 days?

It took me 6 months to hit nuke range due to inactivity and war. Let me tell you: If it had taken me 30 days, I would have quit this game by now for being too easy.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Boondock

[Bob Janova]

Unfortunately the tech supply of both nations is bottlenecked by their aid slots and not their funds, so it really doesn't matter.

Most nations around the nuclear border certainly aren't making full use of their slots, so you can still use your slots to catch them, even though this is technically true. (It didn't used to be true, that's inflation for you.)

[enderland]

Unfortunately the tech supply of both nations is bottlenecked by their aid slots and not their funds, so it really doesn't matter.

Except that most nations around the 4.7% mark are NOT importing that much tech! What part of that don't you understand?

If both nations grow at the same infra rate, the smaller nation will gain at least 500 NS a week on average on the top 5% mark. What part of that is so hard to understand?

Of the 30 or so nations I looked at just above 5% only maybe 3 had their aid slots full, and probably half had 1 or fewer aid offers.

It's possible to grow into the top 5%. You can gain 1000 NS every 10 days from tech deals (with the DRA). The NS requirements have gone up what, maybe 8k over the past 8 months? So what? My NS has gone up far more than that over the same time frame. In fact, its gone up by about 1000 every 10 days!

Stop complaining. Do tech deals. Make smart economic and militaristic decisions.

The only thing that seems to appease you people is a CN reset. That'd make everything fair, right?

[Viluin]

The NS requirements have gone up what, maybe 8k over the past 8 months? So what?

Lol, no. 8 months ago the NS requirement was 20-25k and that was when tech was still worth 20NS per point. The NS requirement has been rising quite fast, I have no doubt that it will hit 50K NS within a year.

The amount of tech sellers is also getting smaller by the day. Eventually tech will cost $3m/50 and you will have a hard time filling up your slots due to a lack of sellers, which means it'll take even longer to get into the top 5%.

Viluin.. I dont think i agree wit hanything you said above.. i mean manhattan project being the ONLY way to get nukes seems kind of retarded.. no offense sorry.. some people should be able to work up to it.. plus for older nations... economic wonder still better than wasting 100mil on MHP..

in your first part you said older nations alreadyhave an advantage and we get more by havcing "easy" nuke capability??

i can show you over 200 nations that are old... like OLD OLD.. whoare no where near the nuke capability range.. and like 200 or so nations who definitely shouldnt be in the nuke range but are.. and arent old..

im sorry for using Veritas as an example but Latincia is literally about 300 days younger than MOST nations.. and hes alreadyin the top 5 nations..

remember that as well.. people can and HAVE grown

The fact remains that the average "older" nation has more NS than the average "younger" nation. They are not necessarily better, they have just played longer. The game already gives an advantage to older players in the form of giving them more time to grow. Why would they need free nuclear capability in the top 5%?

And economical wonders are better than an MP for EVERYONE, not just older nations. Yet most younger nations will have to buy an MP while most older nations in the top 5% get free nuclear capability, even though it is much easier for them to buy an MP than it is for the younger nations.

Making an MP the only way to become nuclear capable would stop giving some older nations an extra advantage and it would prevent the NS requirements for nukes to spiral out of control.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Viluin

[kswiss2783]

There is no such thing are FREE NUCLEAR CAPABILITY!!! I spent money to BUY infra to get nukes...

[enderland]

The amount of tech sellers is also getting smaller by the day. Eventually tech will cost $3m/50 and you will have a hard time filling up your slots due to a lack of sellers, which means it'll take even longer to get into the top 5%.

Ha! I love it when people think this. Anyone trying to get tech deals easily can fill their slots with tech deals. If you cannot find enough sellers, you are doing something wrong. It is EASY to find tech sellers if you want them. Saying otherwise at this point is simply silly.

The fact remains that the average "older" nation has more NS than the average "younger" nation. They are not necessarily better, they have just played longer. The game already gives an advantage to older players in the form of giving them more time to grow. Why would they need free nuclear capability in the top 5%?

No wai! Older nations are stronger than newer nations!? Of course this is the case. Why should nations such as Bubbler Nation have an advantage over me in that they have all the economic wonders? Because they are older. Nuclear capability is actually far easier to overcome than the economic "penalty" I have for starting this game over a year after it was created.

And economical wonders are better than an MP for EVERYONE

Then buy them, and don't complain about needing a MP to buy nukes.

Making an MP the only way to become nuclear capable would stop giving some older nations an extra advantage

Actually it would still give them an advantage, because for example I can save enough cash to buy the MP in only about 20 days of savings, whereas most nations at 4999 infra would have to save much longer. Older nations always will have an advantage, in almost any game (not even just Cybernations). New baseball players don't get an advantage because they are "young" [ignoring the factors of age on their bodies, ie compare a 20 vs 24 year old]. No sport gives a bonus to young players that is not essentially genetic. They all have to work their way to the top somehow.

Deal with it.

[Viluin]

There is no such thing are FREE NUCLEAR CAPABILITY!!! I spent money to BUY infra to get nukes...

The main purpose of buying infra and tech is to increase your daily income, get a larger military and to get a more powerful military. The nuclear capability you get when you're in the top 5% was just an extra, there is no cost directly attached to it. Kinda like how you get the right to vote in real life when you turn a certain age.. Did you endure life on earth for X years just to gain it? No, it's just a bonus you got.

Ha! I love it when people think this. Anyone trying to get tech deals easily can fill their slots with tech deals. If you cannot find enough sellers, you are doing something wrong. It is EASY to find tech sellers if you want them. Saying otherwise at this point is simply silly.

It's widely accepted that the amount of tech sellers is decreasing while the amount of buyers is increasing. From a seller's perspective, I can tell you that there are so many nations out there looking for tech everywhere because they can barely find any. You should consider yourself lucky you can fill up all of your slots.

No wai! Older nations are stronger than newer nations!? Of course this is the case. Why should nations such as Bubbler Nation have an advantage over me in that they have all the economic wonders? Because they are older.

Yes, and this shouldn't change.

Nuclear capability is actually far easier to overcome than the economic "penalty" I have for starting this game over a year after it was created.

Why should it be overcome in the first place? Why can you become nuclear capable just by catching up to bigger nations? It doesn't make sense from ANY perspective. There should be an absolute requirement for nukes, one that doesn't go up over time.

Then buy them, and don't complain about needing a MP to buy nukes.

Without buying an MP many nations won't ever get nukes. They have to sacrifice $100 million and a wonder purchase to become nuclear capable. High-ranked nations don't. It's just stupid to penalize smaller nations if they want to fight with the same weapons as the elite of the game, something they must do if they want to do some meaningful damage in a war.

Actually it would still give them an advantage, because for example I can save enough cash to buy the MP in only about 20 days of savings, whereas most nations at 4999 infra would have to save much longer. Older nations always will have an advantage, in almost any game (not even just Cybernations). New baseball players don't get an advantage because they are "young" [ignoring the factors of age on their bodies, ie compare a 20 vs 24 year old]. No sport gives a bonus to young players that is not essentially genetic. They all have to work their way to the top somehow.

Deal with it.

Any 4999 infra nation can buy a MP within 30 days, or they're doing something wrong. Since you can only buy one wonder every 30 days and since you should've bought a wonder before 4999, it's really not a disadvantage. They do spend a larger chunk of their income on the MP but it doesn't take them any longer to buy it.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Viluin

[Thorr]

Except that most nations around the 4.7% mark are NOT importing that much tech! What part of that don't you understand?

If both nations grow at the same infra rate, the smaller nation will gain at least 500 NS a week on average on the top 5% mark. What part of that is so hard to understand?

Of the 30 or so nations I looked at just above 5% only maybe 3 had their aid slots full, and probably half had 1 or fewer aid offers.

It's possible to grow into the top 5%. You can gain 1000 NS every 10 days from tech deals (with the DRA). The NS requirements have gone up what, maybe 8k over the past 8 months? So what? My NS has gone up far more than that over the same time frame. In fact, its gone up by about 1000 every 10 days!

Stop complaining. Do tech deals. Make smart economic and militaristic decisions.

The only thing that seems to appease you people is a CN reset. That'd make everything fair, right?

Yea they think it will be fair but then someone who comes in 2 years after that reset will argue how unfair I can't get up to the top. While it isn't hard if you do it right. I am way younger than most and I am in the top 1 percent.

Making the MHP the only way to get nukes is going to make it easier for us who are at the top as I know I make over 13 million a day in profit. So 100 million is 7.5 days for me.

Edited April 22, 2008 by Thorr

[Golan 1st]

I actually think that it is becoming increasingly more difficult to climb the ranks after the first few thousands. I think it is somewhat problematic for a game trying to attract new players because they start with a gap which is very hard to close.

But there are many many nations whose are far from optimizing their growth and those who are ready to make an effort can climb the ranks and reach nuclear capability in a matter of a few months.

While I see the reason in setting a fixed requirement for nukes (after all, in the real world, what you need to get nuclear weapons does not change over time), CN is not obliged to do this. It has always been "a bonus" (I could not find a better word) for big nations and it is 100% fair to leave it this way. I actually think that a Manhattan Project, in most cases, is self destructive for a nation.

Getting nukes is not the holy grail of CN and, while they are of course very valuable for war, you can do very well without them. Buying a Manhattan Project, IMHO, is wrong for nations who are not very active militarily for a few reasons:

1. Usually, for such nations, the upkeep price of nukes is a big part of their daily income. They could better use it elsewhere.

2. The money spent on the MP itself can help a nation much more if spent on infra.

3. The same for the money spent on buying the nukes for nations this size.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, of course, but I feel that people whine too much about how the game is not enough in their favour. The biggest CN nations got there by working hard on optimizing their nations. It is true that age is an advantage, but I cannot see how this can be wrong. Instead of complaining about how hard it is to grow your nation, do what is necessary to make it grow faster.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Golan 1st

[Viluin]

Yea they think it will be fair but then someone who comes in 2 years after that reset will argue how unfair I can't get up to the top. While it isn't hard if you do it right. I am way younger than most and I am in the top 1 percent.

Making the MHP the only way to get nukes is going to make it easier for us who are at the top as I know I make over 13 million a day in profit. So 100 million is 7.5 days for me.

I don't see how that would make it any easier for you, since you don't have to buy an MP at all right now.

[Thorr]

Because I wouldn't have to worry about others near me having nukes until they bought the MP. I can afford it easily while some above me can but some below me are going to have a bit more difficulty. There is some 2800 nations inside my attack range. Most all below me since only 300 are near my infra.

I would only have to worry about 300 to 500 nations so I could focuse on growing if all needed the MP. I also don't see the top 5 percent that hard to reach. There are some nations with only 4000ish infra in the top 5 percent. Now if it gets to where all the top 5 percent has 14000 infra that would be hard.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Thorr

[Viluin]

Because I wouldn't have to worry about others near me having nukes until they bought the MP. I can afford it easily while some above me can but some below me are going to have a bit more difficulty. There is some 2800 nations inside my attack range. Most all below me since only 300 are near my infra.

I would only have to worry about 300 to 500 nations so I could focuse on growing if all needed the MP. I also don't see the top 5 percent that hard to reach. There are some nations with only 4000ish infra in the top 5 percent.

Nations with 4k infra would need a ridiculously huge amount of tech for their size to be in the top 5%.

Now if it gets to where all the top 5 percent has 14000 infra that would be hard.

That will happen one day, with the way this is going.

[enderland]

Nations with 4k infra would need a ridiculously huge amount of tech for their size to be in the top 5%.

I have 4999 and am in the top 3%.

[Viluin]

I have 4999 and am in the top 3%.

4999!=4000 and you do have a lot of tech. Also, you already have nukes which gives you more NS.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Viluin

[Huang Ti]

4999 infra and 1500 tech gets you to top 5.0%

\edit\ Thats is with a moderate amount of military. Large military and you could hit 5% sooner.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Huang Ti

[Viluin]

4999 infra and 1500 tech gets you to top 5.0%

\edit\ Thats is with a moderate amount of military. Large military and you could hit 5% sooner.

Not a chance.

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...ation_ID=130694

5625 infra, 1571 tech and 20 nukes won't even get you into the top 5%.

[Huang Ti]

On looking into it a little more its about 2k tech.

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_d...ation_ID=114457

I know he has nukes but more soldiers could replace the nukes for NS.

\edit\ Spelling

\edit2\ Actaul Soldiers by .2 - ah.

Well CMs, max aircraft and 2200 tech would get you there.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Huang Ti

[enderland]

4999!=4000 and you do have a lot of tech. Also, you already have nukes which gives you more NS.

I am in the top 5% without nukes.

[Viluin]

I am in the top 5% without nukes.

Not if you dismiss your military.

[enderland]

I am in the top 5% without nukes.

I lose ~5000: 1000 from tanks, 4000 from nukes. Maybe a few hundred from soldiers.

Leaves me still in nuclear range.

[Viluin]

I lose ~5000: 1000 from tanks, 4000 from nukes. Maybe a few hundred from soldiers.

Leaves me still in nuclear range.

Dismissing everything down to 20% soldiers would cost you about 1750NS. That, combined with the loss of nukes, would put you right outside the top 5%. Or maybe you'd be at exactly 5% if you're lucky.

Why is this relevant anyway?

Edited April 24, 2008 by Viluin

[Thorr]

Well the only solution really is to cap Tech at 10000. Once you have that you don't gain any more nation str from tech or any benefit at all. It will be like land. Gotta cap things if you want it to be abtainable by all. It still shouldn't be very easy.

Edited April 24, 2008 by Thorr

[Bob Janova]

There should be an absolute requirement for nukes, one that doesn't go up over time.

No there shouldn't. That would result in everyone having nukes rather quickly. Imagine we're sitting a year ago having this discussion, where would we have put the absolute requirements? Maybe 4000/1000? The Manhattan Project is 3000/300, so it could well have been closer to that, but say it was 4000 infra/1000 tech. Today, we would have somewhere in the region of 4000 nuclear capable nations (13%); in a year's time it would be 50%, and then nukes have lost their status as a special weapon to be feared.