Doitzel Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 (edited) http://www.cybernations.net/game_update_log.asp 8-21-2008- Team senators that are in peace mode will no longer be allowed to place sanctions against other nations in the game. Why was this changed in the middle of a war in which my alliance has taken a Senate Seat on a colour that is dominated by a single alliance while in peace mode? At the very least would it not be fairer to wait until the next Senate reset to punish us for our successes? Furthermore I find this change to be wholly favoured to the larger alliances. It is a difficult feat in itself to gain a seat on the Senate, where supposedly the people are able to speak, but with this system you are simply allowing those with the firepower to completely nullify the Senate's power by simply attacking anyone who wants to actually use the Senate offensively. This is just another strike against playing the game from peace mode. The tactic of sanctioning from peace is a perfectly legitimate way for smaller groups to fight against larger ones. The odds are already stacked in the latter's favour and I see absolutely no reason why it needs to be made further so. This change literally seems designed to ensure that big alliances control the one last place where an organised grassroots effort that has nothing to do with Nation Strength could keep them somewhat in check, and the timing is dubious at best. Why? Edited August 22, 2008 by admin This update has been rolled back and will be released at a later time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aussie Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 I agree. It should be changed back, in the name of, if nothing else, democracy. If the team votes the senator in, why should it matter if they are in peace mode or not? Obviously the people of the team colour want that senator in office. The only real thing team senators do is sanction. No one really reads team messages. This just kills the democracy intended by senate elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atrophis Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 (edited) This does not help alliances forced into peace mode. Horrible change in the middle of a war. ETA: It makes no sense to even allow nations in peace mode to even vote or participate in the senate now. Why even make a change like this? Edited August 21, 2008 by atrophis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ho Chi Win Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 No matter what the final decision on this rule is, implementing it right now will influence the outcome of the current war and unless it is the intention of the staff to effect game politics, I do not believe it would be fair to execute the changes now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinzent Zeppelin Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 I know there's a very strict policy against claims of "mod bias" here, but seriously, moves like this do nothing but substantiate them. The timing on this was uncanny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Slayer Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 I don't agree with this change at all. Doitzel summed it up quite nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 I must second this sentiment. I have seen the way this game truly is dominated in every aspect by the power-players from which sphere an individual is "allowed" to locate his nation on all the way up to who "gets" to play. As such I have been active in senate campaigning for months precisely because it offered one of the last aspects of play that presented enough of a challenge to be fun, but required tact and timing to be successful. That one more area of gameplay has simply been turned over to the Biggest Sticks represents one more failure of effort to provide any incentive to spend time really playing this game. Why even try to do anything to effect change or create fun with the constant expectation of a hand descending from on high and grabbing success from one's clutch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 No matter what the final decision on this rule is, implementing it right now will influence the outcome of the current war and unless it is the intention of the staff to effect game politics, I do not believe it would be fair to execute the changes now. I dont think it will affect the war that much, either way the end result will be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude Lebowski Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Way to destroy the last bit of fairness in this game. Now we have Jungle politics where might makes right and the voice of the people can simply be bombed and nuked out of the senate. Very disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slayer99 Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Why should a senator be able to maintain a seat and not face the repercussions of their actions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ho Chi Win Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 I dont think it will affect the war that much, either way the end result will be the same. The end result is obvious but that doesn't mean that it should be accelerated by the very rules of the game changing against our favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nShade1337 Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Very suspect change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted August 21, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Why should a senator be able to maintain a seat and not face the repercussions of their actions? If they are not wanted by the team they can be voted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogodai Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 If the team doesn't like a senator, they can just stop electing him. This change gives all the power to those with muscle. There's no justification for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duffman04 Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Another convenient rule change during a war. CN never lets me down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaklin Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Personally I do not like this idea. However, if you guys feel a need to have this. Please remove it and re-implement it AFTER the war is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 (edited) I must admit, this is a disappointing move, and the timing is very uncanny indeed. Edited August 21, 2008 by Arrnea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalare Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Why should a senator be able to maintain a seat and not face the repercussions of their actions? Why should any nation be able to avoid faicing the repercussions of their actions? Peace mode should be removed from the game entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desperado Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 By not wanted you mean nuked down below top 50 on that sphere so that they can't be voted, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Ariana Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 This is indeed a horrible time to implement this. Others have put the reasons into words better than I ever could. I'll only leave my support for this to be changed back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrnea Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Peace mode should be removed from the game entirely. That's what CN: TE is for. Peace mode is needed for those who may be away from their computers and/or internet access a week or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londo Mollari Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 And I'm still waiting for the change that uncaps global radiation and environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Why should a senator be able to maintain a seat and not face the repercussions of their actions? Why should a nation or alliance be able to exert complete phsyical control of gameplay without any possibility of repercussions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lavo Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 If I am correct, as seen in the past, Admin has not implemented changes to CN that effect the war system and/or how wars are fought in the middle of an alliance conflict (sanctions are/can be an economic weapon in war). Why is this war an exception to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Sharpe Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Ugh. This change was requested months ago. It is an entirely logical change to avoid sanction abuse. Leave politics out of game design, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts