Lord Boris Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 And that's what Cyber Nations is all about, after all! Sitting back and begging entertainment from the ones who are actually willing to stick their e-necks out for something rather than reclining in a treaty-weave armchair and whining. I like my armchair. Now all I'm missing is a footstool. I think I'll engineer a micro-alliance war, have the losers enslaved, and have them build me one. Thank you for reminding me of that wonderful suggestion, ma'am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strykewolf Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 ((chuckles)) I have fun with it In some ways, trying to run a small alliance is like trying to herd cats But, once they're all heading in the same direction, things settle down a bit and the focus is growing and teaching each other. I had a different kind of, but about the same level of fun when I was in a larger alliance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 The last month or so has seen a massive influx of micro alliance drama. From random wars, spying, apologies, incoherent announcements... you name it, they've got it (except for size and experience). While at first I found the announcements/drama annoying, I've come to realize that it fills a role in our society: the same roll occupied by reality TV. What they do to each other has, for the most part, absolutely no effect on the CN Majority, yet its all played out on center stage in the OWF/AP forums for us all to see. We sit by, watch them fight and squabble, all the while knowing that its relevance in our lives lasts only for as long as we let it. We laugh, we facepalm, and usually laugh some more - all the while rooting for our favorites in their struggles. Then, in the end, just as you can turn off the TV you can close the thread and their effect on your life has been effectively closed down, and it is wonderful. Their drama gives us a break from treaty signings, government changes, and Vox vs. all argument threads, all without any risk to our own or our alliances well being. For all this I thank you, the inexperienced leaders of the micro alliances. Without you, CN would just be that much more boring. I somehow totally missed this thread. I probably assumed it was more micro-alliance drama and ignored it, as opposed to commentary on micro-alliance drama! Very nicely written OP and great observation. I love what Micro-Alliances bring to the game; its very refreshing to see some passion and people standing up for themselves. They, like many of us medium-sized alliances, are in this to enjoy their communities rather than "win" the game. To this purpose, I see many of them as being very honorable and holding steadfast to their principles; imo and from my experience, a smaller alliance is much more likely to honor its treaties than a larger one. I think this is the absolute truth... Almost everyone who has led a large alliance should agree. Frankly, when you have 600+ nations and 2+ years of history to protect and serve, you make decisions slightly different than you do for an alliance of 15 dudes who came together last week. Sad but inevitable I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sigrun Vapneir Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 I think this is the absolute truth... Almost everyone who has led a large alliance should agree. Frankly, when you have 600+ nations and 2+ years of history to protect and serve, you make decisions slightly different than you do for an alliance of 15 dudes who came together last week. Sad but inevitable I think. Inevitable, yes. But sad? Hardly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowman809 Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 I think this is the absolute truth... Almost everyone who has led a large alliance should agree. Frankly, when you have 600+ nations and 2+ years of history to protect and serve, you make decisions slightly different than you do for an alliance of 15 dudes who came together last week. Sad but inevitable I think. While much shorter than others, many micro alliances do have histories and bonds between members far beyond than "some dudes." For example, my first alliance the Republic of Elite Colonies probably had 4-7 members in it for a prolonged period of time. We eventually did have inside jokes and did reminiscence about the hectic summer (it was actually when most members joined). I mad decisions for it based on their security and to protect our integrity. While I don't know how other micro alliance leader lead, I would expect they do the same (its pretty clear most don't though). There is also a different kind of alliance bond between the government of a large alliance to its members and the many types of a micro alliance. Some MAs just have a leader who does everything and a bunch of noobs. REC was like that in a way. However, we were all noobs when we started and only recruited noobs. We had about 3 members join who had previous experience. Its a much different relationship when you all learn together (with the leader having learned faster or had experience) and teaching each other. Most of the active members back in REC were actually pretty good at nation management but stayed small due to my faults at not acquiring enough tech deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Inevitable, yes. But sad? Hardly. I do find it sad in some ways. There's kind of a loss of innocence that happens at some point, and it's something you can never get back. While much shorter than others, many micro alliances do have histories and bonds between members far beyond than "some dudes." For example, my first alliance the Republic of Elite Colonies probably had 4-7 members in it for a prolonged period of time. We eventually did have inside jokes and did reminiscence about the hectic summer (it was actually when most members joined). I mad decisions for it based on their security and to protect our integrity. While I don't know how other micro alliance leader lead, I would expect they do the same (its pretty clear most don't though).There is also a different kind of alliance bond between the government of a large alliance to its members and the many types of a micro alliance. Some MAs just have a leader who does everything and a bunch of noobs. REC was like that in a way. However, we were all noobs when we started and only recruited noobs. We had about 3 members join who had previous experience. Its a much different relationship when you all learn together (with the leader having learned faster or had experience) and teaching each other. Most of the active members back in REC were actually pretty good at nation management but stayed small due to my faults at not acquiring enough tech deals. Oh, I am not knocking small alliances at all. In many ways there is a much stronger bond present that large alliances can not have. When I was the leader of a large alliance, it was not possible for me to know all 600 members. I did not get a chance to "walk the trenches" if you will and bond with them. Were I a leader of a 20 man alliance, I could have done so. What I mean is, large sanctioned alliance leadership can not simply make decisions based on what they want to do, or what their morals tell them. They have so much more to consider and ultimately they may be forced to make a decision that is good for the long term outlook, and not-so-good in the short term. To put it simply, had I made a few decisions the way my morals told me to as opposed to what my strategic planning told me to, many alliances that exist today would not exist now. Not too many micros impact 4,000 players when they make decisions... It is a different level of decision making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jony Lancer Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 i think it would be even better to see two large alliances fight or maybe a big one vs a small one :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strykewolf Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Oh, I am not knocking small alliances at all. In many ways there is a much stronger bond present that large alliances can not have. When I was the leader of a large alliance, it was not possible for me to know all 600 members. I did not get a chance to "walk the trenches" if you will and bond with them. Were I a leader of a 20 man alliance, I could have done so. Spot on. Much easier with smaller numbers. Though there are some folks out there that seem to be able to handle hundreds...though they will be very, very few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobiashiy Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 I happen to love micro-alliances actually, this is great entertainment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowman809 Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 (edited) Though there are some folks out there that seem to be able to handle hundreds...though they will be very, very few. What do you mean? I happen to love micro-alliances actually, this is great entertainment You probably like hoping them every 2-5 days too. Edited January 31, 2009 by cowman809 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strykewolf Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 What do you mean? Fairly straight forward, cowman...though it depends on in what context. The context I mean? After 30 or 40 members I will find it hard to know the nations fairly intimately, and the rulers. There are some whom I've seen who can remember nearly every important and even the 'not-so-important' details of every nation ruler they run into; it's a knack. Does it mean I will not talk to every one of them when things come up and such? Nopes...but, I know me. I'd start forgetting a bit and not knowing a bit after that; which is why I set up the framework of BH so I could handle up to around 300 and allow myself to keep track. If you want, come on into IRC and I'll explain further there in query if needed. I'm usually in the Blackhorse channel when I'm on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchman Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 This was a great post! :lol: I laughed. Spot on, Cobalt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 To the cynics, the Grand Lodge of Freemasons was a micro alliance and we now have over a hundred and twenty members, many close friends, a tradition of honoring our agreements, are among the fastest growing alliances, and started with,.. erm... 1 person. Plus we have never had a protectorate.I have more respect for people who actually try to do something, even if they fail, then for those who sit comfortably in numbers and shirk their noses up at others. Ah, see, this is what I am talking about. If the small alliances don't immediately run and stick their heads up some large alliance's as a protector, they can do very well for themselves still, AND they won't lose their sovereignty by basically being large alliance lackeys and get tied into the treaty web, making it even uglier than now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowman809 Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Ah, see, this is what I am talking about. If the small alliances don't immediately run and stick their heads up some large alliance's as a protector, they can do very well for themselves still, AND they won't lose their sovereignty by basically being large alliance lackeys and get tied into the treaty web, making it even uglier than now. Very true, its also a lot more fun being risky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Truth is, it's not even a risk. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Ah, see, this is what I am talking about. If the small alliances don't immediately run and stick their heads up some large alliance's as a protector, they can do very well for themselves still, AND they won't lose their sovereignty by basically being large alliance lackeys and get tied into the treaty web, making it even uglier than now. Well, I pointed out in that other thread we were both posting in that is is in fact possible to be a protected alliance and retain your sovereignty. I do still see your point about sticking it out alone though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobiashiy Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 What do you mean?You probably like hoping them every 2-5 days too. Wow how'd you know? Oh I know your a spy so you should know of course Also it is my choice if I want to hop or not.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowman809 Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Wow how'd you know? Oh I know your a spy so you should know of course Also it is my choice if I want to hop or not.. Well your AA is one way to know. I am not a spy, I used to run a spy ring but never did the spying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hegemon Rob Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 :? You ran a spy ring? I am quite sure that was my job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobiashiy Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 lol, he wasn't that great of running it if he was caught Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cowman809 Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 lol, he wasn't that great of running it if he was caught Off topic, but I didn't get caught. Hegemon Rob revealed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kobiashiy Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 w/e you still got caught and all alliances start off as Micro-Alliances so you cant say you hate them or they suck.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshgazza1992 Posted February 1, 2009 Report Share Posted February 1, 2009 Yeah, I agree. o/ The Micro Alliances. B) B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandelsand Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 The micros seem to be back... watch out for those little buggers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeology Posted August 15, 2012 Report Share Posted August 15, 2012 wow grave dig much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts