Northrend Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) The NPO simply perceives vague threats from behind every corner and watches everyone, including their allies to ensure that they are the only exclusive organization that you are chiefly allied to. if you decide that you want to buy 200 tech while you're also selling tech, then yes, you won't profit from it.If you do it the correct way, you make money, if I remember the stats right over 1 million when done correctly. Whether you're buying the tech in halves, or you buy it at once, then you're still going to operate on a loss given you dump the money into Infrastructure, and the time and savings required to purchase more tech to complete the deal, without taking out another deal. Edited February 10, 2009 by Northrend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authur Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Tech selling does not enhance a nation's growth. Especially not at those prices. Tech buying does though and considering most nations spend the vast majority of their time as a buyer it's beneficial to create an atmosphere where there are more sellers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Edit: could also maybe add a section "Get to know a Pacifican" Interview , yes actually interview a Pacifican each week and then publish said interview. I'd hate to be responsible for getting Pacifican's expelled one member at a time. Though that raises an interesting new tactic to defeating them. You are so silly, did you forget I am cool and intelligent it isn't an act. Now you on the other hand.... you change everytime you enter a new alliance. You would fit right in at Vox if you are not already a member. And you are pointing at the porta potties, which I guess is what Vox has to offer for fun.. !@#$. I'd be cautious to allow WarriorConcept in. After all, he took a personal protectorate from Moo after Polaris burned \m/ and then took an NPO protectorate to found an alliance. Tut, tut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authur Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 You pay more for the tech than you get in exchange. Progressibly the price only increases. You cannot run a profit for each individual deal. If purchased 50 at a time you do make money. Trust me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 The profit is quite marginal when counting the aid slot or aid slots you will be "renting" out, the technology you must buy, the days of savings...In the end, the result is short term gain in exchange for a longer period of stagnation and in the end you would end up not far from where you would without the tech deals. Not true. we have nations that are ~4k infra while only doing tech deals, and their efficiencies are well over 100. We have a few that are sending out packages of 3 mil while sitting at the 4k infra jump. Once again, if you listen to the people that know how to build nations and don't do stupid things, you can grow quite fast if you tech deal correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 The profit is quite marginal when counting the aid slot or aid slots you will be "renting" out, the technology you must buy, the days of savings...In the end, the result is short term gain in exchange for a longer period of stagnation and in the end you would end up not far from where you would without the tech deals. Most new nations would put those slots to no other use if it weren't for tech dealing, so actually the profit is good. And it's approximately 1.4 mill profit, per deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Most new nations would put those slots to no other use if it weren't for tech dealing, so actually the profit is good. And it's approximately 1.4 mill profit, per deal. You're assuming that if not for tech dealing, no alliance would send aid to its members. If such is the situation, I must say I am disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hizzy Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 I don't really see how what happens to small NPO nations is really important enough that the CN community at large needs to know about it, although I must say I'd prefer NpO's aid instead if I had a small nation. The MHA thing was sort of interesting but I'm sure we'd see it announced sooner or later anyway. Just being honest: I'm not entirely sure I see the point here. I believe what the commentary is alluding to is that NPO is shifting it's financial machine towards military preparation. For the slower kids: THEY IS BUYIN' SHOTGUNS Y'ALL *insert sexual intercourse with sibling* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Is Vox seriously trying to make political capital by pretending to care about the banking bureaucracy and nation growth in the NPO? If you're that worried then I'm sure the Bank would be willing to organise an aid drive from Vox nations to small Pacifican nations. In other news, the Soviestani Minister of Watching Paint Dry has deemed this the most exciting exposé since 2006, when spies revealed during the height of the cold war that who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authur Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 That attitude is cancerous. You propose that the only way a member should be able to express his opinion is by leaving the alliance. This is not how great alliances function. When did I say that? I have no problem with members expressing their disapproval but to act like it's a nations right to receive aid from their allaince is absurd. No allaince HAS to offer aid to it's members. If any other allaince beside the NPO had done this I doubt there would even be a foul remark. An alliances job is to improve the allaince as a whole, none can cater to each individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) You're assuming that if not for tech dealing, no alliance would send aid to its members.If such is the situation, I must say I am disappointed. So you expect larger nations to not grow in order to dedicate all of their aid slots to sending cash to new players. k EDIT: This thread is not about whether or not tech dealing is profitable. On Topic, I guess congratulations to Vox for spying. Edited February 10, 2009 by Poobah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Anyone remotely competent at tech dealing on an alliance-wide scale can acheive much better growth for the smaller nations than they could solely through aid. Even if you ran at maximum possible efficiency with both systems, the difference for the growing nations is minimal if you are doing it properly, and you increase your overall tech level at the same time. I'm surprised Pacifica hadn't started doing this earlier. It's far better for the economy as a whole, and that includes the tech sellers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authur Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Whether you're buying the tech in halves, or you buy it at once, then you're still going to operate on a loss given you dump the money into Infrastructure, and the time and savings required to purchase more tech to complete the deal, without taking out another deal. Well I'm sure you know more about this then the economic minds in the GPA who showed it to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Kremlin Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 So you expect larger nations to not grow in order to dedicate all of their aid slots to sending cash to new players.k EDIT: This thread is not about whether or not tech dealing is profitable. On the bright side, NPO can use the tips in this thread to make their banking system more efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Buy it 50 at a time, if you have multiple tech deals running, buy each 50 just before sending it out. Co-ordinate and plan it out, you make a profit. I just got done with selling tech. It works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schattenmann Posted February 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) This Week in Pacifica Late-breaking news: We are happy to please. Edited February 10, 2009 by Schattenmann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 So you expect larger nations to not grow in order to dedicate all of their aid slots to sending cash to new players. Yes, actually. It is called prioritizing. The larger nations make enough money, it's the smaller nations that need to get on their feet. I'm actually kind of amused by someone wining about a huge nation wining about "not growing" when all the new players in their alliance wouldn't add up to their strength. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Authur Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Anyone remotely competent at tech dealing on an alliance-wide scale can acheive much better growth for the smaller nations than they could solely through aid. Even if you ran at maximum possible efficiency with both systems, the difference for the growing nations is minimal if you are doing it properly, and you increase your overall tech level at the same time.I'm surprised Pacifica hadn't started doing this earlier. It's far better for the economy as a whole, and that includes the tech sellers. Exactly. Those who disagree are clearly not looking at the big picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Yes, actually.It is called prioritizing. The larger nations make enough money, it's the smaller nations that need to get on their feet. I'm actually kind of amused by someone wining about a huge nation wining about "not growing" when all the new players in their alliance wouldn't add up to their strength. That sounds strangely like a communist talking. A new nation hasnt had that much time in the game to grow that high. I have seen new nations of experienced rulers grow very fast, not by means of aid [being in an alliance that does not aid rampantly and widely] but purely on the base of tech deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 That sounds strangely like a communist talking. A new nation hasnt had that much time in the game to grow that high. I have seen new nations of experienced rulers grow very fast, not by means of aid [being in an alliance that does not aid rampantly and widely] but purely on the base of tech deals. Your anecdote is meaningless and unconvincing. I've seen a pink hippopotamus. What's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Paradise Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Considering that our senate is comprised of two great writers and three people who are well versed in laws, I sincerely doubt anyone could make a more convincing legal argument than us. I possess those two qualities myself, and I am a member of the Planet Bob Associated Press and have passed the Planet Bob bar exam. I also won two Grammies last night, one for best new jazz ensemble and another for most improved hair style. Sir, I suggest you back off lest you be smothered by the weight of my credentials. The problem with your thinking is the same as NPO's: A bloc that is as large as Continuum and is solely DEFENSIVE is not a "rival" to Continuum. Not even for memership. I took the "rival" part from the screenshot itself, which states that the new bloc might bring MHA up against the Continuum, with aggressive goals and the poster raising concerning that it could lead to war. I am well aware that there are other blocs, and the existence of another bloc does not automatically mean it rivals the Continuum. It was the poster himself, one of the potential progenitors of this bloc, that said it might be a rival to the Continuum. And I said good day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youwish959 Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 You're assuming that if not for tech dealing, no alliance would send aid to its members.If such is the situation, I must say I am disappointed. I do not know of a single alliance who fills everyone of its new members slots every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Litler Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 I do not know of a single alliance who fills everyone of its new members slots every week. Yeah, I couldn't find any good ones either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illustrious Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 I do not know of a single alliance who fills everyone of its new members slots every week. Ragnarok. When I was there I couldnt keep those dudes off me! and now look at my nation. Fakeedit: added qoute so i wont post late hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alfred von Tirpitz Posted February 10, 2009 Report Share Posted February 10, 2009 Your anecdote is meaningless and unconvincing. I've seen a pink hippopotamus. What's your point? The point being that tech dealing is a good way for a new nation to grow and benefit the alliance as a whole. And that receiving aid is not the only option available to a young nation that wishes to grow. Now about that pink hippo, where exactly did you see it? And..how does it relate to tech dealing versus aid discussion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts