Mergers

[JerreyRough]

Well then grow your nation before joining here. You shouldnt be rewarded for a loophole in the game.

That takes months and months dude; not to mention less aid after a major alliance war. What if they can't RP then? What if they are not as good at every aspect of RP as you are? Also, please remember that the new rules require people to do much more work to maintain the merge (or at least should).

Now lets see if we can get back on topic again! Constructive critism please!

[mykep]

That takes months and months dude; not to mention less aid after a major alliance war. What if they can't RP then? What if they are not as good at every aspect of RP as you are? Also, please remember that the new rules require people to do much more work to maintain the merge (or at least should).

Now lets see if we can get back on topic again! Constructive critism please!

It takes years to grow out of a third world country as well. Whats that? Relation to Cyber nations? Impossible in CNRP!

Come on...

[Sir Keshav IV]

I rp'ed a small country to a big one when I was using 60's tech its fun. If your lazy to build your country then do tech sharing treaties. Mergers are okay with me, when done properly.

[LeVentNoir]

I would like to counter the "USA" example. I would not define it as a merger, but rather a succession of a colony from a foreign power, at once and en mass. The new entity then never merged with other nations but gained land in more natural ways.

Mergers are just a powerplay, by those who need all their friends at their beck and call. They are inherently unrealistic to RL and IG, and abused to the hilt, by they same people each time, with the same tired reasons, with little to no detail.

Scrap them, let people play at nation level RP.

[Generalissimo]

Merger’s don’t accurately reflect one’s CyberNation’s nation, which is contrary to the purpose of CNRP.

[Justinian the Mighty]

I would like to counter the "USA" example. I would not define it as a merger, but rather a succession of a colony from a foreign power, at once and en mass. The new entity then never merged with other nations but gained land in more natural ways.

Mergers are just a powerplay, by those who need all their friends at their beck and call. They are inherently unrealistic to RL and IG, and abused to the hilt, by they same people each time, with the same tired reasons, with little to no detail.

Scrap them, let people play at nation level RP.

I swear to God I've said something similar to that at least twice already, but they just keep bringing up the USA to support their arguement. Hopefully hearing it from you will finally help everyone understand.

Merger’s don’t accurately reflect one’s CyberNation’s nation, which is contrary to the purpose of CNRP.

simple, but directly to the point. I agree 100%

[JerreyRough]

I would like to counter the "USA" example. I would not define it as a merger, but rather a succession of a colony from a foreign power, at once and en mass. The new entity then never merged with other nations but gained land in more natural ways.

Mergers are just a powerplay, by those who need all their friends at their beck and call. They are inherently unrealistic to RL and IG, and abused to the hilt, by they same people each time, with the same tired reasons, with little to no detail.

Scrap them, let people play at nation level RP.

From a CNRP perspective, it can be seen that every colony was its own "nation", ever so briefly, then they "merged" against a different "nation", grew together, broke the merge in half because a major difference in perspective, then re-merged once more. Eventually, the whole of the nation seemed only one nation because of the so little difference inbetween the areas compared to other places. In this example, the "players" have meerly gone into specific roles rather than having different nations linked up together to form a super nation.

Just my two cents in that area.

Anyway, when a merger is created, then each person merging will/is/should be expected to have better quality RP's. I.e. not a block of text, unless it is a well written block of text, but things that make sense. Like a economic-loving player in a merger will look at the different vehicles for the military and civilians, then choosing the best tanks and civilian vehicles to fit their area (i.e. a northern nation having russian tanks equiped for winter fighting, rather than a middle east tank equiped for dessert fighting).

A suggestion for current mergers: instead of stacking, use the average value. Possibly a easy fix for this situation.

And if this "merger trial take 2" does not work out, then at least allow multiple players to RP one country using only the highest players stat's.

[Tahsir]

And if this "merger trial take 2" does not work out, then at least allow multiple players to RP one country using only the highest players stat's.

Kinda my original idea on my only acceptance of the idea for Rpers to merge.

[Bacharth]

And if this "merger trial take 2" does not work out, then at least allow multiple players to RP one country using only the highest players stat's.

That's essentially what this is. It's just everyone has to rp their own military.

Give mergers a chance, guys. Honestly, they're just born and already you want to tie them up in a garbage sack and throw them, tied to a brick, into a lake.

[Subtleknifewielder]

That's essentially what this is. It's just everyone has to rp their own military.

Give mergers a chance, guys. Honestly, they're just born and already you want to tie them up in a garbage sack and throw them, tied to a brick, into a lake.

well, can you really blame them considering the bad precedent mergers set last time?

[Tahsir]

That's essentially what this is. It's just everyone has to rp their own military.

Give mergers a chance, guys. Honestly, they're just born and already you want to tie them up in a garbage sack and throw them, tied to a brick, into a lake.

I wanted to do that before they were born.

[Generalissimo]

That takes months and months dude; not to mention less aid after a major alliance war. What if they can't RP then? What if they are not as good at every aspect of RP as you are? Also, please remember that the new rules require people to do much more work to maintain the merge (or at least should).

Now lets see if we can get back on topic again! Constructive critism please!

My nation will never grow because I'm not in an alliance, yet I still have to play within the boundaries of my CyberNations nation – if I have to, so should everyone else.

Mergers are an easy loophole giving those with the right connections a significant advantage.

[Generalissimo]

I also don’t like mergers because they remind me of alliances, I play CNRP to escape the tyranny and oppression of alliances.

[Centurius]

My nation will never grow because I'm not in an alliance, yet I still have to play within the boundaries of my CyberNations nation – if I have to, so should everyone else.

Mergers are an easy loophole giving those with the right connections a significant advantage.

Not really in wars a Merger is the same to a MDAP+Tech share

[Cody Seb]

I think this thread is over. Everyone who supports merges are in one, everyone opposed isn't. I'm not sure what that says about them, but it is obvious that there is a problem one way or another. Honestly, I think it speaks about how loophole-ish and powergaming they are.

This game isn't about destroying everyone else, or at least it didn't used to be. It was about interacting with other nations. The only goal of merges, and yeah go behind the superficial reasons, is to make a more powerful force in war.

[Subtleknifewielder]

I think this thread is over. Everyone who supports merges are in one, everyone opposed isn't. I'm not sure what that says about them, but it is obvious that there is a problem one way or another. Honestly, I think it speaks about how loophole-ish and powergaming they are.

This game isn't about destroying everyone else, or at least it didn't used to be. It was about interacting with other nations. The only goal of merges, and yeah go behind the superficial reasons, is to make a more powerful force in war.

Well, it's not the only one, but it is the biggest one, so you're mostly right.

[Uberstein]

Maybe I should revive my dream of Russoscandarabia, a united Scandinavia, Russia, and Middle East!

If RL cultures don't exist in CNRP (according to the Nords), then there should be no problems with it.

[Centurius]

Maybe I should revive my dream of Russoscandarabia, a united Scandinavia, Russia, and Middle East!

If RL cultures don't exist in CNRP (according to the Nords), then there should be no problems with it.

If you get said nations in favor of the merger and have RP'd a common Government, culture, etc. sure go ahead. No problems with it

[Voodoo Nova]

If you get said nations in favor of the merger and have RP'd a common Government, culture, etc. sure go ahead. No problems with it

Well, regionally it wouldn't really work too well

Either way, RP it correctly and no problems from me either.

[Uberstein]

Well, regionally it wouldn't really work too well

Either way, RP it correctly and no problems from me either.

Hell yes, time to organise Russo-Scandarabia.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Hell yes, time to organise Russo-Scandarabia.

Here's wishing you the best...

[Spock]

If you have a problem with a merger, put it in this OOC thread please.

[JerreyRough]

Well, things could quickly become nasty if war comes around when there are merger's involved; not smaller mergers, just the massive ones that have a bunch of players. They will have such high stats that any war they come across they will win.

Here is just an idea for mergers. Please constructive critism (community-wise).

There should be a max to the players per merger at least; especially since no one takes down the fact that mobilization and war cost tones of money, as well as time. Even in modern warfare, we have not truly seen what a long-term WWII-like war is like, and so since the weapons are so advanced it's assumed that a war is very fast, finished in only weeks or perhaps a month.

And if not that, then use the average stats for every nation in the merge (i.e. 2 nations, one 1000 tech and the other 500, both nations use tech of 750); it boost's the lower nations so they can RP better stuff, while makes larger nations indeed suffer, but gain the benifit of a ally while not "overpowering" the merger. Especially in a war this is useful, because then larger nations will have more initiative to get every nation in their merger to RP war RP's (rather than just let the big gun nation do the attacking and the small nation doing little, tiny operations); effectivly increasing the bonds inbetween merged nations.

Edited May 21, 2009 by JerreyRough

[LeVentNoir]

I do not want mergers. However some of you near sighted people do. I have one glorious Rule.

The sum total stats of a merger is equal to that of the strongest nation. IE: A merger is only as strong as its strongest nation. OR, your minions don't help.

I merge with Shan. We RP as if it were just my IG stats. Those that want to merge can, and we will soon see who the powergamers are, and those with legit merger ideas.

[Lynneth]

I have one glorious Rule.

The sum total stats of a merger is equal to that of the strongest nation. IE: A merger is only as strong as its strongest nation. OR, your minions don't help.

This turns mergers into something that is done purely for fluff - for story, roleplay.

I love this rule, and it should be enforced on the mergers.