Drai Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 technically, i think that is still a requirement, but the shift towards typing out the full name of the alliance as opposed to the acronyms sorta made the rule obsolete. I can only think of one alliance off the top of my head that still uses an acronym, OMFG. NATO does too, and FCC I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unsure Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 NATO does too, and FCC I believe. As well as =LOST= and LoSS and M*A*S*H and ROCK and SNAFU (maybe?) and probably a bunch of alliances not in the Top 120. On a related note: I have a statshot I took just after GW1. Like, literally the day after peace was declared. I'll see if I can dig it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 As well as =LOST= and LoSS and M*A*S*H and ROCK and SNAFU (maybe?) and probably a bunch of alliances not in the Top 120.On a related note: I have a statshot I took just after GW1. Like, literally the day after peace was declared. I'll see if I can dig it up. MFO comes to mind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hah, good stuff, great thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watson895 Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 When looking at those stats, remember that was before large nations existed, and new nations started with a lot less money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logan Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 I joined shortly after GWI (rerolled because of Furs/Uranium), so these charts are still before my time. Man were nations small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lebubu Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Thanks for these, always interesting for us not-so-ancient players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Apocalypse Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) MFO comes to mind Abuhhh? I am gobsmacked that someone remembered we exist. Edited November 14, 2009 by Johnny Apocalypse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysocyon Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Er...I was there. It was more epic. Extremely so. It was more epic BECAUSE we were all small. Now if you lose 100 infra, it's nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Sometimes you make me laugh. I hope you're not too horrified at the fact. Not at all, so long as you are laughing with me and not at me. No, the game is better now mechanically than it was then with one or two minor nits such as the narrowing of the range of nations that are "in range" to attack. I never saw it as being universally beneficial. In terms of the role play and other aspects of the game, the stakes are now far higher and there is a tendency for players in leadership to be more cautious about risking their alliances in war. War on a large scale has definitely become more formal, with rules of etiquette that must be met to be considered legitimate. This also explains some of the "reaches" that take place with regard to CBs. If there is anyway to make it look like the other guy's fault, even if you have a whole collection of alliance laying in ambush, you are in a far superior position in terms of rallying what otherwise be neutral or enemy alliances to your cause. The irony: this game reflects real life international politics far more than many of you realize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style #386 Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 (edited) I especially love the nuke counts. Eat the ODN's nuke! Edited November 17, 2009 by Style #386 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bilrow Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 That's...certainly not how things went down, actually. People were as pissed or even moreso about losing stats back then over a war than what you see nowadays. The Karma war was pretty damn tame OWF-wise compared to PWII and GWI, and that's not just nostalgia speaking. I remember us losing the option to edit our posts during the Great Patriotic War, because tempers were so high and people were editing posts before mods could see them and warn them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asriel Belacqua Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Ah how times have changed... It used to be you could expect a great war every few months, but alas, that is not so anymore. Also, Hal's Rule #5 comes to mind here... Always better when you started playing... specifically when you learned you knew how to play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 It's kinda funny to think that my nation now has more NS than whole alliances and nukes than all the major alliances did during some of those times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twizzler Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 I especially love the nuke counts. Eat the ODN's nuke! NPO did eat that nuke. That nuke was KD's Also, I am proud to say that some (I think I had two!) of those nukes in GWI were mine. Yes, my grand nation was once in the top five percent and could buy nukes. I also had a great time fighting NPO in that war and nuking Sir Paul, who then added "The candies called Twizzlers are banned in this nation" in his nation bio These take me way back, and I'm really glad you shared them. Those were great times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 When looking at those stats, remember that was before large nations existed, and new nations started with a lot less money. It was also easier to build up back then. I had nukes within three months of creating my nation. Haven't been able to reattain them in well over two years now. Back then Ivan's nation, for example, although small, was sizeable enough that people who paid attention to politics were in range of him to go rogue on him. Nowadays that won't happen. Active people have large nations, and wouldn't even consider parting with their precious infra to hit him. Even I had a decent sized nation by the standards of the day. I was actually in the NPO's seventy-fifth percentile. At least. Today I'm nothing. And the divide only grows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watson895 Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 True enough. I suppose the other thing to consider is that was based on the old NS formula where tech was worth 20 NS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seerow Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Wow inflation ftw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
President Obama Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 True enough. I suppose the other thing to consider is that was based on the old NS formula where tech was worth 20 NS. I don't know where I heard this, but wasn't back then tech regarded as a waste of money to buy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master-Debater Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 Wow i remember those. Makes me feel really old though. One thing that those stats dont show is the culture on the OWF. You want to talk about an all time high in trolling and just overall !@#$%baggery to each other and your talking the GW era. God it was great. Its sad that i can say I remember when hate was dirrected at a single alliance instead of a bloc of alliances, thats a true sign of how old you are around these parts lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 It was also easier to build up back then. I had nukes within three months of creating my nation. Haven't been able to reattain them in well over two years now. Back then Ivan's nation, for example, although small, was sizeable enough that people who paid attention to politics were in range of him to go rogue on him. Nowadays that won't happen. Active people have large nations, and wouldn't even consider parting with their precious infra to hit him. Even I had a decent sized nation by the standards of the day. I was actually in the NPO's seventy-fifth percentile. At least. Today I'm nothing. And the divide only grows. Ivan is too small for people that care about politics to rogue. I could sell all my infra land and military and my tech would still keep me from roguing him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan King Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 (edited) I don't know where I heard this, but wasn't back then tech regarded as a waste of money to buy? The recommended tech: infra ratio for a long time was 1:10. I didn't even learn tech dealing until late 2007, and it was with a middle man. You used to get just enough tech to get level 9 bombers, which was at 100 infra or so. It was made 500 tech for level 9s in November 2007. Edited November 18, 2009 by Duncan King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonte Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 That's quite an interesting read. Just comparing how different the game was from late 2007 to early 2009 is hard to do. I was expecting to come back to the same deal but ended up having to relearn everything I knew about CN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysocyon Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 That's quite an interesting read. Just comparing how different the game was from late 2007 to early 2009 is hard to do. I was expecting to come back to the same deal but ended up having to relearn everything I knew about CN. I like it better that way. It has helped to keep the game from getting boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpcurley Posted November 18, 2009 Report Share Posted November 18, 2009 the game seemed a lot more fun then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.