Do you wanna quit CN?

[ChairmanHal]

We've lost a lot of notable players recently. Sponge is one such player that comes to mind. Who is next? Doiztel? There must be others who are on the verge of quitting. Why do you think that this is happening?

I would say that while we lost Sponge, we aren't missing Sponge.

Actually he made a pretty cool foil. Such is life.

I'm not planning on quitting, though in the past I gave it some thought. If I do leave at some point in the future, it will be because development of the game mechanics has ground to a halt. Players change. Alliances change. But if the game doesn't change in meaningful ways and become better, all that the players do becomes a rewind, the game stagnates and dies. You only need to look to a certain former Lunar warfare-based game that is now dead to see an example.

[Bob Janova]

The MDP web is simpler than it was, but it's still quite messy. That was only a partial victory.

[Lonely]

I don't know... I'm pretty sure I agree with Litha that the structural and cultural premises of the world drags us all in circles regardless of the alliance(s) at the top of the pile -- that the MADP web is eternal and that multipolarity in any real sense is an illusion (we had multiple competing blocs prior to the Karma war as well -- hence the war).

Really? So you deny that Pacifica manipulated the MADP web in order to surround itself with allies for its own protection? Because that is what I cited you on. From what I understood, it featured in Francoist theory, and if it doesn't, it seems evident Pacifica isn't Francoist, because that's exactly what you did. I never claimed you believed in multipolarity.

[Doitzel]

Really? So you deny that Pacifica manipulated the MADP web in order to surround itself with allies for its own protection? Because that is what I cited you on. From what I understood, it featured in Francoist theory, and if it doesn't, it seems evident Pacifica isn't Francoist, because that's exactly what you did. I never claimed you believed in multipolarity.

You just had to drop the F-bomb.

Francoism is whatever Vladimir says it is at any given time. Can we leave it there?

[Lonely]

You just had to drop the F-bomb.

Francoism is whatever Vladimir says it is at any given time. Can we leave it there?

I know, I know... it's just fun poking holes in it.

The new Godwin's law of Cyber Nations.... all threads will involve Francoism. I'm not complaining, it's fun.

[Vladimir]

Really? So you deny that Pacifica manipulated the MADP web in order to surround itself with allies for its own protection? Because that is what I cited you on. From what I understood, it featured in Francoist theory, and if it doesn't, it seems evident Pacifica isn't Francoist, because that's exactly what you did. I never claimed you believed in multipolarity.

Francoism doesn't say anything one way or the other. More (or less) treaties may be rational in one situation and irrational in another, depending on a great many variables. You can see this reflected in different positions at different points in Pacifican history.

You may be confusing my analysis of the historic [very important word there with a great many implications] proliferation of treaties for a universal declaration on their desirability.

Of course, MDPs are by their very definition a means of mutual protection, and so anyone signing one could be said to be "manipulating the MADP web in order to surround itself with allies for its own protection." My point is that this occurs inevitably in our self-help world with (nearly) every alliance, regardless of whether or not the Order is a central actor -- at an increasing rate the more decentralised strength and power is.

Edited November 26, 2009 by Vladimir

[Homura]

Quitting the game? Yeah I've considered it, now that I have most of the wonders available, and the fact that I don't quite have the time or ambition to be one of the real driving figures of the game. I think I like the idea more for going nuke rogue on Christian Trojans than anything else, but I need more tech to pull that off.

Or I could just devote more energy into this again, and maybe even cause real drama. I like this option better, actually.

[Augustus Autumn]

Were CN politics to return to a point of being both interesting and accessible to the general public you might see a change. As it is, the average player doesn't have a way into the fun tensions of the game. For an older player who decides to step down from government they're suddenly cut out and reduced to collecting money while waiting for others which quickly becomes boring and then pointless. Thus, the older player quits because the fun is over.

Me, I'll quit permanently when I don't think I'll get any more laughs at someone else's expense.

[Lord Brendan]

Francoism doesn't say anything one way or the other.

Finally some honesty.

[Skippy]

I know it's an evil meme but if you are bored:

DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

quoted for truth

TOP in my opinion doesn't want to be like NPO due to wanting to stay up in their snug #1 positon. From a strategic point of view, they're being smart. But its not going to make anything interesting happen anytime soon. People use the excuse "we're rebuilding," well I think its been a hell of a long time since we've seen any decent wars, Karma was a while ago, you've had your time to rebuild. My message to TOP is: please stop making no mistakes

[Lonely]

Francoism doesn't say anything one way or the other. More (or less) treaties may be rational in one situation and irrational in another, depending on a great many variables. You can see this reflected in different positions at different points in Pacifican history.

You may be confusing my analysis of the historic [very important word there with a great many implications] proliferation of treaties for a universal declaration on their desirability.

Of course, MDPs are be their very definition a means of mutual protection, and so anyone signing one could be said to be "manipulating the MADP web in order to surround itself with allies for its own protection." My point is that this occurs inevitably in our self-help world with (nearly) every alliance, regardless of whether or not the Order is a central actor -- at an increasing rate the more decentralised strength and power is.

Speaking with Vladimir about Francoism is like speaking to God about religion.... this is right, and this is wrong! Heh. Nevertheless, in order to secure ones position as a dominant hegemony (or in euphemistic terms, to emancipate the individual by the proliferation of the Order) the Order needs to surround itself with MADPs and that is the treaty manipulation I refer to. The Order realised this, and surrounded itself with One Vision and The Continuum. It might have worked, too, except that blocs consisting of alliances who simply want to kick up to the big kid on the bloc are not as stable as blocs formed by true friends with a similar culture and history.

[Brenann]

People want there to be a Evil person or group in the world so they can rage against it. So far no one is willing to risk being that evil on the grand scale that is needed to bring out the clashing philosophies.

Then again the last war brought down the biggest "Evil" in CN history or so the story goes, people were unhappy before and are unhappy now. The more the world changes the more it stays the same, people always want their fun handed to them.

Make your own fun, find your corner and if you want something OUT of this experience you will need to put something IN to this experience.

[Lord Brendan]

Speaking with Vladimir about Francoism is like speaking to God about religion.... this is right, and this is wrong! Heh. Nevertheless, in order to secure ones position as a dominant hegemony (or in euphemistic terms, to emancipate the individual by the proliferation of the Order) the Order needs to surround itself with MADPs and that is the treaty manipulation I refer to. The Order realised this, and surrounded itself with One Vision and The Continuum. It might have worked, too, except that blocs consisting of alliances who simply want to kick up to the big kid on the bloc are not as stable as blocs formed by true friends with a similar culture and history.

Neither of those blocs were MADPs. The difference between A and oA is significant.

[Goose]

Needs more 'I hate you all!'

[Mathias]

Not enough tech raiding.

[Prime minister Johns]

25414 votes for "I'm not quitting"?

I am calling shenanigans on this poll.

No poll has ever got this many people to vote in it before.

[admin]

25414 votes for "I'm not quitting"?

I am calling shenanigans on this poll.

No poll has ever got this many people to vote in it before.

My vote carries a lot of weight. I speak for the masses.

[Prime minister Johns]

My vote carries a lot of weight. I speak for the masses.

Indeed it does.

Harken unto the mighty words of Admin.

[empirica]

/me wonders the real number of those not quitting

I'm not quitting now. If I do eventually quit, it will be due to RL.

[Locke]

My vote carries a lot of weight. I speak for the masses.

Okay, this wins the day. XD

[britwarlord]

Voted the lack of empire option.

Would be nice to see some more ambitous and aggressive alliances pop up.

[Lord Razzia]

I wouldn't say NPO is finished... not just yet.

They're still sanctioned and they're all decommed... sure they're not nearly as big as before, but there's no reason for them to not get a second wind.

[Kzoppistan]

I've thought about the mechanics for a while and I think there is a distinct difference between rl war and CN war, and the drives behind it.

In rl there is a lot of benefit towards war, you get control of strategically important land and resources, secure your borders, cut down rivals and expand your doctrine over the masses you conquer.

None of that is reflected in CN war.

They’re also no geographic limits. In rl, even if you neighboring rival has allies, not all of them can get to where you are but here, you attack some one and every ally in range can jump on you. If you control a strategic area in rl, you can fend off a lot of enemies, so for nation security there always war to control certain areas.

In CN there is very little benefit towards going to war because the repercussions are too expensive. Which is why every one sits around and waits for the next faux pas so that the transgressor will be politically isolated and thus it become profitable to attack.

In short, aside from the satisfaction of defeating a foe in combat there is no reason to go to war. Land is magically created, the monetary system is not based on any kind of production, and there is no nation that is ever really in want. And that's the problem.

*Edit: But I'm not quitting. I still have to make the entirety of CN acknowledge the awesomeness that is me.

Edited November 26, 2009 by Kzoppistan

[naamah]

kind of disappointing the poll results have been ruined by the admin of the game.

[Kzoppistan]

kind of disappointing the poll results have been ruined by the admin of the game.

That post was disappointing.

Just look at the total vote count at the bottom and the all the votes in the other catagories.

Edited November 26, 2009 by Kzoppistan