A plea to various alliance leaders

[Dochartaigh]

This is the very thing I'm talking about.How long has it been sense the last time some of the veterans actually had to learn anything about the game.

You have to put yourself in the mind of the rookie.

they don't know what tech is let alone know how to be ,,as you put it ,, trustworthy and not scammers, ,, some folks have played the game so long as to not even realize when they are being condecending.you have allready automatically assumes that new players are scammers.

Remember alot of these guys don't even know how to navigate the forum and may not even know the differance between the OWF and their respective AA boards.

all I'm saying is ,That we need to work together (current players) to make new nations feel more welcome and not be so ready to jump on them when mistakes are made.will some take advantage ,yea sure they will ,but I bet a far greater amount will turn into quality players.

This is my humble opinion,

i can honestly tell you most of the veterans i know, do not know the entire game inside and out. in fact, i would say that very few know it that well. most know one segment of the game quite well sure but not all of it. i know vets who still don't know how to war that well, or who do not know the econ side of things, or the diplo side of things.

no, i do not assume that new players are scammers nor did i ever state that.

you actually failed to address most of what was in my post. i stated that most alliances have academies to do exactly what you discuss and you did not even acknowledge it. and you take the fact that i said scammers and use it to state i said all new players are scammers, which is false. a scammer is someone who has taken money without delivering the tech. it is not that hard to figure out a tech deal mate. Tech Buyer A sends 3 million in aid. Tech Seller B sends 50 tech 10 days later and then another 50 tech 10 days after that.

it is that simple. most new nations pick that up in a day or so. this is why when the seller does not send the tech, the buyer gets upset.

i am all for working with the new players to help bring them up to speed and if they make mistakes so what. i still make mistakes and i have been playing for like 3.5 years.

[Qaianna]

Perhaps part of the issue regarding wars is the aftermath. As has been commented on by many others, the fact is if you lose a war, if you're lucky you just get pounded for a few days until you give up. If you're not? Even harder pounding, reparations, possible international stigma if the guys hitting you are considered the 'cool kids' this quarter..

This I think might explain why folks prefer the curbstomp-type war. It's easier to recover from those, and there are many who value their pixels a lot more than others.

Come to think of it..why is it so bad to value them? If nothing else, you have to bring something to the battle. Aren't casual players fond of gathering them? And if that's the case, what happens when they get blasted to bits with 'seasoned' players gleefully giggling at them?

[Madtrixr]

I started...oh man, Let's see...I'll say mid to late '08. My first major war was the MHA vs. IRON conflict, during the Karma war. Now, I have played for a while, yet, I've stayed. I'm not sure why. I guess i'm an anomaly or something, because I'm perfectly content to not get involved in the OWF and the IRC alliance stuff, not even participate on my alliances forum, yet I keep playing. It's very strange to me. Maybe I genuinely like the game on a nerdy level, maybe I'm bored, maybe I have a low tolerance for games in general...

I don't have much of a opinion on this, just giving my viewpoint. now to head on back under the seas to lurk...

[Comrade Craig]

My two cents:

Firstly, I don't really have many complaints about the game. I enjoy the drama on IRC. I like the plotting and the scheming. I enjoy the pervading sense of paranoia. And sometimes losing is even more fun than winning -- all my favorite grudges have been acquired through the merciless beatings I have received at the hands of others.

So much of this game is based upon personal interactions via IRC, IM, Skype, and on forums. It's not like other games in the sense that it never ends, and there are no timeouts. Whenever you're talking to another player, you're playing the game, even if you don't realize it. We develop these complicated relationships with each other, and then become unable to separate them from the game. In-game actions become personal insults, and diplomatic maneuvers that should be admired for their beauty instead become deeply personal betrayals. If you're not able to step back and recognize that it's just a game, then it can become exhausting. I think the answer is to recognize that players who do "bad things" are not bad people. De-personalize it and you'll have more fun.

-Craig

[supercoolyellow]

Well SCM, looks like Grub took you up on your request for more wars

[usmcdude2599]

a long lasting, fair war is exaclly what this game needs! Good point and well done!

[Nobody Expects]

Good post OP, the only issue I have with it is I firmly believe that those in power on both sides of the treaty web only have the cojones to go all in when they have pocket rockets, and as such we will never see the ideal war with equal enough sides that lasts for months.

[Canik]

Good read, Starcraftmazter. A big part of the problem is that from losing can come harsh terms, or maybe even forced disbandment. I believe THAT is what we should all fight against. If alliances could just duke it out for a week every now and then when they had a disagreement, then go about their merry ways with white peace or some such, I think you'd see more wars, more risks. Anyway, myself and FEAR does think along those lines. We're here to have fun, win or lose. We're not here to sit on our infra forever. As the saying goes, "You can't take it with you."

[Alonicus]

Some very good thoughts here, based on an intersting OP.

Speaking as an ordinary nation within my alliance, I see a number of things in the wider world that could help matters. But they all revolve around one basic thing: make it so that when new players come in, they feel that they can accomplish something more than just being pawns and cannon fodder in a great power web they have little understanding of and no influence over.

I agree with Londo that the consequences of losing a war are now too dramatic for someone to start one casually. I believe the treaty web (a tangled Gordian knot of a thing if ever I saw one) is a large contributing factor. It leads to most biggish wars being curbstomps, which I can't believe anyone (especially on the losing side) finds fun. The issue of harsh reparations is also a deterrent from going to war.

If we could find some mechanism to make wars possible between just two alliances, without all and sundry joining in, and then make it so the alliances in question were balanced, it could be a great help. I'm hesitant to ask Admin for improvements (because this really ought to be something we should be able to sort out for ourselves), but a possibility would be to introduce a rule that for more than, say, 5% of an alliances nations to be at war with a single other alliance, there has to be an "Alliance War Declaration" from a nominated Gov member (which would mean introducing a mechanism for the leaders of an alliance to mark government members in a way the game recognises). With an NS range rule similar to the one when nations fight, it would make it so that alliances only fought others of compararble size. This could give new players the chance to cut their teeth by forming micro-alliances that could fight merrily amongst themselves, keeping their level of interest up, without every war dragging in the big boys.

We should also recognise that people come into the game for different reasons. Some want to bomb the heck out of everything they can, some (myself included) want to just quietly build up in peace. The latter is hard to do, as independence isn't practical, being in an alliance means going to war when you're commanded to, and peace mode is only a short-term possibility. Likewise, there are some that dive into every forum, community and IRC channel going, and others who struggle to find even a few minutes around a hectic RL, and both should be recognised.

If the Admin were to be asked for any game improvements, I would suggest that they be focused on low and medium ranking nations, to give them more optional things to do to keep their interest going, especially when they first start up, and that they can do solo rather than spending time hunting out trading partners, interacting as part of an alliance etc.