The Death of Steve

[lonewolfe2015]

[center][IMG]http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv229/lonewolfe2015/RIPSTEVE.jpg[/IMG][/center]

This has been a long time coming it appears. The past few rounds being slower than usual, Bob has moved over.

Four Rounds ago there were a group of leaders, most specifically Myself, Thaisport, Gabryal and Tiberius. While there may have been two sides of a conflict there, we were not opposed to at least trying to talk on occasion. We all feared in our ability to keep the planet from succumbing to Bob's influence, but what was it that we could do? Gabryal and Tiberius tried to create a bloc, of course Thai and I destroyed it, but that was really the last of the pure battles.

What has become of leaders today on Steve that war means global conflict? THIS IS NOT PLANET BOB. You can have a fight without calling your buddies to a fight. You can have 1 on 1, 2 on 2 and you can come out of the conflict laughing that you knocked your opponent's teeth out but he broke your ribs.

Since the time I've been sitting back watching things I've noticed a larger cult of growth nations, heck, I was one of them myself last round. King of the Hill no longer has any meaning, it is all about Capturing the Almighty Flag of Steve to bring home the trophy (something I attribute to KingAdam) so what we do do about this? Some of us older folk have lead a charge for reduced treaties, but the younger generation appears to be repeating our mistakes.

What do we do to fix this problem? How does Steve become [i]fun[/i] again.

No Elb, you can't fix Steve by bringing back the same old dead alliance every round. No Tiberius, our rivalry will not rejuvenate Steve. A massive coalition will do nothing anymore, there is no monster to be destroyed, and we can't even pretend there is this time either (See Ordo Paradoxia Round 8?) No... it is time for the new leaders to get their chance to pave way onto Steve and create their own history.

I send this challenge out to any 'Old Timers' out there, give up your seat of power to someone new and full of energy. End this round with a bang and level the playing field. Remove old grudges and let Steve die. When this round ends in a ball of fierce flames then we will have paved a clean slate fort right towards the future to have a new Steve.

Until then... I will be wearing this sig, others are encouraged to join in. In hopes of a brighter future this sig may encourage a shake up of the blood lines... or maybe it's just a great way of showing Admin that there is or at least was a lot of support behind Tournament Edition. [b]I'd greatly appreciate a real discussion rather than simply people hating or hailing this.[/b]

[code][IMG]http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv229/lonewolfe2015/RIPSTEVESIG.jpg[/IMG][/code]

[IMG]http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv229/lonewolfe2015/RIPSTEVESIG.jpg[/IMG]

[Believland]

I have so much energy... ah forget it, I'm lazy

[kulomascovia]

Back when WOLF was announced, everyone was complaining that it would make TE stagnant. Now look what happened? [img]http://thecastlehall.com/boards/Smileys/kickass/colbert.gif[/img]

[Fisher X]

Nice thoughtful post, I'll try to reciprocate.

[b]The Current:[/b]

LE hit TV. Would we have gotten ninth? likely. Was it a fair fight? Scales were in our favor, blitz ensured that.

CDT jumped in. It was the right thing to do, LE would have done so. You were pretty quick in...tipped off maybe? Would CDT/TV vs. LE been fair? Maybe, but likely due to LE fighting ability, not NS balance. CDT alone v. LE might have been closer.

PU jumped in. Maybe they didn't do much, but they surely increased the 3v1 perception.

OLC, WAPA, TFK jump in (while PU backs out). Swings the scales back the other way, while all the nukes drop. Balanced? No.

So, 1v1, 2v1, 3v1, 3v4, and 2v4 all unbalanced, both ways. But, is balance ever achieved in a world where anyone can DoW at any time? Not often. However, I don't feel any of these great alliances involved are position for a flag...

However, have you noticed this round their are more balanced alliances? Many smaller, strong ones, less big behemoths. This recent battle was more 5-10 of the top 10, not 1-4, but the round is young.


[b]The Past:[/b]

Having been around since Round 1, I can remember very few balanced, fun wars. There have been a few, but there have been many, many more. The NAAC stomp of Round 2 comes to mind. MI was pounded, IDIOT had a rise and fall. TPF has been very large, currently about half. OP grew massive and was welcomed, now is holding about 100. RE is always big, but not too bad. MI is back again and stomped again.

Also, there have been super hot flame wars over wars. Blackwater had a spokesman who would never quit, bark bigger than bite. Some AAs talk in the game, rather than the forums. The forum even has it's trolls and flamers (don't confuse them). They act up sometimes and stay under the bridge at other times.


How do we fix it? I don't know what you would want to fix? In CN:TE, war always breaks out. It might grow with allies or friends, but it starts. And, when it does, you can log on to the server. With CN:S, I know it is war time when the busy message comes up. The CN:TE format of Global Nuke every two months usually ensures most don't get too attached to their nation. Eat a few nukes? That just means you get to sleep through update for awhile, until reroll.

LE changes our leader every round (we'll nearly, Bacon got two in a row cuz he missed a meeting...). We like to keep it fresh and develop leadership. Is this the solution for all? Heck, no. I'm not going to prescribe to anyone how to run there AA. That is the point of starting an AA yourself...you run it.


As far as grudges, I'd agree each round should be a fresh start. I think most do. But, I don't think it should be mandatory. To each his or her own. Again, heck, we are fighting this round with Jim (may I call you Jim?). Who would have thought that?


[b]The Future[/b]

As long as every two rounds they take a copy and hit erase, I think Steve will be alright. It will change. Some rounds more than most. Wars will be balanced or unbalanced. Sometimes stomps will happen.


I look forward to the future of this round, future rounds, and especially other thoughts on this topic.

Fish

[lonewolfe2015]

I recall in my career (beginning end of Round 2) that wars for MHA were never quite so one sided, at least the ones I participated in actively as I grew into the game.

MHA-Fark was perhaps one of the best rivalries I'll never forget, why? Well we kept a pretty good friendship going even now, and we traded 1st/2nd and we never let a grudge develop. The wars were also fairly split, not quite so much beatdowns.

RE-MHA was close, but RE always liked coming in with a bit extra, but in TE how can you reallllly even things up? Even when it was 3 on 1 we still did fairly well, I can remember even having 2 nations competing for a flag that round we got ganged.

So I guess my point is, why do we have such a cult following of Bob politics and agendas paving way on Steve? Bob policies dictate treaties chain and make massive global wars. Bob says to build up and prepare for one massive war. Steve isn't so set like that.

My only real conclusion is that the goal of "Capture The Flag" admin has built into the rounds destroys the spirit of a Tournament, because you can win by simply doing nothing.

I would like to see new leaders take the helm of their alliances, to change the way the Planet is run.

PS: Kulo, I don't even think WOLF would have stopped this. There was simply nothing to prevent the inevitable Frostbite/Paradoxia domination effect that came about the next two rounds.

[arcticllama]

Interistingly enough I agree with the idea that new blood is needed in leadership... However, in each round there is a call put out in RD for anyone who wants to try their hand at leading.. and the response??? *chirp* *chirp*
we've gotten a few to try their hand.. but not many want to take the time..
so, I put out the call for volunteers to take the helm... (TE is a great place to train for ruling too)

I agree with the gist of this topic and hope some players are up to the challenge:)

[JimKongIl]

What TE needs is more of this.

[img]http://perthetic.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/rambo2.jpg[/img]


and this.


[img]http://www.aviationpics.de/prev/t-80u%20firing%20in%20midair.jpg[/img]


and less of this.


[img]http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45453000/jpg/_45453668_-12.jpg[/img]

And, Yes, LE. You may call me Jim.

[Eden Taylor]

I don't have anything thoughtful to contribute at this time (or maybe at all actually, having only participated seriously in the first, previous, and currents rounds), but I will just say that I like the spirit of this even if I can't agree with literal history of it having not played through it. I hope TE stays as fun for me as it has been the last three months.

[scytale]

How about this for next round:

- Every nation and every alliance picks a side.
- The two sides will pick a color so trades are easier to work out and easy to pick out who’s on which side.
- Everyone grows their nations up to the 14 day happiness bonus.
- Starting on the 15th day until the end of round the two sides fight.
- The nations beaten down to near approximate to ZI or bill locked will be given peace so they can re-roll right back into the fight.


It’ll be a knock down drag out fight for the whole round.
What do you think?

[lonewolfe2015]

If only that were possible Scytale, unfortunately a lot of people would not go for it and if you got stuck with inactive fighters you'd be bored to death.

[Titus Pullo]

What about the MI-PS war that just happened?

TPF didn't get involved, OP didn't get involved. It wasn't all too one-sided, especially considering the outcome...

[Schad]

Well said as always; the flag-running vs. war-mongering dynamic does complicate things, but it shouldn't be impossible for both elements to be present and vibrant within the same contest. Part of the problem, IMO, is that fighting occurs at such low levels within the first 30-40 days that you can entirely cripple an opponent in a heartbeat; a good blitz can shave 200+ infra off in a night, and if you're starting below 700 infra and retaining only a small warchest while building, the fight (and for the most part, your round) is all but over at that point...you might as well reroll. However, many simply quit and wait until the next round, leaving Steve half-filled with nations that exist on paper only.

Thus, three quarters of the round consists of a staring contest punctuated by a couple very brief wars, which end by necessity before they can do enough damage to send one or both sides into inactivity, which would only further the stagnation. So every round comes down to a two-week fustercluck of war and flag-running shenanigans (heh, sorry) where a good portion of Steve has one eye on the reset clock.

I wasn't around during the 90-day rounds, so I have no idea whether a longer building time would exacerbate or ameliorate the problem, but allowing nations to mature such that their leaders feel like they have something invested might make wars a little more interesting...but it might also cause people to become bored midway through and cause more inactivity. Replacing the greybeards in leadership with new blood is also a two-way street; they might erase some of the old lines, but if they aren't as committed to TE as the current crop, it's a net negative.

Steve might have lost something over time, but as a relative newcomer, I'm still finding it enjoyable.

Edit:

[quote]What about the MI-PS war that just happened?

TPF didn't get involved, OP didn't get involved. It wasn't all too one-sided, especially considering the outcome... [/quote]

It actually ended up being entirely one-sided, because the vast majority of MI was either inactive before the war or went inactive after the first night. That really surprised us -- honestly, we'd expected that war to be the end of our round -- but it makes sense in hindsight...a coordinated blitz does so much damage this early in the game that unless you're awake at update and ready, you're waking up to a devastated nation and little motivation to keep fighting.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Schad

[LoweAlpine]

Rest in multiple pieces, Steve.

[scytale]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='16 March 2010 - 02:15 PM' timestamp='1268763658' post='2227437']
If only that were possible Scytale, unfortunately a lot of people would not go for it and if you got stuck with inactive fighters you'd be bored to death.
[/quote]
What if we get a sign up of individual players that [i]would[/i] agree to these terms for a full round of fighting. Create two opposing alliances. It'll be a game within the whole game of TE.

[Clash]

tl;dr: Stuff.

Well, I don't see Steve as dead at all. Just sort of lazy. I blame Beazy, of course. The ironic thing to me is that TE is wayyyy more fun than SE. It's not even close, imho.

My problems with Bob? That stupid current war over there - and I don't care what side you're on - is just another example of all the stupid wars they have over there. It's always such srs bsnss, and I think those who treat it that way are all just a bunch of sad, life-less drama queens. REPS!?! I don't much care what bunch of blithering idiots came up with that, the fools who continue it are just as pathetic. Months long wars?!? Goofy, just batbleep crazy talk. At least grudges from Bob seem rarely brought to Steve.

In TE we've not forgotten that [ooc]CN is a GAME - and created purely for fun.[/ooc]
Much of SE appears not to get out of the house much.

Another thing that's very attractive about TE is the reset. There are plenty of proponents of a reset for SE. On Bob, the biggest nations are the oldest ones. A new nation - even if played brilliantly - will never catch to up them. NEVER. It will take you many, many months just to be able to get nukes. Maybe over a year if you get knocked down a few times. Pfft. I like nukes! Nuking people is FUN. Getting nuked is FUN too - just not as much fun.

Yet on Steve, every 60 days everyone starts off even. Everyone has the chance to become the biggest nation and to get to play with the BIG toys. You can get nukes to play with in mere days, if you plan it right. You can't take your nation too seriously, well, you shouldn't at least. After all, Admin's gonna kill it within two months from start, no matter how pretty it is. You can't take your infra with you. So might as well have fun blowing it up, eh?

More attention to the problems on Steve, first.
Then some ideas for answers.

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='15 March 2010 - 07:42 PM' timestamp='1268704079' post='2226820']No Elb, you can't fix Steve by bringing back the same old dead alliance every round. No Tiberius, our rivalry will not rejuvenate Steve. A massive coalition will do nothing anymore, there is no monster to be destroyed, and we can't even pretend there is this time either (See Ordo Paradoxia Round 8?) No... it is time for the new leaders to get their chance to pave way onto Steve and create their own history.[/quote]
I agree with almost all of this, if the question was, "How to improve Steve?"
lonewolf does a good job of explaining what does NOT work.

The next time I hear some narrow-visioned stooge say, "Oh TE peaked in round 3," I swear I'm killing someone. YOU peaked in round 3, Shemp. The people lonewolfe refers to as "Old Timers' really are much of the problem. Y'all remind me of the stereotypical grandpa image, talking about walking 16 miles to school through a blizzard as a kid. Protip: Get a car gramps, and quit yer whining. This thinking is the opposite of productive.

Anyway, solving the problems.
JimKong and I had an idea the other day (well, he did really) that we thought might work.
Elegant, yet simple: A recruiting drive for Steve from Bob.

There's got to be people as sick of Bob's crap as I am, that would love TE's more carefree style. Most of Bob probably doesn't know just how much fun Steve can be. A large part of Bob probably doesn't even know it exists. Steve has had bad or little PR - but those of us who love it can change this. We are Steve's best advocates.

I'm not exactly sure how to go about it, and I suspect that full-timers from Bob might know better. Jim had suggested simply mass spamming Bob nations about 7-10 days before the end of session. There's got to be places to post on these forums about it as well. Sigs with "Steve rules, Bob drools"-type smack on them might be nice too. There are a lot of ways to go about it, those are some ideas off the top.

Keeping Bobs crap over there on Bob and keeping it from slithering over here might be tough. As said, the grudges ready do rarely come over at least. I like what lonewolf had to say about the composition of alliances on Steve too. Few seem to be directly Bob colonies. TPF- TE has few actual TPF-SE members in it. MHA-TE has few Mostly Harmless members in it. I don't know if it can be kept this way outrightly, but right now all that looks good. Can it be kept that way? Doubt it, Frostbite and the original incarnation of OP say differently.

Not recruiting for a specific allinace might be a good idea.
Recruit for Steve itself.

The arrogance some members of Bob have over here is annoying. Especially when considering the average stupid climate of Bob itself. I saw this when vainly trying to talk to the members of Trouble a couple sessions ago. Having fun is one thing, having fun by being an obnoxious toad is quite another. Poor gamesmanship/sportsmanship is just not doing it right.

The leaders on Bob are even bigger "Old Timers" than those on Steve.
Bob can keep 'em, too.

Still.
I don't see the big problem necessarily being Bob's influence on Steve, tho.
Bob has 25,000+ members. Steve has almost 2400. Steve needs Bob.
More to the point, Steve needs Bob's warriors.

Just not it's jerks.

[Believland]

[quote name='Clash' date='16 March 2010 - 05:20 PM' timestamp='1268774727' post='2227599']
I blame Beazy, of course

[ooc]CN is a GAME - and created purely for fun.[/ooc]


Another thing that's very attractive about TE is the reset
Yet on Steve, every 60 days everyone starts off even.
You can't take your nation too seriously, well, you shouldn't at least. After all, Admin's gonna kill it within two months from start, no matter how pretty it is. You can't take your infra with you. So might as well have fun blowing it up, eh?

The next time I hear some narrow-visioned stooge say, "Oh TE peaked in round 3," I swear I'm killing someone. YOU peaked in round 3, Shemp. The people lonewolfe refers to as "Old Timers' really are much of the problem. Y'all remind me of the stereotypical grandpa image, talking about walking 16 miles to school through a blizzard as a kid. Protip: Get a car gramps, and quit yer whining. This thinking is the opposite of productive.
[/quote]
I'm pretty lazy and in a rush, so I would give you multiple quote boxes, but like I said before, I'm lazy.

BEazy ruining your game since 2010.
Don't worry about the OOC tags, this is an OOC forum... D:

TBH, I don't like the 60 day reset, people focus on growing their nation more rather than war. That can also be contributed to the Stevian mindset. But, I agree with the rest of what you said.

Hey the buddy, did I ever tell you that TE reached it's climax in round 3?
Also, I crawled to school in 10 feet snow for 20 miles when I was a kid

On a serious note: The main problem with TE is not the "Old Guard" it's just the mindset. Too many people care. Yeah, I love the OTS flag and would give an arm and a leg for it. But, I'm not going to go hippy to get it.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Believland

[Schad]

[quote name='Believland' date='16 March 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1268777238' post='2227653']

On a serious note: The main problem with TE is not the "Old Guard" it's just the mindset. Too many people care. Yeah, I love the OTS flag and would give an arm and a leg for it. But, I'm not going to go hippy to get it.
[/quote]

The two can coexist, though. Last round, we (Pork Shrimp) had 7-8 sitters under other AAs, divided between rogues-to-be and flag-running potted plants who lacked the time to spend half of the round fighting. The rest of us (numbering around 15) were on Steve looking to blow things up and be blown up, and the expectation was that our paths wouldn't cross. In the end, it didn't quite work out that way (the first TPF/OP war ended rather inconveniently, 12 hours after we entered)...even after a handful shifted AAs to repay a debt to TPF, a small group of us survived long enough to engage in a little roguery alongside 13CG and APO, though it's quite possible that we could have won the flag regardless.

That said, I think that the model works: a handful separate, sit and wait for the end-game, bothering no one and remaining largely removed from the war-mongering. The rest of us spend the bulk of the round fighting, and break out the popcorn for the last couple days and the run to the flag.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Schad

[lonewolfe2015]

Where to begin...

I guess first to come to my mind - A massive Bob recruiting spree will only perpetuate things. People that come here need to want to be here to be frank.

However, the problem continues (like mentioned) when one false step and you're done for the round, but this not at the really early days prior to popular belief, I've become top ten after warring the first few days and losing 1/3 of my infra, without donations mind you.

60 days becoming 90 again will make it worse unless we tweak a lot of things (see below), as it stands the ability for the lucky few to grow beyond declaration ranges makes it worse.

I've had a couple suggestions in the past, namely to increase declaration ranges to be 200%/75% and to eliminate trades. One was actually implemented, but people are still creating immensely efficient nations (Jim ) pushing them out of war ranges. Last round, Dennis could have won since he was out of everyone but I believe 5 nation's ranges. Jim is almost out of my range and I'm in the top 40 right now. Tl/dr; Nation Building > Nation Warring, the ability to build is severely outweighing the ability to conduct war, and on a scale that would be favored.

Suggestions? 90 day rounds, shorter wonders, nukes do half damage and don't instant anarchy allowing you to declare more wars, nukes in the top 10% and remove the Manhattan Project, SDI's bumped up to 75% efficiency (to accommodate the distinct failure they are on Steve) and I'm sure some more simple gameplay modifications, like perhaps 250% max declaration range.

Increase offensive slots to become a max of 5. Give more incentive to play war, by allowing us to war longer while still building some.

And lastly, BUILD A NATION CAP. No one should ever, EVER have a NS above 30,000. I don't care if you keep buying infra and should be 100,000 NS, cap it at 30,000 just give them the advantages of more. How do you determine the winner at that point? Tiebreaker goes to the higher casualty count.

Yes, this is like a gameplay suggestions type situation but it perpetuated from good discussion.

Now: Politically you have some big changes, first you can war without feeling the first war ends the round, that was a major benefit of a longer round previously. Second, you don't have to build like a fiend to keep up because they will become in your range after simply reaching 12,500 NS. Nukes no longer immobilize your armies either.

The original goal of Steve was to be a Bob testing ground, so let's test some things! Experiment, shake up the rounds. Admin, we used to really enjoy this place but things are stagnate, trades are a pain, there's no incentive for players to be more than inactive slugs that turtle when they are hit to try and still win the flag.

Heck, remove the flag if you have to or change how to get it.

PS: Clash, you're wrong about Bob, I believe you're also one of the people who used to be exclusively in TE? If so, it's understandable. Find me sometime if you wanna discuss that part specifically.

Edited March 16, 2010 by lonewolfe2015

[Zikawe]

[quote name='arcticllama' date='15 March 2010 - 10:02 PM' timestamp='1268716056' post='2227051']
Interistingly enough I agree with the idea that new blood is needed in leadership... However, in each round there is a call put out in RD for anyone who wants to try their hand at leading.. and the response??? *chirp* *chirp*
we've gotten a few to try their hand.. but not many want to take the time..
so, I put out the call for volunteers to take the helm... (TE is a great place to train for ruling too)

I agree with the gist of this topic and hope some players are up to the challenge:)
[/quote]

Ok, I will rule RE for you.

I promise entertainment

PS: People should aim to be the number one alliance, give a prize for being #1 overall and then maybe everyone will kill each other for it.

Also the hippies in TPF should go fight wars from time to time.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Zikawe

[Believland]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='16 March 2010 - 07:05 PM' timestamp='1268781059' post='2227730']
Where to begin...

I guess first to come to my mind - A massive Bob recruiting spree will only perpetuate things. People that come here need to want to be here to be frank.

However, the problem continues (like mentioned) when one false step and you're done for the round, but this not at the really early days prior to popular belief, I've become top ten after warring the first few days and losing 1/3 of my infra, without donations mind you.

60 days becoming 90 again will make it worse unless we tweak a lot of things (see below), as it stands the ability for the lucky few to grow beyond declaration ranges makes it worse.

I've had a couple suggestions in the past, namely to increase declaration ranges to be 200%/75% and to eliminate trades. One was actually implemented, but people are still creating immensely efficient nations (Jim ) pushing them out of war ranges. Last round, Dennis could have won since he was out of everyone but I believe 5 nation's ranges. Jim is almost out of my range and I'm in the top 40 right now. Tl/dr; Nation Building > Nation Warring, the ability to build is severely outweighing the ability to conduct war, and on a scale that would be favored.

Suggestions? 90 day rounds, shorter wonders, nukes do half damage and don't instant anarchy allowing you to declare more wars, nukes in the top 10% and remove the Manhattan Project, SDI's bumped up to 75% efficiency (to accommodate the distinct failure they are on Steve) and I'm sure some more simple gameplay modifications, like perhaps 250% max declaration range.

Increase offensive slots to become a max of 5. Give more incentive to play war, by allowing us to war longer while still building some.

And lastly, BUILD A NATION CAP. No one should ever, EVER have a NS above 30,000. I don't care if you keep buying infra and should be 100,000 NS, cap it at 30,000 just give them the advantages of more. How do you determine the winner at that point? Tiebreaker goes to the higher casualty count.

Yes, this is like a gameplay suggestions type situation but it perpetuated from good discussion.

Now: Politically you have some big changes, first you can war without feeling the first war ends the round, that was a major benefit of a longer round previously. Second, you don't have to build like a fiend to keep up because they will become in your range after simply reaching 12,500 NS. Nukes no longer immobilize your armies either.

The original goal of Steve was to be a Bob testing ground, so let's test some things! Experiment, shake up the rounds. Admin, we used to really enjoy this place but things are stagnate, trades are a pain, there's no incentive for players to be more than inactive slugs that turtle when they are hit to try and still win the flag.

Heck, remove the flag if you have to or change how to get it.

PS: Clash, you're wrong about Bob, I believe you're also one of the people who used to be exclusively in TE? If so, it's understandable. Find me sometime if you wanna discuss that part specifically.
[/quote]
Too be honest with you, I think your idea ruins the idea of TE. This was never a place for a tea party, so we need to stop acting like it. We need to break away from the cuurent norms of Stevian society. We need to encourage more shady dealings throughout the game. We need the "%^#" to take on more leadership and just run with it. I've been playing since, well I can't actually remember but, it's been a good time. But, Steve has been missing a vilian for awhile now. So someone please, take the lead. Trust me it's worth it.

Forever asking you to bite the forbidden fruit,
BEazy

[White Chocolate]

Why everyone on SE who was not there before, oh say 2007, is NOT on TE is completely beyond me! The fact that TE resets (regardless of exactly how often) is a huge equalizer. Add to that the lack of the ability to pass aid between nations (so much for reparations ) and even small groups have a chance to change the final outcome of the round. Oh, and some reward (flag or whatever, just so enough people want it) has to be there. Otherwise we'd be back to big nations beating up on small ones without any risk to ruining their chance of "winning."

Sylvia Midnight

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='Believland' date='16 March 2010 - 09:58 PM' timestamp='1268791399' post='2227892']
Too be honest with you, I think your idea ruins the idea of TE. This was never a place for a tea party, so we need to stop acting like it. We need to break away from the cuurent norms of Stevian society. We need to encourage more shady dealings throughout the game. We need the "%^#" to take on more leadership and just run with it. I've been playing since, well I can't actually remember but, it's been a good time. But, Steve has been missing a vilian for awhile now. So someone please, take the lead. Trust me it's worth it.

Forever asking you to bite the forbidden fruit,
BEazy
[/quote]

What do you mean? Everything I just said was to encourage more war.

Also, the Villain idea fails because everyone and their grandmothers are moralists these days. Anyone worth a damn doesn't have the time to properly villainize TE.

[Clash]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' date='16 March 2010 - 05:05 PM' timestamp='1268781059' post='2227730']I guess first to come to my mind - A massive Bob recruiting spree will only perpetuate things. People that come here need to want to be here to be frank.
[...]
PS: Clash, you're wrong about Bob, I believe you're also one of the people who used to be exclusively in TE? If so, it's understandable. Find me sometime if you wanna discuss that part specifically.
[/quote]
Well I'm going to boldly say that no one will ever be forced to join either version of CN. It's always voluntary lol. They'll come and try it, and the ones that like it will stay. Very few CN players do TE alone - the vast majority play SE first. This is where the bulk of TE players come from, so might as well go with it instead of fight against it.

Yepp I just barely play SE.
Seriously. It reeks.

TE is much much more fun.

[Thomasj_tx]

I have to be upfront and admit that I have not completely read every word in this thread, but scanned it pretty well.

I will come back in the morning and read it completely.

But given that, from what I have scanned, here is my off the cuff thoughts....

This is my 5th round. And yes, I am a SE "Hippie".

My first two TE rounds were in tiny alliances. The last three in OP. Jim (may I call you Jim?) took the single effort to pull together an alliance. His efforts and marketing was the sole reason that I keep playing TE and joined the OP.

Since I joined the OP and TE, I have brought in many SE players.

Most players do not even care about what happens politically from round to round. Most play for the idea of building a nation from zero since we have not done that in years, fighting, and meeting new people that we may not have met otherwise.

In my opinion, what has taken down TE in the last several rounds is the "Flag Chase". Not the chase per se, but the games that are played to get the all coveted flag. The Chase has changed the game.

Take the flag out and let's see how the game changes. No hidden Alliances. No desire to pump in donations (Sorry Kevin). No AA hopping.

Well that is my Two Cents for now.

And I reserve the right to alter my views when I actually read the WHOLE thread!

[Archmage]

[i]"If someone said, "A penny for your thoughts.", and you put your two cents in, what happens to the other penny?[/i]

Well here is my $.02

The problem with lopsided wars isn't a problem with Steve. It is simply a fact of what I like to call MSI (motivated self interest). Let's face it, not many people like to be on the losing/curbstomped side of a war. So leaders do what they need to to prevent it. Before you know it Steve and Bob look like twins. Asking leaders not to do this is naive at best, and foolish at worst. If left in the hands of alliance leaders, they will do whatever is needed to protect there MSI and you know what, [b]That is what they should be doing, they are the fricken leaders of fricken alliances.[/b] [/My Dr. Evil channeling]

What I would do if I had the (admin) power:

1. [b]Pinch myself and laugh like a hyena:[/b] I'm just a little twisted that way.
2. [b]Remove the Alliance Affiliation, About (bio) box, all of the teams but one, and the flag reward for SE:[/b] This will go a long way to removing a lot of the MSI and get the game back to what it should be, waging war and having fun.
3. [b]Disable the war function for the first 14 days:[/b] I know I just lost a lot of you here but stay with me there's a method to my madness.
4. [b]On day 15 [i][u]ALL[/u][/i] nations are split into two equal teams (ie. Black and Blue, but any two teams would work), by Admin and the war function is reinstated:[/b] BUT you can only attack a nation on the other team. I know that this would break up alliances and put brother agents brother. Now that's what I call a good war.
5. [b]Reset after 30 days:[/b] Two weeks of building and two weeks of bringing it down. The team with the most nation strength at the end is declared the winner.
6. [b]Come up with a different reward:[/b] I'm at a loss here but it shouldn't be anything that carries over to SE. Maybe forum metals for Most damage done, Largest nation at reset, Most causalities ect. Maybe something else, I don't know here, but something.

Just my thoughts...

Edit: Spllng Fale

Edited March 17, 2010 by Archmage