Cyber Nations 2?

[Reagan1]

This poll is to see how many people would play CN2, if Admin were to create it. This does not mean resetting the current CN or shutting it down. I realize we have CN:TE, but it's not the same. I've often heard talk of people wishing they had the opportunity to play the game over, from the beginning with everyone on even ground, and seeing how a new world would develop. I'm in that group. Sure, many alliances would carry over and start out with a large player base, albeit they would all have small nations. We would also see brand new alliances and opportunities for everyone. The possibilities of what could happen are endless. I think it would be a refreshing challenge to have the opportunity to play in a new world.

Depending on how you answer the poll questions, discuss your logic.

[color="#FF0000"]EDIT: POLL IS NOW CLOSED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION[/color]

Edited June 18, 2010 by Reagan

[PotFace]

That's what I'm talking about. This would be good to see imo.

[ty345]

It would have to have completely different equations and game mechanics, or everyone would just resolve into what they do here.

[Logan]

I think creating a new world would result in smaller communities for both.

[Reagan1]

[quote name='ty345' date='15 June 2010 - 10:58 PM' timestamp='1276657107' post='2338992']
It would have to have completely different equations and game mechanics, or everyone would just resolve into what they do here.
[/quote]

Can't say I agree with that. The current formula is a success or it wouldn't still be around. However, there are so many variables that we create as players and things that have been done that can't be undone, that it would be nice to start in a new world from the ground up, imo.

[Mathias]

I think there'd have to be some kind of unspoken rule that you don't just recreate alliances in CN2. Not an actual rule obviously, but we wouldn't want to see two worlds with the same alliances and the same grudges.

[Vladimir]

We used to have this debate on a weekly basis, with people imagining that a score reset would somehow magically return us to the naive days of January 2006. Fact is that things have advanced a lot since then -- technically, politically, strategically, socially -- and these advances will remain. Consequently you would see large alliances and blocs forming immediately, complete with complex organisational and diplomatic structures, and moving to dominate the new terrain. The only real effect would be to split the player base, thus reducing it in size and intensity, and weakening the gameplay as a result.

To put a more empirical spin on it, we have seen a number of suspiciously similar universes spring up over the years, and we have seen hundreds flock in excitement to explore them. We have also found that this excitement quickly dissipates as the new utopia implodes and everyone returns. The grass on the other side has long been dead.

[twodivine]

I've seen this happen in another [ooc]game[/ooc] and it killed it. One version of a game and it evolving is enough for any game.

Edited June 16, 2010 by Myworld

[Outsiders]

While I usually think that more options can't hurt, I don't think this would be practical. Sounds very cool and would possibly satisfy the curiosity of a few, but I don't see how both CN and CN2 could coexist.

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='Vladimir' date='15 June 2010 - 11:07 PM' timestamp='1276657644' post='2339003']
We used to have this debate on a weekly basis, with people imagining that a score reset would somehow magically return us to the naive days of January 2006. Fact is that things have advanced a lot since then -- technically, politically, strategically, socially -- and these advances will remain. Consequently you would see large alliances and blocs forming immediately, complete with complex organisational and diplomatic structures, and moving to dominate the new terrain. The only real effect would be to split the player base, thus reducing it in size and intensity, and weakening the gameplay as a result.

To put a more empirical spin on it, we have seen a number of suspiciously similar universes spring up over the years, and we have seen hundreds flock in excitement to explore them. We have also found that this excitement quickly dissipates as the new utopia implodes and everyone returns. The grass on the other side has long been dead.
[/quote]

Brilliant. Simply Brilliant.

Couldn't have said it any better.

[Lucas Perry]

Keep the original. Regardless of what people try to do a majority of people would have the same friends and enemies.

[Reagan1]

[quote name='Vladimir' date='15 June 2010 - 11:07 PM' timestamp='1276657644' post='2339003']
We used to have this debate on a weekly basis, with people imagining that a score reset would somehow magically return us to the naive days of January 2006. Fact is that things have advanced a lot since then -- technically, politically, strategically, socially -- and these advances will remain. Consequently you would see large alliances and blocs forming immediately, complete with complex organisational and diplomatic structures, and moving to dominate the new terrain. The only real effect would be to split the player base, thus reducing it in size and intensity, and weakening the gameplay as a result.

To put a more empirical spin on it, we have seen a number of suspiciously similar universes spring up over the years, and we have seen hundreds flock in excitement to explore them. We have also found that this excitement quickly dissipates as the new utopia implodes and everyone returns. The grass on the other side has long been dead.
[/quote]

Never thought about it that way. That's a sober and somber assessment.

[Tarikmo]

[quote name='Myworld' date='16 June 2010 - 12:38 AM' timestamp='1276657705' post='2339005']
I've seen this happen in another [ooc]game[/ooc] and it killed it. One version of a game and it evolving is enough for any game.
[/quote]
Pretty much this, although it would be fun to see, it's probably not a good idea.

[Geoffron X]

[quote name='Reagan' date='15 June 2010 - 11:15 PM' timestamp='1276658087' post='2339022']
Never thought about it that way. That's a sober and somber assessment.
[/quote]
Well... that's Vlad for ya.

[Alfred von Tirpitz]

For one, i would not have the time to devote to two nations and two communities and two .. diplomatic arenas. I guess, this would be true for everyone, or almost everyone. Hence even if folks do populate the new CN, it will end up being a clone of the first, due to people following the path of least resistance, and replicating relationships from 1 on 2.

There is also a serious possibility of such a move actually bringing about the end of many nations, in short order.

[Pomiel]

[quote name='Alfred von Tirpitz' date='15 June 2010 - 11:24 PM' timestamp='1276658634' post='2339039']
For one, i would not have the time to devote to two nations and two communities and two .. diplomatic arenas. I guess, this would be true for everyone, or almost everyone. Hence even if folks do populate the new CN, it will end up being a clone of the first, due to people following the path of least resistance, and replicating relationships from 1 on 2.

There is also a serious possibility of such a move actually bringing about the end of many nations, in short order.
[/quote]

this.

I couldn't handle being two different people on IRC. Would I be expected to idle in private and public chans for every alliance? How can I leave the people I'm closest to for a whole new environment? It would just end up being far too complicated

[Carlton the Great]

I would rather this game get a big update than start a new game.

[ty345]

[quote name='Reagan' date='15 June 2010 - 11:02 PM' timestamp='1276657349' post='2338995']
Can't say I agree with that. The current formula is a success or it wouldn't still be around. However, there are so many variables that we create as players and things that have been done that can't be undone, that it would be nice to start in a new world from the ground up, imo.
[/quote]
But see, that's the thing: it's a tried-and-tested formula. People know that the nation that backcollects, has a warchest, and has a certain trade circle will always win over the one that doesn't, so it would be fairly useless.

With that said, I prefer this one only.

[Ezequiel]

I don't think it would be any good, what's wrong with updating this one?

Ezequiel.

[Banksy]

When I dipped my toes in the TE political scene I felt I didn't have the time to deal with my SE and TE commitments. In the end I felt that I would have to pick one version to concentrate on if I was to do the job properly. I think that will be the same here. People will choose one or the other, and both versions will be weaker for it.

These discussions of a reset tend to be for selfish or political reasons, rather than for the good of the game. It seems to me that people want to be in power or in a better position than they are at present. They want to roll Fark, nuke Duffman or lead the NPO. A reset appeals to them because everyone will be on an even footing. However, this will not be the case, largely for the reasons that Vladimir suggested. In the new game, TOP, Umbrella, MK etc will have the best nation builders and the current alliances that are large/sanctioned will become large there too (because they have the base membership initially and the recruiters so they can grow). We all know exactly what to do to get back to the position that we currently find ourselves in.

[Comrade Craig]

I think there are physical realities to deal with. The current servers can't even handle a decent load during peak times of activity. I don't think the financial resources exist to maintain two parallel versions. Even if the userbases didn't cannibalize each other, performance would clearly suffer.

Although if this is merely a pie-in-the-sky hypothetical situation, then yes, it would be interesting for everyone to start fresh... but I don't have the time to live in two fantasy parallel dimensions simultaneously. One of my existences would almost certainly suffer some neglect. I mean, I completely abandoned TE when Karma happened.

-Craig

Edited June 16, 2010 by Comrade Craig

[Sephiroth]

When you say CN2, do you refer to him pretty much making a copy of CN and starting another game world, or for him to release a new version of the game with enough improvements to be considered a proper sequel? With the lack of updates of this CN world I think if he made a sequel it would never get released and he'd be better of continuing to update CN, especially with so many newer online empire building games with graphics interface it would be hard to compete creating a new game. If it was just another game world that doesn't reset, I think it would need some gameplay mechanic change to make it worthwhile and interesting. If he were to have update every 12 hours instead of every 24 hours for example that would be a gameplay change thats easy to make and would make the new server more appealing to some people. (I would probably play on a server that moves twice as fast)

Edited June 16, 2010 by Methrage

[Scorponok]

I would welcome it with open hands.

[Buds The Man]

[quote name='Myworld' date='15 June 2010 - 11:08 PM' timestamp='1276657705' post='2339005']
I've seen this happen in another [ooc]game[/ooc] and it killed it. One version of a game and it evolving is enough for any game.
[/quote]
^^^^^^ THIS
[quote name='Carlton the Great' date='16 June 2010 - 12:34 AM' timestamp='1276662860' post='2339117']
I would rather this game get a big update than start a new game.
[/quote]
and ^^^^ this

I think you would see a split of the have and have nots in this world. Those who have the power will stay those who dont will leave to the newer world, both would suffer. Im content staying here. Yes this game could use some upgrades so instead of releasing a version 2 just update this one. Vlad hit it on the head as well.

[Ashoka the Great]

I'm old and change scares me.

No.