Your Satisfaction With CN

[Owned-You]

I'm curious to see how many of you are actually enjoying this time of 'peace' and prosperity in CN? I've played for nearly 4 years and the state of CN is honestly the worst I've ever seen it, it's been months (you could argue years) since there's been a major or quality improvement to gameplay while countless brilliant suggestions are routinely ignored, it's been months since there's been a fun or even challenging war (I$%&@ curbstomps) and there aren't any new ones brewing that aren't going to be 'finishing up' previous bouts, the overall quality of drama has devolved, most polarizing figures have left the game leaving only incompetent boring dregs in power.

So I do ask, are you satisfied with this? Do you still feel like this game is on it's upswing, or do you feel like it's literally going to be dissolved in the coming year as more of our best players leave (myself included)? Do tell, in blunt and honest diction; because the political speaking that I've been so accustomed to speaking and listening too is so painfully boring that I couldn't give a damn who I may 'offend' with my choice of words.

[ForeignOwnage]

First to vote!

Chose option 1

[zenergy]

I'm still having fun. As long as I get 6-8 months in between wars to rebuild I'm happy, so this current drought of conflict has been fine for me.

[Captain Flinders]

Voted for the fourth option and decided to ignore the obvious sarcastic undertones.

Because in all seriousness, I am enjoying CN right now. And my alliance has a lot to do with that. There's always something brewing in Nordreich's corner of the world. Always.

Also, you're not allowed to leave.

[Logan]

Almost voted the second option, but the third one relates to me much more I guess. If I didn't have CN what would I do? DO something productive in my real life? The horror.

Edit: Yeah I like my alliance too. That's pretty much all CN is to me at this point.

Edited August 21, 2010 by Logan

[Lord Fingolfin]

[quote name='Owned-You' timestamp='1282406796' post='2425727']
I'm curious to see how many of you are actually enjoying this time of 'peace' and prosperity in CN? I've played for nearly 4 years and the state of CN is honestly the worst I've ever seen it, it's been months (you could argue years) since there's been a major or quality improvement to gameplay while countless brilliant suggestions are routinely ignored, it's been months since there's been a fun or even challenging war (I$%&@ curbstomps) and there aren't any new ones brewing that aren't going to be 'finishing up' previous bouts, the overall quality of drama has devolved, most polarizing figures have left the game leaving only incompetent boring dregs in power.

So I do ask, are you satisfied with this? Do you still feel like this game is on it's upswing, or do you feel like it's literally going to be dissolved in the coming year as more of our best players leave (myself included)? Do tell, in blunt and honest diction; because the political speaking that I've been so accustomed to speaking and listening too is so painfully boring that I couldn't give a damn who I may 'offend' with my choice of words.
[/quote]

A lot of the cause of the long breaks is that fact that people need time to rebuild and restock warchests. After fighting in BiPolar for a month, and then later joining IRON to fight Gramlins, I still need another 3 months or so of just tax collecting to what I'd call my ideal warchest (being able to fight for roughly a month and still be able to rebuild a significant portion of my pre-war infra).

I don't think that we've had a big downgrade in regards to leaders and personalities. You still have people line \m/ causing drama, PC ready to blow up anything that moves, Xiphosis trying to roll people, NSO pushing the limits and getting rolled for it. There has been plenty of drama and action these past couple of months, just most of it has been diplomatically resolved, due in part (at least in my opinion) to the fact that a lot of people aren't at full military readiness and know their alliance isn't prepared to fight in a drawn out slugfest. That being said, I still voted for #2

Edited August 21, 2010 by Lord Fingolfin

[Owned-You]

[quote name='Lord Fingolfin' timestamp='1282408383' post='2425744']
A lot of the cause of the long breaks is that fact that people need time to rebuild and restock warchests. After fighting in BiPolar for a month, and then later joining IRON to fight Gramlins, I still need another 3 months or so of just tax collecting to what I'd call my ideal warchest (being able to fight for roughly a month and still be able to rebuild a significant portion of my pre-war infra). That being said, I still voted for option 2.

I don't think that we've had a big downgrade in regards to leaders and personalities. You still have people line \m/ causing drama, PC ready to blow up anything that moves, Xiphosis trying to roll people, NSO pushing the limits and getting rolled for it. There has been plenty of drama and action these past couple of months, just most of it has been diplomatically resolved, due in part (at least in my opinion) to the fact that a lot of people aren't at full military readiness and know their alliance isn't prepared to fight in a drawn out slugfest. That being said, I still voted for #2
[/quote]

Possibly, however do you agree that the quality of wars themselves have been lacking? I know I haven't really fought anything interesting or very challenging since the No CB War or GWIII, most conflicts these days are nothing more the beatdowns; if your the victor you don't break a sweat which isn't very entertaining in the slightest, and if your being smashed, you have a fun time but you ultimately leave it chaffed because the last year of work was destroyed for a reason which is most likely not worth the fight in the first-place. Furthermore, when and if there manages to be a war it usually ends within about a week.

The problem being, is the majority of that drama isn't really drama at all. There petty squabbles between individuals; whereupon they bring there friends just in case and if both sides are stubborn enough they'll fight. But within about 48hrs of that initial fighting, both sides realize there fighting over an individuals ego; end up peacing out and do not make any moves for a few months. That isn't worth months of waiting. Lastly, I'm quiet sure there are plenty of alliances capable of fighting; it's simply being overly cautious about it that has lead to this problem. Most people have adopted this "victim" psyche where they treat every war as there 'last' and build it up to be some glorious final stand in there minds restricting them from doing anything that could be considered aggressive because of that paranoia. The thing about that is, to the paranoid players out there; they'll never be a time where there protected enough to move beyond there hardwired cautions; hence this prolonged peace.

[potato]

No. There hasn't been any worthwhile improvement ingame in ages. What's worse is that Admin doesn't seem to even care. I'm sorry, Admin, adding a "I like" facebook button or macroing so we don't have to put 10 in the buy infra box is [b]NOT[/b] a worthwhile addition. There are many good suggestions in the Suggestion Box but they get ignored and ditched on the basis of not being Admin's. $%&@ that.

Somewhat being in the center of politics (MK gov't) makes the game still a tad fun (and that's mainly because of #kingdom) but in games addition? Not so much.

Edited August 21, 2010 by potato

[Auctor]

If I am bored, I tend to think I have only myself to blame.

[thaone]

I always was a strong supporter of the: "Do something about it" line of reasoning, but as you don't put the blame somewhere else I'll try to answer in an honest way.

I do also feel the same way as you, which is mainly to blame on the lack of goals I still have left. Planet Bob isn't less interesting than any other time I've played this game, probably more then in any other time period.

Ingame this most recent war is showing me that all that I do would be a waste of time, I'll probably end the war at ZI with 300 million and 3000 tech left. Which will cost me 5 months or so to rebuild to my old level of 8K infra, 5K tech And then there will be another war which will bring me back to almost ZI.
Every time I actually have to collect I really have to put myself beyond a certain threshold to actually do it, My nation already twice was 24 days inactive.

In the wider space of Planet Bob (alliance leadership/ FA), I also don't really have any goals left. Or if I would have them their is a lack of time/interest to pursue them.

[Arrnea]

[quote name='Owned-You' timestamp='1282406796' post='2425727']or do you feel like it's literally going to be dissolved in the coming year [b]as more of our best players leave (myself included)?[/b][/quote]
What's that whistling noise? Oh, it's your credibility, flying away.

Also, voted for the second option, although the last option is also true. They're not mutually exclusive, after all.

[Necromancer V4L]

Oh look, another "baww, I'm going to quit, this game is boring" thread.

You know, not all of us have a cynical view of the direction the game is heading in. [i]If[/i] there is anything going wrong with the game, it's those in the power structure being completely incompetent, but that will correct itself over time when players (like you) give up and leave and new players realize what's wrong and fight to fix it.

[Kevanovia]

Use the peace time to become the most powerful alliance so that when wartime does come, you'll be in a bigger/more fun role.

[The MVP]

[quote name='Kevanovia' timestamp='1282414809' post='2425821']
Use the peace time to become the most powerful alliance so that when wartime does come, you'll be in a bigger/more fun role.
[/quote]

And that's the reason (mentality-wise) why this game sucks right now.

So many of you want to build your alliance and make it on your own for your own satisfaction. You have the right to do so, this game is what you get out of it. However the more you make alliances, the more you water down the product. We all want to be engaged in some sort of war that would be a lot of fun, yet we're all too afraid to be at the center of that war. Constant treaties, Sparta/Ragnarok, makes certain alliances at this very moment untouchable no matter how much we want to deny it.

No one wants to march into a death trap each war, they want to create a favorable situation where the odds are they'll win. The element of uncertainty and actual skill is done due to the fact we have so many alliances, variables and lawyering to worry about. Larger alliances don't want to risk making a major political mistake due to the fact a faux pas by them likely draws much more attention. Since alliances hate to be at the center of wars, they all want to be at the periphery, they rater enter through some proxy reason via another ally.

We will continue to get wars, but the quality of those wars are always in question. People claiming there are two sides to this web are merely reluctant to admit to the fact we have a power and one side trying to rebuild and look for a more, "favorable" situation in which they can challenge the power structure. There is no tension, there's no form of hard nosed diplomacy only a mentality that's going to set the fun in this game back more and more each day.

Edited August 21, 2010 by The MVP

[lonewolfe2015]

I play TE for my monthly war satisfaction, if there was war every month or two months in SE we'd be bored with that just as quickly as we are with peace. Whether you realize it or not, prolonged wars in SE are more boring than prolonged periods of peace and prosperity, because all you do is watch your creation get destroyed and try and find a way to get on at update and destroy someone else's creation constantly.

You lose sleep, time, and part of your life to that, and you quickly become tired of putting the effort through.

[wickedj]

tbh Answer 1.5

at 9500 infra and 10600 tech im in range of alot of big people who can out-deploy me in war so im enjoying the peace time to buy alot of infra but i also really like war and was greatly disappointed when this currento conflict didnt blow up. Can someone ELSE aid a few
rogues...please?

@lonewolf, ever build a lego castle or any of the such just to wreck it? If you didnt then you didnt have a fun childhood building it is half the fun of destroying it

[Sal Paradise]

I'm here for the OOC forums mostly, and taking the occasional IC swipe, but it's your own fault for continuing to play a game long after it ended. Don't you remember when we won back in 2009?


[quote name='Captain Flinders' timestamp='1282407182' post='2425731']
Voted for the fourth option and decided to ignore the obvious sarcastic undertones.

Because in all seriousness, I am enjoying CN right now. And my alliance has a lot to do with that. There's always something brewing in Nordreich's corner of the world. Always.

Also, you're not allowed to leave.
[/quote]

Does that mean I'm still a member? If that's the case, having a little rogue problem here.

[ChairmanHal]

Two separate problems.

The politics tends to fix itself after some period of time. It always has, so people tend to be patient while making sure they stay ahead of events in the backrooms. Indeed, some players genuinely benefit from times such as this, particularly those still trying to get a good grasp of the game and those who took a particularly bad pounding the last major war.

The game mechanics, which I'm hearing as your second complaint could use a serious tune-up. Some new elements to make things interesting again for older players and some needed revisions where it is clear that the mechanics could be better. Unfortunately everything tends to break down into a huge playability vs. realism discussions (e.g. the dread GRL cap), people object to even minor tune-ups adding a few new "game pieces" to the "board" let alone significant changes, and I can easily see where the game admins would finally look at the hours coding work and decide it's easier to turn on ESPN and forget about it.

To those complaining about the politics: get your friends in high places to do something about it if you can't be patient, and nothing says you have to be.

To game admins I would say: the same thing I've said all along, a game that does not evolve is a dead game. We players may love changes we may hate changes, but don't let that fact we grouse about proposed change stop you from changing anything ever.


Edit: are you listening, Kevin?

Edited August 21, 2010 by ChairmanHal

[lonewolfe2015]

[quote name='wickedj' timestamp='1282417031' post='2425854']
@lonewolf, ever build a lego castle or any of the such just to wreck it? If you didnt then you didnt have a fun childhood building it is half the fun of destroying it
[/quote]

I have no problem wrecking what I create, but I wouldn't make a ritual out of doing it every day or two (if you compared the time it takes to make a lego castle to a nation)

All I'm saying is that no matter what we do, there will be people complaining the war has been too long, or peace has been too long. And I personally believe that longer wars are more boring than longer times of peace (of course, there is a limit to peace)

[Yevgeni Luchenkov]

For us, it's been four months and two weeks since the end of the conflict. I can still tolerate such time without war. Mostly because I've spent all that time paying reps, too.

In fact, we at TOP did our plans with a year-long period of peace. We're not even half-way. Warchests and tech have to be rebuilt. Also, even in curbstomps, if you're directly in the line of fire, you'll suffer. Last war was arguably a curbstomp by the time Polaris did its little dance and C&G still took a beating, losing 40 to 50% of their NS.

In all seriousness, some of us are trying a new approach to this game, since Admin is obviously not adding stuff. Changing style takes some time. I'm not sure if it's the same for other alliances, though.

[wickedj]

[quote name='lonewolfe2015' timestamp='1282417818' post='2425873']
I have no problem wrecking what I create, but I wouldn't make a ritual out of doing it every day or two (if you compared the time it takes to make a lego castle to a nation)
[/quote]
All depends on how much you want to rebuild. Ive seen a few people who got big...got all the good wonders then got wrecked and are sitting comfortably at like 50k with a good warchest

[Mason]

The long time players have larger nations now that have taken ages to get that way. They're not willing to throw that work out the window for a "meh" war. More time is spent protecting nations now than anyone wanting to fight. Another possible factor is that many long time players, also now in leadership in the various alliances, have gotten to know others better over time and people generally are more experienced at working out squabbles without leading to war.

People want the action, but they don't want the sacrifice because it's a much greater sacrifice than it used to be. The game has reached a point where the player base has dropped significantly. All small alliances are protected by big ones, which in essence results in actually only having a handful of alliances truly holding the cards and those allances aren't wanting to wage war with each other and have years of work wasted. Can't blame em. It's a flaw with the game. There really isn't a risk/reward system in place that makes it all worthwhile. I would wager that the majority continue to play out of pure habit and the friendships, but are generally dissatisfied with the game mechanics, which are overdue for a serious upgrade.

[Halicore]

Can't really think of much reason I'm still around other than the routine and being there to fight should the need arise. Gone are the days when the politics seemed interesting as it doesn't seem to be going anywhere...

[LittleRena]

[quote name='Zhaan' timestamp='1282419857' post='2425902']
I would wager that the majority continue to play out of pure habit and the friendships, but are generally dissatisfied with the game mechanics, which are overdue for a serious upgrade.
[/quote]

Just going to echo this.

I would add that small alliances are maily protected due to bigger alliances tech raiding or because they lack experiance in running an alliance.

As for the poll, I vote for other.

[Sabertooth]

CN is dying. I don't really see how any new improvements will make it more interesting. The players need to start getting creative and find ways to curb their boredum.

Edited August 21, 2010 by Sabertooth