A Moment with b: My First Looks

[JohnKirk]

After my return to Cybernations, I have found an alliance to settle down in and enjoy myself for a bit. With the stress reduction of "Not fearing for being raided into dust" gone, I've had a chance to look at the current situation of Cybernations in the political sense.

Actually that is a lie. I haven't at all.

Part of it has been my own real life obligations, which go something like this:

Me:"Alright, class is done, now I can write a bit for that article thing I was going to do for this online game!"
Roommate: "Guess who just got Fallout: New Vegas!"
Me: "Whelp"

Additionally, another issue I've had in posting this is the fact that even though it has been ten days, My original thread is still on the front page. In the Cybernations I remember, The thread would have been buried to the deep nether regions of the forum. To put it simply cybernations, This is a problem and a big one at that. Gentlemen, We are suffering from

[b]Stagnation[/b]

*Cue evil music*

When I saw stagnation I mean it in both the physical sense as in the number of nations, and the political sense. I feel this has happened for a number of reasons.

[b]The MDP Web[/b]

Cybernations has always had a very unique system of politics. In must other games, no real sense of politics exists in those game at all. Often you will find alliances declaring war on each other just for the sake of doing it. CN was really the first game I knew that developed an almost real world sense of political intrigue and the ones that tried to create this system often had alliances with names such as "New Pacific Order Lunar Colony" (Note: I don't remember if NPO did have a spin off alliance in the [i]other game[/i]. Please don't hurt me.)The ensuing political situations, with the more treaties and all that other good stuff, would become over time a double edged sword. While this is by far the most unique and attractive feature of CN, it also creates its biggest problem.

With people trying to protect their nations from total destruction and thus preventing their alliances in taking the "$%&@ it. time for war!" approach, this creates peace. Peace is fine and dandy in real life, but in Cybernations, peace involves buying infrastructure and waiting around for the next war. Heck, even with the approach of not collecting taxes for as long as possible means that people do not need to log on for nearly a month if they don't want to. Any activity that has you standing around doing nothing is not fun, which means people leaving the game when they don't care enough to remember what day they are supposed to collect taxes. The only thing that has been done to shake up the boredom is by a universal acceptance of tech raiding which a good portion of the community fought tooth and nail to prevent. And yet, this leads to the next issue.

[b]Tech Raiding[/b]

I can almost be certain that someone who did not read the rest of this paragraph will come here and post something about who I'm a pixel lover and need to be relieved of my tech or whatever degrading stuff they feel like saying. But the rampant nature of Raiding has only added to the stagnation of the game.

So look at my scenario. I joined the game and one of the first things on my agenda was to look for an alliance to join in order to not get raided into rage quit. Which is in effect similar to earning protection from your local mafia boss or joining a prison gang. If you don't enjoy being, err... "pillaged" you need to do this quickly. This becomes even more devastating when a small possibly promising alliance is raided because they are lower than the internationally accepted size, which is continually rising. Yes! cry more tears for the fallen!

But the problem here is that new players are immediately put into the system of standing around and waiting for the next war as referred to in the last section. Whether they like it or not. They also are much quicker to realize "This !@#$ is boring" and move on elsewhere. A lot of the bigger alliances who were pushing towards 1000 members not too long ago are nearly half that size now and I think this issue can be attributed to this core problems.

[b]Sisyphean Nature of The Game[/b]

For those who don't want to Wikipedia it, Sisyphus is the guy who was punished by being forced to push a rock up an mountain for all eternity.

It's not a hard metaphor to imagine in context for a new nation. Typically, one joins a game in order to have fun, but to achieve certain goals in their game. or as the About Cyber Nations screen puts it "...grow your nation and improve your status in the world." Good luck with that one chumps.

It an eternal rat race for someone who wants to have the biggest nation. It takes an incredible amount of time to get to the upper echelon of the game through physical means, which usually is tied in with your political weight. All the while avoiding the losing end of the next big war. So in order to reach the top 5% of the game and be able to buy Nukes without the Manhattan project. You need around 82000 strength. I have gained 2000 strength over the course of twenty days. ignoring the fact that strength gain slows over time and assuming I continued at the same rate (Which is unrealistic to begin with)which is 130. Division says it will take 630 days for me to reach the top 5%. Assuming I don't either get rolled, nobody else in the game grows at all, and my attention span lasts that long which given my previous history, is doubtful. People can nearly graduate from a community college in that time frame and it will most certainly take longer than that. The oldest nation in CN, at an incredible 1751 days as of this post, is at a mere 57,439.328 NS. I assuming this nation has seem some rough days, but for playing four years and not getting into the top 5% is pretty discouraging for little old me.

And the most major recent feature to come out in CN are the Moon and Mars bases. Essentially toys to give bigger nations an even larger advantage and give them more toys to play with. A nation with 100 strength, being techraided, and can't even get a full set of trades is pretty quick to say "$%&@ this !@#$" and every time that happens CN dies a little. *emo*

In conclusion, there are without a doubt some major fundamental problems with the game. Yet I feel bad for simply putting out these ideas and not offering a solution. Truth of the matter is I don't certainly have one. If it were that simple it would have been done a long time ago. I would like to see the game mechanics reworked a bit so it encourages people to stay with the game. I also feel that the current game would need a total overhaul.

So essentially, I'm calling for CN 2. But, we are all aware how well this worked for the other game where a fair number of alliances came from. So err, shoot.

Happy Halloween Guys.

[SonOfHoward]

I don't understand. You say tech raiding contributes to the stagnation of the game because people get bored in big alliances?

This is not the first time there has been tech raiding. If anything raiders are like natural selection; they weed out the weak.

[Sandwich Controversy]

Have you considered making a blog instead?

[JohnKirk]

[quote name='Sandwich Controversy' timestamp='1288583477' post='2498706']
Have you considered making a blog instead?
[/quote]
Just gauging to see how many people care. Then I'll move into blog form. Which will happen shortly.

[Locke]

Personally, I enjoy these, and I don't read blogs much. Though if you move I might have to. :<

[LittleRena]

CN 2 would be nice, with updated graphics and gameplay, the rest of the web seems to have moved on, including web based games, I'm honestly supprised CN has lasted so long, though I am glad it has too because I've met some intresting people along the way and some I can consider friends.

There is often just little to do when you aren't at war and have nothing to sort out, people get bored I suppose, my first time round CN, sometime in 06 or 07, I never really go into it, didn't join an alliance (might have ghosted a sanctioned one?) and such, then I joined a few years on and got into an alliance and the politics, that's what makes it intresting.

I don't have suggestions, I'd just like to see it moving forward.

Also, blogs

[Jens of the desert]

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1288587268' post='2498768']
CN 2 would be nice, with updated graphics and gameplay.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]Double post.[/color]

Edited November 1, 2010 by Jens of the desert

[Jens of the desert]

[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1288587268' post='2498768']
CN 2 would be nice, with updated graphics and gameplay.
[/quote]
[color="#0000FF"]As much as I would like that, knowing the people who run this ship, this will never happen.Ever. Those of us who have been building our nations since 06/07 know just how little things change here in terms of nation development, even over a massive expanse of time. This does not mean that there hasn't been feedback and useful ideas, because there have, it's just the person at the end of the line who has to implement these changes, isn't.[/color]

[LittleRena]

And that's really a shame, I don't think there are many games out there simler, so is it the lack of compertition that is keeping CN from advancing?

[Cesar Julian]

I believe this CN can be perked up enough to "fix" some of the things you mention, without the need to create CN2. Thing is that, like you said, the ones who run the ship are not good with change. It's like FIFA with replay/goal line technology.

My story is similar to Rena's except that I did join an alliance my first time around in 07. I never got too into the game and eventually deleted for inactivity. The reason why I stayed the second time around was because I got active in alliance and CN politics. We must also accept that a good number of people who play the game don't have the RL time to really get involved in all the politics. The game revolves around it's politics and community, so even a upgraded/better game-play won't solve everything.

[size="1"]We need wars more often, because even if you are not involved you enjoy the drama. Not every war has to be a World War.[/size]

Edited November 1, 2010 by Cesar Julian

[LittleRena]

[quote name='Cesar Julian' timestamp='1288616483' post='2498953']
The game revolves around it's politics and community, so even a upgraded/better game-play won't solve everything.
[/quote]

An upgraded/better game-play will attract new players and keep some intrested, someone posted wonders upgrading as a suggestion, that would help for larger nations to have something to do when there are no wars.

A war option for a training battle might be useful too, where casulties are minimal and nothing is lost.

[Cesar Julian]

I know it would help, and any help is good, what I meant is that people should not expect a revamp game-play to magically solve the CN "decay".

[Azhrei]

Nobody seems to be suggesting any ideas that are workable in any way. And as for a reset, it might help the game a little, for a while, but it would just descend into the game it is now, and possibly with less players after all the uproar there would undoubtedly be. Maybe a new game that sits besides CN, that completely replaces it and people can migrate over on their own terms. I mean, there's already CN:TE, but that's not a viable replacement for the game.


[quote name='LittleRena' timestamp='1288626132' post='2499031']An upgraded/better game-play will attract new players and keep some intrested, someone posted wonders upgrading as a suggestion, that would help for larger nations to have something to do when there are no wars.

A war option for a training battle might be useful too, where casulties are minimal and nothing is lost.[/quote]

Wonders will only help the bigger nations get bigger, which is part of the problem we have now, and as for the "training battle", I'm guessing you missed 10/10/10. In any case, the latter can be undertaken by the players themselves, and has been.

Also, I just have to mention this (and I apologise in advance), but it is spelled [i]interested[/i], not intrested. I could forgive it if it were a typo, but you've typed it out several times now. Yes, I am one of [i]those[/i] people.

[TheyCallMeJeezy]

I liked and agree with the OP.

[Azhrei]

[quote name='TheyCallMeJeezy' timestamp='1288633414' post='2499119']
I liked and agree with the OP.
[/quote]

Oh, I do too, don't get me wrong. Great post, OP.

[Jay Z]

There has to be bonuses for the little nations that aren't given to large nations so they can catch up+slow down the growth of large nations.

Similar to how in other games it takes more to maintain a larger 'empire'

With that said, and the game mechanics I am familiar with I would say the best solution is to have large nations not able to stack their taxes as long. (Put them in the same state that nations in the 21-25 days inactive range are in, but earlier).

Top 5% of nations can stack taxes for 5 days.
Top 5-10% can stack for 7 days
Top 10-20% can stack for 10 days
Top 20-30% can stack for 15 days
Top 30-50% can stack for 20 days
Bottom 50-100% can stack for up to 25 days.


Now I know theres going to be a lot of opposition to this, but just realize that the people opposing are those that are active (large nations).


Or, admin, do you have a list of how many times each nation has received a donation? If so we could do a reset. If a nation has donated $20 ten times, they should get 10 times the $20 bonus directly applied to their "new" nation - but then make it so that its impossible to get tech over "x" or infra over "y"

Edited November 1, 2010 by Jay Z

[Manis B]

In October, GATO saw a 33 nation increase.

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=11169&st=32720

Just throwin that out there.



As for fixing the game, heres some tips to get us addicted.
http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html

[Branimir]

A nice summary of the usually mentioned issues with CN.

I think we can all agree that CN is about the politics and the drama llama. From the get go. It was as such, because player's characters made it as such. There is a distinct lack of abrasive leadership type characters, that have no problem "rolling the hard 6" once and a while. And to an extend, there is a lack of characters to begin with.

The allure to the CN was that its drama llama seemed not forced, in sense. Seemed genuine and intriguing (mostly because largely it was a cross over). As such, of course I am not here preaching that alliance leaders that are good with each other, should start fights and drama just 'coz yeah. But what I am talking about is that fights/drama are not avoided at any cost. That the "game", the real one, gets back a little bit to the forums and not kept just to 24/7 give-my-life-to-irc couple of dozen dwellers.

In conclusion I have to repeat, we lack strong leadership characters that have a healthy doze of "dont giving a $%&@" in them and a way about them.
Not talking about handful of loudmouths we have now, but those that back their !@#$ up once and a while and then things get broken.

Its a game, not facebook to make friends. Play, be bad, have fun.

Edited November 1, 2010 by Branimir

[Jay Z]

[quote name='Branimir' timestamp='1288649323' post='2499285']
A nice summary of the usually mentioned issues with CN.

I think we can all agree that CN is about the politics and the drama llama. From the get go. It was as such, because player's characters made it as such. There is a distinct lack of abrasive leadership type characters, that have no problem "rolling the hard 6" once and a while. And to an extend, there is a lack of characters to begin with.

The allure to the CN was that its drama llama seemed not forced, in sense. Seemed genuine and intriguing (mostly because largely it was a cross over). As such, of course I am not here preaching that alliance leaders that are good with each other, should start fights and drama just 'coz yeah. But what I am talking about is that fights/drama are not avoided at any cost. That the "game", the real one, gets back a little bit to the forums and not kept just to 24/7 give-my-life-to-irc couple of dozen dwellers.

In conclusion I have to repeat, we lack strong leadership characters that have a healthy doze of "dont giving a $%&@" in them and a way about them.
Not talking about handful of loudmouths we have now, but those that back their !@#$ up once and a while and then things get broken.

Its a game, not facebook to make friends. Play, be bad, have fun.
[/quote]

Well if it were facebook, and that was your status, I would totally have "liked" that

[Mason]

The OP says everything I probably couldn't have put into words, myself. It's ashame, imo, when there is a community who [i]wants[/i] to like the game, and we hope for the natural course of any game...further development, but get nil. The mechanics that made CN work in the beginning no longer work for what the players have evolved to. Perhaps one day, admin will get that passion back that he must have had when he created CN, listen to his audience, and go to work.

Until then, we make the best of it. And if that day never comes, I'm sure someone else somewhere down the road will take this idea and expand on it. When that happens, I'll see you there.

[DictatatorDan]

[color="#FF0000"]There is also lack of alliances that are worth "rolling the hard six" over. GOONS might be the best option, but that is still extremely weak and contrived.[/color]

[White Chocolate]

Very good observations and well-written overall.

[quote name='&*&^yb' timestamp='1288581230' post='2498679']
[b]Tech Raiding[/b]
Which is in effect similar to earning protection from your local mafia boss or joining a prison gang.
[/quote]


That's exactly how I've described CN to people who want to know about the political structure and don't have experience yet. In fact, I've watched shows about such things with CN in the back of my mind and People experienced in politics should try it if they haven't done so already.

When I'm in a less sarcastic mood, I tell people it's like your nation is a "state" (as in U.S. political system) and the alliance as a whole is the nation.

[quote name='&*&^yb' timestamp='1288581230' post='2498679']But the problem here is that new players are immediately put into the system of standing around and waiting for the next war as referred to in the last section.[/quote]

Send them to Tournament Edition.

[quote name='&*&^yb' timestamp='1288581230' post='2498679']It an eternal rat race for someone who wants to have the biggest nation. It takes an incredible amount of time to get to the upper echelon of the game through physical means, which usually is tied in with your political weight.[/quote]

I decided very early on that there was NO way Lander Clan was going to make it to the top in terms of nation strength and have made a bunch of smaller goals. Good decision on my part. I'm much happier.

Again, if you're looking to raise to the top and don't want to hang around for 3 or 4 years avoiding war, think Tournament Edition.

See a theme here

[quote name='&*&^yb' timestamp='1288581230' post='2498679']So essentially, I'm calling for CN 2.[/quote]

If it's the same game, the same problems will develop - maybe even faster than this one did. Maybe different "powers" and people on top - MAYBE. There would have to be differences in what is possible to do (or not).

What I like about CN (standard edition) really comes down to watching people work through the process of creating a culture and/or attempting to change it. The evolution of culture takes time, but it does happen, even here.

What is the "community standard"? Things like the "rules" of war (what is a "good" CB to why do we need one anyway), treaties, the definition of an "alliance" (how many nations to make an "alliance" vs. an AA), what are the "terms" of peace (define "high" vs. "low" reparations, do to have them or not - they are certainly NOT a requirement), is it okay (or not) to "tech raid" and under what "rules" if any.

That's what I like to observe, and when possible take part in the process of changing - both on the "local" alliance level and as a part of the community.

Edited November 2, 2010 by White Chocolate

[Homeboy]

The topic tittle misled me =/ I though we were going to be talking about /b/ lol

[King Wally]

As far as in game entertainment goes CN during peace times was always boring (im talking in game...not out of game alliance activity)... the real problem here is that a massive percentage of CN nations havn't fought in a war for nearly 9 months now.

Find ways to bring back more reglar wars and you'll find the in game enjoyment rise.

You'll first need to adress several issue's however involving the over complicated treaty web, excessive reps, infra hugging mentality etc.


...Or Just join Ragnarok Hoo likes to find me plenty of regular wars if times get too quiet!!!