Ambition

[NoFish]

[quote name='Rebounder' timestamp='1291496656' post='2530213']
Thank you, I now see that I should do as you do. I'll shortly join an alliance and post complaints about everybody else's complaints. I may be making a show, but I guarantee I am being more helpful to the cause of ending the stagnation than you ever have. You tell us to "do something about it," then complain that nobody else is doing anything. Your post should be submitted to Webster for the definition of "hypocrisy."
[/quote]
Well, the rest of my most wasn't really aimed at you, just the part where I called your posting terrible, but if you took it to mean that then I must have struck a sore spot, huh?

No, I'm not doing anything. I already did my part already, it wasn't huge, but I'm okay with being a supporting character. Now, I'm in retirement. I'm thinking I'm gonna stay in retirement until about May or so, at the very least, then maybe I'll look for something to do. Maybe not. Who knows. Honestly, I'm [i]entirely fine[/i] with stagnation until then. I read the forums once a day or two just to see if there's anything interesting, and that's where I start to have a problem. You see, too many people are whining about nothing happening. I don't really give two !@#$% if people do something or don't just so long as they shut up about whatever it is they're not doing and think everyone else should be doing.

Edited December 5, 2010 by NoFish

[Bob Janova]

The problem, if you believe there is one, is with the alliances that are happy with a secondary role, and don't try to do anything about the web which keeps them there. We have made Pandora's Box, and I'd say that the alliances in that bloc are in the primary role in CN at the moment; both Orders are almost certainly attempting to coalition build and put themselves in a stronger position, because they play the power game well. People call MK the puppeteers and they certainly try to build their own sphere of influence. But look at most of the rest of the world and ask yourself how many of those alliances are simply playing a support role to someone else, and are happy to do so.

So as not to point fingers at anyone, let's take a look at the Continuum hegemony – as always, people were complaining about stagnation, but in that case they had a point (there wasn't a real contested war apart from noCB/BLEU war in 18 months under it). The problem wasn't with the alliances everyone hated – NPO, Valhalla, TPF, GGA – but with the alliances in the 'outer core' that were happy with the web and didn't bother trying to do anything about it. IRON, MCXA, Superfriends (yes they did eventually but they spent over a year MDP'd to Continuum and NPO), Echelon, Legion, ... the list goes on, and I'm sure there are plenty of micros in there too. Eventually, as well as the core breaking up (Continuum was fairly dysfunctional towards the end), some of that protective web did decide to make a power grab and do something about it, and Karma happened. Now the 'hegemony' is centred around a different place, and different people are in that 'outer core' role, but the stagnation, such as it is, is down to them not wanting to shake the 'inner core' up. Take it up with them, or if you're in an irrelevant micro and want something to happen, join them and influence their FA and internal thinking so that they try to grab more power.

[NoFish]

[quote name='Bob Janova' timestamp='1291594802' post='2531374']
The problem, if you believe there is one, is with the alliances that are happy with a secondary role, and don't try to do anything about the web which keeps them there. We have made Pandora's Box, and I'd say that the alliances in that bloc are in the primary role in CN at the moment; both Orders are almost certainly attempting to coalition build and put themselves in a stronger position, because they play the power game well. People call MK the puppeteers and they certainly try to build their own sphere of influence. But look at most of the rest of the world and ask yourself how many of those alliances are simply playing a support role to someone else, and are happy to do so.

So as not to point fingers at anyone, let's take a look at the Continuum hegemony – as always, people were complaining about stagnation, but in that case they had a point (there wasn't a real contested war apart from noCB/BLEU war in 18 months under it). The problem wasn't with the alliances everyone hated – NPO, Valhalla, TPF, GGA – but with the alliances in the 'outer core' that were happy with the web and didn't bother trying to do anything about it. IRON, MCXA, Superfriends (yes they did eventually but they spent over a year MDP'd to Continuum and NPO), Echelon, Legion, ... the list goes on, and I'm sure there are plenty of micros in there too. Eventually, as well as the core breaking up (Continuum was fairly dysfunctional towards the end), some of that protective web did decide to make a power grab and do something about it, and Karma happened. Now the 'hegemony' is centred around a different place, and different people are in that 'outer core' role, but the stagnation, such as it is, is down to them not wanting to shake the 'inner core' up. Take it up with them, or if you're in an irrelevant micro and want something to happen, join them and influence their FA and internal thinking so that they try to grab more power.
[/quote]

This really is an excellent post.

Though I think it's worth noting as someone in SF at the time we were less "happy with the web" and more "afraid that NPO would roll us if we canceled treaties." Given what happened not too long after said treaties were canceled, I feel we were justified.

[WorldConqueror]

[quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1291601160' post='2531469']
This really is an excellent post.

Though I think it's worth noting as someone in SF at the time we were less "happy with the web" and more "afraid that NPO would roll us if we canceled treaties." Given what happened not too long after said treaties were canceled, I feel we were justified.
[/quote]
I still think that justification is hilarious. 'No, we didn't like NPO, we were just scared of them, so we maintained treaties with them and plotted behind their backs! That's much better, right guys?'. Almost as funny as everyone else nodding sagely and saying 'Yes, of course. I mean, those guys were evil, and we were pants-*****ingly scared of them too. You should feel proud to have bravely held those treaties until the last second!'.

[crushtania]

Just bring it, fools.

[NoFish]

[quote name='WorldConqueror' timestamp='1291601843' post='2531488']
I still think that justification is hilarious. 'No, we didn't like NPO, we were just scared of them, so we maintained treaties with them and plotted behind their backs! That's much better, right guys?'. Almost as funny as everyone else nodding sagely and saying 'Yes, of course. I mean, those guys were evil, and we were pants-*****ingly scared of them too. You should feel proud to have bravely held those treaties until the last second!'.
[/quote]

GOD never had any treaties with the NPO, I didn't approve of the fact that my allies did. However, since you attacked us not long after the treaties were dropped, I've since felt their feelings justified. It takes a particular kind of twisted mind to blame others for going behind your back when your FA policy is "ally with us or get rolled into dirt."

[Velka]

Why don't all the uranium nations band together in one giant alliance, monopolise nuclear weapons and launch some sort of great big atomic war on everyone. That'd be a laugh.

[Rextu]

I don't think the politics of this game have really stagnated any further since 2007.

Wars are still fought, treaties are still signed and the cycle of gameplay has not changed. Although the Manhattan Project wonder may stand against that last statement. Granted, the membership has halved since I started playing, but twenty thousand is still a decent number.

As for alliance leadership, the it's a similar path anywhere. Join an alliance, build rapport with as many people as you can, rule a certain department with strong competence, then take the next step. (Note: RL relationships occasionally have an influence on the selection of leaders and deputies). I was in MCXA for two and a half years before becoming Chancellor, previously being Minister of Finance.

But fact is, most new alliances that start up are run by people who have no !@#$@#$ clue, hence leading them into collapse. I've played this game for almost 4 years, been in MCXA govt for months and still sometimes feel like a noob. But there are times when you have to be humble and times when you cannot be.

Now onto diplomacy. I think if you play this game properly, you don't just lead your alliance. You lead other alliances. Have strength of character, win a war, rise to the top.