Jump to content

Zed

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    293

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Zed

    Take me out to the ball game

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    On 2/11/2023 at 4:43 AM, Changeup said:

    More importantly, what sort of baseball is being played in early february

    Latin American leagues usually happen in the winter seasons of Northern Hemisphere. Weather is conducive to it, and you're not playing in most of the US anyway at that time.

     

    9 hours ago, Sweeeeet Ronny D said:

    The only major alliance that does this as far as I know is Grumpy, and even we have had to tone it back.  The reason 99.9% of alliances dont tell their members anything is that if plans get leaked it can completely blow up an alliance/bloc's plans which can lead to them getting rolled.  So the rule of thumb is that most alliances consider the risk to be too great to share OPSEC info with it's general members.  Alot of alliances have additional walls between lower gov and upper gov, and you can have blocs that have an additional wall between upper gov and alliance leaders only. (and if you really want to know where the real plans get made its in private group chats between like 3-5 extremely influential people)

     

    Being an alliance with only experienced veterans who know the culture of the game and about how stuff works is a rarity. Few alliances work on that scale; most majors do some form of active recruiting with brand new players, and that comes with upsides and risks. Elite culture alliances tend to not be large in member count for a variety of reasons, but one of the upsides is that you can be very free and open with members relative to groups that recruit from the masses.

    • Upvote 1

    No one wants to take over the game

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    17 hours ago, Adrienne said:

    No one said they died lmao. But most people aren't in other nation sims like CN and NS and a lot of folks don't use discord extensively except for this game, so when they left, they left and you didn't hear from them again. You're the one making this more dramatic than it is lol.

     

    I know this will be very hypocritical, but y'all please come on - I hope we are not playing CN and NS now. PnW is bad enough as it is.

    • Haha 3

    [PEACE] An Unforgettable Luncheon

    in Alliance Affairs

    Posted

    12 minutes ago, Vein said:


    A) O Fortuna's NAP with GGO lasts until Wednesday, 24 May 2023 7pm EST.

    O Fortuna's NAP with HoF lasts until Monday, 20 March 2023 7pm EST.

     

      Reveal hidden contents

    O Fortuna, on behalf of Terminus est, all Protectorates, and all Extensions,

    Eclipse
    Commander & FA Specialist - Vein
    Defense Specialist - Pascal
    Econ Specialist - Patrick Stewart
    Whale Specialist - Sphinx
    Internal Affairs Specialist - Avatar Patrick
    Tech Specialist - Putmir

    The Syndicate
    Chief Global Strategist - WANA
    Chief Security Officer - Golden Pope 

    Weebunism
    General Secretary: Empiur

     

    HOGG

    Grumpy Old Bastards
    SRD
    Presidential

    Guardian
    Vanek26
    JtTeE
    Memph
    Synthesis

    The Hand of Fate
    Prophet - Ducc Zucc
    Diplomancer - Velyni Vas

    Oblivion
    The Oblivion Company
    DtC Justice (Message for free money)
    Ockey1 
    Ockey2 
    Ockey3 
    Ockey4 
    Ockey5 
    Ockey6 
    Ockey7
    Ockey9
    Ockey42069
    Ockey45454
    Ockey1105
    Ockey0311 
    Ockey19 
    Ockey08 
    Ockey28 
    Ockey48 
    Ockey69


    EST? When the official game time is UTC, and most of the places currently on EST will be on EDT and not EST? Is this… amateur hour? 
     

    Just now, Roberts said:

    This but unironically. No one deserves a NAP.


    Don’t make me tap the sign. 

    On the current state of Foreign Affairs

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    Ever since people in this game worked out that city tiering was a useful thing to gather around, alliances have looked to form groupings that addressed that question in some way. Either you tried to make sure you had good coverage in every tier (or most of them), or you loaded up across a band and made sure you convincingly won there. This really is just MilCom and FA coming together to figure out something that will project power and accomplish the goals you want to do.

    The tier list chart posted above more or less shows this at work. Two of the spheres have gone for the many low and mid nations route, but they have almost nothing in the 35+ range. Then there are four groupings that are mostly 25+, although their configurations each have some kind of distinction. There have been times when some configurations have been more broadly criticized; whether any action gets taken or not is a matter for people to decide upon.

    No one wants to take over the game

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    On 1/14/2023 at 9:42 AM, Arthur Wellington said:

    I really like history. Also PnW history. 

     

    But I don't understand why NPO is talked about so much? Has there really been no progression at all since then? Hasn't Fear and HoF been suprisingly effective scare AA's for some time at least? Hasn't TKR formed a close knitted community since then? Or even bigger, RON? Tech guys made non NPO tech, drama's have come and gone since then and players have gotten attention alot without being connected to NPO or Roq. 

    Referencing to a gone aspect of the game makes it sometimes seen to me that the game/community has stagnated since then, when it didn't really if you read above posts (and simply skip the NPO parts). 

    I really enjoy the game without thinking it's connected to NPO at all. Vein and Pascal are doing awesome, HOGG failed terribly. Camelot is making a comeback. Nokia Rokia is been forgiven. George still didn't pay me my 200m back. I'm c33, highest I've ever been. I like to see the alliances FA moves, tkr fighting, cata trying but failing for the moment, the inevitable moment eclipse will loose (2023?). And of all this without freakin non existing NPO!

     

     

    (*Insert appropriate meme here*)

     

    There are many real life analogies for some thing continuing on, and sometimes making great achievements and developments, while yet being stagnated as an entity and/or sundered of their former glory or heights. I think there are certainly things that have stagnated in the game and the meta, but it does not mean the entire game is at a standstill. Here is a different thought - when was the last major change to the meta of fighting a war, in terms of the mechanics used? It certainly has been a few years. And this says nothing of improvements or resources or other things like that - basic mechanics which have a hard reality to them which after some period of time have been well worn and better resolved.

    Pacifica are also a convenient scapegoat to anathematize. This is why they can be brought up and discussed, even though we are coming up on 3 years without them, and they are not in the memory of a lot of our playerbase.

    • Like 1

    Chicken or the Egg? New Alliances or Old Problems?

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    The thing about democracy in these games is that, unless you have a relatively strong and talented player base, any democratic alliance is going to be beset by demagoguery. Such an act does not represent true ability or skill at the wider game; merely what you can do or present to your own members. The flip side is that democracy can work, but again, you have to have active and engaged players to pull it off. Such alliances tend to be smaller anyway, because managing all the personalities in the room is hard at scale. Charles posted about that idea just above.

    Some game departments do not lend themselves to having a lot of people involved, and some alliance cultures also constrain this. You really do not need that many people in Econ or Tech; and there is a good chance that in some places the Econ people blend with MilCom or IA. On a different note, while there have been attempts to have a large FA staff in t$, it usually has not been a long lasting or durable idea. This is more down to alliance culture, and the types of people who have led t$ FA, than realities on the ground with managing global affairs.

    Having said that, there is a relatively diminished scale in terms of working with other alliances compared to what would happen if we had 1000 member alliances and more major powers. You have a much easier time managing those kinds of decisions in smaller groups when you do not have as many people or places to visit. The advent of improved technology, and the blessing to use it in some instances by the admins, has led to some departments needing far fewer staff to operate.

    Most of our alliances in this game are within the realm of Dunbar's Number, whether the 150 version or the expanded 230 Bernard–Killworth version. That will play into community formation, and how some larger alliances will grow and have something attractive to join, versus a smaller group with more limited resources and less ability to influence world politics.

     

    On 1/15/2023 at 6:47 PM, Roberts said:

    Building off of this, I also think a big part of it is that the major powers have stopped really participating in the politics of the rest of the world. There is no accountability other than verbal threat for most of the smaller AA's. Pay lip service and stay out of the majors ways and you're pretty much safe except from raiders. Get a protector and suddenly natural selection no longer exists.

    TKR, Rose, t$, Eclipse, Cata, etc. all only concern themselves with whatever TKR, Rose, t$, Eclipse, Cata, etc. are doing.

     

    If we stopped constantly slamming into each other over tiering issues and start going after grudges or loud-mouthed micros, I think the game would become more interesting and politics would flow a little more naturally than constantly arguing over tiering, size, or treaty chess.\

    I can scarcely think of the last time I actually felt emotion from any given war against Rose or t$ or whoever.

     

    I am very much on record for beating the tar out of micros with skill issues because they are a waste, and I am more than eager to clear them off of the Green color sphere as well. Most of the powers on Green are not exactly the best of friends with each other, but there is a tacit understanding that they will all be better off if scrubby nations are cleared from the color. This is an act of politics that transcends alliance treaties, and it really only one of the few examples of it happening out there. For some reason most alliances feel like they can put their offshore on Green too, which is misguided.

    This does not change the fact that for most of the majors, there is little need to "participate in the politics of the rest of the world", because there just are not that many alliances in the world which are worth paying attention to. Changeup mentions the same thing above.

    But this is not some attempt to crack at a historical punching bag like (insert your favorite historical punching bag here) - when you account for offshores and academies, there are not really that many alliances outside of the Top 60 or so worth really dealing with. As I stated earlier, I am more than glad to see them exiled from Green, but otherwise... meh. And for most nations above c20, there would not be a lot to do either.

     

    No one wants to take over the game

    in Orbis Central

    Posted

    14 hours ago, Kastor said:

    Everything that happened because of NPO has everyone scared. The issue with these minispheres is everyone is using it as a cop out.

    The goal of the game is to guide your alliance into a hegemony. One that you build, not that you form. You use that hegemony to inflict your governing rules on the game. Thats why a lot of things resemble Guardian, tS, TKr, Rose. 

    No one should try to do what npo did. But don’t let shat they did dissuade you from playing the game. Not making moves simply because you are scared of taking over the game is a bad move. The game needs villains. Too often we shy away from being the villains but trust me, you gain respect by being the bad guy. Not by being the yes man.

     

    I in general agree with the sentiment of your first paragraph, although I disagree with the sentiment of the second insofar as the ultimate objective of the game.

    No one should try to do what Pacifica did, and we agree. I think most of the game agrees. Trying to do some of the politics like they did, with a dominant hegemony, has been thrown out with them. I know we just had a joke term thread between OWR and TKR, but some of those terms would not have been out of the question in ages past. We only really do admissions of defeat, white peace, and memes for terms now. Finding those wars with anything substantially more, like TFP-Arrgh, is uncommon.

    Now that said, there are probably fewer alliances that play in those alternate styles. Raiders have generally been defanged relative to their previous heights, the number of giant neutrals is mostly zero, and there are probably few relevant banker type players. It does seem like more alliances are either general gaming communities, or variations of a PNW-wide community. Someone like Borg is a good example of an alternative individual player, but that is one individual in a game of groups of players, and there are not many of those types in the game.

    I think it is possible to have a hegemon in this meta, but you need at least one, and really you need two, alliance(s) with the broad based appeal and power - both soft and hard - to pull off that kind of governance. The rest do not explicitly have to be that, so long as they can all buy in and fit somehow to whatever that central power is. I am not sure if there are any great candidates to lead a true hegemon right now among the major alliances. Moreover, you would need some alliances to get together and drive towards that as a goal, and as of this moment I do not think that is happening. It could happen, but I think you need some slight changes to the current political environment in order to make it look closer to a reality.

     

    13 hours ago, Lord of Puns said:


    This is what happens when you leave the political scene for a while. You fall into old tropes. Any person that truly believes that this game can be won forgets the 90 different times people have claimed this “win” or built “the perfect hegemony”.

     

    I do think that there are periods where an alliance can say they have "won", in these games. That does not always have to last, and it does not always have to be the strongest military alliance or the one in the #1 AA rank by score. The threshold for that is relatively high, and I would not give that to an alliance that simply won a global war without the impacts of it lasting long-term.

    There are probably 3-4 alliances who can say they have hit that height ever in this game, as it stands right now.

    • Upvote 4
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.

  I accept