Zed

Other commenters have noted several tidbits that I agree with. The Enterprise has a multiple-day application process, and tax rates are well below "command economy" levels. But that is how it is done there. Any alliance worth a rip is going to vet applicants thoroughly, even if they spam message to everyone. Also, any alliance worth anything useful will tell you what they offer for things like grants and taxes. I am not going to say all alliances know what they are doing, because there is a fair amount of dross out there, but in general many of the alliances trying to recruit new players have established procedures and practices because they are what work for the best and most efficient growth and construction of a player nation. This is a good reminder that the game itself and the culture/meta of the game are not always in sync with one another. Just playing the game to play the game is something you can do, but in all honesty I do not know many players or alliances which do this. Finding this game, signing up, and then getting swarmed with messages from all of these places can be a little overwhelming and confusing, and it is tough to navigate sure. There are a lot of nations though that get signed up, poke around for a day or two, and then just never come back. It would be great to avoid this. The reality is that if you do not like where you went you can leave, but keep in mind the various alliances all have different requirements and procedures. Some alliances might be bigger or smaller, but that is not always a measure of skill. Good luck.

Did I not already tell you? SK is disbanded, so you do not have to actually go to war against them to claim the crown.

A good write up. It appears from the outside that the former HedgeMoney elements of Hollywood wanted to make some kind of change and have a fight, but they did not have a lot of options. As TKR would have had some bones to pick with Rose, they were probably the easiest target to assume. That said, t$ chose not to assume anything, and I wonder if Rose wanted to attempt some sort of detente by not arming up, because I just cannot see them looking at a map and assuming that they were not an extremely likely target to be hit due to the nature of the alliances and their structure in Hollywood. I gave Rose a Low Pass on the alliance tier rankings from a recent post because I know Rose is better than what happened in GW18. Would a fully-milled Rose, along with Oasis and the half of Mystery that entered, have been enough to beat Hollywood? Maybe, but I suspect it would have taken longer than the length of this war to do so. Is the appetite there for that? Extremely large coalitions take a lot of planning to be successful with, and, I suspect due to the circumstances of Hollywood's "surprise" attack on a not-totally-prepared Rose, that was not what was on display here. I think Hollywood took a risk here, and at least in the short-term it accomplished a lot of goals for them and it was worth taking. I do not really buy the narrative of secret treaties between Oasis and Rose, mostly due to what Oasis has stated about their philosophies of the game, and the fact that the meta has changed to some point. If you want to have some concept of minispheres, which we can debate to whether it is good or not, then we have to accept that there will be times when some of them fight and some of them do not. We have not broken the mindset where if there is a major but not truly global war, that we will sit in a period of peace for awhile. I think Oasis and the parts of Mystery that entered felt that pressure to actually fight, because they might not know where their next chance will have come from. For them the upshot is that they can reset several narratives, get some fighting in, and make the argument that nearly everyone has fought and so foreign affairs can have a mulligan. Is that good? We have reached a point in the game where at certain city levels the player base is small enough to mean changes in competence and performance really matter. This is why there are alliances that have very outsized performance relative to their numbers, and some where you just expect better from them and they fall well short. Whether we care to admit it or not, like most games and sports the rules and mechanics matter for determining who is successful within them. It has been said that the next global war, and its circumstances of who fights, how it starts, what the peace terms are, and all, will define the meta of the game for the long-term. I buy that.

Ayy lmao disband your alliance and join BK stronk

"Facism" sounds like Facebook meets The Sims, and frankly we do not need that anywhere near here.

So I suppose my questions are: what combination of factors makes a good alliance? Not every alliance will reach that path in the same way, and it is difficult to give a lot of universal truths about it. In general having good member activity and a good understanding of the mechanics of the game is about as universal as it gets. From there I would posit that you need to find some niche in the game. Most of the newest alliances in the game today seem to take a very active approach in raiding and small-scale conflicts, which does require activity. Becoming a macro-alliance is a different story, and will definitely take a lot of time and effort. I would also suggest that at this point if you do not have some kind of automation or programming ability, whether you make it or buy it, you will be at a major disadvantage in the meta compared to those who do. How does one revive a dying alliance? This is difficult. Most alliances that are at this point generally need some established players to right the ship, and have the activity level to do so. And most do not have this, so they fail. Black Knights grew rapidly and then had a major exodus following NPOLT. But, they had some of their founding government come back, along with a few others, and they were able to succeed from that point. There was an alliance called Viridian Entente which rebranded into Guardians of the Galaxy, and that helped them get through a period of internal struggle and conflict. In general though, you are probably better off following some mix of the two, if you can pull that off, and most alliances are not as successful as BK or VE/GotG. How does one create a good alliance from scratch? As others have pointed out, it generally helps to have a base in the game already before you take your own venture. People making their own micro and getting rolled out of existence because they do not have the economic or manpower resources, foreign connections, or just plain raw ability to survive the initial stages of an alliance happens a lot. It would be good if it happened less. I do not think everyone needs to join a macro-alliance to be successful, as there are several solid mid-tier alliances that one could be a part of and really grow with. But to start your own venture you do need some leaders to run things, and it helps if you have a good mix of skills to administer all of the affairs of your alliance.

With some apologies since I do not know everyone out there, and I am not always in the know. High - Alliances that are entirely above the norm, accounting for tiering, member count, or other considerations. Not a grade to be given lightly. Pass - Alliances which are satisfactory. This does not mean boring, weak, or not a power-player. I consider anyone here to be competent. Low - Alliances who need to do some more work to reach the above for whatever reason, but are above a failing grade. Fail - Alliances scoring poor marks in some major category or another. Ungraded - I did not grade alliances I knew little about, and I did not grade t$.

The flashbacks. The horror.

This post might be a bit silly with recent happenings, but here we go. A large part of the issue we had around the end of the NAP was that the incentives for almost anyone to hit anyone just were not there. I would imagine that the only war that might have made some sense was Swamp v Oasis given their beef, but that still left three other major spheres plus some unaligneds out in the wind. While that could be fine, there is a good argument that those were the 4th and 5th most influential of the five major spheres; hardly the stuff of major global wars or politics. Even if you got that, what in the world were the other three spheres supposed to do? There were really no incentives for any of them to hit the other, and no incentives for any of them to team up to fight the third. For Roselot this is simply due to their usual position as kingmakers rather than major movers, plus their own individual matchups are not perfect against Quack or Hedge. For Quack this is because they do not have the whales to really fight Hedge in an interesting way and a Roselot war would allow Hedge to either farm or feel free to combine safely. For Hedge hitting either Quack or Roselot just does not accomplish any goal for them with the way their tiering is setup, unless the raiders want some different targets. Now we have something a little better stewing to take the pressure off, but it is still going to require some shuffling post-war. I think you might get it, but the look and feel in terms of the meta may not change all that much. Of all the major spheres, Hedge is the only one that could just run it back and stand pat, and they would be fine. If everyone else is going to make major changes around you, but you yourself do not really lose anything in your positioning because of the mechanical or technological advantages you have, then you are a winner. The cards can fall where they may. Of course Hedge could make a few changes, but unless GG actually split then there is not much to discuss. Camelot leaving Rose should in theory allow Rose to feel like one of their biggest thorns (no pun intended) is removed from their side in terms of public opinion, and they should feel more confident about playing in public FA. I would also expect Rose to feel confident in picking up anyone from Swamp that they want, and integrate them into their powerbase; some ex-Swamp would likely take on that second power role Camelot had, and I can see several of them being happy with that. Oasis dropping micros to add Camelot is a wash in terms of actual power, but they were really the only bloc that could take in Camelot safely without having some immediate blowback, and it will make them more formidable as a collective to have Camelot rather than the micros. It is a powerplay move, and honestly I like it for everyone involved. If Swamp decides to formally break up post-war then they will probably have a few options of where to go. Some of them might try to lead the micro bloc, some of them might go to Rose, some might make a minisphere, and some might try to find one of the other majors severing off. Most of them, I suspect, will have some choices. They may not be leaders anywhere, but they would probably be able to at least get something to be influential. Quack splintering, and in the only way people talk about which is TKR breaking its spoke off of the t$ hub, will also lead to a lot of changes. TKR will be a very popular pickup for almost anyone out there - especially if they would be willing to sign into GG or Rose. I imagine even Oasis would work to try and add them if that was an option. TKR can also feel fine to make their own sphere too, and they are capable enough to actually do it and be successful in a multipolar world. As for the other spokes off of t$, most of them are also going to have options as to what to do. While I am biased, I would also imagine that t$ could also pick pretty much any destiny it wanted in a post-Quack landscape, and few alliances would actually refuse. Finally there are the unaligneds, such as KT, SF, and the Micro bloc, among others not here. Most probably will not be super relevant to global politics, but I expect KT and SF to be individually influential enough in their own right, and the Micro bloc could maybe cobble something together with a little help from the outside to make something at least partially respectable. So will you get political stagnation to go away? At least in part, probably. Will it be enough? I think that is a question you will have to answer for yourself.

I, for one, support this.

Orange Alliance Bad DRAIN THE SWAMP!

DRAIN THE SWAMP! FOR JUSTICE! FOR GREEN!

I will not lie to you and say that I remembered this, because I did not. I know there were imports from there which reformed under a different aegis here, and many of them blended multiple communities together. Fair play.

I am not a fan for the reason that in CN, more or less, resources were the marketplace. They also had interesting ties to color politics, especially when you could not change your resources. In this game we have a marketplace which is dynamic based on how players configure their nations and their resources. In this game we already have a marketplace, one which I think is way better than that other game, and to be honest it would be better to improve it directly rather than add something layered on top. I think it would be more interesting if some of these proposed commodities or whatanot became improvement slots. I know there has been discussions about Tourism or Recreation or some other improvement categories... but what about other resources? Almost all of the resources in this game go towards war, with the small exception of some that occasionally get ported over to building improvements/projects and power plant consumption. Why not have something else? Additional war resources, or amplifiers to resources you already have, or just straight up new stuff which might be used on the commerce side of the game. Commodities, as proposed here, seem to be something layered on top of already existing mechanics that could just be directly expanded out themselves. That would freshen the meta up, and provide nations with more choices to make in terms of how they build their nations. Honestly, some of the military unit designations that CN had (which relate a bit to those long-talked about military upgrades that have not come here), and the Senate (you want some more actual color politics from what we have now? Bring the Senate into this game...), would be better things to port over from CN than the trade circles.

It is unfortunate that it came to this, but it had to be done.

The alliance I spent my CN career in was usually a friend and close ally of IRON. I have many good memories of working with IRON there; some of them even tie over to color unity and politics that I appreciate in this game (just I swapped Orange for Green). The Syndicate itself has had players from CN IRON in it as well, and some of them are very influential players of IRON even today. All of them were wonderful members of our community, and I would not mind seeing them again. I stand by that. What I am not a fan of, and why I had a more cold response, is why you would choose to import a community in its direct branding over from one place to here given the historical connections and ties that have happened in both games. IRON has a very strong legacy in CN, and would probably be a Sanctioned Alliance if there were an all-time ranking; people know the name. The contemporary cross-game ties are troubling here. I understand that gaming communities often move into multiple games, after all I suspect most of the players here got their start in some other game before this one. I do not have problems with that because doing so would be hypocritical, and it would ignore reality. Honestly if you had formed an alliance, had IRON members come over, and called it something else entirely without the branding from another place which does not evoke a good reaction here… I would not have the same public reaction. As I have stated before, the alliance I play in now (spare me the micro jokes) has had wonderful members of CN IRON in it. I know I have made plenty of posts here which would be critical of certain new communities forming because they are not in a position of strength to understand how to be successful with the mechanics of a new game when it is well-established. I stand by that; part of that understanding is knowing some of the history of a game, and realizing that some people will not appreciate overt references to a community which has ties to one that not only willingly and deliberately violated the rules of the game, but also sought to exterminate players opposed to them from it. It is not a good look. I do not believe you, or this iteration of IRON, will violate the rules willingly and deliberately, nor will you want to seek the removal of players from the game. Good luck.

Imagine using the same theme across games, especially when the recent history of your alliance in one game is being a principal ally of another alliance which violated the rules in another game that you now are going to and showed absolutely no remorse or regret for it.

Because we all know that Partisan does not retire, and will merely be back to lead t$ FA in like a year or two after we've put in some random IA/MilCom people to do it first. amirite

Alliance of the Year: Black Knights Most Powerful Alliance: Grumpy Old Bastards Most Improved Alliance: Black Knights Best Rookie Alliance (must be an alliance formed in 2020): Error 404 Most Missed Alliance: Mensa HQ Best Alliance for New Players: The Enterprise Most Honorable Alliance: House Stark Most Immoral Alliance: Guinea Pig Whaling Corp Most Controversial Alliance: Camelot Biggest Warmongers: Mythic Biggest Pixel-Huggers: Yarr Worst Fighting Alliance: Rose Best Alliance Growth: The Syndicate Biggest Alliance Decline: New Pacific Order Most Likely to Succeed in 2021: Arrgh Most Likely to be Rolled in 2021: Camelot Best Economics Department: The Syndicate Best Foreign Affairs Department: Rose Best Internal Affairs Department: Black Knights Best Milcom Department: The Syndicate Best Government Line-Up: The Syndicate Best Bloc (can be a bloc that disbanded this year): Quack Best Foreign Affairs Move: Rose/HM/Swamp backroom secret treaty Worst Foreign Affairs Move: Sphinx getting leaked multiple times Best Treaty Announcement (please link):https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/29853-they-grow-up-so-fast-electric-boogaloo-2/ Best Declaration of War (please link): Wherever Swamp’s DoW on Arrgh was (not linking) Best Propaganda Post (please link): https://forum.politicsandwar.com/index.php?/topic/30098-propaganda-thread/page/2/&tab=comments#comment-475424 Alliance with Best In-Character Posts: Terminal Jest Alliance with Best Propaganda: The Knights Radiant Best Alliance Ad (please link): The SNES Duck Hunt Ad (not linking) Best Flag (peacetime/standard flags only please): Children of the Light Best War Flag: Guardian Best Holiday Flag: Aurora

Wow we really do need to Fire Vero for these leaks. Congrats and condolences to all. It has been wonderful all around.

Partisani Doctrine requires a Green Enforcement Agency. Make it happen, please.

> including Leo and Adri but not me I am incredibly hurt by this turn of events. Therefore I must call for retribution to my grievances, which I will do as follows: ALEXIO OF THE AMPERSANDII I CALL FOR JUSTICE

I, for one, look forward to all of the micros exiting Green with expedient haste to restore Partisani Doctrine to its rightful state. Let's not, unironically.

Not only month/day/year, but a hideous mongrel version where there is a 01, but only a 7 and a 21 on the back-end. I believe I am going to have to have a stern talking to with Prefonteen about proper procedures in foreign affairs, because this is absolutely dire form.

So good, it happened again. https://politicsandwar.com/nation/war/timeline/war=813406 12/08 04:50 am Emperor Viriato of Portuguese ordered a ground attack upon your nation of Paradisum. The attack was an immense triumph. Emperor Viriato's forces lost 100 soldiers and 0 tanks, while your defenders lost 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. You used 0.00 tons of munitions and 0.00 tons of gasoline defending the attack. The attack destroyed 32.30 infrastructure in the city of Purgatorium. Emperor Viriato stole $0.00 in the attack and destroyed 0 improvements. 12/08 04:50 am Emperor Viriato of Portuguese has defeated you in war. You have forfeited $46,724, 0 Coal, 0 Oil, 272 Uranium, 0 Iron, 0 Bauxite, 0 Lead, 261 Gasoline, 304 Munitions, 359 Steel, 200 Aluminum, and 4,037 Food and lost 4.2% of the infrastructure in each of your cities in exchange for peace. Your nation has been automatically moved to the Beige Protection Color Trade Bloc for 24 turns. This prevents new war declarations on your nation. 12/08 04:50 am Your alliance bank has been looted! Emperor Viriato of Portuguese took $234,860, 0 Coal, 30 Oil, 22 Uranium, 10 Iron, 2 Bauxite, 23 Lead, 45 Gasoline, 36 Munitions, 59 Steel, 40 Aluminum, and 362 Food. 12/08 04:50 am Emperor Viriato of Portuguese ordered a ground attack upon your nation of Paradisum. The attack was an immense triumph. Emperor Viriato's forces lost 117 soldiers and 0 tanks, while your defenders lost 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. You used 0.00 tons of munitions and 0.00 tons of gasoline defending the attack. The attack destroyed 32.33 infrastructure in the city of Tian. Emperor Viriato stole $0.00 in the attack and destroyed 0 improvements. 12/08 04:50 am Emperor Viriato of Portuguese ordered a ground attack upon your nation of Paradisum. The attack was an immense triumph. Emperor Viriato's forces lost 85 soldiers and 0 tanks, while your defenders lost 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. You used 0.00 tons of munitions and 0.00 tons of gasoline defending the attack. The attack destroyed 34.00 infrastructure in the city of Purgatorium. Emperor Viriato stole $0.00 in the attack and destroyed 0 improvements. 12/08 04:49 am Emperor Viriato of Portuguese ordered a ground attack upon your nation of Paradisum. The attack was an immense triumph. Emperor Viriato's forces lost 96 soldiers and 0 tanks, while your defenders lost 0 soldiers and 0 tanks. You used 0.00 tons of munitions and 0.00 tons of gasoline defending the attack. The attack destroyed 34.03 infrastructure in the city of Tian. Emperor Viriato stole $0.00 in the attack and destroyed 0 improvements.