State of Orbis

[greatkitteh]

What about The Shittisyphere attack OO for Steve?

[Buorhann]

Oh, nice.  Looks like we chapped greatkitteh's ass with the new name development.

[LordRahl2]

He has been triggered for like 4 months straight. I think its a record for thr notmal Orbis forums.

[greatkitteh]

He has been triggered for like 4 yeara straight. I think its a record for thr notmal Orbis forums.

Fify

[Roquentin]

1. I haven't seen the stats

 

2. 1k active players sounds about right for our very niche genera. Why is that "a dying game" to you? lol

 

 

 

If you want an actually shocking stat, have the FA guys march out and quote how many different people they see log on to IRC/discord/forums daily even during war.

 

 

Now, take a guess at how many people actually speak or post more than once a week.

 

 

 

People logging in to X communication method, I think 1000 people may be accurate if you include forum lurkers for every single alliance.

 

People speaking/posting? Probably the same hundred or so people, tops.

 

 

 

This will never be a million-member game or genera. That doesn't mean it's dead or stagnating.

 

The retention is pretty bad given how many accounts have been made. 

 

Here are the stats again:

47,250 nations have been simulated to date! 4,582 nations exist now, 2,110 nations have been active in the last week, and 973 nations have been active today. 588 new nations have been created this week, and 78 nations have been created today.

 

This isn't super active.  Compared to most other games of this genre in their hey day, this isn't very active.

 

Anyway, I've said my piece and will be retiring from the forum for now as I've gotten tired of it. 

[Foltest]

The retention is pretty bad given how many accounts have been made. 

 

Here are the stats again:

47,250 nations have been simulated to date! 4,582 nations exist now, 2,110 nations have been active in the last week, and 973 nations have been active today. 588 new nations have been created this week, and 78 nations have been created today.

 

This isn't super active.  Compared to most other games of this genre in their hey day, this isn't very active.

 

Anyway, I've said my piece and will be retiring from the forum for now as I've gotten tired of it. 

 

We're drifting a bit off topic but games like these will only ever appeal to a dwindling population. That's not the fault of the politics or the mechanics - though those may impact a small piece of players.

 

 

I don't say this to be a doomsayer but rather a realist. These games have years left on their lifespans imo. But think about how niche PnW is:

 

- Browser-based game, meaning a potential player has to actually find the website somehow

- Donation-funded, meaning advertising is limited. Development is limited.

- Text-based game, meaning - at best - you're working with pretty spreadsheets as your GUI.

- MMO, you will get raided to pieces if you try to solo this game so you have to be social. Which usually means learning an entirely new community / way of doing things like operating within an alliance or min/maxing your nation.

- Almost entirely player-driven content. 99% of this game happens because the players make it happen, otherwise you're looking at numbers occasionally growing.

 

 

 

The concept of having a "nation" (substitute this word if you want) and grouping up in "alliances" to raid and war other "alliances" is absolutely not a niche concept. People love it. They're some of THE most popular games on mobile devices.

 

We just happen to exist in an archaic implementation of the concept that will only ever appeal to a small number of people. The result from having a small population being that everyone has to min/max properly or be utterly useless (sound familiar in your coalition?) thereby discouraging new players from joining because it's such a competitive environment with a high learning curve. Plus the other stuff I mentioned.

[Harrison Richardson]

the MMO is what keeps players around.  It's literally the only reason I am here.  This game sucks.  But MENSA is fun because I've been playing games with these guys for 7-8 years.  I've literally gotten people in MENSA jobs (and vice versa).

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Bla bla bla, so many words. Instead, I have facts.

 

1) In all the wars after the Great Dogpile war, Paracovenant sphere had the numerical superiority both in terms of number of players, as well as total score. I cannot verify superiority in war stockpiles, but it goes without saying, given economic superiority.

 

2) In all these wars the Syndisphere, or whatever you want to call it, prevailed by superior activity, tactics, and determination, despite the stacked odds against them.

 

My suggestion to Paracovenant is to git gud. Train those players who use spies to kill planes. Sack leaders like Steve who think nukes are the weapons you use to win wars. Get people active, and prevent recruiting !@#$ who run away from the alliance by vacation mode or alliance hopping when shit gets rough.

 

ffs

[Charles Bolivar]

Bla bla bla, so many words. Instead, I have facts.

 

1) In all the wars after the Great Dogpile war, Paracovenant sphere had the numerical superiority both in terms of number of players, as well as total score. I cannot verify superiority in war stockpiles, but it goes without saying, given economic superiority.

 

2) In all these wars the Syndisphere, or whatever you want to call it, prevailed by superior activity, tactics, and determination, despite the stacked odds against them.

 

My suggestion to Paracovenant is to git gud. Train those players who use spies to kill planes. Sack leaders like Steve who think nukes are the weapons you use to win wars. Get people active, and prevent recruiting !@#$ who run away from the alliance by vacation mode or alliance hopping when shit gets rough.

 

ffs

 

 

100% this. I mean the Paracovenant  sphere is still using ships ffs when the rest of us abandoned them what, a year or more ago as being nothing more but a points and resource sink?

[Pangui]

syndisphere largely praised Paragon for creating a third sphere, about how breaking up large clusters of power is a good thing. Then BK signs with Mensa, further aligning the Syndisphere with OO. Paragon can't take the Synidaphere by itself, tc/NPO can't take on Syndisphete alone.

 

You want fresh politics? Well SK moved to the third aphere and where attacked on the OWF relentlessly because they left the aphere of influence. The Synidaphere is not promoting a dynamic political environment anymore than ParaCov. Guys like Kayser and the Mensa posters are obviously going to follow their agendas to promote their sphere, and further their influence and ask for people other than themselves to create politics, because they know full well that creating political diversity and adding extra political dynamics to the game will only hurt themselves by decreasing their unity and overall strength.

 

I'm fine with the "git gud" criticism, but OO and Syndisphere's increasing interconnectedness only furthers the reality of the game that they dislike so much.

[Harrison Richardson]

we actually do have an agenda.  I wrote the talking points for all of MENSA to follow.  It was tedious but worthwhile.  They never veer off message any more.

[Boony]

syndisphere largely praised Paragon for creating a third sphere, about how breaking up large clusters of power is a good thing. Then BK signs with Mensa, further aligning the Syndisphere with OO. Paragon can't take the Synidaphere by itself, tc/NPO can't take on Syndisphete alone.

 

You want fresh politics? Well SK moved to the third aphere and where attacked on the OWF relentlessly because they left the aphere of influence. The Synidaphere is not promoting a dynamic political environment anymore than ParaCov. Guys like Kayser and the Mensa posters are obviously going to follow their agendas to promote their sphere, and further their influence and ask for people other than themselves to create politics, because they know full well that creating political diversity and adding extra political dynamics to the game will only hurt themselves by decreasing their unity and overall strength.

 

I'm fine with the "git gud" criticism, but OO and Syndisphere's increasing interconnectedness only furthers the reality of the game that they dislike so much.

No no no, SK was being attacked because there was unreleased tension between SK and everyone else because of the Gandalf thing. A lot of us didn't care much.

[LordRahl2]

syndisphere largely praised Paragon for creating a third sphere

 

and largely criticized it for rejoining into one sphere in order to launch a war of aggression?  Seems logically consistent.

 

I wasn't in the "largely" though.

[Pangui]

and largely criticized it for rejoining into one sphere in order to launch a war of aggression?  Seems logically consistent.

 

I wasn't in the "largely" though.

If ParaCov together can't fight the Syndisphere, then why would either Paragon or the Covenant be able to take them alone? The split didn't have the intended results that VE and Rose wanted, which is why they called on us to help them in this war. I'm sure if Paragon found itself in a viable sphere capable of taking on Syndisphere alone, they would have. However, the alliances within the Syndisphere make that impossible by further aligning. 

[LordRahl2]

If ParaCov together can't fight the Syndisphere, then why would either Paragon or the Covenant be able to take them alone win? The split didn't have the intended results that VE and Rose wanted, which is why they called on us to help them in this war. I'm sure if Paragon found itself in a viable sphere capable of taking on Syndisphere alone, they would have. However, the alliances within the Syndisphere make that impossible by further aligning. 

 

By not fighting.

 

Fixed your question and answered it.

[Pangui]

By not fighting.

 

Fixed your question and answered it.

So wait for us to get hit by Syndisphere? Current political climate only sees a few scenarios, Paragon vs Syndisphere, tC vs Sydnipshere and tc vs Paragon. The latter would be a negative for both parties involved, with great benefit to that who stays out. I know Syndisphere likes to chalk it down as paranoia, but the fact of the matter is that when our sphere came even close to rivaling yours we were pre-empted. We have no reason to believe you wouldn't do it again. This war is the result of such politics, that we pressed a small advantage where we together pressed a militarization advantage even though the odds where tough.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Pangui

[Eumirbago]

So wait for us to get hit by Syndisphere? Current political climate only sees a few scenarios, Paragon vs Syndisphere, tC vs Sydnipshere and tc vs Paragon. The latter would be a negative for both parties involved, with great benefit to that who stays out. I know Syndisphere likes to chalk it down as paranoia, but the fact of the matter is that when our sphere came even close to rivaling yours we were pre-empted. We have no reason to believe you wouldn't do it again. This war is the result of such politics, that we pressed a small advantage where we together pressed a militarization advantage even though the odds where tough.

That's fine bby. Personally, a lot of us don't mind winning and beta testing more strats lmao.

[LordRahl2]

So wait for us to get hit by Syndisphere? Current political climate only sees a few scenarios, Paragon vs Syndisphere, tC vs Sydnipshere and tc vs Paragon. The latter would be a negative for both parties involved, with great benefit to that who stays out. I know Syndisphere likes to chalk it down as paranoia, but the fact of the matter is that when our sphere came even close to rivaling yours we were pre-empted.

 

You know how politics works.  If you had waited what would Syndisphere have looked like for beating up on a much smaller sphere?  Or it could have attacked both Spheres and then you could easily spin that into Syndisphere being the cause of (whatever it is we are upset about itt).

 

But more likely, particularly if you really could have a multi-polar world in Orbis, would have been limited wars.

 

Many posters here believe in a possible multi-polar game (I don't know about you) and if they did then they completely killed the idea-probably forever.

[Pangui]

The Syndisphere is the hegemon, like it or not. You can literally do whatever you want with impunity. Look at the BK raids against TOG, or the TKR war against RW. We can have a multi-polar world in the current system we have in place, however two smaller  spheres literally can't do anything but fight each other, wait to get hit, or join up. The first two you would not want to do when you are already behind in terms of real power(the amount of power you're AA can put into the battlefield). Is a part of it our inability to overcome the same enemy we've been facing for a while? Sure, but you also should understand that the current state of the game leaves the two spheres at a great disadvantage. I've viewed the Syndisphere as two entities, the Marrionette alliances and tS, and OO. Either one of those groupings leaving the other would create a more vibrant and open political climate. I understand that you worked for your hegemon and understand why one would not be eager to give it up, but to ask the weaker spheres too, just doesn't seem like the right course for change. 

[Guest Curufinwe]

syndisphere largely praised Paragon for creating a third sphere, about how breaking up large clusters of power is a good thing. Then BK signs with Mensa, further aligning the Syndisphere with OO. Paragon can't take the Synidaphere by itself, tc/NPO can't take on Syndisphete alone.

 

You want fresh politics? Well SK moved to the third aphere and where attacked on the OWF relentlessly because they left the aphere of influence. The Synidaphere is not promoting a dynamic political environment anymore than ParaCov. Guys like Kayser and the Mensa posters are obviously going to follow their agendas to promote their sphere, and further their influence and ask for people other than themselves to create politics, because they know full well that creating political diversity and adding extra political dynamics to the game will only hurt themselves by decreasing their unity and overall strength.

 

I'm fine with the "git gud" criticism, but OO and Syndisphere's increasing interconnectedness only furthers the reality of the game that they dislike so much.

 

See, the problem here is that you're talking about the Syndisphere-OOs interconnectedness like its entirely our doing, independent of the actions of Para-covenant. And that's really not the case.  As multiple posters have pointed out (and I believe I have discussed with you in query in the past), the Syndisphere-OO partnership originally arose due the ever increasing concentration of numbers and score on your side of the treaty web, along with various configurations of AAs on your side trying to roll our side on repeated occasions (Proxy, Oktoberfest, Proxyfest).  So to use Rahl's IR terminology, we originally banded together to balance against your side and thereby ensure our survival as independent actors.   So the security incentive was definitely there.  The 'problem' is your side has, unintentionally or not, created a situation where we all work together easily and without a lot of drama, meaning that we're generally more inclined to work together than, say, work with the 'two' blocs that has repeatedly attempted to roll us.  Trying to double down and attack us again because we're 'too connected' is therefore achieving the opposite of what you say you want, since no one seriously believes that Paragon and the Covenant are separate blocs at this point, meaning that we now have no incentive to split up our bloc even if we wanted to.  Plus, why would abandon the friends we've fought beside in every major war that's broken out since I joined PW last August to work with the side that has demonstrate that it is willing to launch yet another completely unprovoked attack on us even after saying it was all about 'new politics' and 'changing the dynamic of the game?'  You guys have squandered any goodwill you had from your 'brave' decision to split up your sphere and you ultimately have only yourselves to blame that the Syndisphere and OO work together as closely as we do.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Curufinwe

[Placentica]

My suggestion to Paracovenant is to git gud. Train those players who use spies to kill planes. Sack leaders like Steve who think nukes are the weapons you use to win wars. Get people active, and prevent recruiting !@#$ who run away from the alliance by vacation mode or alliance hopping when shit gets rough.

 

ffs

Hey there, mate.  I don't know you and, clearly, you don't know me (but you seem to think you do). 

 

Where did I ever post that you win wars with nukes?  Would you rather I "get gud" by figuring out a way for 21 nations to beat 150+ conventionally?  I'm open to your masterful wisdom.  I'll await your answer with bated breath. 

 

You talk big for a guy in an alliance that let Pantheon get demolished so you could get a shitload of help on two small alliances who had less members, less tanks, and less air than your alliance had at the start of our front.

Edited September 17, 2016 by Placentica

[Doktor Avalanche]

Simply stated:

 

Alliances ally other alliances for many reasons.

It is a game. Some people like to roll with other people.

Clans form. Like clans roll with like clans.

Some clans suck. Some clans suck hard.

When war happens, the more coordinated clans triumph, usually.

Some get caught off guard. It happens.

 

If anyone attempts to change this mindset, try growing cactii outside, during winter- in Wisconsin.

Ain't gonna happen. Debating these semantics is pretty futile, and trying to create a "better Orbis" by pulling from like minded clans is, well, stupid.

[Kemal Ergenekon]

Hey there, mate.  I don't know you and, clearly, you don't know me (but you seem to think you do). 

 

Where did I ever post that you win wars with nukes?  Would you rather I "get gud" by figuring out a way for 21 nations to beat 150+ conventionally?  I'm open to your masterful wisdom.  I'll await your answer with bated breath. 

 

You talk big for a guy in an alliance that let Pantheon get demolished so you could get a shitload of help on two small alliances who had less members, less tanks, and less air than your alliance had at the start of our front.

 

Oh this is rich. The guy whom I called out for straight-out lying countless times comes and acts like he doesn't know me. That's because you were trying to lay low, mate.

 

There have been many instances where you advocated that destroying infra is what matters and that's accomplished by nukes. Apeman was quoting you on that very recently. Also your whole strategy against the t$ was based on nuking them till you won (spoiler alert: it didn't work).

 

>21 nations to beat 150+ 

 

Lol, what a stupid comment. No alliance can duke it out alone, so they get allies. You have many allies. You are not alone. The war is not the world against Alpha. It's a war where your side has numerical superiority. Give me a break, sweetie.

 

Still salty about the fact that our side wasn't stupid enough to invite TEst and co to the wider war by being retarded, I see. This is like putting a pawn forward to bait us into wasting our queen. Only a fool would do that, and you are salty because we are not fools like you. Don't try to project your shortcomings on your enemies, pal.

[Ayayay]

tbh, Hans is a dirty moralist. UPN is in the position we're in because Hans has always taken a "is it healthy for the game" approach towards FA. The only time he ever did something out of trying to protect UPN was GW3 imho.

 

 

 

Furthermore, the idea that the weaker side should engage in self-immolation in the vain hope that the other side kills themselves is outright insane.

 

In fact, let's throw a hypothetical out here. Let's say all your fears were right and NPO takes over the game and crushes everyone who doesn't align with them. Would you guys break up your treaties, isolate yourselves, and hope that you won't be cycled by the hegemoney? No, you wouldn't, because that would be !@#$ing retarded. 

 

 

 

Also, a paperless hegemoney actually causes even more stagnation. We had that after Hypocrisy and all that happened was no one wanted to risk making a move since no one knew who would side with the paperless in the event of a war. The only time something almost happened, when BoC built a coalition to roll Mensa HQ (who they knew weren't with Guardian at the time), UPN stepped in and enforced a !@#$ing NAP and payed reps to mensa on behalf of their own damn bloc member.

[greatkitteh]

 

In fact, let's throw a hypothetical out here. Let's say all your fears were right and NPO takes over the game and crushes everyone who doesn't align with them. Would you guys break up your treaties, isolate yourselves, and hope that you won't be cycled by the hegemoney? No, you wouldn't, because that would be !@#$ retarded. 

 

 

Can confirm