Old FA vs Current FA

[greatkitteh]

I just want to throw in my two cents here- I don't think that all the blame can be solely pointed at the syndisphere as it is. From my perspective, when BoC switched sides, it was not because we wanted to win all the time, that didn't matter. Taking a hit is all part of how you play, the rolling didn't matter. No, it was because where we were invited to, the obsidian order, was genuinely more friendly and welcoming. I chose them over the covenant when we were deciding, because we had allies that were frankly not very good to us. I'm sure you're all lovely people really, but you sure do know how to put a guy on a downer. There wasn't a sense of friendship with UPN/DEIC during my time in BoC gov with them around, but with OO I feel much more community, and I can safely say that they aren't just my allies, but my friends. It's not forced. Everything about the other side seemed forced, acted. I wasn't up for that, so I elected to switch. The point is, I think the reason people began to switch is because the syndisphere seemed friendlier, and a more fun place to be. Inb4 'Ur opinion doesn't matter cuz ur BoC lol' but that's just what I think.

I mean BoC pissed off UPN and DEIC by surrendering early, so that explains some hostility.

[Bezzers]

I mean BoC pissed off UPN and DEIC by surrendering early, so that explains some hostility.

If we're talking Oktoberfest don't forget the two days prep time we were given before they decided to preempt even earlier

[greatkitteh]

If we're talking Oktoberfest don't forget the two days prep time we were given before they decided to preempt even earlier

It was BoC who outright objected to launching oktoberfest and got itself locked out. Plus it's just an ass move no matter what.

Edited December 31, 2016 by greatkitteh

[Donald Trump]

The issue here isn't in the game itself, the issue is that the community is crap.

 

Most mechanical based changes, even if they're a short term benefit to in game balance will just dumb down the game even more in the long run.

 

The issue is within the community and community here has been fostered by the large amounts of bad admin decisions over the years, which have mostly appealed to the bigger group of players, but have come at a cost and have driven away the more intelligent players in the process. It's a very similar process on why pay to win is bad, as you're going ahead and making changes to the game that make it less of a matter of intelligence and more about how much money the players will pay. 

 

By now, I suspect it's too late to fix the damage that's been done. But whatever happens, Sheepy must avoid digging his grave any further as things WILL just get worse. 

[Amaryllis]

Now as for the community in general. I just realized this and I could argue this ties in with some people's argument about how some people pessistimistic attitude isn't helping their cause.

 

The community itself, especially in the threads, can get heated with some grudge matches to a point where it can get ugly. I'll admit to loving salt as much as some of us but I will also have to say keep in mind, micros or other AAs that search for allies might be looking at these and just as they might look at a post that says we can't win and think "I don't want to work with them if they're hopeless about things". They'll look at the posts that are just lain viscous (I'll admit both sides can be guilty of this) and think that's not something they want to work with either.

 

Before someone says I'm trying to be politically correct, I'm not trying to censor you. If you want to keep posting how you usually do(and in Strum's case shitposting because he's retired and that's what he always wanted to do xp), go ahead. But I'm trying to say to think a bit more before you post if you want to improve your FA standing.

 

As a side note: sometimes the community can't always blame the admin for what's going on.

 

Warning: if any of this doesn't make sense it's because I wrote this at an early hour without my caffeine xp

[Agent W]

It's fascinating how badly Jodo comes across in this thread. This being the case, the topic has merit. Syndisphere is in a bind right now, and I think it's easy to see. On the one hand Syndisphere has nothing to gain from breaking up, and in fact, it would likely be a poor decision by their leadership. On the other hand, why even bother playing the game when you get to grow infinetly unchallanged, that's a boring way to play the game. Case in point, I left Syndisphere to join VE, because I knew the game was unbalanced and I wasn't having any fun the way they currently are playing. This in and of itself is an existential crisis Syndisphere must face before this game goes the way of the dinosaur. On the other hand, unaligned alliances can and should do their best to grow and become competitive entities in the game to offer an alternative way forward. Through a combination of sphere building and economic growth, the greatest nation sim hegemoney to have ever existed was toppled, and I firmly believe the same can happen in P&W. FFS, BK, tS, and TKR are no NPO/IRON/TOP.

[Beowulf the Second]

i vote that everyone non-Syndisphere treaties into Syndisphere, thus making the game boring, thus when the next war happens in two months Syndisphere rips itself apart

 

its pretty easy to treaty into syndisphere since its so big. you might have to drop other treaties in order to do so, and you might have to eat your humble cake because face it we're winnin right now

 

non-Syndisphere gets to choose balance of power in upcoming war by treatying accordingly: ex. if they all tie to Mensa (also could tie to Rose and other exclusive mensa allies), Mensa becomes central and prob rips on someone else

 

this started out jokingly but fk its actually not a bad plan.

[Roquentin]

Now as for the community in general. I just realized this and I could argue this ties in with some people's argument about how some people pessistimistic attitude isn't helping their cause.

 

The community itself, especially in the threads, can get heated with some grudge matches to a point where it can get ugly. I'll admit to loving salt as much as some of us but I will also have to say keep in mind, micros or other AAs that search for allies might be looking at these and just as they might look at a post that says we can't win and think "I don't want to work with them if they're hopeless about things". They'll look at the posts that are just lain viscous (I'll admit both sides can be guilty of this) and think that's not something they want to work with either.

 

Before someone says I'm trying to be politically correct, I'm not trying to censor you. If you want to keep posting how you usually do(and in Strum's case shitposting because he's retired and that's what he always wanted to do xp), go ahead. But I'm trying to say to think a bit more before you post if you want to improve your FA standing.

 

As a side note: sometimes the community can't always blame the admin for what's going on.

 

Warning: if any of this doesn't make sense it's because I wrote this at an early hour without my caffeine xp

 

It's called being realistic. If someone is bothering to read the threads, they can just as easily look at the stats and treaty web and deduce the same conclusion.  When there was something approaching closer to statistical parity between groupings and there was a chance of winning, what would happen is some of the bigger non-Syndisphere(UPN and Rose, for instance) would spherebuild actively and get lots of smaller alliances coming to them for protectorates or treaties. The problem is when wartime came because a lot of the alliances didn't realize they'd be in for a rough ride and their protector/ally lost, they'd start to resent their protector/ally's  perceived underperformance and blame them  or defect. There's no use in denying the far more evident current reality and most people know the facts on the ground and it's much better to be upfront than to not. No one said they're hopeless about everything; it's just unrealistic right now to contest a certain group of alliances.

 

I didn't see anyone flocking to the paperless alliances ahead of this despite knowing it was going down. They've never struck me as people that are hopeless. No one was switching sides to go with the plucky underdog. They do what they want to do and have fun doing it  and that's almost the opposite. For the last point, if there's no drama and everyone that isn't winning is supposed to just be stoic or even chipper, then the forum is pointless, honestly. It's really damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

 

It's fascinating how badly Jodo comes across in this thread. This being the case, the topic has merit. Syndisphere is in a bind right now, and I think it's easy to see. On the one hand Syndisphere has nothing to gain from breaking up, and in fact, it would likely be a poor decision by their leadership. On the other hand, why even bother playing the game when you get to grow infinetly unchallanged, that's a boring way to play the game. Case in point, I left Syndisphere to join VE, because I knew the game was unbalanced and I wasn't having any fun the way they currently are playing. This in and of itself is an existential crisis Syndisphere must face before this game goes the way of the dinosaur. On the other hand, unaligned alliances can and should do their best to grow and become competitive entities in the game to offer an alternative way forward. Through a combination of sphere building and economic growth, the greatest nation sim hegemoney to have ever existed was toppled, and I firmly believe the same can happen in P&W. FFS, BK, tS, and TKR are no NPO/IRON/TOP.

 

This isn't a great comparison. I really want to avoid talking about it, but since it's been almost 8 years, I don't see it as a big deal and I can speak with a decent amount of authority on the subject as one of the many people involved. The differences between the two settings you're going about are manifold. For one, the ruling bloc was comprised of alliances that did not have prior affiliations to it and were brought together by one entity, but many within it actually disliked each other severely and had substantial philosophical differences.  They had only one real goal in mind with the bloc and when it was exhausted, it had lost its purpose which made it easy for it to fall apart. The concentration of strength here in a relatively tight knit group here is a huge difference. There were fault lines within the ruling bloc and clashes that everyone knew about. It required the departure by several statistically significant alliances and active plotting by alliances that were planning to leave it in order for the outcome you outlined to be achieved. Right now there aren't any equivalents. If we were to imagine it, it would take a serious defection of major alliances ie. we can use Mensa in this example since Beowulf used it in his too. It would require a Mensa-sized defection and then some for this analogy to be applicable at all.

 

 

 

i vote that everyone non-Syndisphere treaties into Syndisphere, thus making the game boring, thus when the next war happens in two months Syndisphere rips itself apart

 

its pretty easy to treaty into syndisphere since its so big. you might have to drop other treaties in order to do so, and you might have to eat your humble cake because face it we're winnin right now

 

non-Syndisphere gets to choose balance of power in upcoming war by treatying accordingly: ex. if they all tie to Mensa (also could tie to Rose and other exclusive mensa allies), Mensa becomes central and prob rips on someone else

 

this started out jokingly but fk its actually not a bad plan.

It would be just as likely the newer allies in this scenario would be more disposable than the older ties and not lead to confrontation.  When certain alliances  within the sphere stacked treaties, it didn't lead to any apparent tension. It's a lot to ask people to burn bridges and give up their self-respect.  So worst case and most likely scenario would be people burn bridges for transparent opportunism and somehow end up worse than before.

 

For the last part, how exactly does treatying Mensa make Mensa want to fight someone else(assuming it'd be someone within Syndisphere)? You're also assuming they'd want to stack treaties to that extent. I mean, Rose signing didn't lead to any shift whatsoever and Rose is probably the most major former Paracov alliance. If there was some sort of fault-line, the maneuvering to gain an edge on other constituents would already be beginning and whoever was trying to do it would be courting outside support. A fault line won't just come about out of nowhere. 

Edited January 1, 2017 by Roquentin

[Kelson]

I just want to throw in my two cents here- I don't think that all the blame can be solely pointed at the syndisphere as it is. From my perspective, when BoC switched sides, it was not because we wanted to win all the time, that didn't matter. Taking a hit is all part of how you play, the rolling didn't matter. No, it was because where we were invited to, the obsidian order, was genuinely more friendly and welcoming. I chose them over the covenant when we were deciding, because we had allies that were frankly not very good to us. I'm sure you're all lovely people really, but you sure do know how to put a guy on a downer. There wasn't a sense of friendship with UPN/DEIC during my time in BoC gov with them around, but with OO I feel much more community, and I can safely say that they aren't just my allies, but my friends. It's not forced. Everything about the other side seemed forced, acted. I wasn't up for that, so I elected to switch. The point is, I think the reason people began to switch is because the syndisphere seemed friendlier, and a more fun place to be. Inb4 'Ur opinion doesn't matter cuz ur BoC lol' but that's just what I think.

Your description of The Covenant with BoC is nonsense. 

[Ayayay]

UPN got shafted because of Hans. They refused to listen to their members base, they turned down a treaty with Syndicate which could've potentially altered something, and due to being absolutely shit and stubborn with leadership - they lost a good chunk of their active memberbase.

Complete opposite actually. Emmad's gov tried to push through the TS ODP under the radar (even though they didn't need to because they had a majority of gov and could really do w/e they wanted). The membership was informed and went up in arms. The split ultimately happened later after an election with less than 20% forming TO.

[Buorhann]

Interesting, I've seen different at that time.

[ComradeMilton]

It honestly doesn't have much to do with fairness at all. No one is asking for a participation trophy(except possibly ComradeMilton), 

We didn't win a participation trophy, we won three awards. Really just waiting to see where Sheepy's going to display the others before we make the graphics and put them in same place.

 

It's definitely not our problem because if we leave Sheepy's just losing revenue and you have even fewer people to attack. Since you're the ones who want no updates to the game or other things Sheepy can do to balance the game, it really is up to you to fix it or accept what Sheepy does on your behalf.

 

E: We're definitely not changing our system. That seems to come up everytime and it's not happening. I'd personally rather lose with our system than switch to the boring stuff other people are doing.

Edited January 2, 2017 by ComradeMilton

[greatkitteh]

We didn't win a participation trophy, we won three awards. Really just waiting to see where Sheepy's going to display the others before we make the graphics and put them in same place.

 

It's definitely not our problem because if we leave Sheepy's just losing revenue and you have even fewer people to attack. Since you're the ones who want no updates to the game or other things Sheepy can do to balance the game, it really is up to you to fix it or accept what Sheepy does on your behalf.

 

E: We're definitely not changing our system. That seems to come up everytime and it's not happening. I'd personally rather lose with our system than switch to the boring stuff other people are doing.

O/

 

Proud to win an additional two more medals for NPO

 

 

 

 

As Roq said its the only possible ones and I got both of them.

Edited January 2, 2017 by greatkitteh

[Kurdanak]

The irony is a portion of the members you are referring to left because they didn't like the direction Rose was going (higher activity standards, higher communication standards, proactive economic policy to improve our fighting capabilities).

 

Maybe I'm a dick, But I consider the "core" members not to be the ones who have been around for ages, but the ones who are active, engaged with the community, and willing to contribute to the success of the alliance.

 

Not sure who shat in your cereal but you have no idea what you are talking about since you aren't in Rose and have no idea how we are doing internally.

 

But ayy, keep bein salty bro.

Just popping into this thread to say hi, jaguar. "Core member" of Rose, here. I'm proud of the fact that we've lived through such a major cultural transition, with the bedrock values of Rose still standing strong. I agree with Sketchy 100%.

[Ranoik]

I'm late to the party here, but I really enjoy threads like this.  It gives people a chance to really think critically about the game state.  If I had to say what was the biggest problem with the Syndisphere hegemoney, it would be the idea of the "core groups" that are in the game right now.  A core group is like a concentration of power that is not likely to fragment, because as many in the Syndisphere point out, their FA is great.  They've built relationships and trust and very likely friendships that extend outside that game, and that translates to an incredibly hard to fragment center of power.

 

The "hegemoney" currently around 1.5 Million NS.  I know that NS isn't everything, but its the easiest to compare stuff too.  I would definitely consider the OO and Syndicate/Mensa to be a core group together, and that equals roughly 850K of the hegemoney's strength, about 57% of their total power.  The rest of the Syndisphere is made up of a lot more different core groups, none of which come close to matching the core group of Syndicate/Mensa/OO.    This means that even if the other core groups of the hegemoney were to split off and start a civil war within the bloc, all of them working in tandem, the Syndicate/Mensa/OO still take it.

 

On the opposite "side", our problem is that there really is no comparable core group at that level.  All the major non-syndisphere alliances aren't as close as the alliances that make up the core group of the Syndisphere.  There is communication problems, philosophical differences, and distrust between some alliances on our side.  Even if I was to lump in NPO, tC, SK, VE and Polaris together as a "core group", we'd only be around 400K in NS.  We'd have to poach 400K from Syndisphere to make it *near* equal, but that's assuming that NPO, tC, SK, VE, and Polaris are as close, tight-knit, and efficient as the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group, which it definitely isn't.

 

I'm not saying that its impossible, but it is really, really hard.  As Partisan said earlier, the fundamental relationship building took a lot of time, energy, and trust.  In order for the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group to be beaten, our "side" would have to befriend and attract the other core groups in the Syndisphere without getting rolled, because no one is going to join a war they think they are going to lose for an alliance they don't know, like, or trust.  

 

As for attracting alliances outside the syndisphere, every other alliance in the game only has about 4000 more NS than Syndisphere.  It would be a Herculean task to convince every other alliance to join us in a war to fight you, and it would likely lead to loss even if we could.

 

The only realistic way to take down Syndisphere is to start peeling off alliances that are not part of the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group, but that leads to the big question, would you let us?  If the NPO decided that it wanted to take down the Syndicate/Mensa/OO group, made friends and began to treaty with all the other core groups and Syndisphere, as well as pursue ties with our previous allies outside the Syndisphere, would you let us simply build a coalition with your former allies and former enemies?  I don't think you would.  I think you would get closer to your bloc, and shut us out, or you would mobilize against us and roll us or probably do both (nothing brings alliances together like rolling other alliances.)

 

You would simply let alliances conduct such business knowing that it may hurt you in the end, or would you put an end to those ambitions before they become a threat to you? I'm just using the NPO as an example, in reality, it could be any alliance.  Perhaps maybe, a Shogunate-themed Alliance with a certain flower in its name >_>

[Eumirbago]

I'm late to the party here, but I really enjoy threads like this. It gives people a chance to really think critically about the game state. If I had to say what was the biggest problem with the Syndisphere hegemoney, it would be the idea of the "core groups" that are in the game right now. A core group is like a concentration of power that is not likely to fragment, because as many in the Syndisphere point out, their FA is great. They've built relationships and trust and very likely friendships that extend outside that game, and that translates to an incredibly hard to fragment center of power.

 

The "hegemoney" currently around 1.5 Million NS. I know that NS isn't everything, but its the easiest to compare stuff too. I would definitely consider the OO and Syndicate/Mensa to be a core group together, and that equals roughly 850K of the hegemoney's strength, about 57% of their total power. The rest of the Syndisphere is made up of a lot more different core groups, none of which come close to matching the core group of Syndicate/Mensa/OO. This means that even if the other core groups of the hegemoney were to split off and start a civil war within the bloc, all of them working in tandem, the Syndicate/Mensa/OO still take it.

 

On the opposite "side", our problem is that there really is no comparable core group at that level. All the major non-syndisphere alliances aren't as close as the alliances that make up the core group of the Syndisphere. There is communication problems, philosophical differences, and distrust between some alliances on our side. Even if I was to lump in NPO, tC, SK, VE and Polaris together as a "core group", we'd only be around 400K in NS. We'd have to poach 400K from Syndisphere to make it *near* equal, but that's assuming that NPO, tC, SK, VE, and Polaris are as close, tight-knit, and efficient as the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group, which it definitely isn't.

 

I'm not saying that its impossible, but it is really, really hard. As Partisan said earlier, the fundamental relationship building took a lot of time, energy, and trust. In order for the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group to be beaten, our "side" would have to befriend and attract the other core groups in the Syndisphere without getting rolled, because no one is going to join a war they think they are going to lose for an alliance they don't know, like, or trust.

 

As for attracting alliances outside the syndisphere, every other alliance in the game only has about 4000 more NS than Syndisphere. It would be a Herculean task to convince every other alliance to join us in a war to fight you, and it would likely lead to loss even if we could.

 

The only realistic way to take down Syndisphere is to start peeling off alliances that are not part of the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group, but that leads to the big question, would you let us? If the NPO decided that it wanted to take down the Syndicate/Mensa/OO group, made friends and began to treaty with all the other core groups and Syndisphere, as well as pursue ties with our previous allies outside the Syndisphere, would you let us simply build a coalition with your former allies and former enemies? I don't think you would. I think you would get closer to your bloc, and shut us out, or you would mobilize against us and roll us or probably do both (nothing brings alliances together like rolling other alliances.)

 

You would simply let alliances conduct such business knowing that it may hurt you in the end, or would you put an end to those ambitions before they become a threat to you? I'm just using the NPO as an example, in reality, it could be any alliance. Perhaps maybe, a Shogunate-themed Alliance with a certain flower in its name >_>

Who is ready to lose half of their membership?

[Buorhann]

There's a couple of "core groups".

 

Guardian, Mensa, Syndicate were the original 'MenSyn/Syndisphere/Kickasssphere'  (Along with Seven Kingdoms)

 

You also had Syndicate, BK, TKR (?), and a few other small ones (Coalition was part of this maybe?).  If I recall, BK and TKR were for a time a protectorate of Syndicate's during their initial phases.

 

Then OO formed - BK, TKR headed it up (Wasn't there a third alliance?).  Later joined by BoC.

 

Of course through all that, and the warring going on, the mentioned alliances here all bonded together to form Voltr- I mean the OOSyndisphere.

 

Don't get me wrong, there's other alliances involved nowadays, but those been the big ones were alliances usually gravitated towards through our history.

 

 

 

Oh, finally, there's Top Gun.  Which is just Mensa and Black Knights.  The others haven't reached that pinnacle yet.  Gotta feel the need for speed to achieve this.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Buorhann

[Prefontaine]

Oh, finally, there's Top Gun.  Which is just Mensa and Black Knights.  The others haven't reached that pinnacle yet.  Gotta feel the need for speed to achieve this.

 

[Buorhann]

That's a rare sight.

[Prefontaine]

That's a rare sight.

 

[Charles Bolivar]

I'm late to the party here, but I really enjoy threads like this.  It gives people a chance to really think critically about the game state.  If I had to say what was the biggest problem with the Syndisphere hegemoney, it would be the idea of the "core groups" that are in the game right now.  A core group is like a concentration of power that is not likely to fragment, because as many in the Syndisphere point out, their FA is great.  They've built relationships and trust and very likely friendships that extend outside that game, and that translates to an incredibly hard to fragment center of power.

 

The "hegemoney" currently around 1.5 Million NS.  I know that NS isn't everything, but its the easiest to compare stuff too.  I would definitely consider the OO and Syndicate/Mensa to be a core group together, and that equals roughly 850K of the hegemoney's strength, about 57% of their total power.  The rest of the Syndisphere is made up of a lot more different core groups, none of which come close to matching the core group of Syndicate/Mensa/OO.    This means that even if the other core groups of the hegemoney were to split off and start a civil war within the bloc, all of them working in tandem, the Syndicate/Mensa/OO still take it.

 

On the opposite "side", our problem is that there really is no comparable core group at that level.  All the major non-syndisphere alliances aren't as close as the alliances that make up the core group of the Syndisphere.  There is communication problems, philosophical differences, and distrust between some alliances on our side.  Even if I was to lump in NPO, tC, SK, VE and Polaris together as a "core group", we'd only be around 400K in NS.  We'd have to poach 400K from Syndisphere to make it *near* equal, but that's assuming that NPO, tC, SK, VE, and Polaris are as close, tight-knit, and efficient as the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group, which it definitely isn't.

 

I'm not saying that its impossible, but it is really, really hard.  As Partisan said earlier, the fundamental relationship building took a lot of time, energy, and trust.  In order for the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group to be beaten, our "side" would have to befriend and attract the other core groups in the Syndisphere without getting rolled, because no one is going to join a war they think they are going to lose for an alliance they don't know, like, or trust.  

 

As for attracting alliances outside the syndisphere, every other alliance in the game only has about 4000 more NS than Syndisphere.  It would be a Herculean task to convince every other alliance to join us in a war to fight you, and it would likely lead to loss even if we could.

 

The only realistic way to take down Syndisphere is to start peeling off alliances that are not part of the Syndicate/Mensa/OO core group, but that leads to the big question, would you let us?  If the NPO decided that it wanted to take down the Syndicate/Mensa/OO group, made friends and began to treaty with all the other core groups and Syndisphere, as well as pursue ties with our previous allies outside the Syndisphere, would you let us simply build a coalition with your former allies and former enemies?  I don't think you would.  I think you would get closer to your bloc, and shut us out, or you would mobilize against us and roll us or probably do both (nothing brings alliances together like rolling other alliances.)

 

You would simply let alliances conduct such business knowing that it may hurt you in the end, or would you put an end to those ambitions before they become a threat to you? I'm just using the NPO as an example, in reality, it could be any alliance.  Perhaps maybe, a Shogunate-themed Alliance with a certain flower in its name >_>

It's a good post, something to remember though is that originally, all the AAs you mentioned as being core members originally banded together for one common purpose and that was survival. It was a different era back then and all these core AAs would have been wiped out if it hadn't been for the differences amongst their opponents which prevented them from working together.

[Ranoik]

There's a couple of "core groups".

 

Guardian, Mensa, Syndicate were the original 'MenSyn/Syndisphere/Kickasssphere'  (Along with Seven Kingdoms)

 

You also had Syndicate, BK, TKR (?), and a few other small ones (Coalition was part of this maybe?).  If I recall, BK and TKR were for a time a protectorate of Syndicate's during their initial phases.

 

Then OO formed - BK, TKR headed it up (Wasn't there a third alliance?).  Later joined by BoC.

 

Of course through all that, and the warring going on, the mentioned alliances here all bonded together to form Voltr- I mean the OOSyndisphere.

 

Don't get me wrong, there's other alliances involved nowadays, but those been the big ones were alliances usually gravitated towards through our history.

 

Exactly, you guys have a strong links among your core groups, and each of these links also contain a significant amount of strength.  It's very true that more could have been done, or could be done, to foster a cooperation between our side, to make NPO/tC/VE as close as MenSyn, or Voltr-OOSyndisphere, but at this point, strength on our side is basically tapped out.  In order to try and "dominate", we'd probably have to move to your sphere and co-opt those other alliances, all of which you have probably been good too, treated well, and have warm relations with, making it really difficult to poach.  And the question is, as soon as we start making some treaties, will we get rolled?

 

If we need to get to the point where we are going to start being friendly with everyone, we can just simply join your sphere for real.

 

Of course, thats not really how it works.  People get bored, and its been shown that both sides are more than willing to use weak or non-existent CB's for war, which is fine, but it also means that as soon as any core group from the syndisphere feels like we may be becoming a threat, we'll get rolled.  Even if your bloc implodes, I cannot see anything to break OOSyndisphere short of a massive leadership change, you guys are just too good friends, and you control too much NS.

 

I didn't even include Guardian in my numbers average (sorry, I forgot about them :[ ), which means that the OO/Syndicate/Guardian/Mensa Core Group is ~913K, which is just under 30% of all the NS for all alliances in the game.  That's pretty insane and well earned.  The total combined NS for NPO/VE/tC/Polaris is just above 14% of all the alliances.

 

Syndisphere as a whole just shy of 50% in terms of the total strength of all alliances.  In order to compete for dominance, we'd have to unite every other non-TS aligned alliance against you, nearly impossible or try and cause your bloc to implode by you allowing us to break your bloc apart, after which we would need to poach at least 15% of the other alliances that break from you due  to remain competitive.  Otherwise, its just another curb stomp.

 

 

Oh, finally, there's Top Gun.  Which is just Mensa and Black Knights.  The others haven't reached that pinnacle yet.  Gotta feel the need for speed to achieve this.

 

 

Oooh, can we join and be the MIGs!?  We should make a Mutual Enmity Pact (MEP).  The treaty simply binds the Top Gun signatories and the MIGs! to only engage each other in the event of global, multi-alliance war, and we agree to defend each other from all outside parties that wish to ruin our battle royal in the sky.

[Ranoik]

It's a good post, something to remember though is that originally, all the AAs you mentioned as being core members originally banded together for one common purpose and that was survival. It was a different era back then and all these core AAs would have been wiped out if it hadn't been for the differences amongst their opponents which prevented them from working together.

 

Yup, they did band together for survival, and that's a good point.  A few years ago, it was tC & Paragon that were the monsters, not the Syndisphere.  However, unlike Paracov, those core groups didn't really have an established history of bad blood between them.  The struggles and friction between SK and Rose, Rose and tC, and SK/Guardian and VE were always apparent during those eras.

 

When it was time to band together for our survival/hegemoney, many of us did not think well of each other, and that fragmentation translated to miscommunication on every level.  And that miscommunication leads to things like Rose only have 1 day to mobilize, as in during the Silent War.

 

Losing a war with someone often makes bonds stronger between those alliances, but losing enough wars with someone makes you resentful and lethargic.

 

I'm only speaking for alliances that have been here for some time, obviously the NPO hasn't been here too long, but being NPO also comes with its own baggage as well.

Edited January 13, 2017 by Ranoik

[DragonK]

So the summary of this message is basically "get together and do something about it". I want to ignore this and comment on topics with more to talk about like your paperless argument, but it's impossible to do that.

 

It is unthinkable that anybody would even suggest that the "rest of the game" can match Syndisphere. By all quantitative measures, that fight is automatically a Syndi win. "The rest of the game" acknowledged that fact after Ground Zero war, as they faced the new situation of no longer having equal or comparable numbers to Syndi.

 

The last frontier of this "rest of the game" is being stomped out by us as we speak. The paperless alliances are respected for having good knowledge of mechanics and high activity, but that only matters when a fight has close numbers, but this one doesn't. So now the paperless guys suffer a default loss.

 

In the current state of affairs it is impossible for "the rest of the game" to rally a force to defeat Syndisphere. Anybody who suggests otherwise simply doesn't understand just how numbers work. The incentive for the rest of the game to fight Syndisphere, knowing they will lose, is zero. This should not even be up for debate, period. The day Syndisphere surrender and pay reps to the nuke bloc, GoT sphere, the paperless sphere and the remnants of tC I will !@#$ reroll.

 

What I believe is a more productive discussion is "what does the rest of the game do now?", which I get the impression you were alluding to anyway tbh. As I've established, military campaign is out of the question without major change in allegiances. I'd look at Rose and VE as two exemplary cases of the extreme responses to hegemonic life. Rose imploded and joined up with their former arch-nemesis. VE just showed the rest of the game a middle finger and have done literally nothing at all since then.

 

Another response is to form a bloc. Valyria and SK managed to rally a significant number of people to their cause, which was great, but in classic Syndi style, we took exception to their bad leadership decisions and now their community is crumbling. In an ideal world, GoT sphere would have become a nucleus for an opposition to form around. There were several unfortunate circumstances such as bad leaders, questionable objectives and poor calculation of FA moves which prevented this however. The same bloc formed under better leaders would probably make a gradual rise to prominence, and would also create a gravity that might sway peripheries of Syndisphere to join them. But this is not an ideal world, this is a world where we no longer need to justify conflicts, where nobody cares about the reasons for war anymore. It takes minimal provocation and causes the ground on which communities are built to shake. More than a dozen members left GoT sphere after last week, and no matter how you look at it the CB is weak.

 

To clarify my thoughts on this, saying "do something about it" is dumb, and so are the people who criticise Syndisphere for killing the game. Syndi have no reason, incentive or even the means to make the game fun for the rest of us. Members wrongly accuse Syndisphere of killing the game anyway, all it means is politics and the state of affairs are now different. Most of the world thought the Ottomans would never ever ever ever fall, but - spoiler alert- they did! The wants and needs of dynasties change. The wants and needs of Syndisphere change, and with time that change will grow to cause problems, which must be answered with solutions. The simple cycle of answering problems and incidentally creating new problems will unavoidably lead to disagreement and divide. It is only a matter of time before the inevitable migration of players away from Syndisphere happens. It won't happen quickly, and it might even go largely unnoticed. It could take years to even start to happen, but I say again it will happen.

 

So I say to you all, be patient. Things always change.

Very well written, and accurate description of the state of game. I'd just extend that by killing politics for rest of game and their war efforts (either against you or agaisnt each other) kills their incitive to play, wich leades to you guys loosing everyone else to play with. Boredom and stagnation is the only outcome of TKR spehre resting at top undivided, much like Roman or Ottoman empire did. As a Croat we take extra history lessons in Ottoman empire sicne they were our enemys for over couple of cenutrys. And yeah we were slautgered in wars agaisnt them to keep europe safe while being explotied by both hungarians and austrians allike, much liek papperless alliances are right now. But Ottomans and Romans weren't defeated by outside enemys, but by inside problems, stagnation and corruption, elitist way of life and failing to adapt to change. TKR sphere is nowhere near decadant stage of stagnation, they are in their prime, and since this is game and not RL, peopel can just quit, and they will. Both sides will lose people till either game dies hegemoney msuters up some courage, breaks in half andm akes the game itneresting, for both themselfs and rest of us.

 

Can't remeber who said it, but soemone said there were plently of reasons to roll paperless alliances? Oh do tell? We attacked alliances unralted to you / enemys you wanted to roll yoruself? The Pantheon attack that we cut short in exchange for not getting attacked for it later? The same Pantehon that was fine with it and asked for no revenge but TKR took it upon themselfs to execute it regardless? Do tell me, since my FA was avoiding any negative dealings with TKR sphere, even havign nice bussiens partnership and selling treasures and stuff helping your side cement the power you just aquired. And for what? To get roleld with no cb whatsover, under such cowardy terms (utilizing both sheer number advantage and game update exploit to hit us). I could go on, but to tired of repeating the same argumentation and reasoning over and over again. You guys bored, want a challenge? Break them treatys and go syndosphere vs OO. You won't find challenge anywhere else.

 

I keep hearing this "paperless block" bs. There is TEst. TEst does da !@#$ they want. There is no paperless block. We have no treatys and our friendships and alliances are on individual level, an ally of Arrgh can be an enemy of TEst, or Arrgh or TEst decide to roll someone (individually, not planned together) and then the other one joins the good fight and then RW joins too so Roz can force his peace talks and end wars prematurlly. Ironically all peaceouts Arrgh has had sicne I took over were in large part due to Rozalia's insitance. Also there are other alliances that are paperless, soem of them are allys to RW, some of them are allys to Arrgh and I asume none of them are allys to TEst. Trying to bang us in some sort of block is both insulting and pointless, blocks serve a purpsoe to further their political power. Wich in terms implys we care about dominance or power structure or, dare I even say, politics of this game. Wich is utter nonsense. I engage politics when I have to, I do enjoy diplomacy part of it, but !@#$ you and your rankings, treaties and other crap. If I want to war I'll go to war, I'll open invitation to my allys but I'll not ask of them to join or count on them joining. In defensive operation it's different. You still count on your own alliance only, but if it's evenlly matched fight other paperless might join knowing they might be next, or trying to make you owe them a favour or other stuff like that. Our only common interest is that we don't care that much for politics and prefere to be left alone. Why would the hegemoney see us as threat is beyond me. But what happened happend.

 

So to sum it up, instead of !@#$ing or saying peopel to get good, no that won't help. Only way out is to speed up the splitting process or the degeneration process. And only one of those keeps the gmae alive. ahte to say it but it's in your hands, your are in the control. And to people !@#$ing about fighting friends adn stuff. They are not your firneds. If they were they'd be in yoru alliance fighting with you or you'd be with them. And once this game dies, adn it will, liek all the other games do, how long do you think you'll hang around together? I've been part of large gaming community, knew over people there, from across timezones, and once gmod died we all went our own way. Same thing will happen with PnW, unless you have other games in common.

[DragonK]

It's amazing how everything is t$/Syndisphere ruining the game. I mean ffs, I am going purely off the wiki page here, but in the Silent War, you guys had more total alliances, more total score, the advantage of being the aggressors, and you still lost. Somehow this is part of Syndisphere ruining the game. I mean honestly, are we supposed to just let you win?

 

Paperless probably could have turned the tide of that war. I recall being pretty damn nervous when I saw TEst was hitting Pantheon, and of course RW and Arrgh tag along. But nah, they were playing the game how they wanted, and that didn't involve taking down Syndisphere, because they don't care that we are at the top. They just wanted a quick hit on an already engaged alliance and to get out before they burned too many of their pixels.

 

It's not our fault that we keep winning. If you want someone to blame for where we are right now, then you should be looking somewhere else.

Yes/No. Our goal was hunting whales. Pantheon didn't particiapte in more than couple of previous wars, so we deicded it'd be fun to do it. We weren't aware they were entering the war when we concluded most of our plans and target assignment. After we already armed up not hitting them would have been a waste. And yeah we didn't care much for turning the tide nor do we now. If Paracovenant showed at least some levels of competence I might have tried to convince Arrgh to say and help, for a price, just to keep the game in balance. Who is at the top is not my concern, as long as there is coutner force to keep it in blanace, makes pirate way of life easyer.