Is NPO Proof Communism Doesn't Work?

[Rob Semloh]

NPO is relatively militarized for their size at all times, which can hinder economic growth,and is far and away the top ranked alliance for tier cohesion. They seem to be following a disciplined long term strategy. Don't be surprised if they reach #1 in the next couple of years.

 

Also, I thought they followed "Francoism"?

Edited March 3, 2017 by Robert P. Holmes III

[ComradeMilton]

I admit that I have not been a member of PW-NPO in many months, but based on what I saw when I was, I would say that the state of NPO says nothing about communism in this game.

 

I'm not trying to bash them, but they were not being run particularly well while I was a member there. Organization and communication were very limited. They did not offer a whole lot of bang to go along with the buck that their members provided. Opportunities to contribute to the alliance in ways other than as a farm were few and far between, and the culture of the alliance itself was not one that really seemed to encourage it.

 

Again, not bashing them, but my honest assessment is that they could have done much more with what they had.

A lot of users were brought over on the condition that their play-style would be minimal as a help to the alliance. If you wanted to upgrade, you just needed to talk to the IOs as there are (or were) a ton of job openings and ways to make money.

[Buorhann]

So why are you in Black Knights, Milton?  Didn't you have a yuge hardon for NPO?

[Edward I]

Also, I thought they followed "Francoism"?

Francoism borrows heavily from Marxist-Leninist rhetoric and its original analysis of Nationstates reads very similarly to Marx's analysis of a class struggle based on material conditions. It also includes some non-Marxist political thought and references to game mechanics that don't have real life parallels, so even though NPO's economic system in PW is collectivist, the alliance's political creed isn't exactly communist.

[greatkitteh]

Francoism borrows heavily from Marxist-Leninist rhetoric and its original analysis of Nationstates reads very similarly to Marx's analysis of a class struggle based on material conditions. It also includes some non-Marxist political thought and references to game mechanics that don't have real life parallels, so even though NPO's economic system in PW is collectivist, the alliance's political creed isn't exactly communist.

 

Da, trump vs comrademilton in discord is avalible.

[ComradeMilton]

So why are you in Black Knights, Milton?  Didn't you have a yuge hardon for NPO?

Still do.

[Azaghul]

You're right that in-game it's "not an issue", but it can become an issue with player retention.  However, like Dalinar stated, as long as you're playing other games (Being occupied elsewhere), then it shouldn't hinder you too much here.

 

 

Still, I'm not a fan of the 100% taxes model.  As an individual, you're not really playing the game.  You're loaning your time and your email/account to someone else for control in a pseudo way, literally.

 

If you're an incompetent player, it works out to completely do what someone else tells you to do, otherwise - there's no real incentive to get involved with the gaming community if someone else controls all your resources, your time, and your build.  You're just a simple little cog.

This.  Not having any real control over your nation is boring.  Not surprised that NPO had problems with people getting bored and leaving.

 

TKR is not afraid of high taxes, but people still have plenty left over for people to use on their own.

 

NPO is relatively militarized for their size at all times, which can hinder economic growth,and is far and away the top ranked alliance for tier cohesion. They seem to be following a disciplined long term strategy. Don't be surprised if they reach #1 in the next couple of years.

 

Also, I thought they followed "Francoism"?

NPO is leaving a ton of potential economic growth on the table and they never are going to be a top tier alliance with that approach.

 

TKR has been lucky in that we haven't been in any loosing wars, and that's certainly helped.  But we've also almost never had any brakes in fighting by skipping wars that other alliances like NPO have had.  2 winning wars can sometimes be as or more costly than 1 loosing war.  We've been smart about knowing when to focus on growth, distributing resources for growth in an efficient manager, and knowing when to militarize and when not to.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Azaghul

[Apeman]

Solid strategy.

[ComradeMilton]

This.  Not having any real control over your nation is boring.  Not surprised that NPO had problems with people getting bored and leaving.

 

TKR is not afraid of high taxes, but people still have plenty left over for people to use on their own.

 

NPO is leaving a ton of potential economic growth on the table and they never are going to be a top tier alliance with that approach.

 

TKR has been lucky in that we haven't been in any loosing wars, and that's certainly helped.  But we've also almost never had any brakes in fighting by skipping wars that other alliances like NPO have had.  2 winning wars can sometimes be as or more costly than 1 loosing war.  We've been smart about knowing when to focus on growth, distributing resources for growth in an efficient manager, and knowing when to militarize and when not to.

NPO's members have always appeared quite happy with that structure and player retention has nothing been much of a problem. I don't think alliance ranking really enters into it. They're here to have fun, not to play to other players' opinion of the proper way.

[Roquentin]

I mean, I'm not really interested in repeating the same argument that's been had on here with the tiering, but in terms of retention, the issue has largely been other commitments people have and not being able to sustain enough activity for the game.  If other alliances have a plethora of people who find the game mechanics and tinkering with them to be exciting and are willing to commit to doing that on a regular basis, good for them.  However, when it comes to players from a more casually-oriented games that were never hardcore players there, it's definitely an issue. A lot of people don't like that if they put the game down for a week, they may get raided. Other games basically let people dip out for months at a time with no issues.  There are several alliances that had mostly imported playerbases and they have had low retention regardless of economic system. You can see it reflected in the member counts of similar alliances. Simply having more to do in the game doesn't make a person willing to play it regularly. For every person that may get bored due to not having enough to do in the game, there are more for who it is too much.

Edited March 4, 2017 by Roquentin

[Keegoz]

So why are you in Black Knights, Milton?  Didn't you have a yuge hardon for NPO?

Someone was a Trump supporter and trolled him hard.

 

10/10 everyone should troll Milton.

[ComradeMilton]

Someone was a Trump supporter and trolled him hard.

 

10/10 everyone should troll Milton.

Still annoyed I blocked you? Haha.

[Holton]

This.  Not having any real control over your nation is boring.  Not surprised that NPO had problems with people getting bored and leaving.

 

TKR is not afraid of high taxes, but people still have plenty left over for people to use on their own.

 

NPO is leaving a ton of potential economic growth on the table and they never are going to be a top tier alliance with that approach.

 

TKR has been lucky in that we haven't been in any loosing wars, and that's certainly helped.  But we've also almost never had any brakes in fighting by skipping wars that other alliances like NPO have had.  2 winning wars can sometimes be as or more costly than 1 loosing war.  We've been smart about knowing when to focus on growth, distributing resources for growth in an efficient manager, and knowing when to militarize and when not to.

 

NPO won't ever be a top tier alliance in their current political position, period.

 

They're doing the best thing for their situation - capping growth into tiers they have the coalition advantage in. More people should try actually organizing their alliance. If people want to play simcity and ignore basic strategy then kick them out and let the raiders show them why alliances are necessary.

[Azaghul]

NPO won't ever be a top tier alliance in their current political position, period.

 

They're doing the best thing for their situation - capping growth into tiers they have the coalition advantage in. More people should try actually organizing their alliance. If people want to play simcity and ignore basic strategy then kick them out and let the raiders show them why alliances are necessary.

There's a big difference between being smart about your growth and growing in a coordinated way, and choosing not to grow.

 

If you don't grow, you just grow further and further behind those that do grow.  They aren't setting themselves up to do well if their political position ever changes.

[Kastor]

There's a big difference between being smart about your growth and growing in a coordinated way, and choosing not to grow.

 

If you don't grow, you just grow further and further behind those that do grow.  They aren't setting themselves up to do well if their political position ever changes.

I disagree, as long as they stay 1-2 cities behind BK they'll be politically relevant.

 

If Syndi-OO break in the traditional way(right down the middle), Syndi would most likely need NPO to hit BK for their move to be successful(assuming they fight) so as long as NPO stays steady they'll be fine. Even so if more and more people from Syndisphere start their own alliances like they have been.

[Holton]

There's a big difference between being smart about your growth and growing in a coordinated way, and choosing not to grow.

 

If you don't grow, you just grow further and further behind those that do grow.  They aren't setting themselves up to do well if their political position ever changes.

 

I feel like recognizing overwhelming disadvantage in a higher tier is pretty smart and coordinated.

 

In this game there is no advantage other than extra cash flow from a having a supertier. If you're growing fine and aren't strapped on cash, you hypothetically don't *need* whales and indeed you can effectively fight and win a war without them.

 

 

The world is rapidly approaching a tipping point where Syndisphere won't be able to reach far enough down to impact alliances like NPO. Look at the numbers.

[ComradeMilton]

There's a big difference between being smart about your growth and growing in a coordinated way, and choosing not to grow.

 

If you don't grow, you just grow further and further behind those that do grow.  They aren't setting themselves up to do well if their political position ever changes.

I'm sure they'll be fine. Growing isn't everyone's goal of playing.

 

I disagree, as long as they stay 1-2 cities behind BK they'll be politically relevant.

 

If Syndi-OO break in the traditional way(right down the middle), Syndi would most likely need NPO to hit BK for their move to be successful(assuming they fight) so as long as NPO stays steady they'll be fine. Even so if more and more people from Syndisphere start their own alliances like they have been.

NPO's usually doing something unusual with their alliance and it tends to be very well thought out.

[Buorhann]

The only reason why NPO is even remotely taken serious is because they stunt their growth and people make threads like this about it.

 

And considering various mutual interests to the political scheme, I highly doubt Syndisphere will war with OO even if there's a split (Just to humor this idea since it's always brought up), and I even highly doubt NPO will be asked to join in it.

 

Why do I doubt Syndisphere will war with OO?  There's literally no reason to.  You're asking a band of brothers to fight each other, a group of individuals who work together on a daily basis, to suddenly be at odds with one another?  Desperate much?

[Keegoz]

Still annoyed I blocked you? Haha.

Not really, I just love how incredibly idiotic and immature you are making you incredibly easy to troll.

[Keegoz]

The only reason why NPO is even remotely taken serious is because they stunt their growth and people make threads like this about it.

 

And considering various mutual interests to the political scheme, I highly doubt Syndisphere will war with OO even if there's a split (Just to humor this idea since it's always brought up), and I even highly doubt NPO will be asked to join in it.

 

Why do I doubt Syndisphere will war with OO?  There's literally no reason to.  You're asking a band of brothers to fight each other, a group of individuals who work together on a daily basis, to suddenly be at odds with one another?  Desperate much?

Edited March 6, 2017 by Keegoz

[Buorhann]

Cute.

[Eumirbago]

Not really, I just love how incredibly idiotic and immature you are making you incredibly easy to troll.

Stop hurting his feelings and making Hogwarts look bad!

[Keegoz]

Stop hurting his feelings and making Hogwarts look bad!

As you wish, my master.

[ComradeMilton]

The only reason why NPO is even remotely taken serious is because they stunt their growth and people make threads like this about it. Also they're pretty good at the game.

 

And considering various mutual interests to the political scheme, I highly doubt Syndisphere will war with OO even if there's a split (Just to humor this idea since it's always brought up), and I even highly doubt NPO will be asked to join in it.   So the game shuts down. How long do you give it?

 

Why do I doubt Syndisphere will war with OO?  There's literally no reason to.  You're asking a band of brothers to fight each other, a group of individuals who work together on a daily basis, to suddenly be at odds with one another?  Desperate much? Without someone to fight against the war part of PW is kind of moot.

[Buorhann]

>pretty good at the game

 

Pretty good at what again?

 

>How long do I give it?

 

Don't know.  You tell me.

 

>Without someone to fight

 

Huh, who's NPO fighting again?  Weren't people just discussing their purposely stunting growth to stay out of conflict of certain alliances?

Edited March 6, 2017 by Buorhann