by Mutant Lobster People » Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:16 pm
Dinosaurana wrote:I am not fucking kid.
Nazi Flower Power wrote:Why is there an 11 page thread arguing about pubic hair?
Progressiae wrote:Dinosaur My Is Purple-Raisins
Chatkasatan wrote:Or people who serve poop in ice cream.
An issue about gay adoption wrote:"Think about it: say you have two gay Mutant DinosaurApeCrabs"
The Altani Federation wrote:Are you lobsters trying to wreck your economy?
by Satirius » Fri Apr 30, 2010 8:47 pm
by Todd McCloud » Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:40 pm
by Mayor For Life » Mon May 03, 2010 2:11 pm
by Naivetry » Wed May 05, 2010 9:35 pm
by Echolilia » Fri May 07, 2010 8:36 am
Naivetry wrote:5) The size of the region does matter; the fewer nations in the region, the more quickly each of them accumulates Influence. This is why it takes absolutely forever to change your Influence rating in a feeder or large UCR.
10) I've also heard that Influence is like a "pool" shared by all the nations in a region. So you can have 5 Eminence Grise nations in either a very small region or a region that has a bigger "pool" than another region... for whatever reason. This has always seemed a little odd to me, and I don't know whether or not I believe it.
by Oh my Days » Fri May 07, 2010 2:15 pm
Naivetry wrote:1) Your Influence rating is valid only for the region you are in. You can compare your Influence rating to those of nations in other regions, but the comparison is meaningless, because every nation starts with 0 Influence when they move to a new region. So yes; Lady Edea might be a Minnow, but if your Eminence Grise nation moved to TEP, you'd become a Minnow too.
5) The size of the region does matter; the fewer nations in the region, the more quickly each of them accumulates Influence. This is why it takes absolutely forever to change your Influence rating in a feeder or large UCR.
7) We assume, though I don't think it's been empirically tested, that a WA nation (even one with no endorsements) will gain Influence more quickly than a non-WA nation.
8.) WA Delegates accumulate Influence more quickly than any other nation in the region. This seems to be not just a factor of having more endorsements than everyone else, but an actual difference in the daily rate of accumulation based on the fact that you hold the delegacy.
9) I think it was the folks in TWP who had a theory about Influence calculations also being affected by the number of endorsements given vs. the number received, with a lower ratio of given to received being better for your Influence rating. This is the most speculative of the factors listed.
10) I've also heard that Influence is like a "pool" shared by all the nations in a region. So you can have 5 Eminence Grise nations in either a very small region or a region that has a bigger "pool" than another region... for whatever reason. This has always seemed a little odd to me, and I don't know whether or not I believe it.
It certainly has nothing to do with forum posts, as the game had no way of tracking that when the forums were hosted on Jolt. I would be very surprised if it had anything to do with whether or not you voted in the WA, but the idea is intriguing. Nation population does not to my knowledge affect the rate at which a nation accumulates Influence; the frequent correlation between population and Influence is simply due to the fact that older nations have had more time to accumulate Influence.
...I feel as if there are things I'm leaving out, but hey.
by Sedgistan » Fri May 07, 2010 2:20 pm
Echolilia wrote:Naivetry wrote:5) The size of the region does matter; the fewer nations in the region, the more quickly each of them accumulates Influence. This is why it takes absolutely forever to change your Influence rating in a feeder or large UCR.
10) I've also heard that Influence is like a "pool" shared by all the nations in a region. So you can have 5 Eminence Grise nations in either a very small region or a region that has a bigger "pool" than another region... for whatever reason. This has always seemed a little odd to me, and I don't know whether or not I believe it.
My guess, not even based on observation of nations in regions with dramatically changing population levels, is that your influence is just a number, not at all dependent on anything else in the region, but the label is based on dividing that number by the total influence for the region or total population or something of the sort.
by Sedgistan » Fri May 07, 2010 2:25 pm
Oh my Days wrote:Naivetry wrote:7) We assume, though I don't think it's been empirically tested, that a WA nation (even one with no endorsements) will gain Influence more quickly than a non-WA nation.
We should definitely test this, I'm not sure exactly how though because the regional control screen doesn't give you any exact numbers. It would require us to leave X number of non-WA nations in one region for Y days, and simultaneously leave the same number of WA nations in another region for the same length of time. If we had a new delegate elected at the start, and the delegate's endorsements were identical at every update, then you would have a test at the end to see how many nations they could eject. Really difficult to get all those WAs though, including the endorsers for the delegate. NationStates for educators allows for unlimited WA nations, could we use this feature for an experiment instead?
Oh my Days wrote:Naivetry wrote:9) I think it was the folks in TWP who had a theory about Influence calculations also being affected by the number of endorsements given vs. the number received, with a lower ratio of given to received being better for your Influence rating. This is the most speculative of the factors listed.
Like number 8, this is never hinted at in any official text about influence, but we could test it, with a lot of time and WA nations.
by Oh my Days » Fri May 07, 2010 2:28 pm
Sedgistan wrote:Oh my Days wrote:Naivetry wrote:7) We assume, though I don't think it's been empirically tested, that a WA nation (even one with no endorsements) will gain Influence more quickly than a non-WA nation.
We should definitely test this, I'm not sure exactly how though because the regional control screen doesn't give you any exact numbers. It would require us to leave X number of non-WA nations in one region for Y days, and simultaneously leave the same number of WA nations in another region for the same length of time. If we had a new delegate elected at the start, and the delegate's endorsements were identical at every update, then you would have a test at the end to see how many nations they could eject. Really difficult to get all those WAs though, including the endorsers for the delegate. NationStates for educators allows for unlimited WA nations, could we use this feature for an experiment instead?
Simple - get a non-WA nation to found a new region, and then get a WA nation to move in before the next update. Leave them there for a week or two, and then see if they have different influence ratings.
Oh my Days wrote:Naivetry wrote:9) I think it was the folks in TWP who had a theory about Influence calculations also being affected by the number of endorsements given vs. the number received, with a lower ratio of given to received being better for your Influence rating. This is the most speculative of the factors listed.
Like number 8, this is never hinted at in any official text about influence, but we could test it, with a lot of time and WA nations.
by Naivetry » Mon May 17, 2010 11:37 am
by Oh my Days » Thu May 20, 2010 3:20 am
Naivetry wrote:It would definitely be fun to test. Problem is finding the WA nations to sit around doing nothing.
Also, with regards to #10... interesting, Sedge/Oh My Days. That does make sense.Nation A (non WA) has been in the region for 1 update, and has a raw influence figure of '1'
Nation B (non WA) has been in the region for 2 updates, and has a raw influence figure of '2'
Nation C (non WA) has been in the region for 3 updates, and has a raw influence figure of '3'
Region 1 therefore has a total regional influence of '6'. This means its regional power is 'low'.
Nation A has 16% of Region 1's influence, and therefore gets a rating of "Duckspeaker"
Nation B has 33% of Region 1's influence, and therefore gets a rating of "Negotiator"
Nation B has 50% of Region 1's influence, and therefore gets a rating of "Enforcer"
by Naivetry » Thu May 20, 2010 9:47 am
by Oh my Days » Thu May 20, 2010 11:42 am
by Pythria » Thu May 20, 2010 6:23 pm
Tell me about it. I've been in Capitalist Paradise for months and have 82 endorsements, but I'm still a Minnow.Naivetry wrote:5) The size of the region does matter; the fewer nations in the region, the more quickly each of them accumulates Influence. This is why it takes absolutely forever to change your Influence rating in a feeder or large UCR.
by Oh my Days » Fri May 21, 2010 3:32 am
Pythria wrote:Tell me about it. I've been in Capitalist Paradise for months and have 82 endorsements, but I'm still a Minnow.Naivetry wrote:5) The size of the region does matter; the fewer nations in the region, the more quickly each of them accumulates Influence. This is why it takes absolutely forever to change your Influence rating in a feeder or large UCR.
by Naivetry » Fri May 21, 2010 2:05 pm
Oh my Days wrote:I'm sure that we could use it legitimately, aren't you a teacher Nai?
by Oh my Days » Fri May 21, 2010 2:18 pm
by Naivetry » Fri May 21, 2010 2:43 pm
Oh my Days wrote:
That's a shame, maybe it has some relevance to the political structures in Ancient Rome?
by Oh my Days » Fri May 21, 2010 3:20 pm
Naivetry wrote:I was considering - purely as a thought experiment, mind - having their nations represent different Roman politicians, or making them write to each other in Latin on the RMB.
But I would have no real reason to tell them who to endorse when and where, and I'd have to keep checking up on them to make sure they'd done it. Plus, do we even know if Influence works the same way in school regions, since they're all signed up for the WA automatically?
by Naivetry » Fri May 21, 2010 6:07 pm
Oh my Days wrote:Nalagas is in a registered school class and isn't in the WA, I don't think they are automatically signed up. Although you couldn't control the pupils' endorsements, could you create multiple nations yourself? It is allowed in school classes. Although, I suppose that rather makes the pupils superfluous, and they could also get in the way, be endorsing nations who shouldn't be receiving additional endorsements. We could try just one person using a school class region, but the admins might put a stop to that.
by Oh my Days » Sat May 22, 2010 12:11 pm
Naivetry wrote:Oh my Days wrote:Nalagas is in a registered school class and isn't in the WA, I don't think they are automatically signed up. Although you couldn't control the pupils' endorsements, could you create multiple nations yourself? It is allowed in school classes. Although, I suppose that rather makes the pupils superfluous, and they could also get in the way, be endorsing nations who shouldn't be receiving additional endorsements. We could try just one person using a school class region, but the admins might put a stop to that.
Max agrees with me.
Looks like Nalagas got the password and moved in afterwards.
by Grandon » Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:11 pm
by Kandarin » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:56 pm
Grandon wrote:But how in the hell can anyone explain how his influence has risen while mine has fallen?
I wish I remember who wrote:Games like Nationstates are like a big cardboard box, and there are two kinds of people in the world. The kind who look at the empty void inside the box and ask "Where the hell is it?" and the kind who jump into the box with their friends and make it into a fort, or a spaceship.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Star Lords Council
Advertisement