Advertisement
by Bazlantis » Sat May 29, 2010 6:02 am
by Quoziced » Sat May 29, 2010 8:54 am
by Southern Bellz » Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:54 pm
by Oh my Days » Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:44 am
Southern Bellz wrote:I want to throw my 2cents in as a Feeder delegate. I think the influence rules at the least need to change.
In its current form where influence goes only up, it is near impossible to change a well established feeder delegate. Their influence is unrivaled considering some them have been at the top of the charts for years. Influence in its current form only limits gameplay.
I feel the best solution is to look at influence and how it can change.
The biggest argument to keep influence is the fact that it self moderates. The biggest argument against it, is that it restricts gameplay because it is near impossible to boot a troublesome political threat that has been around awhile. (this is included in invasions). The result of this is often time the people who get ejected from regions are not the people who should be ejected, but the people who happen to be endorsing them. This is a problem.
I think the solution to this is to make it so an active delegates influence goes up quicker than others in the region AND have that effect be reversed to the old delegate. That way the new delegate, if they can stay in power a reasonable about of time will surpass the ex delegate faster.
by Palaam » Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:57 am
by Southern Bellz » Sat Jun 05, 2010 6:27 am
by Palaam » Sun Jun 06, 2010 6:04 am
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 07, 2010 3:12 pm
Palaam wrote:Perhaps Influence can be made a function (as inscrutable as it is now) of how often nations answer issues? I know the gamecode is basically a giant thicket of programming that the admins hate to wade into, but it seems fair to reward those players who diligently answer their issues every day with a little extra influence.
by Palaam » Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:50 pm
Naivetry wrote:Palaam wrote:Perhaps Influence can be made a function (as inscrutable as it is now) of how often nations answer issues? I know the gamecode is basically a giant thicket of programming that the admins hate to wade into, but it seems fair to reward those players who diligently answer their issues every day with a little extra influence.
Urgh, no, please. Issues have nothing to do with political gameplay or power of any sort.
by Kalibarr » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:14 pm
Palaam wrote:Naivetry wrote:Palaam wrote:Perhaps Influence can be made a function (as inscrutable as it is now) of how often nations answer issues? I know the gamecode is basically a giant thicket of programming that the admins hate to wade into, but it seems fair to reward those players who diligently answer their issues every day with a little extra influence.
Urgh, no, please. Issues have nothing to do with political gameplay or power of any sort.
Why not?
by Unibot » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:43 pm
Palaam wrote:Yeah, that's not really an answer. "I don't want to" isn't a very compelling response.
Vocenae wrote:Unibot, you have won NS.
by Kalibarr » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:44 pm
Palaam wrote:Yeah, that's not really an answer. "I don't want to" isn't a very compelling response.
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:53 pm
Unibot wrote:Palaam wrote:Yeah, that's not really an answer. "I don't want to" isn't a very compelling response.
Here is an answer,
Gameplayers are enthralled with a game environment that treats players/nations as soldiers, fighting over regions and delegatations, for glory and morality, to prove to themselves who is the most vigilant, the brightest, the most strategic, the most prepared, the most coordinated -- ultimately, the Gameplay arena is about being the best solider. Answering multiple answer quizzes about your political philosophies and what you think about cheese throwing as a legal method of dissidence is nothing that a solider would give a shit about. ¿ Comprende
by Unibot » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:55 pm
Naivetry wrote:Unibot wrote:Palaam wrote:Yeah, that's not really an answer. "I don't want to" isn't a very compelling response.
Here is an answer,
Gameplayers are enthralled with a game environment that treats players/nations as soldiers, fighting over regions and delegatations, for glory and morality, to prove to themselves who is the most vigilant, the brightest, the most strategic, the most prepared, the most coordinated -- ultimately, the Gameplay arena is about being the best solider. Answering multiple answer quizzes about your political philosophies and what you think about cheese throwing as a legal method of dissidence is nothing that a solider would give a shit about. ¿ Comprende
Er. Well, the raiding/defending side of Gameplay, yes.
There are also a lot of us who don't really do the raid/defend thing, and care more about regional and interregional politics.
Vocenae wrote:Unibot, you have won NS.
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 07, 2010 6:56 pm
Palaam wrote:Naivetry wrote:Palaam wrote:Perhaps Influence can be made a function (as inscrutable as it is now) of how often nations answer issues? I know the gamecode is basically a giant thicket of programming that the admins hate to wade into, but it seems fair to reward those players who diligently answer their issues every day with a little extra influence.
Urgh, no, please. Issues have nothing to do with political gameplay or power of any sort.
Why not?
by Palaam » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:22 pm
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:30 pm
Palaam wrote:Right, but the system of gameplay that currently exists developed around the original issues game. Considering that back in the old days people on the raiding/defending side of things got very good at figuring out update times and endorsements and the like, I would think that they would be interested in a new way to game, as it were, the system to give themselves the greatest advantage.
I would imagine that a system of issue answering could be adapted to by players in such a way that it supplements the system you describe. I suppose I don't see either as mutually exclusive facets of the same overarching NationStates game. Adaptability is the word.
But what you're saying is, I suppose, that such a development would be so completely at odds with the way Gameplay is now it's totally moot to even suggest it?
by Palaam » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:42 pm
by Kalibarr » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:43 pm
Palaam wrote:I see your point, but I disagree that it's comparable to your II analogy. If we pursue the endorsement comparison, however, it makes more sense to have such a thing. If Influence is the amount of power a nation has in a given region, it would make logical sense for that power to be a function of how often, and in what means, that nation answers it daily issues.
Certainly if answering issues had the benefit of adding or subtracting Influence, it wouldn't be a pointless exercise- there would be intrinsic benefit to it. How you answer your issues influencing your... Influence, I guess, would also eliminate the contention that it would be pointless.
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:47 pm
Palaam wrote:I see your point, but I disagree that it's comparable to your II analogy. If we pursue the endorsement comparison, however, it makes more sense to have such a thing. If Influence is the amount of power a nation has in a given region, it would make logical sense for that power to be a function of how often, and in what means, that nation answers it daily issues.
Certainly if answering issues had the benefit of adding or subtracting Influence, it wouldn't be a pointless exercise- there would be intrinsic benefit to it. How you answer your issues influencing your... Influence, I guess, would also eliminate the contention that it would be pointless.
by Palaam » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:50 pm
by Naivetry » Mon Jun 07, 2010 7:53 pm
Palaam wrote:In the context of NationStates as a nation simulation game, it can be construed that the business of government (how you answer you issues) translates into influence among the community of nations in which yours resides (your region).
by Kandarin » Mon Jun 07, 2010 9:45 pm
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
Advertisement