lol I say smart things sometimes

[Dontasemebro]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...st&p=524192

[Joker]

FAN and GOONS are only perma-ZI as long as they stay in FAN or GOONS, really, or have done something really bad - Diskord fought in the first FAN War for FAN and he's safely with us today, while we have quite a few ex-GOONS among us, including a couple who didn't come to us 'til fucking DECEMBER, after 3 months of fighting. Outside of them, few alliances outside of LUE had many of their players driven out by perma-ZI to my knowledge, and even LUE didn't have a blanket perma-ZI (though I've heard quite a few stories of people being perma-ZIed for totally BS reasons there).

[Lanna]

Long post is long.

tl;dr??

[DrunkWino]

Since you brought stats to bear in that, and it's currently being disputed, here's a few stats and forecasts for you: CN has 86% drop out rate. If you halve the number of nations that have dropped out to counter folks that re-roll, it drops it down to a 43% drop out rate. In raw numbers, that's an allowance of 94,055 re-rolls for 30,970 players, which basically puts the number at every nation in the game has had three separate nations. The whole point is that there really isn't that big a number of incoming nations, when the drop out rate is factored in, so imposing the perma-ZI, without a reaaaaaly good reason, further erodes the player pool to the point that CN starts losing active players, only to be replaced by someone that probably has a greater that 50% chance of looking around and leaving.

So there's some stats for you to keep going.

[enragedlobster]

I doubt that many people have re-rolled, honestly.

[IronSoldier820]

Many people have been driven away from Cyber Nations due to Perma-ZI Joker. Just go to LW forums, you'll see a whole club of them. Although a lot can be blamed on permanent ZI, its actually just the way the game works.

Example. Any player who starts playing in 2008 has an incredibly narrow chance to pass up a player who started in 2006. Looking through stats, only 4 of the top 50 nations were founded in 2007. The rest were made in 2006. So, looking at this, its safe to say most at top are there due to seniority and accumulating strength over time. Even I felt this when starting in late 2006, that I would never reach the rank of those who started when the game did. As time goes on, this possibility of moving up to the top ranks becomes just that much more narrow.

And its one of the most noticeable things about the game.

Its why so many people join, and then leave. They notice how slow it is, and then take a look at the top nations, and realize they're ages away from reaching that point. And when they do, those nations will probably be even more ahead of them. Then others just quit because it seems boring. Then others quit because they don't feel like joining an alliance, so they'd rather just die.

Combine the game mechanics with the Elitist style of playing, and you realize CN has such a small potential for growth its ridiculous. So, having looked at this, its easy to say that most of the long-lasting members are going to be ones from 2006 to early 2007. And these people are dying off, and not being replaced. The way the game is set up is just destined to an end when a certain group has held on for so long that they can no longer be knocked off, and there is no chance for a comeback.

I'm highly expecting CN to either end or restart sometime later in 2008. Then again, I'm sure some other people thought the same in 2007, so who knows.

[DrunkWino]

There's not enough stagmentation for a restart, yet, but I think it's almost inevitable, especially unless some major war comes along and makes things interesting for a bit. Even that is only a temp band-aid.