NationStates Jolt Archive

Does anyone know if being the regional founder has any effect on influence? I'm the regional founder and I have no endorsements(population only 8 million, 3 days old) and already my influence is Superpower. Though most of the other nations in my reagion are Powers, it may just be that small regions have a bigger distribution of power.(To each nation, that is.)
not really

I'm the founder of my region but I'm still an instigator like the other nations

Could someone point me to a region with a Hegemony in it?

Also, while I've found regions with Duckspeakers in, all I've been able to deduce is that it's between Truckler and Diplomat. Can anyone point me to a region with all three of Duckspeakers, Envoys and Handshakers (preferrably with a few of each).
Indus River Valley

perhaps it is a math thing on how it works. like each rank is a certain amount of points and the region ranking is the average of everything combined. then passworded us and stuff are worth certain ponts as well.

Fantastic work! With this kind of incontrovertible evidence I do not understand how the moderator team can ignore your whining.

Fact is until the influence system has been in place for 3-5 months it will not work properly, after that it will be an excellent system. If you are too shortsighted to see that this system benefits NS hugely in the long run then that is just too bad for you.

Your bitter sarcasm is touching.

Perhaps this will change NS for the better, but all I've seen of it thus far is enabling region invaders to more easily topple pre-existing regional delegates, especially those without founders, such as ours.

I can safely say one thing, having some advance notice of the implementation of this gig would have been swell. At least then we'd have some kind of defense from being sacked by the 'opportunists' out there.

I can safely say one thing, having some advance notice of the implementation of this gig would have been swell. At least then we'd have some kind of defense from being sacked by the 'opportunists' out there.
Did you think we were going to spell out the specific code or send every player a personalized email about it? You had six day's notice (http://www.nationstates.net/news/2006/04/06/index.html#foreshadowing) of it, same as eveyone else.

My region was taking into account the coming changes a week before they were implemented. Personal responsibility is a nice trait. You didn't pay attention to changes to the game and then complain because you didn't pay attention. The admins and Max don't usually make a habit of accosting us with TGs warning us of system changes. They assume those of us who care will watch for changes. My experience is that they were right.

Anyone know what influence level you must be at to password a region without showing it to the members of the region?

Did you think we were going to spell out the specific code or send every player a personalized email about it? You had six day's notice (http://www.nationstates.net/news/2006/04/06/index.html#foreshadowing) of it, same as eveyone else.

Hell... so it did.

Allright, I concede.

Anyone know what influence level you must be at to password a region without showing it to the members of the region?

I assume you have to be a Superpower. When my regional influence was Powerbroker I was unable to do so. When it upgraded to Power, I still couldn't do it, or even change the password at all without hiding it... so aggrevating.

Recently I've been able to determine that there are differences in people with the same rank, ie; some minnows have more influence than others, and also i've concluded that the influence it costs to ban someone is half of that persons influence, because it costs half of your influence to ban yourself....

Edit: The complete list is now available here:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10769550&postcount=267

This list below is that original contained in this post.

The (incomplete - missing Duckspeaker) ordering of national influence rankings is as follows:

Hermit
Hegemony
Dominator
Superpower
Power
Powerbroker
Eminence Grise
Enforcer
Dealmaker
Instigator
Contender
Negotiator
Auxiliary
Ambassador
Diplomat
Envoy
Handshaker
Truckler
Vassal
Minnow

I think Contender and Negotiator are the other way around - one of my nations went from Contender to Negotiator after a few days, with no changes to endorsements or regional membership.

There is a Duckspeaker in The Syndicate, if you need to find what position it is in...

I take it that deciding issues has no impact on influence?

I take it that deciding issues has no impact on influence?
I doubt it. However, you never know, the admins may well have coded in some special Influence rating if you decide a particular issue a particular way.
Or alternately they may have coded in a new Easter Egg for nations with a particular Influence.

I think Contender and Negotiator are the other way around - one of my nations went from Contender to Negotiator after a few days, with no changes to endorsements or regional membership.
If the region doesn't change for a few days, the nations positions relative to each other become closer (imagine there were three nations with influences 1, 2, and 3 - after three days these would become 4, 5, and 6, which are proportionately much closer). This goes along with Negotiator being weaker than Contender.

There is a Duckspeaker in The Syndicate, if you need to find what position it is in...
Unfortunately there isn't enough information - looking at the regional XML feed I can see that the Duckspeaker has been in the region longer than one Envoy, but shorter than another Envoy. One of them must have been in the UN at some point.

Safalra's Guide To Influence
Complete version - now with added quack

When a nation moves to a region, it has no influence within that region. Nations accrue influence in a region by remaining in the region, and by receiving endorsements from the region's members. Being a member of the UN has no effect unless the nation gains endorsements, and the influence of the nations endorsing has no effect either.

At each UN update the each nation's influence is increased by a constant factor (to represent its remaining in the region) and a factor proportionate to the number of UN endorsements it has. The precise equivalence between these two factors (for example, whether having n endorsements is equivalent to remaining in a region for n days) is unclear.

The regional power is equal to the sum of the national influence of all its members (updated each UN update), and is displayed as a ranking on a scale ranging from 'Backwater' to 'Extremely High'.

The national influence ranking (ranging from 'Minnow' to 'Hermit') is determined by the ratio of national influence to total regional influence and the previous UN update. If the nation joined the region since the last UN update it has no power. If the region was created since the last UN update all its member have ranking 'Hermit' until the next UN update.

The ordering of national influence rankings is as follows:

Hermit
Hegemony
Dominator
Superpower
Power
Powerbroker
Eminence Grise
Enforcer
Dealmaker
Instigator
Contender
Negotiator
Auxiliary
Ambassador
Diplomat
Envoy
Duckspeaker
Handshaker
Truckler
Vassal
Minnow

The ordering can mainly be deduced by looking at regions where all nations have identical influence (mainly regions without UN members where the membership hasn't changed since the influence system was introduced):

1 Hermit (00000000000000000000000000)
2 Dominator (000000000000000000000000)
3 Superpower (000000000 GrandIslamicAlliance)
4 Power (00000000000000000000000000000)
5 Power (Abudabi)
6 Powerbroker (00 Nirvana 00)
7 Eminence Grise (A Home for Those About to Rock)
8 Eminence Grise (Abcede)
9 Eminence Grise (Anti Nerd Alliance)
10 Eminence Grise (Acheron)
11 Enforcer (Conservicstan)
12 Dealmaker (Alrindor)
13 Instigator (Ashtan)
14 Instigator (Lost Caribbean Islands)
15 Contender (Poke World)
16 Contender (Civics Class Sandbox)
17 Contender (EOTLOUD)
18 Negotiator (Sheep Protectors)
19 Negotiator (Chemistry)
20 Negotiator (Major IMPACT)
21
22 Ambassador (The NSPD)
23 Ambassador (Terra 13)
24
25 Ambassador (The Cheese Alliance)
26 Diplomat (Pantheon)
27
28
29
30
31 Envoy (ECU)

This also allows us to derive bounds on the share of total regional influence that leads to each title.

The positions of the remaining rankings can be deduced by using the regional XML feeds to determine the relative ages of nations in a region and see how this correlates with the rankings of those that aren't UN members. To complete the list above the regions of England, The YoungWorld, Indus River Valley, and 00000000000000000 ALL 4 TEENS were used.

I know this is most likely a waste of time, but since I have seen a few posts about it, I have an idea.

As a lot of people don't like or even don't understand most of the names, why not have a setting where next to it is the default name and that nation can choose a custom title for that ranking.

Some people might prefer higher influence to be "level x" and lowest to be "level 1" or even more custom and bizarre names.

So therefore, there would not being any hassle about the names and truely helps everyone around the world understand who has what.

As a lot of people don't like or even don't understand most of the names, why not have a setting where next to it is the default name and that nation can choose a custom title for that ranking.
That would involve storing a lot of extra information per nation. I doubt the admin are that keen on causing another Great Diskspace Disaster...

Some people might prefer higher influence to be "level x"
Level 21. (Unless there are more that no-one has noticed yet.)

Unfortunately there isn't enough information - looking at the regional XML feed I can see that the Duckspeaker has been in the region longer than one Envoy, but shorter than another Envoy. One of them must have been in the UN at some point.

hey, do you mind telling me how you use the XML feed?

I know this is most likely a waste of time, but since I have seen a few posts about it, I have an idea.

As a lot of people don't like or even don't understand most of the names, why not have a setting where next to it is the default name and that nation can choose a custom title for that ranking.

Some people might prefer higher influence to be "level x" and lowest to be "level 1" or even more custom and bizarre names.

So therefore, there would not being any hassle about the names and truely helps everyone around the world understand who has what.
that would make things more confusing than they are already

hey, do you mind telling me how you use the XML feed?

I'd actually like to know how to do that too.

http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/XML_feed

i did that, but it doesnt have the regional influence...

looks like they added something to the xml since the last time I checked it:
time elapsed since nation founding.

And what's interesting is that if the nation dies and is revived, it doesn't get a new founding date. I had nation that was created 29 days ago. I forgot to log into it so it died the other day and I asked to have it restored. And after it was restored, it still showed it was founded 29 days ago.

nice feature. Though I don't understand what those numbers on the first log in and last log in are.

Those numbers are explained also on NSWiki, ...
Something strange, Delegates seem to have '0' at the 'Founded'-tag, and '0' at the 'First Login'-tag and i know it used to be a real number ... Someone knows why ???

Delegates seem to have '0' at the 'Founded'-tag, and '0' at the 'First Login'-tag and i know it used to be a real numberNations have a 0 if they were created before that data was recorded.


i did that, but it doesnt have the regional influence...Reread Safalra's methodology. He wasn't using the XML to just tell him the influence.

okay then but now i wonder how influence is calculated if it's not with data on the XML-feed? another secret XML-feed?

okay then but now i wonder how influence is calculated if it's not with data on the XML-feed? another secret XML-feed?The XML is just the data we choose to share with regular players. There is quit a bit that isn't shared.

The XML is just the data we choose to share with regular players. There is quit a bit that isn't shared.


so in otherwords, you arent gonna ever show it...

My nation is a Truckler, what exactly is that again?

so in otherwords, you arent gonna ever show it...
Never say never, but we have no immediate plans.

so in otherwords, you arent gonna ever show it...Maybe. I don't know. Adding the word to the XML seems reasonably trivial, but it may be too trivial to bother adding. However, I can guarantee that we aren't going to add the numerical value.

Maybe. I don't know. Adding the word to the XML seems reasonably trivial, but it may be too trivial to bother adding. However, I can guarantee that we aren't going to add the numerical value.

well obviously not the numerical value, but if you add the grouping, could you possibly say that it was my idea....

also can one of the mods conferm the listing of the regional influence posted earlier in this topic?

can one of the mods conferm the listing of the regional influence posted earlier in this topic?
We've already stated multiple times that we're not going to post such a list. Why would we then turn around and state, "Yep, that's it! Good job."?

You can use posted lists or not as suits you. There will be no official list or official sanction.

@Safalra: I don't quite understand your explaination. (My bad english probably, I'm not a native) Do you mean that when a region has 3 members at 1, 2, 3 ranking, after X number of days, since the nation at position 1 cannot advance anymore, the 3 members will ultimately reach 1, 1, 1 ranking?

Also, did you mean nation 1's position depends on the proportion (or %) of total possible endorsements, or just total endorsements? I.e. Say a region has 3 UN members, and nation A has 2 votes. Will his rank rise faster if the other 2 nations have zero votes each, or will it rise at the same rate irregardless of how many votes the other 2 nations have? (another way to put it is, will a monopoly of votes make a difference?)

Hope you or someone can clarify, thank you.

@Safalra: I don't quite understand your explaination. (My bad english probably, I'm not a native) Do you mean that when a region has 3 members at 1, 2, 3 ranking, after X number of days, since the nation at position 1 cannot advance anymore, the 3 members will ultimately reach 1, 1, 1 ranking?

Also, did you mean nation 1's position depends on the proportion (or %) of total possible endorsements, or just total endorsements? I.e. Say a region has 3 UN members, and nation A has 2 votes. Will his rank rise faster if the other 2 nations have zero votes each, or will it rise at the same rate irregardless of how many votes the other 2 nations have? (another way to put it is, will a monopoly of votes make a difference?)

Hope you or someone can clarify, thank you.

The general concept, I think, is that there is one set amount of influence in each region, shared by all its members. If none of the nations are in the UN, and they have all been there since the system was started, they will all have the same ranking. A new nation will have less influence, but will gain more as time goes on. As for endorsements, the amount you have supposedly gets you influence at a set rate, and more endorsements equals more influence, but as always when one nation is gaining influence, the influence of the other nations in the region is going down, since it's all coming from the one pool of influence.

Hope that made sense. :)

We've already stated multiple times that we're not going to post such a list. Why would we then turn around and state, "Yep, that's it! Good job."?

You can use posted lists or not as suits you. There will be no official list or official sanction.
Well, Hack's already confirmed I'd discovered a clue earlier in the thread. Plus [violet] said ealier in this thread that official lists of the other rankings have never been posted previosuly, but then there's this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8029726&postcount=1) by game moderator Euroslavia - notice the list of civil/economic/political rankings at the bottom of the post.

Not that I'm particularly fussed - the only way I can see that my ordering could be wrong would be if there are extra categories that I've missed. I'm going to confirm the list using the region Influence Experiment once it's old enough (the idea being to move two nations in several weeks apart, and watch one nation rise through the categories to Dominator as the other falls to Dominator).

I have a feeling that was made before Euroslavia became Mod.

I have a feeling that was made before Euroslavia became Mod.
Oh well. Point conceded.

Well, Hack's already confirmed I'd discovered a clue earlier in the thread..
Don't get me wrong - you've obviously put a lot of effort into your list, and I'm not saying it's incorrect. You have done what appears to be excellent research. What we won't do is give you a thumbs-up or thumbs-down to give it official status.

And yes, the Euroslavia posts were pre-mod.

Don't get me wrong - you've obviously put a lot of effort into your list, and I'm not saying it's incorrect. You have done what appears to be excellent research. What we won't do is give you a thumbs-up or thumbs-down to give it official status.
Okay, I've put a note saying it's strictly unofficial on my website: http://www.safalra.com/special/nationstates/influence/

(Yes, this post was just a plug for the new page...)

Well, Hack's already confirmed I'd discovered a clue earlier in the thread. Plus [violet] said ealier in this thread that official lists of the other rankings have never been posted previosuly, but then there's this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8029726&postcount=1) by game moderator Euroslavia - notice the list of civil/economic/political rankings at the bottom of the post.

Not that I'm particularly fussed - the only way I can see that my ordering could be wrong would be if there are extra categories that I've missed. I'm going to confirm the list using the region Influence Experiment once it's old enough (the idea being to move two nations in several weeks apart, and watch one nation rise through the categories to Dominator as the other falls to Dominator).
I remember that Euro posted that before he was moderator. There was a lot of guessing on the matter back then, just as there is now. And some people did not agree that Frigtening was the highest ranking. Myself being one of the dissidents.

My nation is a Truckler, what exactly is that again?

AFAIK, it's someone who drives a truckle. :D (sorry, long day)

The only problem I have with this is that I'm the UN Delegate and the founder of our region has ceased to exist. I find it somewhat ridiculous that I get taxed for what I do in regional control when there is no one else who can do anything in regional control.

HN

The only problem I have with this is that I'm the UN Delegate and the founder of our region has ceased to exist. I find it somewhat ridiculous that I get taxed for what I do in regional control when there is no one else who can do anything in regional control.
*looks at Sirap's region* Seeing as you're all from over at Armchair General, I suggest using a puppet to found a new region called Armchair General (making you the founder of the region), then put a password on Armchair and tell everyone to move over to the new region or get ejected after some specified time limit. Finally, move over to the new region yourself.

AFAIK, it's someone who drives a truckle. :D (sorry, long day)
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=truckler

Well, I'm going to suggest something. I'm not sure if this has already been suggested, but I'm not going to read through 20 pages of posts.

We already know there are lots of ranks. Some seem to have been lost, but if you bother to read the whole topic, you can get the entire story.

Here's my hypothesis. There is a certain amount of influence in each region, distributed among the members. The higher amount of power a region has, the more influence there is to be distributed among the members. My only other thing I need to know is if you can lose influence without doing anything. The Hermit level means you have all the power of the region, or at least a very large amount.

Well, I'm going to suggest something. I'm not sure if this has already been suggested, but I'm not going to read through 20 pages of posts.

We already know there are lots of ranks. Some seem to have been lost, but if you bother to read the whole topic, you can get the entire story.

Here's my hypothesis. There is a certain amount of influence in each region, distributed among the members. The higher amount of power a region has, the more influence there is to be distributed among the members. My only other thing I need to know is if you can lose influence without doing anything. The Hermit level means you have all the power of the region, or at least a very large amount.

Actually I believe each region has the same amount of influence. You don't have to read the whole thred, just look further up on this page. (At my post.)

Well, I'm going to suggest something. I'm not sure if this has already been suggested, but I'm not going to read through 20 pages of posts.

We already know there are lots of ranks. Some seem to have been lost, but if you bother to read the whole topic, you can get the entire story.

Here's my hypothesis. There is a certain amount of influence in each region, distributed among the members. The higher amount of power a region has, the more influence there is to be distributed among the members. My only other thing I need to know is if you can lose influence without doing anything. The Hermit level means you have all the power of the region, or at least a very large amount.
You're on the right track. See this page:

http://www.safalra.com/special/nationstates/influence/

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=truckler
someone who is submissive?

Following the trail of the Nationstates bunny it looks like Low is the ranking of the vast majority of nations on NS. So far I found only 2 moderate regions.

So far I found only 2 moderate regions.

I assure you there are many more than that.

Since I'm involved in TWO moderate regions, I'm pretty sure there are many more than that.

Following the trail of the Nationstates bunny it looks like Low is the ranking of the vast majority of nations on NS. So far I found only 2 moderate regions.
You'd expect that given how small most regions are:

44 with 0 nations
5631 with 1 nation
3919 with 2-3 nations
2456 with 4-7 nations
1312 with 8-15 nations
510 with 16-31 nations
213 with 32-63 nations
76 with 64-127 nations
25 with 128-255 nations
8 with 256-511 nations
4 with 512-1023 nations
2 with 1024-2047 nations
0 with 2048-4095 nations
5 with 4096-8191 nations

I assure you there are many more than that.
I'm sure there is. I just stopped looking after the 50th region.

I'm sure there is. I just stopped looking after the 50th region.

You should have given that information in your assessment. That's weird because I saw you come through both of my regions and I'm guessing that's not the only two moderates you would naturally pass through.

You should have given that information in your assessment. That's weird because I saw you come through both of my regions and I'm guessing that's not the only two moderates you would naturally pass through.
how is that possible? I didn't physically move my nation anywhere. I just clicked on the regions where it said the nationstates bunny went. My nation should only show up if I physically relocate to your regions. Unless you have some way to see who is looking at your regions.
I'm sorry, but I think you are pulling my leg.

I think he misunderstood you as being the NationStates Bunny

I think he misunderstood you as being the NationStates Bunny

Oh, I did. He switched back and forth from talking about the bunny to talking about himself so quickly I assumed it was his puppet. Carry on.

I clearly said I was following the nationstates bunny. And actually I only mentioned the bunny one time.

Nice attempt at deflection.

I clearly said I was following the nationstates bunny. And actually I only mentioned the bunny one time.

Nice attempt at deflection.

I meant that you should have added that you only looked at about 50 regions. The nationstates bunny thing I admitted I misunderstood. Oddly my misunderstanding was so unreasonable that another poster was able to figure out rather quickly that I had drawn that conclusion.

Thank you for being so patient in your explanation. I continue to be impressed with you, as are we all.

You'd expect that given how small most regions are:

44 with 0 nations
5631 with 1 nation
3919 with 2-3 nations
2456 with 4-7 nations
1312 with 8-15 nations
510 with 16-31 nations
213 with 32-63 nations
76 with 64-127 nations
25 with 128-255 nations
8 with 256-511 nations
4 with 512-1023 nations
2 with 1024-2047 nations
0 with 2048-4095 nations
5 with 4096-8191 nations

and how do you no this?

and how do you no this?
he looked at a lot of regions. So far, my own findings appear to agree with his.

and how do you no this?
I have a program that occasionally downloads the entire region list (very slowly, of course, to avoid enraging the admins) and performs analysis (see my sig for links).

I have a program that occasionally downloads the entire region list (very slowly, of course, to avoid enraging the admins) and performs analysis (see my sig for links).

can i get that program?

y'know, it seems to me that so many people are trying to work out the details of this regional influence stuff that they have no time or energy left for invading, griefing, flaming or anything else...

...maybe this is the mods' real reason for inventing regional influence :D

Oh no, invasions are still taking place. They're just much longer term projects now.

darn! thought i had it all sussed out there

Inhabitants of small regions (for example regions of only 1 nation) get the Hermit rank quickier. Is it possible that this influence is shared to each nation in the region, thus having a region with less nations gets you more influence?

Look at their regional power levels. They have more of the regional power, but less power in the region. It doesn't mean much that they have a lot.

Inhabitants of small regions (for example regions of only 1 nation) get the Hermit rank quickier. Is it possible that this influence is shared to each nation in the region, thus having a region with less nations gets you more influence?
http://www.safalra.com/special/nationstates/influence/

This is what I came up with about Influence. What do you think? it is based off the region i am in at the moment.

Concerning Influence. At the moment the game thinks that there are 17 nations fighting to increase influence. Each nation grows influence at a faster rate if there is less competition in the region. Thus, the smaller the region, the more the players gain influence. This was proven in several exercises conducted over the last week. Though the full limits of influence have not fully been understood, it is generally accepted that if there were two nations in a region, who have NOT endorsed each other, then those two nations would grow their influence at a 50% rate (as per update). If one nation endorses the other, then that nation will grow their influence at a 75% rate. Now, I will provide you with some statistics about our region.

Before I do, let me put this in laymens terms. The more people who endorse one person, the faster that person grows in influence. The more endorsement swapping that ocurres, the slower the speed of the UN Delegate, due to widespread competition (at least that is how the game ‘thinks’). Now there are currently 16 UN nations in Illuminati, with exactly 77 endorsements throughout. 11 of them are given to me. The ideal influence growth rate is 50% (because just one person in a region ends up being a hermit). I have calculated everyones influence growth percent by taking 100 (the non-existent ideal for influence growth), and dividing it by 17 (the number of nations in Illuminati). This number comes out to 5.9. 5.9% is Illuminati’s magic number at the moment, and here is why. If every nation did not endorse anyone, or everyone endorse ALL other nations, then the influence of a nation would grow by 5.9% a day. This isnt very much, considering there are 20 or so ranks in influence. Non UN nations will grow by this much a day reguardless, (assuming the total population remains at 17), but I am talking about the UN ones, seeing as how all people are in the UN currently. After that, you take the current number of total endorsements, and divide it up by the ideal percentage of gain. (I hate Algebra). The number you get is .77. - .77 now reflects the current value of each endorsement. After that is a simple multiplication of .77 and the number of endorsements you have. What you come out to is a flux; or plus or minus 5.9%. I took the time to calculate each nations growth percentage.

Mercury God - 11 - 8.47%
Barrakus - 5 0 3.85%
South West Dorset - 5 - 3.85%
Mount Calvery - 2 - 1.54%
Eulesis - 5 - 3.85%
Ronzenburg - 5 - 3.85%
PiggiesS - 8 - 6.16%
Wardak of One - 6 - 4.62%
Natokuura - 5 - 3.85%
New Oldschool - 5 - 3.85%
Lysernia - 4 - 3.08%
Sativa Indaca - 5 - 3.85%
Army of Wodan - 5 - 3.85%
The Iron Wheel - 4 - 3.08%
Zardugal - 1 - .77%
Bartholins - 1 - .77%

Add all that up, and you get 59.29 - because we indented our decimal in the previous problem we have to move it foreward a space, giving us a grand total of 5.9% (the averate growth rate). I suspect, though not yet tested that if 5.9 (our magic number) is our average growth rate, our flux rate, then the regional power grows at this rate as well.

and if someone could please check to see if you have noticed similar growth rates in similar region sizes. The flux rate (the magic number for a regions growth). This would be very helpful if mathmatically we can figure out influence.

A UN nation does not need to have endorsement to grow faster than a non UN nation. This was determined by experimentation in one of my own regions in which I created a puppet and then made it a UN member. The puppet is growing faster than the original inhabitant of the region.

A UN nation does not need to have endorsement to grow faster than a non UN nation. This was determined by experimentation in one of my own regions in which I created a puppet and then made it a UN member. The puppet is growing faster than the original inhabitant of the region.
Could you tell us which region? 'Cause when I was looking doing research I found that in regions where all the nations had been present since the start of the influence calculators and where the UN members hadn't endorsed each other, all nations had the same influence ranking - there were about 20 such regions.

Before I do, let me put this in laymens terms. The more people who endorse one person, the faster that person grows in influence. The more endorsement swapping that ocurres, the slower the speed of the UN Delegate, due to widespread competition (at least that is how the game ‘thinks’). Now there are currently 16 UN nations in Illuminati, with exactly 77 endorsements throughout. 11 of them are given to me. The ideal influence growth rate is 50% (because just one person in a region ends up being a hermit). I have calculated everyones influence growth percent by taking 100 (the non-existent ideal for influence growth), and dividing it by 17 (the number of nations in Illuminati). This number comes out to 5.9. 5.9% is Illuminati’s magic number at the moment, and here is why. If every nation did not endorse anyone, or everyone endorse ALL other nations, then the influence of a nation would grow by 5.9% a day. This isnt very much, considering there are 20 or so ranks in influence. Non UN nations will grow by this much a day reguardless, (assuming the total population remains at 17), but I am talking about the UN ones, seeing as how all people are in the UN currently. After that, you take the current number of total endorsements, and divide it up by the ideal percentage of gain. (I hate Algebra). The number you get is .77. - .77 now reflects the current value of each endorsement. After that is a simple multiplication of .77 and the number of endorsements you have. What you come out to is a flux; or plus or minus 5.9%. I took the time to calculate each nations growth percentage.
You seem to be confusing influence share with 'absolute' influence. A nation outside of the UN accrues influence at the same rate no matter its region, but in a larger region that will be a lower share of the total influence being apportioned each day.

well, is there a way to mathmatically determine how many days it would take to be a certain rank in influence. How to determine at what rate a person gains influence?

I enjoy math, in this way, figuring out problems. What I dont understand is how a nation in TNP can increase influence at the rate it does. If influence is spread out within a region "everyone fighting to gain influence" then wouldnt it be spread so thin that noone would grow very much at all?

I enjoy math, in this way, figuring out problems. What I dont understand is how a nation in TNP can increase influence at the rate it does. If influence is spread out within a region "everyone fighting to gain influence" then wouldnt it be spread so thin that noone would grow very much at all?
Assuming you're using the abbreviation for The North Pacific, I would note that almost everyone (except for about 6-7 nations) are all at a Minnow status.

Could you tell us which region? 'Cause when I was looking doing research I found that in regions where all the nations had been present since the start of the influence calculators and where the UN members hadn't endorsed each other, all nations had the same influence ranking - there were about 20 such regions.
Your findings are still valid this one is just supplemental.
The Indus River Valley where I introduced that puppet to check on the region rankings. When I first introduced it, it was growing slowly. But after I made it a UN member, to see what that did, it growth sped up. It's already achieved powerbroker status.

I think if I left it out of the UN, it would have gotten to that ranking later than it has as a UN member.

I think if I left it out of the UN, it would have gotten to that ranking later than it has as a UN member.

But is it proven. Simply send two minnows into a region. have one of them be a UN nation and the other (obviously) not. Test their spead of growth. My region is also performing the same tests, though is only on day two still.

I can't seem to find an answer to this already posted so I'll ask here:

If someone uses illegal methods to launch an invasion (most likely UN multing now) and then bans natives or password protects the region, would the mods remove the bans and pwd? Or would it be considered a fair side effect of influence in the region?

If someone uses multis to grief a region, of course we'll unlock it.

And delete all their nations.

i went through here and i didnt see the one thing i'm realy looking for, is the amount of influence required to pwp or change a pw higher for regions with more nations?

i went through here and i didnt see the one thing i'm realy looking for, is the amount of influence required to pwp or change a pw higher for regions with more nations?Experiment and find out.

will do

I was able to password my region at Enforcer, I can password (and not show it at Superpower, My region is at Low Influence overall.

every nation can be ejected/banned right? its not possabel for a nation to have so much influnce in a region that they can never be booted/banned?

I will neither confirm nor deny that.

Hello everyone. I'm sorry if this is a point that has been raised before (I didn't read all 23 preceeding pages)...

I am the founder of my own region. It's been in existance for six months or so. My population is over a billion. My regional influence remains set at minnow. I have not left the region at any point since entering it... As well, others of my oldest residents of the region, who are also fairly sizeable nations, are stuck as minnows...

What's going on here?

Skim the thread.

I've seen regions with the following regional powers and number of nations (minimum-maximum):

backwater (1-27)
low (10-104)
moderate (40-185)
high (63-295)
very high (288-2237)
extremely high (1218-5712)

A region with 104 nations could be low, moderate, or high.

My region has 5 nations and is low.

Why does it say that changing the wfe would have no cost but when you try to update it it says you dont have enough influnce

I will neither confirm nor deny that.



that means it must be true!;)

Has anybody noticed a loss in growth for endorsements given?

If the theory holds that a region grows by 100/(# UN Members), and this is adjusted by (Growth Number)/(Endorsements), the total growth becomes larger than 100% unless every endorsement given subtracts from your growth at the same rate.

Example: 100%/10 Nations = Magic Number = 10%. If there are 20 Endorsements in total then 10/20 Endorsement means each Endorsement changes the Magic Number by 0,5%. Unless each endorsement subtracts from the endorsor, then the total regional growth becomes 110%.

Either numerous endorsements accelerate growth and endorsing costs you no influence growth but increases the regional growth; or endorsements don't affect regional growth, and endorsements cost you influence (assuming a zero sum gain).

According to the list of regional influences, I seethat Hermit is somehow at the top of the pack. That makes no sense people.
Stop and think about it.
Since when do Hermits have any influence on the world? They are hermits. They live alone.
If it were up to me, I think I'd put them at the bottom, below minnow. We'd have Hermit, Minnow, Vassal, Truckler, and so on...

--Rooty

According to the list of regional influences, I seethat Hermit is somehow at the top of the pack. That makes no sense people.
Stop and think about it.
Since when do Hermits have any influence on the world? They are hermits. They live alone.
If it were up to me, I think I'd put them at the bottom, below minnow. We'd have Hermit, Minnow, Vassal, Truckler, and so on...

--Rooty

The list is about which titles have the largest percentage of regional influence. Hermits have all of it, even if it's all of a very small amount. You can't do the list your way, because a hermit may have more actual influence that minnow or may not.

According to the list of regional influences, I seethat Hermit is somehow at the top of the pack. That makes no sense people.
Stop and think about it.
Since when do Hermits have any influence on the world? They are hermits. They live alone.
Exactly. So they have 100% of the influence in their region, and are therefore the most powerful within a region any nation can be.

Regional influence is idiotic, especially since you lose influence at a rate at least as great as you gain it if you leave a region. Now way to really build up influence unless you just plant yourself in anyone region.

Moderators really thought this one out...not.

I gained regional influence after a month in a region. Left for one day, lost it, have been back for one day, still didn't get it back. It is a badly thought out policy if it is one to one.

Great one guys.

Go back to the drawing board.

Regional influence is idiotic, especially since you lose influence at a rate at least as great as you gain it if you leave a region. Now way to really build up influence unless you just plant yourself in anyone region.

Moderators really thought this one out...not.

I gained regional influence after a month in a region. Left for one day, lost it, have been back for one day, still didn't get it back. It is a badly thought out policy if it is one to one.

Great one guys.

Go back to the drawing board.

You know, we don't require anyone to play.
If it doesn't suit your needs, I'm sure there are other games you can find that will.
Or, you could make up your own. I mean, it's so easy to think up the concept, implement it, and have thousands of friendly players telling you, "Great job!"

Yeah. Try it. :)

The list is about which titles have the largest percentage of regional influence. Hermits have all of it, even if it's all of a very small amount. You can't do the list your way, because a hermit may have more actual influence that minnow or may not.

Hello??
You're joking, right?
In order to have influence, there has to be someone for you to HAVE INFLUENCE OVER.
What are hermits going to do? Beat up on no one? Tell the plants what to do?
And given that there is no official list, how exactly do you plan to point out that I am wrong?


<hears crickets>

--Rooty

A Hermit is the most powerful person in his region, since he's also the only person in his region. But a one person region is an unimportant Backwater. It can't even have a UN delegate, since it would require a 2nd UN nation to endorse the 1st one.

Hello??
You're joking, right?
In order to have influence, there has to be someone for you to HAVE INFLUENCE OVER.
What are hermits going to do? Beat up on no one? Tell the plants what to do?
And given that there is no official list, how exactly do you plan to point out that I am wrong?


<hears crickets>

--Rooty

Um, I guess there is no such thing as testing. God didn't give us an official list of Physics laws so I suppose there is no way to tell what they are. Good thing the only way to tell how something works is if someone tells us. There's no such thing as the scientific method.

Quick question - who does the minnow have influence over unless he's the delegate? How about the truckler? Any of the other rankings. I would be interested in you explaining to me how your influence affords you the chance to "tell [anyone] what to do".

<hears crickets>

Influence is really only useful if you are the delegate, if you are trying not to get ejected or in the event of an invasion. Hermits can get invaded too. Now, it's a fact that a Hermit has 100% of the influence of a region. It's not a guess. It's not a hypothesis. It's a truism. That's why the hermit is at the top of the list.

You've seen the testing and methodology for the current list. Now, would you like to tell me what testing and methodology your list is based on?

<hears crickets>

<hears crickets>


<hears crickets>


<hears crickets>

where are all these mother #%$!ing crickets coming from?

http://www.thecrickets.com/images/collage2b.jpg

Lubbock, Texas.

I had a region with two non-UN nations who were both hermits.
whatever that means.

Now, it's a fact that a Hermit has 100% of the influence of a region.

A fact based on what?
Again, no one is answering the question of how someone who lives alone can have influence over anyone.
What is my methodology based on? Common sense. Having more than two brain cells to rub together. Anything other than the babble you just presented.

Out of curiosity, since regional influence does not equal rank, why have it? Since you can't "win" at this game, in the usual sense, why do we care about influence? What is it supposed to be adding to the simulation? So far, I can't see anything... except for maybe a new feature to argue about.

--Rooty

You know, we don't require anyone to play.
If it doesn't suit your needs, I'm sure there are other games you can find that will.
Or, you could make up your own. I mean, it's so easy to think up the concept, implement it, and have thousands of friendly players telling you, "Great job!"

Yeah. Try it. :)


How typical and indicative of the amount of research the average moderator actually does. You might have noticed that I began playing this game either just before, just after, or the same time as you. This ridiculous parameter was not there when I joined, and is there because the mods are too lazy to do their job, which is to moderator. Instead they implement a greatly flawed system and get huffy when the flaws are highlighted.

And yes, I have done what you suggested with one little difference, suggestions and complaints weren't laughed off or replied to in a defensive manner, especially when it went against entirely what was listed earlier by a moderator. I see you just ignore or ridicule complaints.

When I first brought up this subject when Regional Influence was first implemented, I was told in no uncertain terms that the rate of influence would ebb slowly when a nation left a region. This is entirley wrong. Whoever stated it didn't know what they were talking about. The rate of influence decreases at a greatly expanded rate compared to the rate it is gained, therefore it is impossible for a nation to be part of two regions.

This flies against logic, as one would assume that influence would slowly dissapate over time, not decrease in a flash. It's like if you lived in a nation, took a vacation overseas for a week, came back and your job, house, and family were gone. It would be reasonable for influence to decrease at about half the rate it increases, or a little less (probably one third).

As it is now, it decreases at least three and possibly four times as fast as it was gained. I left my region after attaining Vassal status just to check on the statements made by moderators that influence declined very slowly. I was gone all of one day and came back to find my influence rank back to minnow. This was expected, but what was also expected was that I would gain that rank back in a day or less, according to the mods.

It took four days for the rank to be restored and no change occurred in the size of the region during that time. If it takes four times as long to regain influence than it is impossible for dual citizenship to exist as I was led to believe.

Another glitch is several nations have noticed to have lost influence for absolutely no reason. No nation came into the region, neither had any UN endorsement before or after the change but still they lost regional ranks, for what? They were active nations that logged on every day, but still they lost influence, for nothing.

Rather than get defensive, maybe you should look into complaints and address them. And if you don't know anything about it, just keep your mouth shut. ;)


* 3 days ago: The Confederacy of Undivulged Principles arrived from The Pacific.
* 3 days ago: The Confederacy of Undivulged Principles departed this region for The Pacific
* 3 days ago: The Confederacy of Undivulged Principles arrived from The Pacific.
* 4 days ago: The Confederacy of Undivulged Principles departed this region for The Pacific

A fact based on what?

Influence is a game element. All nations have some influence. If there is only nation in a region then all influence in that region was belong to that one nation. It's a truism. If you think it's otherwise please explain how that's possible.

Again, no one is answering the question of how someone who lives alone can have influence over anyone.

Again, influence in the game is not the same thing as the English word 'Influence'. One can have influence in the game and not influence over anyone as I've explained. The influence a hermit has will come into play if the region is ever invaded or if anyone ever joins the region.

What is my methodology based on? Common sense. Having more than two brain cells to rub together. Anything other than the babble you just presented.

Ah, a compelling argument. Your evidence is overwhelming. I'm particularly compelled by the fact that you can't differentiate a game term from a term in the basic lexicon and insulting people who can.

Out of curiosity, since regional influence does not equal rank, why have it? Since you can't "win" at this game, in the usual sense, why do we care about influence? What is it supposed to be adding to the simulation? So far, I can't see anything... except for maybe a new feature to argue about.

--Rooty
Influence as a game element is discussed throughout the thread. Read up. It has many effects on the game. It dramatically affects delegate activities like password protecting a region and ejecting nations. Thus it has a dramatic effect on the invasion game. It also eliminates griefing a region.

I find it interesting that you came here to rudely insult people accusing them of not having two brain cells to rub together while admitting you don't actually know what you're talking about. Wouldn't it have been easier to start with these questions rather than end with them.

Influence is so the moderators don't have to moderate anymore. More time to post on the forum!

How typical and indicative of the amount of research the average moderator actually does. You might have noticed that I began playing this game either just before, just after, or the same time as you. This ridiculous parameter was not there when I joined, and is there because the mods are too lazy to do their job, which is to moderator. Instead they implement a greatly flawed system and get huffy when the flaws are highlighted.

To 'moderator', huh? Meanwhile there are several thousand people who greatly enjoy the changes, a vast majority who don't care either way and a few people who don't. They have no obligation to the people who don't like it. Now, they'll listen to your complaints if you don't insult them. But what do you expect when you come in and insult them?

And yes, I have done what you suggested with one little difference, suggestions and complaints weren't laughed off or replied to in a defensive manner, especially when it went against entirely what was listed earlier by a moderator. I see you just ignore or ridicule complaints.

Or maybe just the ones that are insulting. Perhaps you would do better to present your complaints in a reasonable manner.

You began with ridicule and you are surprised that you got it in response. You reap what you sow.

When I first brought up this subject when Regional Influence was first implemented, I was told in no uncertain terms that the rate of influence would ebb slowly when a nation left a region. This is entirley wrong. Whoever stated it didn't know what they were talking about. The rate of influence decreases at a greatly expanded rate compared to the rate it is gained, therefore it is impossible for a nation to be part of two regions.

Now, it's possible to be a part of two regions and you have the exact same protection you had before. The only thing that is different is that if you choose to be a part of a single region your position there is made more stable by influence. Your position cannot be less stable than it was before.

It should also be pointed out that endorsements discourage membership in multiple regions too. There are many aspects of the game that don't lend themselves to multiple regions for one nation. You should consider that this may just be another portion of the game you choose to ignore.

This flies against logic, as one would assume that influence would slowly dissapate over time, not decrease in a flash. It's like if you lived in a nation, took a vacation overseas for a week, came back and your job, house, and family were gone. It would be reasonable for influence to decrease at about half the rate it increases, or a little less (probably one third).

Interesting. You said you think influence should not have been implemented and then compared it to a job, house and family. If influence is so wrong why to you equate with such important things. Perhaps this influence thing brings a lot more to the game than you let on.

As it is now, it decreases at least three and possibly four times as fast as it was gained. I left my region after attaining Vassal status just to check on the statements made by moderators that influence declined very slowly. I was gone all of one day and came back to find my influence rank back to minnow. This was expected, but what was also expected was that I would gain that rank back in a day or less, according to the mods.

When did you perform the test? The mods have been tweaking the influence. Also, keep in mind that other nations are gaining in influence and that your influence rank is in relation to the rest of your region. If you left the region and lost influence while other nations that were already gaining influence faster than you continued to gain, then the fact that you got the EXACT same amount of influence back would not get you to the same rank. as rank has to do with your relationship to the rest of the nations in the region.

Your experiment appears to be flawed.

It took four days for the rank to be restored and no change occurred in the size of the region during that time. If it takes four times as long to regain influence than it is impossible for dual citizenship to exist as I was led to believe.

Size of the region is not the only factor. Again, your experiment appears to be flawed.

And impossible? Really? You mean you CANNOT have dual citizenship or you simply have to do without the benefits offered by influence. Not gaining from the benefits of influence is not the same as impossible.

Another glitch is several nations have noticed to have lost influence for absolutely no reason. No nation came into the region, neither had any UN endorsement before or after the change but still they lost regional ranks, for what? They were active nations that logged on every day, but still they lost influence, for nothing.

Ah, here we go. Someone is starting to notice that regional influence is a relationship between nations in the region. If some nations are growing in influence faster than others, then this would a natural side-effect. The ranks are not equated to the actual amount of influence. They are a relationship. That is why your experiment was flawed in the first place. It's odd that you would notice this and not notice that your experiment didn't indicate what you claimed it did. Losing rank =/= losing influence. Rank = relationship of the various influences of the region. Influence = an actual number based on amount of time in the region and number of endorsements.

Rather than get defensive, maybe you should look into complaints and address them. And if you don't know anything about it, just keep your mouth shut. ;)
Why? If you are aggressive it encourages people to be defensive. Perhaps the flaw here is your methods both in your experiment and your aggressive comments to the moderators.

Influence is so the moderators don't have to moderate anymore. More time to post on the forum!

Yeah? I take it there is no other type of moderation than griefing. Amusing. You're upset because the job they do for free for a game you don't pay for got a little easier and that they added a part to the game that many people enjoy and that you, because of your style of play, don't. Again, amusing (assuming one is amused by people who act like brats complaining that people who they don't pay and don't get paid won't do exactly what they want).

How typical and indicative of the amount of research the average moderator actually does. You might have noticed that I began playing this game either just before, just after, or the same time as you....and?

This ridiculous parameter was not there when I joined, and is there because the mods are too lazy to do their job, which is to moderator.Aside from the fact that "moderator" isn't a verb...

Influence (if you had bothered to do any reading of your own instead of just popping off) was introduced because the game didn't provide the proper tools to us so that we would be able to properly differentiate between natives and non-natives. Since the griefing rules focused on nativity, we were required to largely guess who had been where when. Since there was log of when a nation joined a region, it was guesswork. It would be like not providing police officers with radar guns, and just having them stand by the side of the road and try to divine the speed of cars. It doesn't work so well.

This system was not created because we were lazy. It was created because moderators that frequently dealt with invasions pointed out flaws in the current system. The administrators then came up with the mechanics.

Instead they implement a greatly flawed system and get huffy when the flaws are highlighted.Vague insiniations about our laziness is not highlighting flaws.

I see you just ignore or ridicule complaints.No, we ignore pig-headed complainers. Big difference.

Whoever stated it didn't know what they were talking about. The rate of influence decreases at a greatly expanded rate compared to the rate it is gainedLet's see... who should I believe...?

A) The admin who coded the thing and showed me the code

-or-

B) A single player with (vague) anecdotal evidence based on what he sees from the vague stat displayed to the user.

Gee... I wonder...

This flies against logic, as one would assume that influence would slowly dissapate over time, not decrease in a flash.And it does. Your ignorance of how the system works doesn't invalidate the system.

It's like if you lived in a nation, took a vacation overseas for a week, came back and your job, house, and family were gone. It would be reasonable for influence to decrease at about half the rate it increases, or a little less (probably one third).So, tell me, what, exactly, does the rank "Negotiator" mean? Can you tell me? No? Then how do you know the rate at which your influence decreases? If you don't know the mechanic, what makes you think you are in any position to tell me how the system works?

As it is now, it decreases at least three and possibly four times as fast as it was gained.No, it doesn't.

I left my region after attaining Vassal status just to check on the statements made by moderators that influence declined very slowly. I was gone all of one day and came back to find my influence rank back to minnow.So? The names changed. The influence decreased as it's supposed to. Once again, you don't know what "Vassal" means, so you can't tell me how much your influence changed.

It took four days for the rank to be restored and no change occurred in the size of the region during that time. If it takes four times as long to regain influence than it is impossible for dual citizenship to exist as I was led to believe.False premise due do ignorance. There's more to influence than just those words in red, you know...

Another glitch is several nations have noticed to have lost influence for absolutely no reason. No nation came into the region, neither had any UN endorsement before or after the change but still they lost regional ranks, for what? They were active nations that logged on every day, but still they lost influence, for nothing.Gee... maybe the names don't line up exactly with a number. Maybe it's more complex...

Rather than get defensive, maybe you should look into complaints and address them.Maybe you should offer something solid than just bitching?

And if you don't know anything about it, just keep your mouth shut.Pot; kettle; black. Kat's seen the code, have you?

Influence is so the moderators don't have to moderate anymore. More time to post on the forum!And speaking of not knowing anything... Influence is so that we can do all the other aspects of moderation, as opposed to spending two hours trying to figure out if some nation in a region who didn't get the password is a defender pretending to be a native or really a native.

How refreshing it is... all those peaceful people losing huge amounts of skin-under-their-fingers to discriminate against the work of unpaid people moderating an unpaid GAME... oh boy ...

Thinking about it, couldn't we just have a somehow clear explanation of how the system works ? Not the code, but the rule of calculation...

With this information, people could argue on the benefit or not of every point of the system, and therefore try to find ideas to make it just better.

After all, "[...] besides, you can't say the system is a piece of shit just because you do not love it or the way it seems to work, but on the other hand you can't just say 'so is the system, bow down to its greatness' and never fix the bolt that just doesn't turn right!" Varkhan, President of the Peaceful Treehuggers of Zazarstan

(ok, of course, a game programmer, be the game free or not CAN absolutely tell its players to go fuck themselves with their weird ideas of changes; a game programmer CAN also tell those same players that if they're not happy, they can co see if the big doh on the other side of the Web is better or not... does it take the game programmer (or the player, for what we know) closer to the ape or not, that's the fairest point of the question...)

And oh boy, I just lost 2Mu of skin under my fingers...

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

How refreshing it is... all those peaceful people losing huge amounts of skin-under-their-fingers to discriminate against the work of unpaid people moderating an unpaid GAME... oh boy ...

Thinking about it, couldn't we just have a somehow clear explanation of how the system works ? Not the code, but the rule of calculation...

With this information, people could argue on the benefit or not of every point of the system, and therefore try to find ideas to make it just better.
As far as I can see the only major unknown factor is the ratio of the rate at which UN-members accrue influence to the rate at which non-UN-members accrue influence. I can't see how this would effect any qualitative discussion of the system. The qualitative details are all well known:

http://www.safalra.com/special/nationstates/influence/

couldn't we just have a somehow clear explanation of how the system works ? Not the code, but the rule of calculation...
No.

We've said it before, but I guess it bears repeating. If the numbers behind the code (influence, daily UN reports, whatever) become public, this relatively simple game goes from being "I wonder what this does?" to "I'll number-crunch the BESTEST nation in all of NS!" You may find that fun, but Max, the admins, and the mods share the opinion that such a policy change would have far more negatives than positives.

You've been given ample (more than I personally would like) information on the core portion of the rules. Some players have remarkably accurate guesses, others are fumbling for the light switch and trying hard not to drool. We won't tell you in which you category you fall.


Again, no.

Hehe ok, lol, the answer satisfies me - if it's clearly a choice to let a "try and guess" feel to the game, then it's fine. After all, it's not as if we were playing chess without knowing the rules...

Peace
V.

(and of course, thanks Safalra for the link...)

How powerful is superpower? Has a definative listactually been drawn up yet?

Yeah, the region I'm in is moderate now, still with 16 members. Someone have an example of less than 10 with low?

backwater (1-27)
low (10-104)
moderate (8-185)
high (63-295)
very high (288-2237)
extremely high (1218-5712)I have three of them:

Ayad (http://www.nationstates.net/region=ayad) - 2 members, none in the NSUN
Somewhere Out There (http://www.nationstates.net/region=somewhere_out_there) - 3 members, none in the NSUN
The Hollow Earth (http://www.nationstates.net/region=the_hollow_earth) - 3 members, none in the NSUN

Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I didn't feel like reading all 25 pages or searching with 180 seconds of waiting time. :)

I'd like to know if the amount of influence changing/hiding the password is constant or, if it changes, what the cost is determined by.
I'd also like to point out that I was unable to change my region's factbook entry, with the region control panel claiming I didn't have enough influence...yet the Influence Cost Estimate was always at 'No cost'. I finally made the change by checking 'Show password to residents', but now I can't change it back.

It's awfully confusing, and I hope someone can help me with this.

EDIT: Jocabia has already answered me on the influence costs of different actions, so my remaining issue (I've had the founder reset the settings for me to try again) is that I am unable to edit World Factbook Entry on its own. An edit must come with a change in one of the other checkboxes, otherwise you don't have "enough" influence, which is obviously undesirable if you only want to modify the factbook entry.

Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I didn't feel like reading all 25 pages or searching with 180 seconds of waiting time. :)

I'd like to know if the amount of influence changing/hiding the password is constant or, if it changes, what the cost is determined by.
I'd also like to point out that I was unable to change my region's factbook entry, with the region control panel claiming I didn't have enough influence...yet the Influence Cost Estimate was always at 'No cost'. I finally made the change by checking 'Show password to residents', but now I can't change it back.

It's awfully confusing, and I hope someone can help me with this.

The actually way of computing the cost of certain activities is not known to us. It's a mod thing. For all other information you can find much of it in the pages you're not looking at.

Hermit is the lowest and Eminence Grise is the highest. Correct?

Hermit is the lowest and Eminence Grise is the highest. Correct?

thats been debated a bit, people in 1 nation regions seem to get hermit (which means they have 100% of the regional influence) so on that basis hermit is the highest.

http://www.safalra.com/special/nationstates/influence/

Safalra has written a fairly comprehensive explanation of what his research into influence has shown.

All right, I've read through all the pages now and I've found nothing like what I was talking about.

Here's what I did:
1. I went to the regional control panel, and then clicked 'Make Changes' without making ANY changes. I got the error 'You don't have enough regional influence to do that', presumably because there weren't any changes to make.
2. I now edited the World Factbook Entry (it's still within the character limit). The Influence Cost Estimate stayed at 'None', so I clicked on 'Make Changes'...but I still got the error 'You don't have enough regional influence to do that'!
3. I clicked on one of checkboxes, 'Show password to residents', and the cost changed to 'Revealing a password to residents costs no influence'. Only then was I able to successfully edit the World Factbook entry, except I did not intend to reveal the password. I don't want to check a box every time I edit the world factbook, because it may waste influence...

Can anyone help me with this, please?

All right, I've read through all the pages now and I've found nothing like what I was talking about.

Here's what I did:
1. I went to the regional control panel, and then clicked 'Make Changes' without making ANY changes. I got the error 'You don't have enough regional influence to do that', presumably because there weren't any changes to make.
2. I now edited the World Factbook Entry (it's still within the character limit). The Influence Cost Estimate stayed at 'None', so I clicked on 'Make Changes'...but I still got the error 'You don't have enough regional influence to do that'!
3. I clicked on one of checkboxes, 'Show password to residents', and the cost changed to 'Revealing a password to residents costs no influence'. Only then was I able to successfully edit the World Factbook entry, except I did not intend to reveal the password. I don't want to check a box every time I edit the world factbook, because it may waste influence...

Can anyone help me with this, please?

it sounds like your problem might be related to the one mentioned in this topic:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=488773
Frisbeeteria gave some suggestions there on how to fix it.

Thanks. For Firefox, I allowed Javascripts to change 'Status Bar Text', and that seemed to work.

Can a moderator please post an official influence list/ladder?

Can a moderator please post an official influence list/ladder?
No, that's not going to happen.

may i ask why not?

may i ask why not?

Because the mods are all sadists who love torturing us. :p

Can a moderator please post an official influence list/ladder?

Can you just read the thread?

may i ask why not?
'Cause it's a secret. And if they did, I wouldn't be able to keep promoting this page:

http://www.safalra.com/special/nationstates/influence/

lol

one thing i dont understand (maybe a mod could help me on this)



why is it now that long term natives are not able to even know the password to their own region? I think that overall these changes are very good but this bit in particular is confusing.

Surely natives should have the right to know the password for the region incase they wish to leave and then return (advertising, diplomatic regions, etc) but now if i wish to do one of these things i must do it knowing i cant return to the region. This seems too far a swing in favour of invaders+griefers and away from players that have no interest in that aspect of the game, especially when you consider that in under 24hrs in a region you can gain enough "influence" to do this. In regions not interested in invasions at all 24hrs simply isnt enough time to mount a proper defence against people trying to spoil your region.

But like i said, maybe i'm missing something here.

This is an easy one.. if you don't want to play the game of invader/defender then if only one person (the founder) knows the password, then even if you are invaded.. it's really a waste of time because the invaders cannot get control of the RMB because they do not know the password. Safer for us regions who want stability.

Any chance of condensing this thread to something a bit more manageable? Took 18 pages to find out what I wanted to know, and got a conformation of the info on page 23.

It's almost as bad as trying to read about real politics ;)

Any chance of condensing this thread to something a bit more manageable? Took 18 pages to find out what I wanted to know, and got a conformation of the info on page 23.

It's almost as bad as trying to read about real politics ;)

Sounds like we have a pretty good political simulation here, then. Which is good for a political simulation game. ;)

Sounds like we have a pretty good political simulation here, then. Which is good for a political simulation game. ;)

HotRodia, it's good...It's VERY good...but sometimes it's a BIT TOO GOOD :headbang: :D

HotRodia, it's good...It's VERY good...but sometimes it's a BIT TOO GOOD :headbang: :D

I know exactly what you mean. It's been that way since I started playing, and I expect NS to mirror RL in disturbing ways for as long as it exists.

It's entirely possible (even likely) that the regional influence and individual player matrices are only tangentially related. From a programmer's standpoint, it would make sense to keep them separate (at least initially,) and then make the regional influence calculation a function of the "average" ratings of the member nations.

I suspect that the individual nation influence calculation is a function of the INITIAL "values/beliefs" selection when the nation was first created. The relative strength of this initial configuration would then increase as the nation endures. Particular configurations will progress at differing rates, as each "value/belief" is given a different degree of importance (or "weight") for purposes of the influence calculation.

This may account for the difference in influence values between two nations which were created simultaneously, but with differing values/beliefs configurations.

The calculation of regional influence is pretty straightforward from there. It may be a simple mathematical "average" of the various individual nation influence values, which is in turn weighted according to:

---total number of nations in the region, and
---number of UN-member nations present.


If this calculation method holds, you would expect regions with nations having a narrower range of "age" between nations and a consistent political ideology to hold a particular "influence rating" which is more "powerful" than regions of the same size with "younger" nations and more diverse political ideologies.

The regional influence spectrum then arranges itself among nations of greater and lesser total population; the expected arrangement placing regions with larger populations with overall narrower political diversity at the "higher" end of the regional influence spectrum than smaller regions of the same range of diversity, and so on.

Meaning, of course, the larger the region and less-politically diverse its member nations, the more powerful it is overall.

Can anyone say "feeder zones?"

"Diversity" in this analysis means the representation of a range of political ideologies within a region. Assign a number value to each of the possible political ideologies, then calculate the total number of nations in each ideology. These numbers are then reflected as percentages of the total number of nations in the region (e.g., X percent democracies, X percent dictatorships, etc etc.) The greater the percentage of a particular ideology, the less "diverse" the region.

The key is to identify WHICH configuration of values progresses the quickest toward the most powerful individual nation influence rating. With only a limited number of values/beliefs to choose from, this experiment is quite simple and a reliable result achieved in a couple of months.

Just create a nation of each of the possible political configurations and create individual regions for that nation. Make sure the settings for each of the nations in all regions is identical (meaning, the number and frequency of issues received. The best setting would be to place the nations on "vacation" status after deleting the initial telegram and dismissing the initial issue received.) Then populate the regions with 10 or so identical nations. Each of the respective regions will be different, of course, based on the political ideology configurations.

Then keep the activity level identical between the test regions. For example, login to each nation in each region only once a day, and only for purposes of issue resolution (no telegrams or any other nebulous variable.)

Then watch as they develop.

Predicted Results:

1. Differences between the regions in the regional influence value assigned.

2. Within each of the region, each of the identical nations will have the identical individual nation influence value.

3. Between regions, the individual nation influence values will be different.

And the big prediction:

4. More democratic-valued nations will have higher indivdual influence ratings, and thus a greater average regional influence rating.

What does regional influence mean? Mine is apparently a minnow, which I understand to be a fish, am I right? What's going on?

http://www.nationstates.net/pages/influence.html

Yeah? I take it there is no other type of moderation than griefing. Amusing. You're upset because the job they do for free for a game you don't pay for got a little easier and that they added a part to the game that many people enjoy and that you, because of your style of play, don't. Again, amusing (assuming one is amused by people who act like brats complaining that people who they don't pay and don't get paid won't do exactly what they want).

Are the moderators forced to take their position? No. Therefore your point is meaningless. What does the amount of pay they receive have to do with moderating? I never said I didn't enjoy this new aspect, I just noted a few glaring flaws which have not been addressed, just ignored or ridiculed for having been brought up in the first place. How dare I question the altruistic design created by those most open minded moderators. These same moderators who responded to one person's attempt to quantify the system they designed with 'I said we won't post a list of the order of the rankings, so we won't even say whether you did a good job in your assessment.' Technically, stating whetehr the assessment was accurate or not would not be posting a list. It would just be stating whether or not the person was accurate. Can't do that because....um....well, no reason at all other than because we said so. You sound like a sad version of my parents.

More plain arrogance combined with laziness, that is all. Just like your answer to my previous suggestion of having some basis for a person who posts within the regional forum. Your answer was this would only reward spammers. This is true if the moderators don't do their job. However, if they do (which is up to speculation since I have notified them on occasion of people spamming founder regions and only 50% of these notifications were acted upon. Not a very good ratio in most lines of work. Probably a good thing they are not getting paid.), then spammers would be punished and not rewarded for their posts, so the so called fatal flawed is nothing of the sort, but merely a rather lame excuse to not redefine or reevaluate the system in question.

I really don't care since these rankings are meaningless to mean, just felt obliged for a rebuttal.

Have a nice day.

How dare I question the altruistic design created by those most open minded moderators.Mods don't code. Admins do.

Technically, stating whetehr the assessment was accurate or not would not be posting a list. It would just be stating whether or not the person was accurate.We don't want you to have accurate information on the game code. Max wanted this to be a political simulation, with unexpected results. We aren't interested in watching the best mathematicians at play.

Your answer was this would only reward spammers. This is true if the moderators don't do their job.
Number of nations right now: 99,611
Number of regional messageboards: 12,383
Number of active game mods in any given week: about 5
Yeah, we're lazy if we don't keep a close eye on every single region. Next.

However, if they do (which is up to speculation since I have notified them on occasion of people spamming founder regions and only 50% of these notifications were acted upon.
In a word, bullshit. The fact that you didn't SEE an effect doesn't mean there wasn't one. Every Single Task Is Addressed By A Game Moderator. Some aren't actionable, and we ignore them. Others require only a warning on the target nation. If we have time, we MAY choose to sweep up the spam, but a single multi-region spammer can take up to an hour to clean up after, and we've gotten up to 300 tasks in a given day, and we do get paid to do our other jobs for 8+ hours a day. Do the math.

Have a nice day.
Thank you for whining.

Oh, for pity's sake, is he STILL at it? :rolleyes:
If it's so terrible here, and we're so lazy in your opinion, and we haven't paid decent enough homage to your brilliance, why not start your own game and forum where everything will be just as you like it?

Someone needs a hug.
In my opinion, the influence mechanism is the best addition to NationStates in a long time. It adds a welcome level of depth AND streamlines the invasion rules.

A big thumbs up to the Admin for coding it, And to the Mods who have to take all the SH*T some idiots dump on them.

All in favour of the next 100 years being Mod Appreciation Century?
Aye!!

Well this is cool. I just finished reading all 27 pages and my understanding is a little better.

My review is such for those who are simply going to jump to the last page instead of reading the entire thread:

* Don't be lazy and/or impatient, read the thread. Take 2 days to absorb the info.

* Don't ask mods for an inside analysis of how regional influence and power are designed. It's not for us to know how the world turns just know that it does.

* All statements here are guesses. Some better than others though we'll not find out which ones from the mods so don't ask.

* The overly common list that floats throughout this thread defining the order of influence ranks may be 100% accurate though there seems to be a general acceptance that there's a lot more to it than a simple list.

* Regional power is not covered as much as influence though it would appear that they are related.

* More posts were focused on attempting to define and weight the merit of influence more than power.

* Many intelligent members have run many tests in attempts to discover the truth in this matter. Results are inconclusive.

* If you are looking for a clearly defined explanation of the factors that affect influence and power with lines drawn to connect the dots for you, you will not find such bliss in this thread. However, you may find from other members analysis, brainstorming and research enough information to get a better understanding on these issues.

Whereas I came here with just two questions, I am leaving here with more.
I think at this point my guess would be just as accurate as anyone else's.

1) Why would a long standing nation's regional influence start to decrease in a region that is growing in members? Regional Influence is reportedly supposed to increase the longer you stay in a region. Not decrease.

This thread has many theories on why this happens.Truth is, I do not know but I'm settling on a weighed average that a region will balance itself to reflect the components of its entire makeup.

2) What factors govern a 60 nation region with a low regional power index versus a 30 nation region with a high regional power index?

I do not know...and neither do the other players. I will also run tests though I will not be devastated if I never know.

All said and done, it's a compelling and consuming game that should be taken at face value and not over analyzed. Enjoy it for what it is. Not for what you want it to be.

Hmmm...so I'm a Hegemony...makes sense since my region is only me and my two puppet-nations lol. Hegemony sounds way cooler than Hermit, my previous rank.

As Founder of my region I was a Hermit to start with, then 3 nations later I was a Superpower and stayed there for a long time. I don't have UN status for that nation and now at 101 nations in the region, I am a Handshaker.

The only reasonable explanation for this, in my mind anyway, is that the rapid growth of the region has spawned many, many minnows who are slowly climbing in influence.

I choose to believe that my influence is coming down to balance this. The 27 UN nations are all climbing at a steady rate which may suggest that the large minnow population may not affect them in the same way it will a non UN nation.

But then again, what do I know? The magical fairies are gumming-up the works and laughing while we continually scratch our heads.

Oh, for pity's sake, is he STILL at it? :rolleyes:
If it's so terrible here, and we're so lazy in your opinion, and we haven't paid decent enough homage to your brilliance, why not start your own game and forum where everything will be just as you like it?


hahaha, I think katgan has a point being that one person cant see what the entire word is doing let alone notice every little speck that one person has to say etc etc. Yeah its good to voice your opinion but not in the "im the best in the world" type of attitude. Theyre players/people too..cant do it or see it all

(this might be a little late but here it is)

This influence thing is kind of like a statistical model of the real world.
In the real world, you really don't know what the consequences of your actions right now will be in two weeks. You can't see that far into the future.
If they were to reveal a "list", it would be like giving you the ability to see 2 weeks or even years into the future.
Life is random but certain rules affect it. Just as certain rules seem to affect power and influence in this game.
Do you know what causes earthquakes? No. You just know that they happen. But you don't have a list of what actually causes earthquakes, hence you cannot predict them. But what you do have is a number of hypothesis and scientific statements by brilliant scientists as to what they think causes earthquakes. These statements are based on study in their fields.
What we have in this thread are some of the brilliant members of the NS community studying regional influence and then, based on those studies, stating what they think are the rules that govern regional influence.
Having a list actually defeats the purpose of the game. The game is better off without it.

It's better late than never when you intend to compliment something, right?
So, I just wanted to say that I enjoy the influence setting just because it's an added bonus for me to log into my favorite nation and see that my ranking has been redesignated to something that sounds more dignified.
I have spent my whole NS life within a large and stable region. We don't invade and really have no chance of being invaded so that part never really comes into play as far as I Know(at least for us.) I have noticed that the founder who is more than 3 times my size in pop. and endo's carries the same influence as myself. However, I must point out that he has password protected the region with a hidden password. So, I would say that is a good example of the cost inflicted to do something like that as noted in the earlier post.
Thank you to the Admin. and mods. I really enjoy everything.

My regional delegate seems to be a bit delinquent. He has only 1 endorsement and I have 5. Doesnt that mean I should be delegate? How do I become delegate?

If you have the most endorsements after the next update time (probably in about 3-6 hours), you'll become Delegate.

Something odd happened during Ivan's retirement party just a moment ago.

Ivan began at Aux booting nations until lunch time where he was. When he stopped, at least an hour before midday update, he was at Truckler.

So... If the only way to lose influence is to be outside the region or to burn it with boot/ban/password type actions, how is it that the update decreased his influence to minnow status rather than increase it?

He is the delegate and has the most endos.

makes no sense...

Yeah, what she said.

Doesn't make any sense to go from Truckler to Minnow without any actual acts that would draw on my influence level.

Wow, only 18 posts in over 4 years. This place isn't much of a draw is it?

Yeah, what she said.

Doesn't make any sense to go from Truckler to Minnow without any actual acts that would draw on my influence level.

Wow, only 18 posts in over 4 years. This place isn't much of a draw is it?

No, it's not.

Looks like you may have discovered an Influence Bug.

Influence is not a fixed characteristic and the words are simply descriptions. Changes in your region can change your relative influence.

I understand that. I have the most "working" experience with Influence in the game.

I purposely stopped ejecting nations two hours before the midday update so that my position at Truckler would not change. I was not expecting it to go up because I had made some rather drastic changes to the region as a whole but it should not have dropped three levels down to Minnow.

Just another example of how influence ruined the game. :mad:

Very true.

In the old days I would be down to just the UN nations and calculating the max number I could eject daily to keep from it being griefing and planning out a complete cleanse of the region.

Oh well. It has been fun.

1700-1800 nations today. Not bad.

Just another example of how influence ruined the game. :mad:Your failure to understand how it works is not a failure on its part.

Dropping down to minnow is perfectly possible, and doesn't necessarily represent any kind of bug.

ah, I see now. If it displays random behavior or causes harm to that which it purports to help, claim the peons are just too stupid to understand.

Why not? It worked for the Patriot Act for a long time.

ah, I see now. If it displays random behavior or causes harm to that which it purports to help, claim the peons are just too stupid to understand.
Lack of knowledge about a subject does not always equate to stupidity - the secrecy surrounding the precise workings of the influence system means we can't really be expected to understand it fully (though I think I made a good attempt here (http://www.safalra.com/other/nationstates/influence/)). By the way, if the precise meaning of 'stupid' is in doubt, I think your next argument nicely clarifies it:
Why not? It worked for the Patriot Act for a long time.
Additionally, there's big difference between something not acting as you expect and its behaviour being random.

ah, I see now. If it displays random behavior or causes harm to that which it purports to help, claim the peons are just too stupid to understand.

Why not? It worked for the Patriot Act for a long time.

I love these arguments. It purports to help people like me. I does. See how useless to act like your opinion is all that matters?

Lots of us are very comfortable with the operation of influence and the reasons for them not explaining every detail of it. The fact you think it's random demonstrates his point.

Mostly, how do you think these posts do anything useful other than just you complaining about how the game is out to get you?

I don't think I've ever said or implied that "the game was out to get me."

I'm merely pointing out that no one understands it. According to Salfara we are not meant to understand it. And according to those with more knowledge than I, Mods have been forbidden from explaining it.

It leaves me wondering why.

Games have rules. When you keep those rules a secret, the game is patently unfun. It reminds me of a card game that some of my class mates would "play" as a mean-spirited way of getting back at those non-geek types that made fun of them in highschool. Mao, I think it was called. Oddly, the three of them who "played" it, never got another person to join them a second time.

Jacobia, I do not know who you are in the game, so I couldn't tell if you actually engage in gameplay or not. If it helps you, I would wager that's because you are one who prefers to just answer issues and see how high you can get in the rankings. If so. Cool for ya.

I do understand that the "military" aspect of the game is a pain in the <can I say that here?> for those who don't like to play that way.


I don't look at influence at all in the game actually. And therefore you are correct. I'm just complaining. It doesn't effect me except to keep me constantly disappointed in the way it promotes inactivity in general.

Also, it would be great, when people asked questions if they weren't automatically ridiculed. It's the main reason most of us icky gameplay types stay out of this horrendous jolt forum.

I can see it was a mistake to ask the question in the first place. I'll take my leave and bother you no more with my most irritating unwashed presence.

According to Salfara we are not meant to understand it.
No, I said we can't be expected to understand it.

Games have rules. When you keep those rules a secret, the game is patently unfun.
On the contrary, it provides an intellectual challenge. Very few computer games reveal all their secrets.

It reminds me of a card game that some of my class mates would "play" as a mean-spirited way of getting back at those non-geek types that made fun of them in highschool. Mao, I think it was called.
That makes as much sense as claiming that playground football is a mean-spirited way of getting back at the non-athletic kids who did well in lessons. Some people like to kick a ball around. Other people prefer a more intellectual challenge. Each to their own.

Also, it would be great, when people asked questions if they weren't automatically ridiculed. It's the main reason most of us icky gameplay types stay out of this horrendous jolt forum.

And here I thought it was for the very simple reason that folks primarily interested in gameplay are much more likely to spend their time actually playing the game rather than browsing the forums.

Perhaps it ends up being a sort of Pygmalion Effect. Forumites and gameplayers don't relate well because of divergent interests and rarely interact with each other. Many gameplayers don't spend much time on the forums in the first place because they're focused on the in-game excitement, and due to the fact that a helpful forum presence is the best way of getting a Moderator position, players focused that heavily on gameplay are unlikely to become Moderators. This feeds the perception that gameplayer interests aren't really represented.

Some added food for thought. The best gameplayers also tend to be highly involved gameplayers, and would run a much higher risk of making Moderator decisions in favor of an ally or against an opponent. Whether the decision was made for the right reasons or not, it's going to look like not. Really, the only practical way to get a gameplayer as a Mod would be for a hardcore gameplayer to give up gameplay so that they could remain relatively unbiased and then spend most of their time on the forums helping newbies. And how many hardcore gameplayers are going to retire completely from the fun part of the game to babysit ignorant newbies along with their old friends and enemies? I'd surmise that it'd be a short list.

I don't think I've ever said or implied that "the game was out to get me."

I'm merely pointing out that no one understands it. According to Salfara we are not meant to understand it. And according to those with more knowledge than I, Mods have been forbidden from explaining it.

It leaves me wondering why.

Games have rules. When you keep those rules a secret, the game is patently unfun. It reminds me of a card game that some of my class mates would "play" as a mean-spirited way of getting back at those non-geek types that made fun of them in highschool. Mao, I think it was called. Oddly, the three of them who "played" it, never got another person to join them a second time.

Jacobia, I do not know who you are in the game, so I couldn't tell if you actually engage in gameplay or not. If it helps you, I would wager that's because you are one who prefers to just answer issues and see how high you can get in the rankings. If so. Cool for ya.

I do understand that the "military" aspect of the game is a pain in the <can I say that here?> for those who don't like to play that way.


I don't look at influence at all in the game actually. And therefore you are correct. I'm just complaining. It doesn't effect me except to keep me constantly disappointed in the way it promotes inactivity in general.

Also, it would be great, when people asked questions if they weren't automatically ridiculed. It's the main reason most of us icky gameplay types stay out of this horrendous jolt forum.

I can see it was a mistake to ask the question in the first place. I'll take my leave and bother you no more with my most irritating unwashed presence.

Some of the older raiders would certainly remember me and I've been working with some of them to try find a new strategy to increase gameplay, but that's neither here nor there.

You think the game has slowed down because of this action, but it's been waning for a very long time. This certainly didn't help. Raiding did one thing. It forced non-gameplayers to play the game, something they didn't want to do and often caused both gameplayers and non-gameplayers to get into trouble. It's part of the reason for this influence move and it's why I'm a fan.

If gameplayers were inventive they would create a new style of play that only involved gameplayers and make it fun for themselves. Unfortunately, since there are less gameplayers than people in the game, it feels to most of them like they're settling. A lot (not most, but a lot) of raiders relished the idea of harrassing people who wished to be left alone. That's why they did it. Like team killers in COD4 or any number of other things people do outside of intended gameplay. You lost activity because they changed the game to make gameplay more voluntary. Sorry, but it's there now. Deal with it. Start a war and create wargrounds and have a contest to which isde can conquer more of the other side's regions. Do anything. But stop complaining that the mods didn't want to spend so much time dealing with the reactions of non-gameplayers being forced to interact with gameplayers.

As far as being ridiculed by questions, perhaps when you're not feeling so froggy, you should go up and reread your comments in your "question". You intentionally chose a way of wording it that would amount to ridicule, while admitting that you think its random, which it quite factually isn't. You made that bed, and people reacted accordingly.

Reread both of your posts. They are full of assumptioins that no one voiced. They are an assault and then you play the victim when someone, I, responded in kind. Your spoiling for a fight and you can't claim your a victim for finding one. Frankly, and admittedly, I'm in the wrong since that's not what this thread or forum is for, but you're attacking a part of the game you admit you don't understand and complaining that a game would have mechanics that are not fulling explained. You know what else is not fully explained? Everything else about the game. It's not uncommon to refuse to explain game mechanics to players. In fact, it's uncommon to explain it. Usually, game developers allow the players to work out the mechanics on their own. It's not big conspiracy and it's not out to get the "geeks". You're not a victim of foulplay. It's just a game and they are perfectly willing for you to figure it out if you have the patience to do so. So either do so, or quit complaining that you're too lazy to do so.

ah, I see now. If it displays random behavior or causes harm to that which it purports to help, claim the peons are just too stupid to understand.

Why not? It worked for the Patriot Act for a long time.Please. If I wanted to be insulting, I would have been direct.

The behavior is not random. The behavior is quite what it should be. Just because someone doesn't know how it works, doesn't mean it's broken. Furthermore, me saying "you just don't know how it works" isn't the same as me saying "you're a fucking dumbass".

It's not meant to be impenetrable. It's more that few players aside from Safalra have bothered to stop bitching long enough to figure out how things work. It's really not that complicated. You've already got all the information you need. Just sit and think logically for a bit.

But, hey. It's more fun to play the victim and the martyr and to pretend everyone's out to get you and to always assume the worst, isn't it?

If a founder is kicked out can they still enter regional control?

Yes they can.

I've entered regional control with one of my other nations while it was off in a seperate region.

Yes they can.

I've entered regional control with one of my other nations while it was off in a seperate region.

Ditto. The founder is pretty much a god in his region. Except not quite as omniscient or see-through.

damn ive been wasting my time

It seems, however, that a founder can't block the delegate's access to regional control while they're outside the region.

It seems, however, that a founder can't block the delegate's access to regional control while they're outside the region.Correct.

I see that some expertise and effort has been applied to find a ranking of the labels. But we still don't know a lot of things:

- Some boundaries for what influence share will result in what label. Safalra said it was possible to derive that, but his page doesn't have that yet.
- An estimate of what it costs to banject, eject and password. We know it's "about half" for banjection, but perhaps we can get a more precise number such as "45%" or "60%" of the target's influence.

And for the holy grail:

- A formula for the actual growth of influence, as influenced by the input factors (which appear to be residence time, endorsements received, and possibly the influence you already have). My pet hypothesis (which is about as well-founded as a tower of turtles): Influence growth at daily update = A + B * endos if inside the region, or -C if outside, where A, B and C are constants. It's just a wild guess, of course.

Did anyone ever launch a coordinated project for investigating this? If not, is anyone interested in doing so? The mods don't appear to discourage it. They also won't confirm it - but Newton didn't get a divine "Yes, that's how it works" for his theory of gravity, and he coped. :)

Anyone with some background in statistics or at least mathematics and a bit of natural curiosity? We could experiment a bit with shuffling some nations around in small regions!

I am a Superpower, but only a delegate with 2 endorsements in a region with 12 nations.

Hmm

I am a Superpower, but only a delegate with 2 endorsements in a region with 12 nations.

Hmm

Superpowers are founders, I believe.

Superpowers are founders, I believe.

Not always, I'm a founder and I'm only a Power.

I = - (0.875E)+10 x S ) + 22

Influence I
Regional Seniority S (Days your nation have been in the region / Age of region in days)
Endorsements E (Number of Endorsements)

______________________________

Doesn't work at all for small regions (1 or two) or large ones. So this isn't it.
It works very well however for my specific region of 20.
______________________________________

1. Hermit
2. Hegemony
3. Dominator
4. Superpower
5. Power
6. Powerbroker
7. Eminence Grise
8. Enforcer
9. Dealmaker
10. Instigator
11. Contender
12. Negotiator
13. Auxiliary
14. Ambassador
15. Diplomat
16. Envoy
17. Duckspeaker
18. Handshaker
19. Truckler
20. Vassal
21. Minnow

The numbers correspond to each influence number

____________________

My hypothesis is that the 10 value is (Region Population / Number of current votes for the Delegate)

Not always, I'm a founder and I'm only a Power.

Influence does not work that way. You will see that the founders of the largest regions in the game are "Minnow's" This is because they tend not to be in the WA.

The fewer nations you have in a region the more influence there is to spread around. It is there that you will see a region of 8 nations who aren't in the WA and are all "Eminence Grise's." However in the larger regions (100+ nations) it is basically impossible to have a non-WA nation higher than a minnow no matter how long they have been in the region.

Since founders do not need influence to use any of the regional controls their influence level doesn't really matter.

A delegate of a region of 3 nations who has two endorsements will likely be a super-power or higher. Because the influence is so concentrated on that one person. However you will notice that the delegate in a feeder region for only a month or two (look at The East pacific) can still be a minnow even though they have 200+ endorsements. This is because there are thousands of endorsements scattered all through the region which "suck" influence away from the delegate.

Imagine 100 points being given out each update. The delegate may have only 40% of the endorsements in the region... so he/she gets 60 "points"... the other 60% is divided up between the hundreds of nations who have a good number of endorsements. A delegate is just the person who is currently gaining influence the fastest in the region.

-------------

Sorry that was a bit long and (likely) very confusing. If you have any specific questions feel free to ask...

EDIT: Yes they can.

I've entered regional control with one of my other nations while it was off in a seperate region.

yes, there is a link that you can see the regional controls of ANY region in the game. You just can't actually do anything with it. But it is handy for looking at ban lists.

You just can't actually do anything with it.

Founders and active Delegates (with permissions) can. That's why it's impossible to ban-ject an active Founder. He can access Regional Controls from outside the region and unban himself. Fact.

Anyway, back on topic.

The link on the OP leads you to a dead page. (It gives you a re-direct, but wouldn't it be simpler to just re-do the link?) It's not really that bothersome, I just wanted to point it out to the mods if they felt like fixing it.

Read More! (http://www.nationstates.net/pages/influence.html)That one.


Edited - Fris

Ok, I got a Q. How do I increase my regional influence?
Oh, and while I'm asking things...
How do I change my flag to an uploaded image?
Thank to whoever is going to answer this.

Ok, I got a Q. How do I increase my regional influence?To my knowledge, the only method that works is time.
Oh, and while I'm asking things...
How do I change my flag to an uploaded image?In your nations "settings" page there is a link which reads "create your own flag", click it.
Thank to whoever is going to answer this.No problem.

Ok, I got a Q. How do I increase my regional influence?
To my knowledge, the only method that works is time.

True; but you can increase your regional influence more quickly by joining the WA and gaining endorsements from other WA natons. (You can either simply endorse them and wait for them to reciprocate, or you can send them a telegram as well requesting that they endorse you in return - that's the usual etiquette.)

True; but you can increase your regional influence more quickly by joining the WA and gaining endorsements from other WA natons. (You can either simply endorse them and wait for them to reciprocate, or you can send them a telegram as well requesting that they endorse you in return - that's the usual etiquette.)... although some regions have rules about how many endorsements people can have, relative to the numbers possessed by their current Delegates, and exceeding those limits may be treated as grounds for expulsion...