Pepperm1nts said
@Pasta: I think he said it depends on how much of your influence your nation is able to impose upon others. If your nation is constantly ending people's wars with diplomacy, it might become more important. Same if.. like, you have a serious hold on resources that make a lot of people dependent on you. And, obviously, if your nation is able to use sheer force to get what it wants, it'll probably be somewhere high in the tier scale.But I imagine that being active on the world stage would help too. Even if it's just getting involved in international topics.
I can understand that, my worry is
who or
what determines whether you have such influence. Like...as we have all seen from previous RPs...we like to argue. If this is placed in the hands of a person, my worry is that their opinions will factor into who fits into such and such a tier. So I'm concerned that there does appear to be a factual/statistical/spreadsheet or whatever to determine Tiers, but rather it is something that can be argued against. My main point is that I can see lots of OOC argument's arising from this trying to 'sway' the GMs into giving more tiers based on decisions and such. I don't mind the tier system, just would like it to be made very clear now how it works.
Edit: Ninja'D. Thanks Dutch! :P