The Update Time Makes Me Wanna Cry

[Ballotonia]

The thing is, though, we have a honking great new server, and I suspect we can now do daily updates any time we like without slowing things down. We can probably even do full daily updates twice a day, so Delegates would be elected every 12 hours, not 24.

What say you: would that be good?

No. It would be an utter nightmare.

It's perfectly fine for the raiders - they get to pick and choose when they want to be active. Defenders would effectively have their workload doubled, and we're already (not to put too fine a point on it) utterly failing at spotting and preventing raids for lack of motivated players.

Agreed, except on one item: you blame a lack of motivation. I blame the current ruleset / game system which simply makes playing Defense pointless. So, yeah, there's a lack of motivation to engage in a mode of playing which through game modifications has become an utter waste of time and effort.

Ballotonia

[Naivetry]

Agreed, except on one item: you blame a lack of motivation. I blame the current ruleset / game system which simply makes playing Defense pointless. So, yeah, there's a lack of motivation to engage in a mode of playing which through game modifications has become an utter waste of time and effort.

Ballotonia

Agreed; I just didn't want to get into that argument again here.

[Todd McCloud]

I still think two updates would be a good thing and increase activity. It would make things harder for defenders and natives initially, but then again, it might help spark them and give them more to fight for. After all, while their game has fallen off, so have the raiders' game.

[Naivetry]

I still think two updates would be a good thing and increase activity. It would make things harder for defenders and natives initially, but then again, it might help spark them and give them more to fight for. After all, while their game has fallen off, so have the raiders' game.

Increasing the frequency of raids will not change the basic problem, which is that what was previously considered griefing is legal and there's not a thing we can do to stop it.

[TannerFrankLand]

I still think two updates would be a good thing and increase activity. It would make things harder for defenders and natives initially, but then again, it might help spark them and give them more to fight for. After all, while their game has fallen off, so have the raiders' game.

Increasing the frequency of raids will not change the basic problem, which is that what was previously considered griefing is legal and there's not a thing we can do to stop it.

It could be made usefull though, like what if the code wouldn't let a delegate put a password in place until he's been in control for one update (or 12 hours), that would give defenders a 12 hour opportunity to stop the raiders, and it would be (or IMHO) small enough time to make defenders have to be on their toes to save the region.

[Hadisthe]

What Naivetry said.

And if you think it's bad for defenders, that doesn't hold a candle to how bad it would be for all the neutral/RP/etc. regions that are getting raided. Right now, invaders expect them to be on at update to keep watch every day if they're going to survive. Make it twice a day, and that'll become even more impossible. A single update at a slightly earlier time is more practical for everyone.

What she said

[Bears Armed]

I still think two updates would be a good thing and increase activity. It would make things harder for defenders and natives initially, but then again, it might help spark them and give them more to fight for.

You're apparently missing the point that they don't want to have to fight...

[King HEM]

I like the idea of two updates. That's all.

[Lethen]

Thanks HEM. Thanks.

The two-updates idea is fine, but I also would not terribly mind an update time between 6 am and 7 am GMT. That way it would be a single update, late at night, but not too late to hold us all up in the US, you know?

As for the two-a-day updates idea...that'd have its merits. It would make raiding a lot easier and possibly expand raiding interests, but we don't know if it would effectively spark the defenders to come up with ways to stop them. Then again, so many defenders I've talked to have been so sure of thsemselves that maybe it wouldn't matter.

As for the idea about randomly-generated update times...it sounds like a neat idea, and would make things a lot easier for both sides...and harder at the same time. Essentially it'd be a crap-shoot. Not a big fan of that idea.

[Naivetry]

It could be made usefull though, like what if the code wouldn't let a delegate put a password in place until he's been in control for one update (or 12 hours), that would give defenders a 12 hour opportunity to stop the raiders, and it would be (or IMHO) small enough time to make defenders have to be on their toes to save the region.

12 hours is not enough time, and passwording (invisible to the natives) should never be allowed, it's game over.

First, we need to spot it. There are over 6000 regions in NS. We can't check them all twice a day. We can't even check them once a day. We could go through that whole list region by region and try to create a comprehensive list of founderless regions, but it has the potential to be entirely out-of-date within 28 days; also, that would leave any regions with non-update Founders subject to slash and burn refoundings.

Second, we need to pull together enough people to top the raiders' endo count. This cannot currently be done. I tried. I needed to get 11 people to attempt to liberate Belgium, a major region with history which everyone cared about, and couldn't come up with more than 9 within 24 hours.

Third, all raiders have to do is have one player awake, and they can instantly banject every defender attempting to enter the region; whereas defenders have to have everyone awake, moving at exactly the same time, and moving at the correct time - seconds before update, so the raider has less of an opportunity to eject.

Fourth, we don't know the update time of every region; the update times shift not only from region to region but across time.
Unless we spotted the invasion within the first hour, we would have to wait for another update to pass in order to identify the time to the minute, just to have a chance - given an incompetent raider and perfect coordination on our part - to liberate the region.

In short, liberations are already next to impossible, and doubling the opportunities for us to attempt the impossible is not going to help anyone on the defender/native side.

[Tanaara]

Third, all raiders have to do is have one player awake, and they can instantly banject every defender attempting to enter the region; whereas defenders have to have everyone awake, moving at exactly the same time, and moving at the correct time - seconds before update, so the raider has less of an opportunity to eject.

Question: Are you claiming that any invading nation can do ban-eject? I thought ONLY the Founder or Delegate could do such?

Or are you claiming that Raiders regularly and will malice afore-thought give their national passwords to others of their raiding party so any raider can go in as the delegate ( ie access the nation that is the delegate ) and ban-ject?

[Naivetry]

Third, all raiders have to do is have one player awake, and they can instantly banject every defender attempting to enter the region; whereas defenders have to have everyone awake, moving at exactly the same time, and moving at the correct time - seconds before update, so the raider has less of an opportunity to eject.

Question: Are you claiming that any invading nation can do ban-eject? I thought ONLY the Founder or Delegate could do such?

Or are you claiming that Raiders regularly and will malice afore-thought give their national passwords to others of their raiding party so any raider can go in as the delegate ( ie access the nation that is the delegate ) and ban-ject?

Only the Delegate or Founder, yes.

But that still means, that out of the (say) 10 player group of raiders, only one (the Delegate) has to pay any attention to the region at all after the first night.

[Marcuslandia]

Do you guys ever take into account that many players have Real Lives to live? The guy may be enthusiastic about the game, but when he has to get up to go to work at 5:00 a.m., it's hard to rationalize being up at 1 a.m., just in case. These mechanics seriously reward those that totally dedicate their lives to playing NS, but _should_ they given such a huge advantage over those that simply cannot realistic play the game the optimal way?

[Naivetry]

Do you guys ever take into account that many players have Real Lives to live? The guy may be enthusiastic about the game, but when he has to get up to go to work at 5:00 a.m., it's hard to rationalize being up at 1 a.m., just in case. These mechanics seriously reward those that totally dedicate their lives to playing NS, but _should_ they given such a huge advantage over those that simply cannot realistic play the game the optimal way?

This is why the defender situation is currently ridiculous.

The raiders only need ONE guy with nothing better to do, or someone who lives in a timezone convenient for update.

ALL defenders are expected to somehow be so dedicated. It doesn't work.

[Marcuslandia]

Hmm. We launch the invasion Sunday night. Leroy is our front man on this cause he works second shift. Come Monday morning, no one has the time to deal with what we started. Gives Leroy LOTS of time to do what is necessary.

See your point.

Makes me thing of proxies. The defenders have their version of Leroy. He has authorization from ALL of the defenders to execute a single set of orders (move in; vote for Delegate). It would make it easier for the invaders to strike, but by my best estimate, it makes it equally easy for the defender to react. MUCH easier than the way they are now where it's necessary to coordinate 20-30-50+ players at 1 a.m.

[Lethen]

We can't even check them once a day. We could go through that whole list region by region and try to create a comprehensive list of founderless regions, but it has the potential to be entirely out-of-date within 28 days

If thats the case, then how do so many raids get spoiled when they are kept quiet and clean puppets are used? A few hours ahead of update and suddenly the region is flooded with defenders.

Do you guys ever take into account that many players have Real Lives to live? The guy may be enthusiastic about the game, but when he has to get up to go to work at 5:00 a.m., it's hard to rationalize being up at 1 a.m., just in case. These mechanics seriously reward those that totally dedicate their lives to playing NS, but _should_ they given such a huge advantage over those that simply cannot realistic play the game the optimal way?

This.

The raiders only need ONE guy with nothing better to do, or someone who lives in a timezone convenient for update.

Not true. The raiders, as you put it, also need people to be on at update to get their delegate into place.

[Naivetry]

We can't even check them once a day. We could go through that whole list region by region and try to create a comprehensive list of founderless regions, but it has the potential to be entirely out-of-date within 28 days

If thats the case, then how do so many raids get spoiled when they are kept quiet and clean puppets are used? A few hours ahead of update and suddenly the region is flooded with defenders.

Let's just say it's not as easy as it looks.

Not true. The raiders, as you put it, also need people to be on at update to get their delegate into place.

Once, and on a day and time of their choosing.

Makes me thing of proxies. The defenders have their version of Leroy. He has authorization from ALL of the defenders to execute a single set of orders (move in; vote for Delegate). It would make it easier for the invaders to strike, but by my best estimate, it makes it equally easy for the defender to react. MUCH easier than the way they are now where it's necessary to coordinate 20-30-50+ players at 1 a.m.

The problem is that our dedicated defender can't log into his friends' nations to get them to move. That would read as multiing. And they all have to move in, or their endorsements don't count.

[Marcuslandia]

Makes me thing of proxies. The defenders have their version of Leroy. He has authorization from ALL of the defenders to execute a single set of orders (move in; vote for Delegate). It would make it easier for the invaders to strike, but by my best estimate, it makes it equally easy for the defender to react. MUCH easier than the way they are now where it's necessary to coordinate 20-30-50+ players at 1 a.m.

The problem is that our dedicated defender can't log into his friends' nations to get them to move. That would read as multiing. And they all have to move in, or their endorsements don't count.

Quite true -- at the moment. It would require a major game change and a serious amount of programming. I do know that it's doable. I've played in some games involving alliances where there was a mechanism called something like "Priority Contingency Orders". The player lays out in concise fashion what is to be done, and under what circumstances the order will be executed. [Move nation to region specified by Coordinator. Once there, endorse nation specified by Coordinator.] The Contingency Order is a Priority because it overrides _everything_ else. When it goes down, the player gets an email stating that the order conditions were met and the order executed. Now get your ass into the game and tell the program what to do next. Notification is as fast as "how often do you check your email?"

[[violet]]

There are over 6000 regions in NS. We can't check them all twice a day. We can't even check them once a day.

If it's not feasible to defend regions by monitoring them all at update time (which I'm sure it's not), then does it matter how many updates there are? Whether it's one or twenty, invaders will get in somewhere before you can stop them. So the real issue is what you can do then.

Obviously we have this problem whereby large modern invasions start and finish all at once: the invaders pile in and password-lock a region more or less immediately. We're discussing ideas for addressing that elsewhere: removing invisible passwords, a Liberation WA resolution, a minimum length of Delegacy before allowing pw, etc. But limiting the update time does not seem like a solution to me: that still requires defenders to be supernaturally aware and co-ordinated. Granted, if that's the only method of repelling invasions, doubling the daily updates requires defenders to be twice as supernaturally aware and co-ordinated, but I think the idea should be to ensure that's not the only method of repelling invasions.

(Do you actually halt some invasions by acting in the window between invaders entering a region and the next update? That's a timeframe of minutes, right?)

[TannerFrankLand]

There are over 6000 regions in NS. We can't check them all twice a day. We can't even check them once a day.

If it's not feasible to defend regions by monitoring them all at update time (which I'm sure it's not), then does it matter how many updates there are? Whether it's one or twenty, invaders will get in somewhere before you can stop them. So the real issue is what you can do then.

Obviously we have this problem whereby large modern invasions start and finish all at once: the invaders pile in and password-lock a region more or less immediately. We're discussing ideas for addressing that elsewhere: removing invisible passwords, a Liberation WA resolution, a minimum length of Delegacy before allowing pw, etc. But limiting the update time does not seem like a solution to me: that still requires defenders to be supernaturally aware and co-ordinated. Granted, if that's the only method of repelling invasions, doubling the daily updates requires defenders to be twice as supernaturally aware and co-ordinated, but I think the idea should be to ensure that's not the only method of repelling invasions.

(Do you actually halt some invasions by acting in the window between invaders entering a region and the next update? That's a timeframe of minutes, right?)

If your new population ranking thing works like I think it does (which it may not) and it creates a list at update time of the population of all regions, and that list dosn't change until the new update, we can use that. If a region had 100 nations on the list, and then we look at it just before the update and it has 150, there is a good chance it was raided. The only thing we would have to do is make a list of the important (big, old) founderless regions, and compare their population on the list, to the population they have just before the update.

Is that what the population list was intended for??? (Or do I have how it works completely wrong...)

[Naivetry]

(Do you actually halt some invasions by acting in the window between invaders entering a region and the next update? That's a timeframe of minutes, right?)

It depends on how well the raiders prepare. If raiders conduct raids the way we conduct liberations, there is no stopping them. If they're sloppy and move in a couple hours before update, we have a chance of catching them.

This is why I have never understood the raider claim that we should make raids easier - if they're done properly, they're practically impossible to stop already.

If your new population ranking thing works like I think it does (which it may not) and it creates a list at update time of the population of all regions, and that list dosn't change until the new update, we can use that. If a region had 100 nations on the list, and then we look at it just before the update and it has 150, there is a good chance it was raided. The only thing we would have to do is make a list of the important (big, old) founderless regions, and compare their population on the list, to the population they have just before the update.

Is that what the population list was intended for??? (Or do I have how it works completely wrong...)

That might have worked in the heyday of the raiding/defending game. We're a shadow of our former selves now. The biggest raids I've seen lately have been 12-15 people, tops. Good-sized raids are in the range of 5-10. I've seen a number lately with just 2-3 nations - enough to take a region without a delegate.

In order to identify raids, you have to analyze a lot more than EDIT: numerical population changes.

[TannerFrankLand]

If your new population ranking thing works like I think it does (which it may not) and it creates a list at update time of the population of all regions, and that list dosn't change until the new update, we can use that. If a region had 100 nations on the list, and then we look at it just before the update and it has 150, there is a good chance it was raided. The only thing we would have to do is make a list of the important (big, old) founderless regions, and compare their population on the list, to the population they have just before the update.

Is that what the population list was intended for??? (Or do I have how it works completely wrong...)

That might have worked in the heyday of the raiding/defending game. We're a shadow of our former selves now. The biggest raids I've seen lately have been 12-15 people, tops. Good-sized raids are in the range of 5-10. I've seen a number lately with just 2-3 nations - enough to take a region without a delegate.

In order to identify raids, you have to analyze a lot more than population changes.

Well, any region that only needs 2-3 members to crash isn't what I meant by "important".

At any rate, 10 nation gain in a day is worth investigating, especially if that's like a 10% increase.

[Biyah]

I agree, bad idea. We have enough problems with one update, much less two.

[Naivetry]

Well, any region that only needs 2-3 members to crash isn't what I meant by "important".

By that standard, very few important regions get crashed. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be protecting them; it just means it's a lot harder to find the motivation to do so.

At any rate, 10 nation gain in a day is worth investigating, especially if that's like a 10% increase.

If this population list only updates at, well, update, then it is no improvement on what we have to do now, which is check each region's page by hand. We can already see daily changes in population by looking at the regional happenings, and that's what we'll still have to do.

[Whamabama]

Just to add in my two cents. An earlier update would be great, during prime time, eastern time to be greedy hell ya. Anything would be better than 4 AM though.

Random updates, bad idea. It doesn't make everyone more equall. even a standard update time is equall to everybody.