NationStates

Firstly... this used to be a thread about Removing Regional Influence.... this is now being changed to the collaborative regional influence overhaul thread...




So we all realize that there are problems with the regional influence... It doesnt grow fast but falls drastically... It ruins the fun for the defenders and raiders.... etc....

This is a thread to list ideas and collaborate on what we could change about regional influence... It does need the overhaul....

Please add your Ideas.....

Wow.... I didnt think somebody would do this....

The inevitable response to any call to remove influence is this: what would you replace it with?

sorry, personally I don't think this will work, just because you think it will (and this ^)

@Sedge.... You dont replace it with anything.... you just remove it....

Sigma FIstica wrote:@Sedge.... You dont replace it with anything.... you just remove it....

which is why influence hasn't been removed...

I think it could equal a playing field that is too swayed in many different situations...

[bump?]

It would appear a little history lesson is in order.

*sits in her rocking chair and sips her coffee*

Back in the days, we had no influence. Well, further back, we also didn't have founders, and the only regional control powers that existed were changing the WFE.

But that's a bit too far back.

Lets go to the point where there were all the regional controls as we know them now (more or less) but no regional influence.
As you can imagine, invaders had plenty of fun with the regional controls (I was one myself back then.)
Those who didn't play the invasion game...didn't like invaders jumping in their regions and kicking everyone out just because they could. And they could.

So with the passing of time, rules were created. At first, it started simply: Play nice.
As we all know...that doesn't work on the internet.
So more rules were created, based on "natives" of a region.
When invaders would take over a region, they had to respect the natives. Which meant:
When passwording a region, send the password to all natives through TG immediately. (passwords visible to the region...didn't have those back then)
No banning natives (well, you could just eject a nation, so you had to unban them immediately after kicking them)
And you could only eject about 10% of a region (native delegates also had a limit on the number of nations they were allowed to eject, but it was larger than for an invader delegate, and they were allowed to ban)

So, then came the problem: who was a native? How to prove it?
Personally, I never had much trouble with determining this...until italia. That was one big mess.

It always had a large grey area, and it was a real headache for mods to clean up the mess and see if the rules were broken.
So...that is why influence was introduced.

Do I hate it? Yes. Would I love to see it removed? Also yes. But suggesting it doesn't need a proper replacement...is plain silly.

Could you suggest in a replacement PLEASE, I could edit it in.... I believe it would be fine because of the founder now being supreme

Not all regions have a founder...

Sigma FIstica wrote:Could you suggest in a replacement PLEASE, I could edit it in.... I believe it would be fine because of the founder now being supreme

What about regions where there is no founder?

those are the main reason influence exists

As a defender I like this... We have the numbers to destroy the raiders... This would make it much easier for us

It would screw up the whole raiding/defending process.

Mad insane genius wrote:As a defender I like this... We have the numbers to destroy the raiders... This would make it much easier for us

Ooh aren't you funny!

If founderless regions would be allowed to have new founders (I think it used to be that way before the rules were changed and regional influence implemented), yeah, sure. Wouldn't give a damn about the influence thing.

But as of now, it's a pretty handy tool for kicking out raiders from where they're not wanted. Natives are supposed to have an edge.

Actually, that was only right after founders were introduced. Later on (but well before influence came along) the mods stopped doing that. I'm not sure if it was because it was hard to figure out who should become a region's founder, or because the invasion game needs founderless region (or a combination of both)

I think this could totally work.... so crazy girl? that replacement you were talking about... As for the refounding... how about... If the region is FRA. Then if the WA del has been WA del for atleast 25 days then he becomes founder....

That could actually work... any supporters of it?

What if its a region in unrest of seventy nations with only thirty nations in the wa? and the delegate has twenty five endorsements.

Aglrinia wrote:Ooh aren't you funny!

How badly do you want another warning? Cut it out.

Sedgistan wrote:

Aglrinia wrote:Ooh aren't you funny!

How badly do you want another warning? Cut it out.

ummm... do I want to know?

It doesn't matter whether you do or don't. Keep this thread to discussing your suggestion (removing regional influence), and I'd recommend you put some thought into what would replace it.

Sounds good.... As for the replacement... I'll edit it in soon... I'm adding finishing touches

Naturally, being the vanguard of several raiding groups, I would love not having Regional Influence...if my intention was simply to blow up as many regions as possible. It is not. A lack of RI would open up the door for brutish thugs to sweep through NationStates, instead of the more thought out attacks currently being orchestrated.
However, judging by the votes, there is a statistically significant sample of NS-ers who dislike RI. So, here is a suggestion. Why not make it possible to turn off a region's Regional Influence count-in the same way as WA Delegate Powers? The question, however, lies with who would decide that. Would it be founder only? Whoever has access to the Admin. Powers? Or even a vote by all WA members of the region? Food for thought.

I might as well cross post what I've wrote in an other thread.

-------

Or simply make influence apply only on WA Delegates and non WA nations.

So if not in WA, you gather influence which can prevent you from being kicked.
If you decide to join the WA, you no longer that Influence protection. All bets are off

The in game explanation (if you want one) is that if you're not in the WA you are "Native" of the region. WA means you are part of the "World" (especially since it's called the World Assembly) thus could no longer "Native". You gave up the right to be native in exchange to participate in World affairs.

WA Delegates also gain influence so there's way to accumulate enough power to kick non WA "natives". The assumption is that they have to hold the region for a while though.

(The obvious side effect of such a system is that'll it cause lot of people will run two nations. A non WA "native" as their main "I want to have a community here" nation and a WA puppet to participate in the "game")