Neutral Ground - an Open Discussion Thread

[Tim-Opolis]

First time: Franco's Spain had just taken over TNP, I believe.

Second time: Durk had just taken over TNP.

If you ever leave and come back, you should warn TNP first.

Murt. Bringer of TNP Doom

[The Murtunian Tribes]

First time: Franco's Spain had just taken over TNP, I believe.

Second time: Durk had just taken over TNP.

If you ever leave and come back, you should warn TNP first.

OR I could NOT do that. Personally I found Durk eject 600 people for no reason to be amusing.

[Tim-Opolis]

If you ever leave and come back, you should warn TNP first.

OR I could NOT do that. Personally I found Durk eject 600 people for no reason to be amusing.

He had a reason.

To be amusing...

[Goobergunchia]

I'm upset that I joined the game too late to fully comprehend Sedge's ninja attack on the South Pacific. What event in gameplay was happening when everyone else joined?

Back when I joined, I'm pretty sure the biggest invader group was the Atlantic Alliance. (Although I didn't really get involved in Gameplay until after Francos Spain took over the Pacific.)

[Tim-Opolis]

I'm upset that I joined the game too late to fully comprehend Sedge's ninja attack on the South Pacific. What event in gameplay was happening when everyone else joined?

Back when I joined, I'm pretty sure the biggest invader group was the Atlantic Alliance. (Although I didn't really get involved in Gameplay until after Francos Spain took over the Pacific.)

Francos Spain taking over The Pacific seems to have made a lot of people get involved in Gameplay. Why is that O.o

[Goobergunchia]

Francos Spain taking over The Pacific seems to have made a lot of people get involved in Gameplay. Why is that O.o

It was the first major feeder coup that got a good deal of publicity outside of Gameplay channels. (At least, it was the first one I noticed.) The mass ejections, combined with the utter suppression of in-region dissent, wasn't something people had seen before, and after it was ruled not to be griefing, a fair number of previously uninvolved players wanted to do something about it.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Plus, it's the only feeder coup that has lasted for a significant period of time, to my knowledge.

[Drop Your Pants]

I joined NS just in time for the fallout of TYW/TRR CG was really mean back then.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

This thread is active again?

[Goobergunchia]

Plus, it's the only feeder coup that has lasted for a significant period of time, to my knowledge.

Eh, depends how you define "significant". For instance, Pixiedance's delegacy in TNP lasted a good six months (although the first couple months of that were legitimate).

Of course, it's a bit harder to sustain a feeder takeover in the post-Influence world since you can't just banject your high-endorsement opponents.

[Tim-Opolis]

This thread is active again?

Yes it is


And thanks for the info on Francos Spain guys

[Crazy girl]

I joined NS just in time for the fallout of TYW/TRR CG was really mean back then.

Was? I guess I've been slacking...

[Drop Your Pants]

Well you haven't called for my banning yet

[Mallorea and Riva]

Well you haven't called for my banning yet

My vote goes towards banning. Fireworks are so much fun.

[Tim-Opolis]

Well you haven't called for my banning yet

My vote goes towards banning. Fireworks are so much fun.

But then we would lose our sheep!

I vote for the purging of Lazarus as a last day move by DYP

[New New York]

I joined NS just in time for the fallout of TYW/TRR CG was really mean back then.

Was? I guess I've been slacking...

Darn it. I was going to say that.

[The Bruce]

If you don't actually have anything to say, try not saying anything.

I'm upset that I joined the game too late to fully comprehend Sedge's ninja attack on the South Pacific. What event in gameplay was happening when everyone else joined?

When I joined NationStates in 2002 there were no invaders or the defenders that came much later. The closest things to what people now considered "gameplay" were endorsement skirmishes fought between the British and Irish regions, or the German and Soviet regions. In the case of North Alerica vs USSR the conflict got later structured to the point where they later created colony regions as battlegrounds.

These early forms of NS endorsement conflicts always made a lot more sense than the invaders who emerged in 2003 to destroy random regions for the sheer joy of ruining what other people had built. They were more consensual conflicts and it wasn't generally a case of one region attacking a region that had never heard of them.

[The Blaatschapen]

My vote goes towards banning. Fireworks are so much fun.

But then we would lose our sheep!

I vote for the purging of Lazarus as a last day move by DYP

Yes, we would lose our sheep

[Riemstagrad]

I'm upset that I joined the game too late to fully comprehend Sedge's ninja attack on the South Pacific. What event in gameplay was happening when everyone else joined?

When I joined NationStates in 2002 there were no invaders or the defenders that came much later. The closest things to what people now considered "gameplay" were endorsement skirmishes fought between the British and Irish regions, or the German and Soviet regions. In the case of North Alerica vs USSR the conflict got later structured to the point where they later created colony regions as battlegrounds.

These early forms of NS endorsement conflicts always made a lot more sense than the invaders who emerged in 2003 to destroy random regions for the sheer joy of ruining what other people had built. They were more consensual conflicts and it wasn't generally a case of one region attacking a region that had never heard of them.

this is why i would like invaders more if they opened their homeregions for possible retaliations. holding your own region and still being able to attack, that would be an achievement.

[The Blaatschapen]

When I joined NationStates in 2002 there were no invaders or the defenders that came much later. The closest things to what people now considered "gameplay" were endorsement skirmishes fought between the British and Irish regions, or the German and Soviet regions. In the case of North Alerica vs USSR the conflict got later structured to the point where they later created colony regions as battlegrounds.

These early forms of NS endorsement conflicts always made a lot more sense than the invaders who emerged in 2003 to destroy random regions for the sheer joy of ruining what other people had built. They were more consensual conflicts and it wasn't generally a case of one region attacking a region that had never heard of them.

this is why i would like invaders more if they opened their homeregions for possible retaliations. holding your own region and still being able to attack, that would be an achievement.

Abolish founders *nods*

[Crushing Our Enemies]

this is why i would like invaders more if they opened their homeregions for possible retaliations. holding your own region and still being able to attack, that would be an achievement.

Abolish founders *nods*

Raider communities like TBH and other groups are well-enough established that our community is not tied to our home region. I mean, look at DEN- they've lost their region about 200 times and they're still kicking. Plus, the military structure of the region makes it easy, almost effortless, to reorganize in a new region. I mean, our entire business is getting nations to move to certain regions at certain times. I think we can handle moving to a new region.

No, abolishing founders would not have much effect on raiders. All it would do is turn every single region in NationStates into a target.

[The Blaatschapen]

Abolish founders *nods*

Raider communities like TBH and other groups are well-enough established that our community is not tied to our home region. I mean, look at DEN- they've lost their region about 200 times and they're still kicking. Plus, the military structure of the region makes it easy, almost effortless, to reorganize in a new region. I mean, our entire business is getting nations to move to certain regions at certain times. I think we can handle moving to a new region.

No, abolishing founders would not have much effect on raiders. All it would do is turn every single region in NationStates into a target.

The nod was sarcastic

[Drop Your Pants]

Really? Then hand over control of the TBH founder to a raided region if you feel it won't affect you

[Uni]

Hand the account over to me, I'll show those new recruits a good time.

[The Blaatschapen]

Hand the account over to me, I'll show those new recruits a good time.

I heard TRR is quite lovely at this time of the year.