The NationStates World

[Whiskum]

You do realize that the FRA raid was a joke, right? And a funny one at that. Not even LKE would consider that a 'symbolic blow'.

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

[Mahaj]

You do realize that the FRA raid was a joke, right? And a funny one at that. Not even LKE would consider that a 'symbolic blow'.

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

Who else saw this coming?

[Feuer Ritter]

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

Who else saw this coming?

Well, Whiskum is right

[The NS World]

The NationStates World

Volume 1 Issue 2
June 13 2012

---

DOES GAMEPLAY NEED CHANGES?

The Technical subforum on the NationStates forums has been active lately with topics debating new suggestions for changes to gameplay.

The proponents and opponents of each suggestion are largely separated along raider/defender lines, with defenders generally arguing that gameplay has become biased towards raiding, and raiders arguing that defenders could use many of their methods to improve their results, without making sweeping changes.

Another fundamental debate is over the issue of technical changes being made to the game specficially in the interests of making a sub-game more fair or equal. Many participants, both raider and defender, agree that instead of making defenders' jobs inherently easier, raiders should have their jobs made slightly harder.

One of the most controversial proposals is one made by Riemstagrad, a defender, to add a WA-Delegate pending period for each time the previous Delegate's endorsement count is overtaken. It would create a 12-hour period, between updates, in which there would be no official Delegate.

Riemstagrad stated that he believed the proposal would allow players who couldn't be online at updates to participate, making gameplay easier to become involved in. He also pointed out it would bring interregional politicking and alliances into play, giving invaded regions time to call on allies for help. He also said it was necessary because raiders were moving into regions so soon before update that defenders had no chance.

Immediately, debate ensued. Raiders jumped to contend that this proposal would make raiding merely a "numbers game." They argued it would take away update raiding, and allow defenders to win almost every time, because they could bring in larger numbers. Raiders argued that defenders could bring in those previously unassociated with gameplay, while raiders would have trouble convincing those players to join their cause. Finally, raiders argued that the identity of each raiding group would be harmed, as they would likely have to team up even more often than they do now.

Defenders widely accepted the proposal, insisting that update raiding would still be important, as moving in seconds before update would make a 12-hour difference, when compared to moving in seconds after update. They also contended the assertion that defenders would always find larger numbers.

Raider Crushing Our Enemies suggested making the feature an option in regional controls, which received support from both sides, with raiders applauding update raiding remaining.

One point on which opinions vary, even within the raider and defender camps, is what powers would be afforded to the "delegate-elect," or the delegate who caused the transition. Raiders contend that without giving the incoming delegate the power to modify the WFE and regional flag, tag raiding would be eliminated. However, any further powers granted, and what powers the old delegate should have, if any, are points of contention.

Another suggestion has been made by Guy, a member of The Rejected Realms Army, to somehow require raiders to work harder to enter a region right before update. He argued that many users' computers or internet connections cannot refresh quickly enough to stop raiders from a successful invasion. He argued that defenders have almost an impossible job.

Numerous suggestions have been floated, whether it be hiding the update order, or shuffling it, to make it harder to detect. Even making the update order artificially determined and random has been proposed. Defenders point out that even with a shuffled update order, update times could still be deciphered, albeit with less precision than currently possible. One raider, Crushing Our Enemies, even noted that spotting raids has become almost impossible, and supported the notion of some change.

Other raiders, though, argue that helping defenders, or making technical changes to hamper raiders, is unfair. Others argue that defenders could determine raiders' targets and spot raids even without changes to the technical aspects of the game.

Even [violet] pointed out that having nations piling into a region seconds before update isn't ideal, but also stated no changes are likely in the short-term.

These two suggestions and ensuing debates show that the NS gameplay community is divided over the state of their craft, whether it is truly fair to all sides, and even if it is unfair, whether game mechanics should ensure its fairness. It is sure to be a debate which will continue.

---

CAPITALIST PARADISE LEFT TO THE NATIVES

Capitalist Paradise, one of the 50 largest regions in NationStates, is back in the hands of a native delegate, Ad Vitam Adsum after the raider groups occupying it withdrew, declaring victory.

The Black Hawks Field Marshal Jakker announced in a news thread focusing on the invasion: "The mission is complete with 68 nations banjected. Thank you to all involved. It was a pleasure." The announcement came just hours after Monday's major update.

The raid took place 9 days earlier at Saturday, June 2nd's major update. The raider delegate, FantasticRay had been serving as a sleeper in the region, and with the addition of 23 updaters, was able to overthrow Ad Vitam Adsum, who had served as CP delegate for over 300 days.

FantasticRay, after several days, was able to place a password on the region, preventing a possible liberation without a Security Council Liberation resolution. The move to password the region also sparked a debate in the Technical forums over whether passwording a region required too little influence.

During his 9-day reign, FantasticRay was able to eject and ban 68 natives and defenders from the region, along with the normal changing of the World Factbook Entry. All embassies were also withdrawn, including one with defender region Eastern Islands of Dharma, and an embassy with The Black Hawks was constructed.

As a result, though, of the raider's decision to declare victory and withdraw, Ad Vitam Adsum was able to attain the Delegacy again at Monday's minor update. He began to withdraw the embassy with TBH, and construct embassies with one of CP's former allies, Laissez Fareholm. The World Factbook Entry, though, as of press time, remains almost blank, merely stating: "Welcome to Capitalist Paradise" in bold type.

Another remaining "relic," so to say, of the occupation is a regional password. Ad Vitam Adsum has promised to keep the password in place for several days until stability is restored, but has also stated he will send it to any banned natives, albeit after changing it daily.

Debate has ensued on the CP RMB on how to protect the region from future raids and assaults. One popular idea is to place an endorsement cap on nations within the region, but some natives have opposed the idea, regarding it as an assault on a nation's liberty or unfair to long-term regional residents. Another idea is refounding the region, but this seems unlikely, due to the region's high population and the issue of who would be the new founder.

The newly elected delegate has also stated plans to work with the United Defenders League to create a functioning regional military.

---

NS WORLD EXCLUSIVE: INTERVIEW WITH MAHAJ

The UDL member discusses the conflict between raiders and defenders, and possible suggestions to improve gameplay

Question: How long have you been on NS? How long have you been defending?
Answer: I've been on NS for over 2 years (joined December 8 2009) and I have been defending for less than a year. I did some defenses for about a month before I joined the UDL and I joined the UDL last August.

Q: What defender group(s) are you a member of?
A: I am a member of simply the UDL.

Q: Why do you defend?
A: I defended at first because I saw something wrong and wanted to fix it, I continued defending because I found it fun, but there are really two reasons why I defend, one for fun and the other is a slightly moralistic reason. At first I thought 'moral defending? On an online game? You've got to be joking' but I find that a couple things really push that to happening, one is seeing these griefs and the natives wanting to do something but can't, and the other is the raider propaganda and their behavior, the way they carry themselves, the things they say. The very way many raiders act, for me, increased my feelings towards moral defending.

Q: How do you feel about raiders, in general?
A: Well, some of them are nice people, like from an OOC standpoint, even though I dislike what they do. I'd say a lot of them are pretty cool, but there is a whole clique of invaders that I just tend not to get along with, although they claim they're not even raiders. So it really depends, somewhat, on their org, and then furthermore on what the person is like as a whole. I'm mature enough to separate my feelings about raiderism from my feelings about the individual raiders.

Q: What do you think contributes the most to the raider/defender animosity?
A: I think the biggest problem is that defenders who defend for morals are going to dislike raiders anyway, because raiders exist simply for an action that is considered by many others to be atrocious, and hard-core moralistic defenders are going to tend to rise to the top of the orgs due to their greater passion for defending, so they wind up setting the tone for the organizations.
Another factor that definitely doesn't help is the fact that as the way gameplaying is currently working, defenders have little to no chance to actually do anything against raiders, and this frustration inevitably boils over into something more.
Petty personal dislikes may play a part too, but I think the first two points are possibly the biggest.

Q:I assume that you feel raiders have an unfair advantage in gameplay?
A: I'd say that raiders adapted to the system to the best of their ability, but I think that because they've adapted in new ways, the system was fundamentally flawed, and its now been abused to the point that, really, gameplay is broken without changes. So I'd say that the system is being abused, and got broken, yeah.

Q: What changes do you endorse for gameplay?
A: The suggestion I endorse is the suggestion proposed by Riemstagrad (viewtopic.php?f=15&t=184224). I'm of the opinion that this change would balance gameplay, encourage more political aspects and increase the worth of treaties (since now there's a space to move in armies) while not completely overbalancing one side of gameplay such as we have currently.
Really, the way gameplay is right now and how its heading, we can't afford *not* to change it.

Q: How do you reply to arguments that Riemstagrad's proposal would make R/D a "numbers game"?
A: I would argue that there's really more to a 'numbers game' than simply just the numbers, for example, where are you getting those numbers? Are you getting them from your treatied allies? Because things like this would make treaties more important. In the feeder/sinker/GCR world, treaties such as the Modern Pacific Alliance and The Pan Sinker Act become more important because various regional militaries can now actually do things. Furthermore, it takes considerable skill to mobilize a large amount of people in 12 hours.
Keep in mind too that after the period, the raiding/defending becomes similar to how it is now.

Q: What do you enjoy doing on NS when not defending?
A: When i'm not defending I enjoy engaging in debates on the forums. I've authored a couple GA resolutions and a couple SC resolutions, and can be found in basically all the non-roleplaying forums. I'm the founder of The South and one of my goals is to build it up over the summer.

Q: Anything else you'd like to say?
A: Not much... I sure hope that this news service succeeds, we haven't had a good unbiased news service in a while, NSNS sort of lost a lot of clout over the Devonitians scandal, I hope this one stays clean. Good luck.

Thanks for your time, Mahaj

-The NS World

[Tramiar]

You should interview Unibot next.

I'd prefer if he interviewed people who are less known. We already know what Uni thinks. He posts about it enough. What about the defenders that aren't known by everyone on NS? It'd be more interesting to learn about others and their views. Pull out the people who're afraid to post in Gameplay.

Since Mahaj's interview was posted before I could post this... Mahaj is not one of those people.

[The NS World]

You should interview Unibot next.

I'd prefer if he interviewed people who are less known. We already know what Uni thinks. He posts about it enough. What about the defenders that aren't known by everyone on NS? It'd be more interesting to learn about others and their views. Pull out the people who're afraid to post in Gameplay.

Since Mahaj's interview was posted before I could post this... Mahaj is not one of those people.

I am looking for lesser-known subjects. Mahaj volunteered to be interviewed.

On that note: The next issue will be a special report: a Veterans' Forum. It will feature interviews with three veteran players, (who do not post here often, if at all) about their experiences in NS, what they see wrong with it, and whether they feel it's improving. Look out for it!

[Mahaj]

You should interview Unibot next.

I'd prefer if he interviewed people who are less known. We already know what Uni thinks. He posts about it enough. What about the defenders that aren't known by everyone on NS? It'd be more interesting to learn about others and their views. Pull out the people who're afraid to post in Gameplay.

Since Mahaj's interview was posted before I could post this... Mahaj is not one of those people.

It is, though, my first time being interviewed.

[Fischistan]

You do realize that the FRA raid was a joke, right? And a funny one at that. Not even LKE would consider that a 'symbolic blow'.

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

Please, please tell me you're kidding.

[Tramiar]

I'd prefer if he interviewed people who are less known. We already know what Uni thinks. He posts about it enough. What about the defenders that aren't known by everyone on NS? It'd be more interesting to learn about others and their views. Pull out the people who're afraid to post in Gameplay.

Since Mahaj's interview was posted before I could post this... Mahaj is not one of those people.

It is, though, my first time being interviewed.

That is because you post your opinions on everything too often to need interviewed. >.> I learned nothing new, except that there's a couple answers I'd argue about. But it doesn't surprise me.

[Mahaj]

It is, though, my first time being interviewed.

That is because you post your opinions on everything too often to need interviewed. >.> I learned nothing new, except that there's a couple answers I'd argue about. But it doesn't surprise me.

have your own interview!
then a counter interview!
and a counter counter interview!
and a counter counter counter interview!

[Aaraya]

Very good article, the Mahaj interview was a nice touch

[Northern Chittowa]

You do realize that the FRA raid was a joke, right? And a funny one at that. Not even LKE would consider that a 'symbolic blow'.

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

Oh yes,we all believe that it was a terrible blow to our moral. Honestly, we are at rock bottom following this loss, we just don't know how to cope. We are honestly finding it hard to come to terms with losing a puppet dump region to a quick raid that was over before people really noticed.

Onder, even for you, to pretend that this action is anything more than something to raise a smile about is beyond embarrassing.

[Whiskum]

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

Please, please tell me you're kidding.

There is nothing especially striking about what has been stated. The suggestion that a raid, of the region which the FRA created to represent themselves in the actual game, in turn represents a symbolic blow against the FRA (essentially constituting a defeat for the FRA) should not be controversial in the least. The additional statement I made was that the raid carries a significance beyond an ordinary tagging operation. This should also be apparent.

On the contrary, The LKE would consider the successful action by TBR, TBH and Unknown to be a 'symbolic blow' against the FRA. This because the action was an effective demonstration that the FRA, an organisation whose sole military focus is defending, is incapable of defending, and anticipating threats to, its current foundation on the NationStates site. Therefore this raid inherently carries more meaning than a ordinary tagging operation..

Oh yes,we all believe that it was a terrible blow to our moral. Honestly, we are at rock bottom following this loss, we just don't know how to cope. We are honestly finding it hard to come to terms with losing a puppet dump region to a quick raid that was over before people really noticed.

First, I never stated the symbolic blow caused a blow to FRA morale.

Second, as I told you when you denied the impact of TNI's April 2011 raid of The Security Council, we would not expect the FRA to acknowledge any blow (specifically because it would be contrary to their interests to do so).

Onder, even for you, to pretend that this action is anything more than something to raise a smile about is beyond embarrassing.

Even for an FRA Arch Chancellor, to pretend that you are ignorant of how I woud view this incident is particuarly embarrassing.

Merely because an event is humorous does not deprive it of symbolism; in fact the humorous aspect of this affair makes it all the more a blow.

[Tramiar]

That is because you post your opinions on everything too often to need interviewed. >.> I learned nothing new, except that there's a couple answers I'd argue about. But it doesn't surprise me.

have your own interview!
then a counter interview!
and a counter counter interview!
and a counter counter counter interview!

I don't want an interview. I talk too much already.

[Mahaj]

Merely because an event is humorous does not deprive it of symbolism; in fact the humorous aspect of this affair makes it all the more a blow.

This from someone that doesn't seem to understand humor very well.

[Tim-Opolis]

Nice article. A fairly unbiased report from the world of Tech.

And after reading the interview with Mahaj, I caught a little snippet that made me curious

but there is a whole clique of invaders that I just tend not to get along with, although they claim they're not even raiders.

Mahaj. Is this a TITO reference?



And because all my fans are obviously curious about this topic. Yes I am willing to do an interview

[Tramiar]

And because all my fans are obviously curious about this topic. Yes I am willing to do an interview

You talk even more than I do.

[Mahaj]

Nice article. A fairly unbiased report from the world of Tech.

And after reading the interview with Mahaj, I caught a little snippet that made me curious

but there is a whole clique of invaders that I just tend not to get along with, although they claim they're not even raiders.

Mahaj. Is this a TITO reference?

Nope.

[Northern Chittowa]

]First, I never stated the symbolic blow caused a blow to FRA morale.

Second, as I told you when you denied the impact of TNI's April 2011 raid of The Security Council, we would not expect the FRA to acknowledge any blow (specifically because it would be contrary to their interests to do so).

Onder, even for you, to pretend that this action is anything more than something to raise a smile about is beyond embarrassing.

Even for an FRA Arch Chancellor, to pretend that you are ignorant of how I woud view this incident is particuarly embarrassing.

Merely because an event is humorous does not deprive it of symbolism; in fact the humorous aspect of this affair makes it all the more a blow.

While it is true that we would not acknowledge a real blow, this does not fall anywhere near that category. The security council was not a symbolic blow as it did nothing to stop the effect of the SC upon the world - its activities, its resolutions or the people involved there. This 'raid' is the same. A symbolic blow it is not, its hardly even a breeze.

believe me, i wasn't being ignorant - I expected you to come out claiming this was a victory in some way shape or form, as did a few others before me. Doesn't make it any less embarrassing to see though.

[Whiskum]

While it is true that we would not acknowledge a real blow, this does not fall anywhere near that category.

A symbolic blow it is not, its hardly even a breeze.

If indeed it is, as you say, true you would not acknowledge a 'real blow' then it is equally true therefore that you woud dismiss a 'real blow' as a 'breeze' in order to avoid acknowledging such a blow. As it is, far from not falling within the category of a symbolic blow, this incident was a raid of the region the FRA created as a representation of their organisation on the NationStates site. Temporary or not, such a raid represents defeat for the FRA and that is by definition a symbolic blow, even if you believe it has done no 'real' damage to the FRA's functioning (that is why it the blow is termed 'symbolic').

The security council was not a symbolic blow as it did nothing to stop the effect of the SC upon the world - its activities, its resolutions or the people involved there. This 'raid' is the same.

Again, you seem to be focusing on functioning and practical effcts rather than symbolism in your conceptualisation of a symbolic blow. This is flawed.

The main point, actually, though is that TNI never argued The Security Council represented a symbolic blow against the World Assembly Security Council. The blow was the embarrasment perceived to the only administrator on The Security Council's forums, Unibot, in having a region he was so closely affiliated to raided while he was the incumbent Arch Chancellor of the FRA and during a notable series of shambles for the FRA.

believe me, i wasn't being ignorant - I expected you to come out claiming this was a victory in some way shape or form, as did a few others before me. Doesn't make it any less embarrassing to see though.

Far from The LKE rushing out to claim this was a victory, we were silent on the matter until Fischistan argued that 'Not even LKE' would consider it a symbolic below. At that point it became necessary to clarify our position, namely that this incident falls squarely into the category of symbolic blow, and thereby quell Fischistan's argument.

Second, the only reason our clarification of our position would create embarrassment is if it created awkwardness, for instance awkwardness induced by being perplexed or puzzled by our position. You should have been fully aware of our actual position beforehand. Instead, you resolved that 'even for' The LKE regarding a raid of this region as a symbolic blow would fall below expectations and consequently be 'beyond embarrassing'. If, on the other hand, it was normal for The LKE to issue a statement then there is no reason why this would be 'beyond embarrassing' even for The LKE, which was your argument.

[Drop Your Pants]

NC and Onder, bugger off and make a new topic about LKE vs TNI and leave everyone else to enjoy the news.

[Belschaft]

Minor correction; EID is not a defender region, but is rather an IntFed region. We've had some pretty major discussions about our military stance since leaving the FRA, and the general consensus was that we are 'neutral-ish and welcoming to everyone' (I'm paraphrasing there). A lot of the debate happened on IRC, but we have most of it covered here in an old election thread. At present there are only a handful of active defenders in EID - I'm not sure of the exact number, but it may only be me and Uni - and the Defender tag is largely a relic from our days in the FRA. EID has neither a military or a military position.

Yours;

Belschaft, still technically MoFA of EID because no one ever confirmed his resignation or appointed a replacement

[The NS World]

Minor correction; EID is not a defender region, but is rather an IntFed region. We've had some pretty major discussions about our military stance since leaving the FRA, and the general consensus was that we are 'neutral-ish and welcoming to everyone' (I'm paraphrasing there). A lot of the debate happened on IRC, but we have most of it covered here in an old election thread. At present there are only a handful of active defenders in EID - I'm not sure of the exact number, but it may only be me and Uni - and the Defender tag is largely a relic from our days in the FRA. EID has neither a military or a military position.

Yours;

Belschaft, still technically MoFA of EID because no one ever confirmed his resignation or appointed a replacement

Apologies: I'm changing it to EID, home of Unibot II...

[Northern Chittowa]

NC and Onder, bugger off and make a new topic about LKE vs TNI and leave everyone else to enjoy the news.

Calm down dear...

And Onder, i'll get to your points shortly.

[Pandemicia]

It's good to see people actually doing these news reports again after NSNS foundered. Fun to read.