NationStates

Evil Wolf wrote:

Unibot III wrote:Despite the fact that WPLF was the most successful of the incarnations of TWP's military. Anti-defender ideology has not always been rational.

WPLF was also its most successful in 2004-2005, which was over a decade ago. It then sharply declined and was almost non-existent following Biyah and Neenee's attempted West Pacific Dominion coup in which they planned to establish a dictatorship loyal to the defender organization the ADN. You'd be reaching pretty far back to make the argument that TWP should be Defender based on the WPLF. If you've going to pull that, why not argue that TEP should be purely raider? After all, it was founded by the raiders in Atlantic Alliance, prior to it being given feeder status. By Unibot's logic, they should be pure raiders forever.

I think once again TRT and Unibot have demonstrated their inability to distinguish between people who raid for fun sometimes and "Anti-defender ideology". I'm inclined to believe that if TWP was truly anti-defender, they would be banning known defenders from the region and prohibiting them from joining the government.

I don't see that occurring.

All defender activity is a propaganda front for imperialist, like the old ADN. At least the raiders don't engage in such hypocrisy.

Wickedly evil people wrote: All defender activity is a propaganda front for imperialist, like the old ADN. At least the raiders don't engage in such hypocrisy.

Maybe you need to update your theories from the ADN - there's nothing intrinsic about defenderism that says 'imperialism'.

I think once again TRT and Unibot have demonstrated their inability to distinguish between people who raid for fun sometimes and "Anti-defender ideology". I'm inclined to believe that if TWP was truly anti-defender, they would be banning known defenders from the region and prohibiting them from joining the government.

No, "anti-defender" theory is just what I call Eli's theories - because he makes so little sense most of the time, the only thing I can cobble out of it is that defenders are bad.

Eh. Raiders celebrate when they tag raid with like 4 people. Defenders have a hard time getting more than a handful any given night. The only time we see huge numbers is when people are piling, which doesn't say much.

Defenders and raiders playing the numbers game is dumb. Everybody's losing.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Eh. Raiders celebrate when they tag raid with like 4 people. Defenders have a hard time getting more than a handful any given night. The only time we see huge numbers is when people are piling, which doesn't say much.

Defenders and raiders playing the numbers game is dumb. Everybody's losing.

Except raiders, apparently.

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Eh. Raiders celebrate when they tag raid with like 4 people. Defenders have a hard time getting more than a handful any given night.

And that is, in my opinion, the problem - an hour long game of cat and mouse with only a limited number of people actually participating

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Defenders and raiders playing the numbers game is dumb. Everybody's losing.

That's why defenders are the only ones that complain about the way Gameplay works, right? Because everybody's losing?

Letoilenoir wrote:

Glen-Rhodes wrote:Eh. Raiders celebrate when they tag raid with like 4 people. Defenders have a hard time getting more than a handful any given night.

And that is, in my opinion, the problem - an hour long game of cat and mouse with only a limited number of people actually participating

I was going to say "just cat," but I think I'll say just mouse instead For one, There's a lot of squeaking going on recently Vandooooooosa, and it's actually a better metaphor - we go around eating all the cheese, with few cats to stop us! While the cat's away....

Anyways, Four isn't really that huge of a number. Six or seven, for a tag, yes, but four? I mean, look at recent AoI and TBH runs for example - most have 3-5 people. ANd to be fair, when we see defender groups nowadays, there's usually two or three in them as well. Used to be, we saw lone ones more often, but with Apple busy, DYP disappearing for a while, etc, from my POV at least there's been a lot less solo updaters, compared to small groups. Now, overall, I've been on less runs with any interference, but the interference seen has been larger.

And raiders at least see larger numbers than that without pilers Region inc, for example, was an op thrown together in just about a full day, and had...I think it was nine? We didn't reach out to everyone we could have either, and hit at a minor, which generally have less people online overall. Better-planned and prepared operations regularly see turnouts of 15-30 updaters. On the other hand, in a full month occupying Islam, with my lead as low as 12 endos at some points later on IIRC, there was only one lib attempt, a few days in. We we not famous enough to warrant a liberation, or was that even too many? And a more prominent one, CCS - huge showing, didn't go through. But why only one showing of that size? I mean, if we fail an invasion attempt (well first off we screwed up pretty badly), often it's noticed in some way and a pile begins, with us moving on. But on the other side, there's nothing changed to prevent trying again. Anne Frank, multiple tries, until there was victory. Why does it take Nazi's for that, not just the average raid? Beats me.

+ I'll add, while they may not be trained, the other side has the advantage of reaching out to sympathetic forumgoers, natives, etc. If we ask the world for help on an op, all we're going to get is spies and leaks

Anyways, IMO, the fun's in what you put the fun in. We don't need the defenders to have fun, though they do make things more interesting We're happy with the cheese, the activity, the new people coming in, and maybe spelling a few things along the way We can do it with two, we can do it with eight, all depends on who wants in that night. Raider orgs are only growing, and I personally see 2015 as a good year in the making so far, with several more active players rising up. Where exactly is the problem with that?

Unibot III wrote:

Wickedly evil people wrote: All defender activity is a propaganda front for imperialist, like the old ADN. At least the raiders don't engage in such hypocrisy.

Maybe you need to update your theories from the ADN - there's nothing intrinsic about defenderism that says 'imperialism'.

I think once again TRT and Unibot have demonstrated their inability to distinguish between people who raid for fun sometimes and "Anti-defender ideology". I'm inclined to believe that if TWP was truly anti-defender, they would be banning known defenders from the region and prohibiting them from joining the government.

No, "anti-defender" theory is just what I call Eli's theories - because he makes so little sense most of the time, the only thing I can cobble out of it is that defenders are bad.

actually I don't think posting mega nonsense articles about why you're apple pie and everyone else sucks makes sense.

I've listened to self righteous drivel such as yours since the game started, it's always the same. Defenders equal god and apple pie, every one else equals nazis. Glad you have so much fun trying to justify your obsessions and belittle others while you do it.

justify that, mr. self righteous nonsense.

Eli knows what is up

The fact that Milograd is an opportunist is hardly news. The behavior dates back as far as 2012 with his activities in TSP and UDL. However, he's generally highly effective in what he does due to his Durk like ability to be sufficiently likeable that he can get away with the crap he pulls, and the existence of regional politicians interested in using his popularity and reputation for their own ends.

Belschaft wrote:The fact that Milograd is an opportunist is hardly news. The behavior dates back as far as 2012 with his activities in TSP and UDL. However, he's generally highly effective in what he does due to his Durk like ability to be sufficiently likeable that he can get away with the crap he pulls, and the existence of regional politicians interested in using his popularity and reputation for their own ends.

Pfft, what's with all the Milo hate?

Zaolat wrote:

Belschaft wrote:The fact that Milograd is an opportunist is hardly news. The behavior dates back as far as 2012 with his activities in TSP and UDL. However, he's generally highly effective in what he does due to his Durk like ability to be sufficiently likeable that he can get away with the crap he pulls, and the existence of regional politicians interested in using his popularity and reputation for their own ends.

Pfft, what's with all the Milo hate?

I don't hate Milo by any means; I did for about six months after his coup, but that was ages ago. I like and respect him, but he's always been opportunistic and ambitious.

Most people who make it to GCR Delegate are.

OOC: Calling me an opportunist in the UDL is silly. I was barely interested in GP at the time and only stuck in #UDL because RP'ers were encouraged to be around. Unibot threw the offer for me to be CL out of nowhere - I wasn't even an Lt. or active - and I said, "why not?" I spent most of that time RPing nonetheless - I had no GP agenda and for the merits of your argument, that is simply a weak point. I didn't have any true investment in GP until 2013.

@Zao: Bel being a rhetoric grenade and anti-Milo isn't very new.

---

TWP and I have a very realistic understanding of each other that isn't lacking the illuminating wisdom of the Gameplay forum. This forum is a place where people say things that are easily observable from simple different viewpoints to people who aren't to be convinced of anything under the delusion that the loudest party will make some sort of intangible P.R. or ideological gain. Reputation, short of forum-destroying, is a pebble when you're competent in this game. You can get away with anything if you look at the world's landscape and realities without being romantic about it.

People yell about feeder purges like they're atrocities but half of them don't care when Anarchy is raided and purged. Why was the coup of TSP supposed to be a career-ending reputation disaster, whereas a career raider is fine? Simple political opportunism on behalf of everyone who points a finger at me and says I'm a deplorable, shallow player (who, unfortunately, has even been called a sociopath for playing this game the way he does, like wtf :/) in a game of angels. The raids on real communities add up. I say this to make a point - people are full of it and don't believe much. Beyond very simple GP beliefs, most of our politics are a grand lie. There are two brands of opportunism in this game, and I am an opportunist in a way that is different from the way that you're all "opportunists".

And people treat pursuing opportunity like it's something to be ashamed of. But you all know you do it too.

This game is meant to simulate politics. People only raise a fuss when people are good at it.

Pestarzt the Traveller wrote:This game is meant to simulate politics. People only raise a fuss when people are good at it.

People raise a fuss when someone their politically opposed to does it. With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

Belschaft wrote:With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

You forgot the part where GP is about having fun. There's plenty of prominent players in this area of the game still following that principle.

Ridersyl wrote:

Belschaft wrote:With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

You forgot the part where GP is about having fun. There's plenty of prominent players in this area of the game still following that principle.

Those people tend not to involve themselves in GP forum bs.

I got the sense that you were talking about GP overall and not just the forums, but okay. You're right, they typically don't.

Ridersyl wrote:

Belschaft wrote:With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

You forgot the part where GP is about having fun. There's plenty of prominent players in this area of the game still following that principle.

Those people tend to find that fun. They wouldn't play the game if they didn't. This is a political simulation game, after all.

Busy rift is a slow at seeing things rift...

Just off the bat I want to say thanks for the article. Far more interesting than my last inclusion in TRT when Xoriet depicted me as an evil jackass. I appreciate the time put into just writing that - and than the fact it was published? Just amazing

Just an issue at the beginning - not sure if you're saying I am or shad is a Co-founder of AoI but either way both are wrong. Shad has nothing to do with the founding and I am THE founder.

When I first started reading this edition you can just feel that defender bias that I've grown to love. It's nice reading something from a different mindset. Regarding TWP and it's revolution - I honestly have no clue what is going on. The military event was completely run by them and all we did was help out in the initial claim.

Noticing a listing discussion around winners and losers in R/D - personally don't think anyone wins. Recreation raiding is becoming something that I kind of dislike. Raiding should be nothing more than a tool to deal with enemies; not to terrorise the hundreds of founderless communities. Hypocritical to say that I know - sadly my ideal isn't shared by those around me.

Again though - thanks heaps for the article and the valued support throughout this time. I know for a fact that myself and the community appreciate it.

Rifty wrote:Busy rift is a slow at seeing things rift...

Just off the bat I want to say thanks for the article. Far more interesting than my last inclusion in TRT when Xoriet depicted me as an evil jackass. I appreciate the time put into just writing that - and than the fact it was published? Just amazing

Just an issue at the beginning - not sure if you're saying I am or shad is a Co-founder of AoI but either way both are wrong. Shad has nothing to do with the founding and I am THE founder.

When I first started reading this edition you can just feel that defender bias that I've grown to love. It's nice reading something from a different mindset. Regarding TWP and it's revolution - I honestly have no clue what is going on. The military event was completely run by them and all we did was help out in the initial claim.

Noticing a listing discussion around winners and losers in R/D - personally don't think anyone wins. Recreation raiding is becoming something that I kind of dislike. Raiding should be nothing more than a tool to deal with enemies; not to terrorise the hundreds of founderless communities. Hypocritical to say that I know - sadly my ideal isn't shared by those around me.

Again though - thanks heaps for the article and the valued support throughout this time. I know for a fact that myself and the community appreciate it.

You can always go a la Catburglars.

Belschaft wrote:

Pestarzt the Traveller wrote:This game is meant to simulate politics. People only raise a fuss when people are good at it.

People raise a fuss when someone their politically opposed to does it. With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

So which am I? Insane or powermongering?

Zemnaya Svoboda wrote:

Belschaft wrote:People raise a fuss when someone their politically opposed to does it. With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

So which am I? Insane or powermongering?

You're playing since '04 at least.

Insane, definitely insane

Zemnaya Svoboda wrote:

Belschaft wrote:People raise a fuss when someone their politically opposed to does it. With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

So which am I? Insane or powermongering?

Considering that you've never been one to partake in the GP forum bs? Neither.

Zemnaya Svoboda wrote:

Belschaft wrote:People raise a fuss when someone their politically opposed to does it. With a marginally insane exceptions no one in GP takes much of the ideological stuff seriously; it's all about personal political gain and influence.

Oh, and a hell of a lot of juvenile feuds and personal vendettas.

So which am I? Insane or powermongering?

Keyword "people", Elubot 3.0.