Page 4 of 4

PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 11:23 pm
by Canton Empire
I came I saw I conquered wrote:I've started a war lol

Yes, unfortunately there are those who would rather go and brag about their own side than answer a simple question.

FOCUS was the first interregional alliance for frontiers. It consists of some of the first of what I would call "true" frontiers, regions created with the express purpose of being a frontier.

As for regions who will defend frontiers, they have gone over the major names in this thread, the South Pacific, Europeia, The League, etc.

Now, many have made rather... interesting claims, from political purpose of these regions to their effectiveness. Regardless of that, those regions will defend almost any region, I've found, with the exceptions being:

Regions that have had serious OOC misconduct resulting in a "Do No Defend" order (which does not mean that region will be automatically raided by defenders, instead, defenders wont move to defend the region in the event of invasion). There is a very high bar to getting a Do Not Defend request approved, and believe it or not, raiders have, in the past, worked with defenders on having one of these issued. z

The second exception is when a region is a raider region, or allied with one.

It's pretty straight forward

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 12:24 am
by Magicia
I came I saw I conquered wrote:I've started a war lol

The war's been started since GP existed. Raiders and Fendas are in a perpetual state of war-no matter what their declarations say.
Canton Empire wrote:-snip-
The second exception is when a region is a raider region, or allied with one.

Huh, where were those regions during Red October, when the innocent region of Solidarity was torched simply for being an NSLeft project, of which TCB, a BoM treaty region, is a member?

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:16 am
by New Fernia
Rosartemis wrote:I don't see that to be entirely the case. Skiva's analogy still portrays Defenders as a notably virtuous force, but that couldn't be further from the truth. The modern Defender is a selfish, self-serving entity driven by the pursuit of victory for its own sake, not for the noble goal of liberation, but rather to stake their flags in crumbling cities abandoned by raiders in pursuit of new fields to light aflame.

If every defender were like some of the most outspoken, then sure. But if I just wanted to power my ego or whatever, I would raid. Of course, I can't speak for every defender, but I'd imagine the majority of them are there because they either (a) landed in a defender region and wanted to participate or (b) actually wanted to help natives. Not to "stake their flags in crumbling cities."
Rosartemis wrote:Defending has become nothing more than a publicity stunt, designed to convince naive natives that Defenders are doing more than just engaging in empty posturing. But if all they do is brandish their fists at Raiders without taking any tangible action, are they truly fighting on the side of the native?

I wouldn't call sieging a region for several days "brandish[ing] their fists at Raiders" or "just engaging in empty posturing." If all we wanted to do was send raiders a stern message or whatever, then we wouldn't try for very long. I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors with command but I assume they think the same way. And besides- if we really wanted to send a message to raiders, then we would (or at least, I would) try to hit them where it hurts instead of just on the battleground in some random frontier with 3 natives and no infrastructure for new nations.
Rosartemis wrote:By that logic, why not continue fighting regardless? Even if the prospects seem bleak, it provides new recruits with the opportunity to learn the ropes, even if it ultimately leads to no outcome. There's still potential to unearth talent among these fresh faces. Yet, Defender Command seems content to exhaust them all.

They could be providing the chance for a new person to lead an update every day, teaching them triggering, balancing a force, and commanding an army. But alas, they refuse to do so.

Do Defenders fear competency that much?

Well, practice doesn't hinge on what region is being targeted. And I commonly see new faces leading update or helping trigger.
Rosartemis wrote:Let's not pretend that doing two jumps in a single update is an insurmountable feat. We've chased and tagged enough to know better :p. Utopeus and ROTWW are only 20 minutes apart from each other. If Defenderdom takes pride in being unable to manage jumps at both, then it's no wonder they're still losing.

That's not possible, at least with those two specific regions. ROTWW updates first, so unless we were able to scrape together all of the endos required to liberate the region (unlikely) we would have to choose just one region. If we jumped into ROTWW, then we would get WA locked. The only ones who would be able to continue on to Utopeus would be those who were banned, and there likely would not have been enough of them to liberate Utopeus.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:53 am
by Rosartemis
New Fernia wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:I don't see that to be entirely the case. Skiva's analogy still portrays Defenders as a notably virtuous force, but that couldn't be further from the truth. The modern Defender is a selfish, self-serving entity driven by the pursuit of victory for its own sake, not for the noble goal of liberation, but rather to stake their flags in crumbling cities abandoned by raiders in pursuit of new fields to light aflame.

If every defender were like some of the most outspoken, then sure. But if I just wanted to power my ego or whatever, I would raid. Of course, I can't speak for every defender, but I'd imagine the majority of them are there because they either (a) landed in a defender region and wanted to participate or (b) actually wanted to help natives. Not to "stake their flags in crumbling cities."

If they truly cared about aiding natives,

Then they would have preemptively defended ROTWW.

You can attribute this incompetence to your command, questioning how such a blatant oversight could have transpired... But let's point out the harsh reality that your commanders, the ones you idolize and follow, simply couldn't be bothered. They didn't lift a finger to ensure the safety of the native community.

You could have shown more initiative, but you chose not to.
New Fernia wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:Defending has become nothing more than a publicity stunt, designed to convince naive natives that Defenders are doing more than just engaging in empty posturing. But if all they do is brandish their fists at Raiders without taking any tangible action, are they truly fighting on the side of the native?

I wouldn't call sieging a region for several days "brandish[ing] their fists at Raiders" or "just engaging in empty posturing." If all we wanted to do was send raiders a stern message or whatever, then we wouldn't try for very long. I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors with command but I assume they think the same way. And besides- if we really wanted to send a message to raiders, then we would (or at least, I would) try to hit them where it hurts instead of just on the battleground in some random frontier with 3 natives and no infrastructure for new nations.

I'm delighted to see you Defenders acknowledge that ROTWW is simply a random, inconsequential, worthless region with no purpose whatsoever, truly showcasing your commitment to upholding native sovereignty.

Your actions convey no message, there was a splinter in Raiderdom a few months ago, yet now there are two entirely autonomous branches operating independently, and you can't defeat either of them, separately or together. The only message this could possibly convey is that Defenderdom doesn't genuinely care about native sovereignty.

Your Command may claim otherwise, but this isn't about "sending a stern message" to raiders, it's all sheer incompetence and complacency in all its glory. Frankly, persisting in the fight, regardless of the odds, would send a stronger message, because surrendering only serves to weaken Defenderdom.
New Fernia wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:By that logic, why not continue fighting regardless? Even if the prospects seem bleak, it provides new recruits with the opportunity to learn the ropes, even if it ultimately leads to no outcome. There's still potential to unearth talent among these fresh faces. Yet, Defender Command seems content to exhaust them all.

They could be providing the chance for a new person to lead an update every day, teaching them triggering, balancing a force, and commanding an army. But alas, they refuse to do so.

Do Defenders fear competency that much?

Well, practice doesn't hinge on what region is being targeted. And I commonly see new faces leading update or helping trigger.

How many times have your commanders fed you and other liberators the excuse of preserving "morale" as a reason to abandon a siege? If your more determined, committed comrades chose to press on regardless, how would your leaders respond to that?

Let's be honest, even jumping into a region currently occupied, even if it only leads to a trip to the Rejected Realms, does more to bolster morale than simply walking away and saying, "We gave it our best shot."

Your commanders seem more interested in preserving their own positions of power than in genuine defending. Does that mean nothing to you?
New Fernia wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:Let's not pretend that doing two jumps in a single update is an insurmountable feat. We've chased and tagged enough to know better :p. Utopeus and ROTWW are only 20 minutes apart from each other. If Defenderdom takes pride in being unable to manage jumps at both, then it's no wonder they're still losing.

That's not possible, at least with those two specific regions. ROTWW updates first, so unless we were able to scrape together all of the endos required to liberate the region (unlikely) we would have to choose just one region. If we jumped into ROTWW, then we would get WA locked. The only ones who would be able to continue on to Utopeus would be those who were banned, and there likely would not have been enough of them to liberate Utopeus.

I suppose that speaks volumes, doesn't it? Especially considering that Utopeus occurred a few updates after ROTWW became open for sieging.

Where were the defenders in their token run when ROTWW was (and is) still vulnerable to retaking?

Surely, we're not going to overlook the fact that Utopeus didn't happen simultaneously with ROTWW. That would be silly. You had numerous opportunities to launch a siege on ROTWW before Sparkalia decided to do anything.

Just say that you don't want to liberate ROTWW, it's not that hard.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 8:13 am
by Concrete Slab
Rosartemis wrote:snip


I'll never get over the fact that the ones who are doing the raiding of the community are consistently the ones accusing the people trying to give the region back to that native community of not caring about said native community. I don't know how losing the first lib attempt by one endorsement and sieging for a week turned into defenders not caring but you do you I guess.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 8:38 am
by Improper Classifications
Concrete Slab wrote:I don't know how losing the first lib attempt by one endorsement and sieging for a week turned into defenders not caring

Let me summarize it for you. In case you didn't notice, there is a big shiny purple resolution up for vote in the Security Council. This resolution is at vote in order to prevent raiders from acquiring governorship through governor transfer in their invaded territory, Realm of the Whispering Winds. The issue is, multiple natives, both of whom are prominent in their leadership of the Realm, have clearly opposed this resolution. Despite knowing this, and despite having ample time to pull the resolution from vote, defenders are currently forcing it through the Council. Even worse, this whole situation could have been prevented in its entirety if the request for pilers from the natives hadn't been ignored. Defenders didn't listen to the natives then and they aren't listening to them now.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 10:15 am
by Angeloid Astraea
Concrete Slab wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:snip


I'll never get over the fact that the ones who are doing the raiding of the community are consistently the ones accusing the people trying to give the region back to that native community of not caring about said native community.


Maybe you always respect the native community and its wishes, Concrete Slab, but your faction leaders have a track record of ignoring native communities and what they want for their regions when it benefits R/D Gameplay. Realm of the Whispering Winds isn't the first time natives have been ignored by defenders seeking a fat W over raiders and it won't be the last time either. =P

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 4:09 pm
by The Sea of Shadows
Concrete Slab wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:snip


I'll never get over the fact that the ones who are doing the raiding of the community are consistently the ones accusing the people trying to give the region back to that native community of not caring about said native community. I don't know how losing the first lib attempt by one endorsement and sieging for a week turned into defenders not caring but you do you I guess.


Natives knew they were a target and asked for help. Silence on your part. Your libjunctions spat in the face of the native populace who desired a password. Well done.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 5:05 pm
by Merien
Improper Classifications wrote:
Concrete Slab wrote:I don't know how losing the first lib attempt by one endorsement and sieging for a week turned into defenders not caring

Let me summarize it for you. In case you didn't notice, there is a big shiny purple resolution up for vote in the Security Council. This resolution is at vote in order to prevent raiders from acquiring governorship through governor transfer in their invaded territory, Realm of the Whispering Winds. The issue is, multiple natives, both of whom are prominent in their leadership of the Realm, have clearly opposed this resolution. Despite knowing this, and despite having ample time to pull the resolution from vote, defenders are currently forcing it through the Council. Even worse, this whole situation could have been prevented in its entirety if the request for pilers from the natives hadn't been ignored. Defenders didn't listen to the natives then and they aren't listening to them now.


Defenders just care about the region, not the people in it. Just look at the Philippines region.

Sometimes they'll raid ya just for being with the "wrong side"

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 6:46 pm
by Magicia
Merien wrote:
Improper Classifications wrote:Let me summarize it for you. In case you didn't notice, there is a big shiny purple resolution up for vote in the Security Council. This resolution is at vote in order to prevent raiders from acquiring governorship through governor transfer in their invaded territory, Realm of the Whispering Winds. The issue is, multiple natives, both of whom are prominent in their leadership of the Realm, have clearly opposed this resolution. Despite knowing this, and despite having ample time to pull the resolution from vote, defenders are currently forcing it through the Council. Even worse, this whole situation could have been prevented in its entirety if the request for pilers from the natives hadn't been ignored. Defenders didn't listen to the natives then and they aren't listening to them now.


Defenders just care about the region, not the people in it. Just look at the Philippines region.

Sometimes they'll raid ya just for being with the "wrong side"

Agreed here, defenders killed Philippines to boost their egos.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 8:35 pm
by Chaotic Sparkles
Concrete Slab wrote:
Rosartemis wrote:snip


I'll never get over the fact that the ones who are doing the raiding of the community are consistently the ones accusing the people trying to give the region back to that native community of not caring about said native community. I don't know how losing the first lib attempt by one endorsement and sieging for a week turned into defenders not caring but you do you I guess.

hey listen i want this to make sense too, but if my enemy gives me continuous and endless ammunition that is easily used against them, who am i to deny the generous gesture?

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 9:15 pm
by Reside
Magicia wrote:Could you cite an example of an untrustworthy raider region?

While I have my own opinions about certain raider regions, I’ll say that the least trustworthy raider region is currently just as helpful the most reliable defender region. You have to be able to provide at least some sense of security for your own region - whether that be through treaties, high delegate endos, alliances, etc.

Raiders, by literal design, are not trustworthy. And why should they be? Villains aren’t trustworthy, they never have been. Recent examples are those of Ovenerium in Magna Aurea (TBH) or Davids Gorge in Majestia (Voidcall/IC).

And yet, in practice, raiders are oftentimes more trustworthy than defenders. They don’t give false cause for their raids, they’re straightforward about what they plan to do and typically follow through on it. I find that, ironically, villains have the power to keep their word more often than the good guys. It just depends whether they want to or not.

You’re getting nowhere alone, and you’re getting nowhere choosing any single side.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 9:21 pm
by Rosartemis
Reside wrote:
Magicia wrote:Could you cite an example of an untrustworthy raider region?

While I have my own opinions about certain raider regions, I’ll say that the least trustworthy raider region is currently just as helpful the most reliable defender region. You have to be able to provide at least some sense of security for your own region - whether that be through treaties, high delegate endos, alliances, etc.

Raiders, by literal design, are not trustworthy. And why should they be? Villains aren’t trustworthy, they never have been. Recent examples are those of Ovenerium in Magna Aurea (TBH) or Davids Gorge in Majestia (Voidcall/IC).

And yet, in practice, raiders are oftentimes more trustworthy than defenders. They don’t give false cause for their raids, they’re straightforward about what they plan to do and typically follow through on it. I find that, ironically, villains have the power to keep their word more often than the good guys. It just depends whether they want to or not.

You’re getting nowhere alone, and you’re getting nowhere choosing any single side.

Let's exclude Majestia from this as there was actual OOC justification. I can't speak for IMPC, but there's been plenty of reasons to take it down.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 9:58 pm
by Angeloid Astraea
Reside wrote:
Magicia wrote:Could you cite an example of an untrustworthy raider region?

While I have my own opinions about certain raider regions, I’ll say that the least trustworthy raider region is currently just as helpful the most reliable defender region. You have to be able to provide at least some sense of security for your own region - whether that be through treaties, high delegate endos, alliances, etc.

Raiders, by literal design, are not trustworthy. And why should they be? Villains aren’t trustworthy, they never have been. Recent examples are those of Ovenerium in Magna Aurea (TBH) or Davids Gorge in Majestia (Voidcall/IC).

And yet, in practice, raiders are oftentimes more trustworthy than defenders. They don’t give false cause for their raids, they’re straightforward about what they plan to do and typically follow through on it. I find that, ironically, villains have the power to keep their word more often than the good guys. It just depends whether they want to or not.

You’re getting nowhere alone, and you’re getting nowhere choosing any single side.


I like your assessment. In my view, it comes down to what you're concerned with as Frontier! If you're concerned with the perceived morality of who you side with, side with defenders. If you're concerned with the practical utility of who you're siding with, then side with whoever you want.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 10:11 pm
by I came I saw I conquered
Sounds like it's best to avoid both and hope your region isn't too noticed

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:04 pm
by Omnicontrol
I came I saw I conquered wrote:Sounds like it's best to avoid both and hope your region isn't too noticed

As soon as it appears conveniently on the Spyglass sheet it'll be noticed. Also, if you want to keep a low profile, don't post about it on the forums =P

Or just don't make a frontier

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 11:07 pm
by Cyptopir
Omnicontrol wrote:
I came I saw I conquered wrote:Sounds like it's best to avoid both and hope your region isn't too noticed

As soon as it appears conveniently on the Spyglass sheet it'll be noticed. Also, if you want to keep a low profile, don't post about it on the forums =P

Or just don't make a frontier

If I'm not mistaken, frontiers are the territory of raiders and will always be.

PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2024 7:01 am
by Reside
Rosartemis wrote:Let's exclude Majestia from this as there was actual OOC justification. I can't speak for IMPC, but there's been plenty of reasons to take it down.

Oh yeah of course. I only mentioned it as I believe that it was well done. Regardless, I’m sure I could have scraped together a few more examples, but I’m fairly sure the point was made.

I came I saw I conquered wrote:Sounds like it's best to avoid both and hope your region isn't too noticed

That’s one way to look at it. However, you could also pay attention to both sides and strike deals that find you allies and friends on both of them.

The best thing a burgeoning, promising, or successful frontier can do is align themselves with those like them. That’s why large frontier alliances such as FOCUS are - to date - successful.

PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 9:21 pm
by Magicia
Reside wrote:
Magicia wrote:Could you cite an example of an untrustworthy raider region?

While I have my own opinions about certain raider regions, I’ll say that the least trustworthy raider region is currently just as helpful the most reliable defender region. You have to be able to provide at least some sense of security for your own region - whether that be through treaties, high delegate endos, alliances, etc.

Raiders, by literal design, are not trustworthy. And why should they be? Villains aren’t trustworthy, they never have been. Recent examples are those of Ovenerium in Magna Aurea (TBH) or Davids Gorge in Majestia (Voidcall/IC).

And yet, in practice, raiders are oftentimes more trustworthy than defenders. They don’t give false cause for their raids, they’re straightforward about what they plan to do and typically follow through on it. I find that, ironically, villains have the power to keep their word more often than the good guys. It just depends whether they want to or not.

You’re getting nowhere alone, and you’re getting nowhere choosing any single side.

The case with Ovenerium in MA was different, since Ben was not participating under his main gameplay persona, and was infact working solely to take over the region. Has any modern-day raider region, violated their treaty obligations/actively worked against an ally? Closest examples are from the other side of GP.