Regional 'opt-out' for R/D? [Gameplay/Proposal]

[The Fanboyists]

Which is why what I and many others are talking about isn't a tagging for RP regions. It's making the protection granted to regions with Founders are more permanent than the lifespan of an individual nation (see: the recurring suggestion of transferable Foundership). It's just an expansion of existing tools. If you oppose *that*, you're just being butt-hurt about not being able to fuck up the handiwork of whoever you want.

And what would the advantages of this be? All I can see is that it would make Gameplay as a whole (and not just the R/D game) boring and static, as there would be little to no risk in foreign affairs. Gameplayers (be they raiders, defenders, or neither) have a right to be able to play the game just as roleplayers have a right to play their game in its style. If you're calling for the elimination of an important aspect of the game just because you failed to take the requisite security measures and therefore can't have the WFE be just the way you all want it, then you're being the butthurt one.

I fail to see how making it so that making that one protection more durable "eliminates an aspect of the game." You're ignoring the countless regions that just straight-up don't have founders, keep an executive WA Delegate, and/or don't password protect. You're acting like the ones who aren't using the existing options will suddenly start using a new protection en masse. In reality, the only ones who would bother to use it are the people who don't want to participate in the R/D subgame.

You really think the handful of regions that already password protect and/or have founders are going to be any more open to you if they can't renew their Founder protection than if they can? Speaking from experience, regions have literally been refounded so as to continue founder protection, because we want out of R/D that badly. And you're acting like transferable foundership is even an additional protection, when in reality, it's just making it easier to maintain an existing one. So. Is it going to eliminate your possible targets out of the literally thousands of regions out there? Get some perspective. So you'll lose some of the juicier targets. Big fucking whoop.

And to answer the direct question of what the advantages would be? It would make it easier for those who don't want to participate in the R/D game to stay out of it, thus avoiding pissing matches like the current one, and allowing more people in more than one subgame to be happier. That should be a pretty worthwhile advantage, wouldn't you say?

And raiding is not about going around "fucking up the handiwork of whoever [we] want." It's centered around the same general ideas that RP is centered around. The desire to grow an empire and "win" (be it a region or an RP war).

If you think RPing is necessarily about growing an empire and/or "winning," then you've fundamentally misunderstood most of the stable members of the RPing community. Sure, to some extent, that's what RPing entails, and what some of the goals are. But it's more than that. It's fleshing out your nation into your creation. It's telling stories. It's creating characters to fill that rich world that you and others like you build. You can't honestly tell me R/D is comparable to that. Is R/D less worthwhile? No. But is it fundamentally different? Yes. And as a result, it's something many of us in the RP community don't find enjoyable, and why we don't want to have to be a part of it.

Failure to take the requisite security measures in an RP war can result in your nation suddenly and unexpectedly being conquered by a more powerful opponent. In the same way, failure to take adequate security measures for your in-game region can result in it being conquered. Unless your a remarkably poor sport, you don't go pitching a hissy fit because you lost an RP war because you didn't protect yourself, so why is it any different when you fail to take adequate security measures for your region.

Because that's the big difference between pitching a hissy fit because you lost an RP'd war and losing a R/D one. You don't have to RP if you don't want to. You don't lose any RP wars that you didn't damn well sign up for yourself, or at least accept your place in. None of us in the RPing community got to sign up for the R/D game, were asked if we wanted in or not. Asking RP'ers to worry about the R/D side of the game more than as a very periphery of their consciousness is like us demanding that R/D'ers devote time to RPing. In RP, if someone invades you and wrecks all your progress, you can ignore it if it's not something you signed on for. Someone comes and defaces a WFE that sometimes has important information on it, you didn't sign up for that, but it's getting forced on you, anyway.

As a side note, I'm a member of an RP region which has been founderless since early August of this year. Their WAD currently has 5 or 6 endorsements, for a while it was only 3. They have not yet been raided. There is no reason to add features to NS that could potentially kill an aspect if the game that has existed since NS was created to protect against something that could be protected against by simply having three people scroll down to the bottom of a nation page and click a button that says "Endorse [nation name]".

Also, it doesn't seem to be reaching you that many of these RP regions, for one reason or another, frequently don't have very many WA nations, either because they have puppets from people who participate in multiple regions, or have CTE'd and never gotten around to reapplying to join what is otherwise a pointless part of the game if it's not something you happen to be interested in.

For some reason, that's what R/D'ers (mostly Raiders) don't seem to get. What RP'ers are so annoyed about is not that R/D exists, but that we can be adversely affected unless we go out of our way to safeguard against a part of this game that we didn't sign up for, while R/D'ers have no such situation. We're frustrated that while R/D'ers can just completely ignore RP if they don't want to be involved (as it should be), we have no such option in regards to the aspect of the game we didn't sign on for. I can only imagine the screaming from R/D'ers if suddenly, what we RP'ed could affect your nations without your consent. So think about that.

Edit #1: Altered some wording in first paragraph for clarity; added edit notes.
Edit #2: Added: "And you're acting like transferable foundership is even an additional protection, when in reality, it's just making it easier to maintain an existing one," to first paragraph.
Edits #3 - #6: Altered format and wording to make post more readable.

[Communist Eraser]

There's a fair question that's been asked several times:

Why do raiders feel they have to deface everything on waltzing in and taking over where they aren't wanted? For that matter, where's the challenge in going after unprepared regions? It does often come off as a situation of some jock walking along the beach bragging about how many others he managed to kick sand into the faces of.

It's not my thing, I don't get the appeal, simply understand many of the rules that govern it. Might be nice to have some insight, especially considering some of the comments along the lines of 'the RPers are griping, lets get 'em' that have been made. Smacks of griefing and such right there, no?

The heart of it is being able to do something against another's wishes. Getting a raise out of natives or defenders. It simply isn't fun if someone isn't pissed by the raids, that's why the attempt to have Warzones as official R/D areas failed.

My assumption of the bigger picture is that some players have fun doing that (raiders), some players have fun preventing that (defenders) and combined more players are able to have fun being able to R/D then those being intruded by R/D (given the various precautions available). Not everyone is happy, but there is a net gain.

So the game allows it, with some regulation to stop it going too far.

[The Fanboyists]

First of all, yeah, you can, by removing the stuff on our RMB's, the Admin Boards, and other such Region-based affairs, raiders are also notorious for ejecting people from regions they were in in the first place, so thus we'd have to recognize you existed. The idea of offsite forums is only needed because we fear being raided. It's not fun for the victims, its only fun for the raiders, which honestly feels like trolling to me, because if the RPers need to live in fear of being raided and losing progress on their regions, then they have to acknowledge the threat of being raided. Thus this defeats your whole "ignore it guys, we'll only be molesting you silently if so" argument.

Also, if we have to store it on another website, whats the use of being here in the first place? If the RPers should keep their stuff on other sites, do you not think they'd rather move to those sites where they can remain safe? It's not conducive to efficient role-play to have everything spread out across the internet. So even if we did keep our stuff on other sites, would we even be doing so freely because that's where we were forced to store our stuff since the regions are R/D's domain? Of course not! We would've been forced to move and that isn't what we want to do. Call us lazy, but we'd much rather keep everything centralized without fear of ti being erased.

As for the Alternative, what's an Endo?

An endo is short for an endorsement.

I can see why you wouldn't want to have NS-based RP information on an offsite forum. But it is still probably the most secure way to store information. WFE's can be changed (even were an exemption to be put in place, WFE's could still be changed), and nation's factbooks can be lost if the nation CTE's (or in the depths of F&NI). RMB posts are a pain to dig up. To me, or makes the most sense to store such information offsite, regardless of whether your region is at risk or not). As for living in constant fear, in the RP region im a member of (see my post directly above the one you quoted) the entire fear of raiding expressed by the region was one guy saying "Oh sh*t were founderless now, we could get raided." Since then, they have gone almost 5 months with no founder and no raids. With only 3 endorsements on their WAD. It's really not as horrible a threat as people in this thread are making it out to be.

Whether or not you should put that stuff off-site or into other formats is not the point. You shouldn't *have* to because someone is going to come in and delete stuff for shits and giggles.

Someone gets mugged in an alley and left for dead, it's not the victim's fault for not being armed to the teeth, it's the fault of the bastard who used their guts as a pincushion and took all their shit.

Edit #1: Added in "Someone gets mugged in an alley..."
Edit #2: Added in Edit Notes.

[Anemos Major]

There's a fair question that's been asked several times:

Why do raiders feel they have to deface everything on waltzing in and taking over where they aren't wanted? For that matter, where's the challenge in going after unprepared regions? It does often come off as a situation of some jock walking along the beach bragging about how many others he managed to kick sand into the faces of.

It's not my thing, I don't get the appeal, simply understand many of the rules that govern it. Might be nice to have some insight, especially considering some of the comments along the lines of 'the RPers are griping, lets get 'em' that have been made. Smacks of griefing and such right there, no?

The heart of it is being able to do something against another's wishes. Getting a raise out of natives or defenders. It simply isn't fun if someone isn't pissed by the raids, that's why the attempt to have Warzones as official R/D areas failed.

My assumption of the bigger picture is that some players have fun doing that (raiders), some players have fun preventing that (defenders) and combined more players are able to have fun being able to R/D then those being intruded by R/D (given the various precautions available). Not everyone is happy, but there is a net gain.

So the game allows it, with some regulation to stop it going too far.

But in essence, what we have here is the suggestion that raiders only exist because they get a kick out of pissing people off - and as such, what they do has to be disruptive and offensive by definition for their actions to meet their objectives. What you'd have then isn't the need for a debate on RPers and their relationship with R/D, but why something as malignant as raiding exists in the first place.

I'm sure there's more to that than raiding, and that the essence of that part of the game lies more in the challenge and the rivalry with defenders rather than the itching desire to go around ruining other players' lives. And because I'm sure that this is the case, DLN's query (one echoed by plenty of people during this thread) is really something that needs to be answered - to the raiders here, why does your modus operandi have to be so aggressively offensive in the first place? Because I'm sure there're ways to raid regions that don't involve all the objectionable actions listed many times above, and yet it seems to be at the heart of what raiders actually do.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I should point out that I kindly asked TBR to cease harassing Minoa the region after this incident, even though there was an active founder, and necessary security features were already in place, such as WAD access being off. Yet they ignored it and persisted. How does it relate to this? It is causing concern for those who have already taken the necessary measures. I know it is not an excuse for a blanket opt-out feature, but there has to be a review of checks and balances.

[Arumdaum]

First of all, yeah, you can, by removing the stuff on our RMB's, the Admin Boards, and other such Region-based affairs, raiders are also notorious for ejecting people from regions they were in in the first place, so thus we'd have to recognize you existed. The idea of offsite forums is only needed because we fear being raided. It's not fun for the victims, its only fun for the raiders, which honestly feels like trolling to me, because if the RPers need to live in fear of being raided and losing progress on their regions, then they have to acknowledge the threat of being raided. Thus this defeats your whole "ignore it guys, we'll only be molesting you silently if so" argument.

Also, if we have to store it on another website, whats the use of being here in the first place? If the RPers should keep their stuff on other sites, do you not think they'd rather move to those sites where they can remain safe? It's not conducive to efficient role-play to have everything spread out across the internet. So even if we did keep our stuff on other sites, would we even be doing so freely because that's where we were forced to store our stuff since the regions are R/D's domain? Of course not! We would've been forced to move and that isn't what we want to do. Call us lazy, but we'd much rather keep everything centralized without fear of ti being erased.

As for the Alternative, what's an Endo?

An endo is short for an endorsement.

I can see why you wouldn't want to have NS-based RP information on an offsite forum. But it is still probably the most secure way to store information. WFE's can be changed (even were an exemption to be put in place, WFE's could still be changed), and nation's factbooks can be lost if the nation CTE's (or in the depths of F&NI). RMB posts are a pain to dig up. To me, or makes the most sense to store such information offsite, regardless of whether your region is at risk or not).

"if you don't like losing all your information, why don't you just do everything outside of nationstates"

[SquareDisc City]

Their WAD currently has 5 or 6 endorsements, for a while it was only 3. They have not yet been raided. There is no reason to add features to NS that could potentially kill an aspect if the game that has existed since NS was created to protect against something that could be protected against by simply having three people scroll down to the bottom of a nation page and click a button that says "Endorse [nation name]".

OK, something I don't get. I'm hearing that half a dozen, or even fewer, WA endorsements is strong protection against raiders. I'm also hearing that raiders and defenders outnumber RPers. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up. Even considering raiders are split across many groups, if they were such a big part of the game and RPers a tiny minority, raiders should be able to muster more than a handful of people to take a region.

[Evil Wolf]

I should point out that I kindly asked TBR to cease harassing Minoa the region after this incident, even though there was an active founder, and necessary security features were already in place, such as WAD access being off. Yet they ignored it and persisted. How does it relate to this? It is causing concern for those who have already taken the necessary measures. I know it is not an excuse for a blanket opt-out feature, but there has to be a review of checks and balances.

Actually, this is an excellent example of what I've been talking about, that Delegate Controls being off makes you safe from all the consequences of a raid. TBR hit the region and then could do absolutely nothing with it. No WFE changes were made, no RMB posts were suppressed, no embassies where closed, literally nothing happened other than they were in the region and they became delegate in an utterly worthless and futile gesture on their part. They didn't even leave any posts on the RMB.

Who cares, even from a RPing stand point, that they became the delegate in Minoa? The Controls were off, TBR couldn't, and didn't, do anything to that region. It's not even worth asking them to stop, what they did was pointless. They just did it simply to show that they could.

[Grenartia]

Issues are also part of the game. Tons of people don't participate in the answering of issues.

1. Oh, but you *do* have to be exposed to Issues, don't you? The link for them appears every single time you log into your nation. 2. And the WA? Oh god, it's everywhere! On the forums, on every single page on NS with a little hyperlink that says "WA".

3. Demanding from MOD and ADMIN that you will never, ever be exposed to GP is equally as laughable as demanding that you never, ever have to be exposed to the potential of seeing WA proposals or Issues. You can choose not to raid or defend just as you can choose not to answer issues or vote in the WA, but it's still always going to be there, you're never going to be able to separate it out 100% from RP in general.

It's all part of Nationstates as a game.

1. No, you don't. You get to pay no attention to it at all if you so choose. Whether or not you ignore issues doesn't affect any part of RP. Having your region raided, however, does.

2. See above. Especially with regards to P2TM regions. WA delegates are only a means to an end, and that end is to decide who gets to help run the region, or for regions where the founder is inactive, to actually run the region. Nothing more. We don't give any shits about what other people do with regards to the WA, and GA and SC shit doesn't affect us. We'd ignore WA altogether if we had a way to choose the delegate without using the WA.

3. Except, as I've pointed out, the only aspect of gameside that actually inherently affects us is having our regions raided. To say otherwise is to be either totally ignorant or blatantly lying.

Oh by far I agree with you that some people are guilty for a hell of a lot more than a simple game regarding voting in regions. Your actions and my actions prove this.

1) I'm not even going to bother addressing every issue regarding that thread.

2) You further proved my point because even someone like me who is closer to a light-gray when it comes to IC actions can be a total jerk with anger issues OOC.

What I was referring to was IC actions. Hello, have you seen many RP's? People nuke each others cities just because they disagree with their ideology; people seek to erraticate minorities IC, people freaking RP raping another country's female soldier just because her country is "infidels"...

1. It takes a lot more malice intent to write out any of the above than it does "haha, we invaded ur region!".

There is decent innocent roleplayers though, and they outnumber guys like us. They deserve what they're asking for: peace of mind. Not just for their sake but for the sake of this game which will suffer without them being here to guide newbies from making the same fuck-ups you or I made in the past.

2. What do you mean "suffer"? You are generalizing an entire category of players claiming that somehow the RP players won't get to RP just because a few jokers run around and goof off with other peoples regions.

If you don't like the action someone does in an RP, just ignore/retcon it. 3. If you don't like that someone raided your region then build a freaking new region and turn off delegate controls!

This is such a non-issue and it's making out raider players to be these evil people, when in reality they are no worse than the rest of us!

1. Except, that shit can be ignored. That's the beauty of RP. Its totally-opt in. Not so with getting your region invaded.

2. We've already pointed out exactly how raids negatively impact RPs.

3. Not that fucking simple. As has already been fucking pointed out.

Get off your high horse and stop acting like your little game is the only part of this site that matters.

I don't think he is on a "high horse". My entire point is that it isn't fair to raiders that they get marginalized as these somehow evil people because of how they choose to play, and everyone talks what awful people they are for kicking out "natives"; meanwhile defenders are just as bad, RP people can be 100x worse, and WA people wanna shove their WA laws and morals down everyone's throats.

Yet all four can be ignored and nullified. So why is it that raiders harbor this bad reputation when they are simply playing the same game in a different way?

Again with this "why can't you be fair to raiders?" question. What about fairness for RP? You want fairness for R/D? Start talking fairness to RP. Ignoring all the other shit wrong with your post that I've already addressed.

This argument has been refuted at least six times by now, probably. That's not how rp regions work.

Oh. So the problem is the failure of RP regions to adapt to the situation that the region is in. So now you need a game mechanic to be put in place to counteract your own failure to maintain your own security. Pathetic.

No. What's fucking pathetic is that an entire section of the userbase is being told to bend over and bite the fucking pillow so another section of the userbase can go around legally trolling whomever the fuck they please with impunity. R/Ders, for reasons that are totally asinine, can't (or refuse to believe you can) get your jollies pissing on their own sandcastles and preventing others from pissing on theirs, so they demand the ability to continue piss on ours. That's what's really pathetic here.

And we're sick and fucking tired of being told that our way of playing is lesser to theirs. That we should let them piss on our sandcastles. That we should let them actively fuck us over. All we're asking is for fucking fairness.

That's really not a good point. It's like saying shop owners should cover their walls in plastic wrap so vandalism doesn't ruin their store. The problem isn't how you adapt to the vandalism because in some places it's accepted but in others frankly it shouldn't be tolerated. The RP regions don't want to have their regions screwed over because some raiders feel like pissing people off, and frankly this warrants change.

1. Maybe the raiders don't like people that think they have such a sense of entitlement that they should be exempt from a vital part of the game.

2. Hey! We should make it possible to play the game without having nations! I think having nations is annoying! Let's make nations opt out!

We earlier discussed processes by which regions could be confirmed as actual RP regions. And again with the bloody passwords. RP REGIONS DO NOT WANT TO PUT UP PASSWORDS, AS IT MAKES WELCOMING IN NEW PEOPLE MORE DIFFICULT WHEN YOU'RE WORRIED IF THAT NEW NATION IS ACTUALLY A RAIDER PUPPET INTENT ON BRINGING DOWN TUESDAY REGION FOR THE LULZ. I HAVE THIS IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS AND UNDERLINED IF YOU MISSED IT WHEN IT WAS EARLIER STATED.

3. THEN KEEP YOUR FOUNDER. YOU CAN FOUND THE REGION WITH A PUPPET AND SHARE THE PUPPET, I'VE SEEN OTHER SUCCESSFUL REGIONS THAT DO IT.

No.

The problem is that we don't want to play your game because we use regions in a different way and this entire thread has been raiders and defenders shouting us down because god forbid a few people don't want to play with them, because they're the mostest important part of the site and everything else should be subservient.

4. No. The problem is that you want to be exempted from a part of the game.

5. I think that nations in Gameplayer regions should not be allowed to see RP regions or access the RP forums because I think RPing is annoying.

Oh wait, that's absurd and conveys an absurd sense of entitlement to have the mods bend to your will so you can avoid parts of the game you don't like..

1. Except, its not the only vital part of the game. And every other part of the game is opt-in.

2. Pathetic strawman is pathetic. If you'd actually listen, maybe you'd learn that's not what we're saying at all.

3. IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK LIKE THAT FOR RP.

4. Only in the same way R/D wants to be exempted from RP. I'm tired of having to put up with the fucking double standards.

5. Maybe if RP actually affected R/D, that would be comparable to our situation. But its not, because it doesn't.

You're not the whole game, stop acting like it.

It's no wonder raiders have such a poor reputation when every one of you posting in this thread seems to think they own this website and that every part of it should cater to them.

When you play a game. You agree to play the game. There may be aspects of the game that you do not like, and you have every right to try to avoid those parts of the game. 1. But to claim that you should never have to play that part of the game that you do not like conveys a sense of entitlement. 2. If you were to be playing a board game with your friends and you insist that you should be exempt from part of the game, you would probably be called a "poor sport." I see no way that this is any different.

1. Like demanding that others be forced to play a part of the game that should, like all other aspects of the game, be totally voluntary and opt-in, doesn't convey an even bigger sense of entitlement? I mean fuck, you want to complain about our supposed sense of entitlement? Why not look in a mirror, and realize you're just the pot calling the kettle black?

2. Except, this place is less like playing Monopoly, and more like your local playground. Your analogy is shit.

You're not the whole game, stop acting like it.

It's no wonder raiders have such a poor reputation when every one of you posting in this thread seems to think they own this website and that every part of it should cater to them.

1. Neither are you. I could go off an a massive rant about how WA nations behave in RP's and make offensive generalizing comments about you because you happen to be a WA member, but I won't.

2. All he is doing is advocating status quo; not demanding admins make it easier for regions to raid.

3. I have never even touch R/D until I heard a week or so ago they were targeting us. Yet everyone here is acting like us RP people are somehow innocent players oppressed by ebul waiders, when that is not the least bit true.
4. Maybe not everyone on the RP forums wants the mods to cater to us?

1. Again, RPs are totally opt-in, and can be actively ignored. I can link posts from the staff officially backing that up. Raiding can't be ignored.

2. And we're upset because status quo is fucking shit.

3. You've been mislead if you actually think the underlined isn't the case.

4. Maybe its not 'wanting mods to cater to us'. Maybe its this little concept called fair play. Maybe we're tired of (admittedly only some, though it seems there's more mods on the R/D side than for RP)mods catering to R/D and treating us like the redheaded stepchild whenever we get shat on by R/D?

I started to go through the entire thread, but then I gave up by page six because everyone was repeating themselves. Here's some comments on early comments

___________________

Hmm, I don't know about you but this seems like an open invitation for raiding parties to do as they please

1. Dude, that's the whole point.

This kind of opt-out option is right, let the R/D remain in Gameside and allow the RPing to remain RPing without the threat of becoming the target of raiding parties, be they the Black Riders or Black Hawks. Giving the choice for regions to say "No, I don't want to partake in this" would be exceptional and would further give no excuse for regions to say there was no concrete way of stopping raiding parties as there would be with this opt-out.

2. And then everyone would opt-out and raiding would die.

The policy, whatever it would be, would simply protect RP regions from being dragged into annoying games they have no interest in participating in. RPs don't join their regions and start RPing on the raider/defender RMBs, they have no business interfering with a region that is playing a pivotal role in another aspect of nationstates.

3. Its not really that much of an interference, and if we exempt RP regions, we may as well exempt Generalite regions too. And WA/SC regions. And Causual regions. And Fandom regions. And every region in the game.

I'd definitely support this.

It's really stupid and annoying not being involved in gameplay at all, and then having your region be invaded and destroyed, with all your links relating to RPs, worldbuilding, etc. being erased.

4. Because what? You don't keep the links anywhere else?

The 'what ifs' are not relevant here, there's an infinite amount of possibilities of abusing a function that frankly hasn't even been put in beta. The point of this thread is simple, there's no reason for R/D players to vandalize RP regions, how they would implement this is not the same as the argument that they should or shouldn't. I'm not a moderator, but I'm not going to go off topic.

5. The point of the thread is for you to propose a bad idea that has a zillion holes a truck can fit through. Pointing out those holes is very relevant

But that doesn't justify anything. I'm not accusing raiders of malicious intent in the first place, I'm just pointing out that, regardless of the targeting rationale, GD was hit, GD was disrupted and now they're considering, seriously considering, walling themselves up with a password to prevent this from happening again - which runs entirely contrary to their modus operandi and their basic ethos since their foundation. Regions play different roles for RPers - they're hubs of activity, of cohesion, of teaching and learning between the new and old and a whole host of different things. The fact that raiders target regions randomly doesn't change the fact that those raids affect the targeted regions.

6. That is their problem, not ours. No one said that you had to overreact to a TAG

As a result, changing the WFE is significantly more important than it is for an established gameplay organization, which organize almost exclusively on IRC and on off-site forums.

7. Gameplay regions put a lot of effort into their WFEs, so you're talking out of your ass. Solution: Backups (as in, saving a copy of the code somewhere). Or, you know, things like the Wayback Machine or whatever. Boom. Solution that doesn't kill raiding.

Invaders do what they do, specifically because they want to attack regions who don't want to be invaded. They take no pleasure from attacking "warzones" - regions meant to be invaded.

8. The problem with Warzones remains the lack of challenge, Unibot. Defenders never defend them, so there's much less challenge, and there's no 'live-fire' value as a training exercise either

I have absolutely no doubt that if Military Gameplay was completely consensual on the part of all parties that it would die within a few months -- because invaders wouldn't care and defenders wouldn't care. Not saying that's a bad thing, I'm just saying that's what would happen.

9. Not everyone who raids does it to bother people, Unibot, whatever you want to think. But the R/D game would die because no one would voluntarily open themselves up to being raided. UIAF (for example) does not raid to bother people - it raids for training, demonstration of power, a source of community and activity, and to advance foreign policy goals. Bothering people is not the objective, and is not the incentive for the militaries of regions that are primarily political in nature.

The mods and admins have said they do not want to go back to the days of judging invasions - a la the old griefing rules.

10. Leaving aside the massive workload it would give our unpaid, volunteer mods, there's also the issue that judging is filled with about a million potholes and traps. Its a veritiable minefeild that no sane mod wants to walk into. (And yes, I'm mixing metaphors somewhat)

First of all, stop casually referring to invading as the same thing as defending by bunching it together as "R/D". Defenders don't like that regions are being exploited in the way that they are - that's why most of us defend.

No, they exploit communities instead.

Gameplay doesn't need Militarization.

Wrong (as usual), Unibot.

What makes Gameplay Gameplay, at the end of the day, is R/D. If you got rid of R/D, the whole concept of Gameplay would start to fall apart.

Yes, even as a Gameplayer, I can see why RP regions get peeved when they get raided. However, an alternative to peeving off RPers is to...completely destroy a whole community, essentially? Sorry if that seems...off, to me.

You shouldn't have to be "forced" into it, but you need to come up with a way of facilitating that because I'm damned if I can think of one.

This. Totally this.

1. Shouldn't be.

2. Bullshit. As long as people love trolling other regions, and as long as the mods deem it legal (which it will be), R/D will always exist. And even making it to where R/D is purely opt-in won't stop people from wanting to troll other regions. R/D will still thrive. All the "ZOMG I WON'T BE ABLE TO TROLL OTHER REGIONS" butthurt is just a kneejerk reaction. I find it incredibly hard to believe there hasn't been similar kneejerk reactions to all the changes to R/D mechanics. R/D survived and even thrived despite them, and will continue to do so even if its purely opt-in. The only difference is that now raiders will be raiding raiders. Hell, its got a shitton of potential. Raiders form alliances, ganging up on rivals, forming alliances to help defend themselves, etc. Yall wanted some sort of combat mechanic to the game from the start, right? I mean, after all, that's what started this whole R/D bullshit in the first place. Only difference is that now, it'd be even more petty than it currently is, which seems to be the only appeal to raiding, outside of trolling. And the best part is, nobody who doesn't want to participate would be forced into it. Everybody fucking wins.

3. Except those that want to R/D. Again, it won't just survive, it'd fucking thrive.

4. Files get lost. Still, we shouldn't have to fucking deal with what is literally legalized trolling unless we want to take part in it. And if we wanted to fucking take part in it, we'd be involved in it already.

5. Like anything an R/Der has said here didn't have a zillion holes in it, either. I mean, for fuck's sakes, we've got multiple posts outlining how every 'solution' somebody from R/D has proposed either won't work, or is just as bad, if not, WORSE, than status quo.

6. Except RP region destruction literally kills RPs. Hell, even taking over said region and returning it a few hours later (even if they leave it just as it was when it was taken) can kill RPs.

7. See above.

8. See 2.

9. Which is why in order to participate in R/D, under what I said in 2, your region wouldn't be allowed to be exempt from raiding. If you want to raid, you'd have to only target other regions that want to raid.

10. And none of what has been proposed here would revert back to that system.

If the R/D game relies on their being a constant pool of people who genuinely don't want to be raided, and who would be forced into the game against their wishes, I don't really see what makes it that good a game.

Indeed. If you're not willing to take what you're dishing out, then you shouldn't fucking be dishing.

If the R/D game relies on their being a constant pool of people who genuinely don't want to be raided, and who would be forced into the game against their wishes, I don't really see what makes it that good a game.

It's popular, and now that Max has seen the success, he's not going to get rid of it for our sake.

As I said before, it feels we come second and are told to just "deal with it".

Well, if that is really that case, I say screw that.

Well, it really seems to be the opinion of the entire R/D community (yes, Uni, I'm even labelling you defenders under this) that RP 'comes second' and is 'subservient to R/D'. Max has been quoted, IIRC, as saying that RP is just as legitimate as R/D. Logically, this means that one can't and shouldn't be subject to the whims of the other, or else the one being subjected to the whims of the other isn't as legitimate. And right now, every other aspect of NS is being treated as subservient to R/D. Which runs counter to Max's very words that all aspects are just as legitimate.

There's a point. It might have been said already, I don't know.

If someone can opt out of being raided because they're in a "RP region", it'll create a precedent where anyone can opt out of raiding if they want to. Regions will start being tagged to avoid raiding. Other groups will complain. "If RP regions can avoid raiding, why can't we? We don't want to be raided either."

This would lead to a sudden rush where almost all potential raiding targets disappear. This would totally ruin the Raider/Defender functions of NS.

Raiding/Defending is an important aspect of this site, and has been here since the creation of the site. You shouldn't get rid of it just because your sore about your region being raided.

Play the game, use some tricks to protect your region. It's not like your region being raided is a big deal anyway.

Read above and below for why you're wrong on the underlined statements.

This doesn't mean we shouldn't take General out either.

/joke

You know, I was sitting here thinking, what if we all went to a R/D thread and broke out a RP game? We could form a plot and start posting. But then, you know, we'd get slapped with a newspaper for spamming their threads because it would be "not the right forum" or "off topic". We'd be reported for going to their threads uninvited and engaging in activity that was against the purpose of that thread.

Hmmm.

I actually pointed this out in the Excalibur OOC. I find it to be an incredibly stupid double standard that R/D can fuck with RP, and yet RP can't fuck with R/D.

Anyone considering spamming to "prove a point" can expect a forum ban as a result. Swith Witherward, The Black Dragon Empire etc. - you are not helping your case.

Crystal Spires - please refrain from re-posting that list, you're bordering on spamming.

I'd like to publicly express disapproval with regards to the underlined. The R/Ders seem to not be reading the thread (which, given its size, is understandable) to see why what they're telling us to do is not an option. So why can't we collect a list of all the reasons why the suggestions don't work for us, and post it whenever somebody posts an idea on that list that's been shot down? From here, it seems like you're trying to suppress our ability to make a rebuttal via threatening moderator action, which gives impressions of a pro-R/D bias on your part (which is counterproductive).

Which will be controlled by the WA SC which forces regions again to join the WA when they should not be forced to. ICly it's untenable for most nations.

Tying a region's autonomy to the security council is basically saying the region is owned by the R/D community when it belongs to the RP community.

Indeed. Everybody keeps saying we're not being forced to participate in R/D. But all of their suggestions and all the proposed compromise solutions thus far submitted inherently involve forcing us to participate in R/D.

read 3-6.

I agree that these P2TM RPs seem like something that are especially quite vulnerable to invasions and I would recommend pushing for in-game recognition of how they work - to help lessen the blow of how much an invasion can disrupt them.

I don't see how a password makes a RP region any more unfriendly than a passworded Non-RP region - a password always disrupts the population flow.

Because passwords create, in the newcomers' mind, an aura of "Members only" and "No n00bz allowed". That inherently discourages them from wanting to join the group and learn.

*sigh* The issue still remains that, if a RP region is invaded, we have to put any discussion we were having in the RMB (because of ejections and general disruption) on hold for the sake of this stupid little R/D game we're being forced into.

That's the same as any region, unfortunately, Esternial. That's exactly why I defend - because I don't like that invaders can waltz into a region and disrupt what it is going on in those regions -- community discussions, roleplay discussions, activities etc.

You're portraying defenders as people who like or benefit off your unfortunate circumstances ("stupid little R/D game"). We understand you don't want to be invaded - that's why we defend!

And coming to you for help inherently throws us into R/D. That. Should. Not. Have. To. Happen.

I think Spires is telling people is that they don't even want to be dragged into the R/D game in the first place.

That includes both raiders and defenders.

But defenders don't come unless the raiders do, so all that needs to be addressed is the raider aspect.

We realize this. However, all the proposed 'solutions' coming from the R/D side, and even intended compromise solutions, involve forcing ourselves to participate in R/D. And as currently stands, we either we go to defenders, or we abuse the raider tag so that raiders avoid us (at which point, we'd have to conduct token raids anyways). BOTH inherently involve participating in R/D. Its equivalent to forcing a vegan to eat a double bacon cheeseburger. While there are certainly differences in motives, the end result is still the same. Raiders shove the double bacon cheeseburgers down our throats for the pure sadistic pleasure of trolling, and defenders shove them down our throats because "C'mon, try it, you'll like it". Either way you cut it, its still forcing us to do something we don't want.

Having hundreds of defenders in a region is equally as disruptive to RP as invaders.

We don't want you there. Can you not understand this?

The invasion game is always going to always exist. What you're asking for is for you to be excused from it, while so many other people also don't want to be invaded and won't be excused -- that's silly. We're all in this together - which is why I defend. I'm sorry if I'm disruptive, but I imagine its better to have defenders, than to have invaders without them.

Then you're effectively no better than raiders, for the reasons listed above.

Roleplay is also apart of Gameplay though given that logic. You have a region that's as much of a "gameplay" element as many of the so-called "Gameplay" regions you're condemning to invasions.

It's an element of the game, but we're not using it for that. We're using them for our own means, thus taking no part in Gameplay.

And unless someone creates "RP Communities" as an alternative to using Regions, then that's what we'll have to settle for.

I feel that that would be the best option, so long as it incorporates those features we find useful in regions. Which, unless they also add other features specifically for us, also comes across to me as little more than a R/D exempt region. Not that I'm opposed to it at all. Just pointing out that there's little difference between the two.

I agree with Mahaj's idea entirely, but here people go complaining about the current problem while ignoring the solution. At the current time, Raiders can walk in, banject you all and then own your region (especially with Imperialists), then what do you do? Where's your safety and security? Raiders and Defenders are bad, don't get me wrong. I do both in fact. I'm a big Role-player on the offsite message boards, being President of Nysa and in the Caprecia-Nysa ring of RP. I'm also running for Prime Minister there (hopefully) yet I'm sitting here as the Chief of Foreign Affairs for the UDL. At the current time, the game cannot be separate.

So Mahaj still has the best idea here, no?

If that happens, then why don't you just make a new region with an active founder and take away WA delegate controls?

Why is this such an issue?

Because the way we use our regions, delegates help or even act in place of founders. Our regions need to be active (and, obviously, under our control) for our RPs to survive. It obviously should go without saying that founders can't be on all the time, and often, founders can get caught up in RL concerns. Delegates having control means that the community doesn't go kaput whenever the founder is offline. THAT'S why its an issue.

You /are/ able to opt out of it. I opted out of it years ago, and haven't been bothered by it - and that was pre-modship, for any doubting that it works. That's my point. You're pushing for something you already have - but with your additional specifications.

I'm having a difficult time understanding what is so impossible to grasp about that rather salient point.

I think the major stumbling block is that the "soft" opt-out on the part of an RP region wasn't respected by raiders. Hence, the current frustration and talk of ways about how to ensure that people who want to be left alone, are.

Indeed.

RP'ers can be infinitely worse.

Worse than actively ruining an entire group's method of playing the game?

RP can be ignored. Its totally opt-in. Getting raided can't, and has no real opt-out that doesn't also hinder RP groups accomplishing their mission.

Also, what part of raiding is not essentially legalized trolling? Why do people raid? To set back the progress of other in this game! How is this not trolling? Especially when the region attacked has lost IC content which is considered to have value. I recognize the RP content we have in the forums, but the forums are not the game itself! The game itself is the development of your nation through the completing of issues. The forums, if I'm correct, were simply add-ons to enhance, but not protect gameplay. The WA wasn't always around because from what I can tell, Max was wanting players to communicate and act out somewhat real-life applications of politics and government in a safe online zone to do so.

1. Have you seen some of the RP forums? Have you seen how some people RP? We can be infinitely worse than raiders, and operate our roleplay with far more malice intent than just a few laughs and giggles of raiding.

2. Raiders are just there to have fun, why does everyone keep demonizing them?

1. Yes. And all of it can be ignored. Even though the claim that RP at its worst is literally worse than raiding at its worst is blatantly bullshit.

2. Because raiding can't be ignored. Shitty RP can. This should be obvious.

So, please correct me if I'm wrong: you are implying it's their fault because they don't want to use a password and want to have a delegate with access to regional controls to take over part of the administration?

It's at least partially their fault if they have 50+ nations in the region and just one endo on the delegate. It's called painting a bullseye on your back.

And I swear to god if anyone equates what I just said to blaming rape victims for 'dressing like sluts' or whatever, I'm going to punt you right back in NSG where you belong. >_>

Except, it rather is victim blaming.

1. WFE? That's it? 2. Man, announcements can be made in a number of ways as well. 3. Mass tg's. 4. Notes on the RMB. 5. It really isn't as key as some might like to think. 6. I still haven't grasped this 'co-op' thing on the forums either. Either you're the OP, or you aren't. It's not as though we can track that sort of thing as mods. Been running things solo, as have most of the folks I rp with, for the entire time I've been on. 7. Granted, doesn't mean y'all can't do it, but hey - its additional complications that are not, in fact, necessary to participation. Much like some of the kerfluffle here.

1. Not all of it.

2. But not as effectively.

3. I think I can safely speak for most of the P2TM community (if not most of all the RP communities here) when I say that unlike what seems to be the stance of most R/Ders, we don't see the point in wasting our time with scripts/API and/or wasting our money on TG stamps. It makes no sense to us. We have better things to spend our time doing (namely RPs, among other things), and better things to spend our money on, assuming we even have the money and Paypal account required.

4. Which can get drowned out. Which is the same as the reason you said you don't like the idea of RMB RPing. Not to mention said RMB notes can get suppressed if the region gets raided.

5. Except it is.

6. It allows the RP to continue if/when one of the OPs isn't avaliable.

7. Except it does make it much easier. Just like the "kerfluffle" here. Having RP groups use regions to organize is the most workable and most convenient solution to the problems with organizing on here. Until the admins put in a new mechanic (either by exempting RP regions from R/D, or creating a region alternative specifically for RP, or whatever) specifically to make it easier for RP groups to organize ourselves without having to worry about being trolled by raiders, this debate will constantly continue. That isn't a threat, but rather a prediction. A prediction based in current trends, much like your local weather forecast for tomorrow's weather.

If I can't get an opt out from your crap, then I'm going to fight you, clan-waz style.

Clan-waz? what is that?

And I'd like an opt out from your crap - that is, people like you trying to destroy the part of the game I play. At most, we disrupt Rpers with raids. Your proposal would destroy R/D. Not equivalent.

Except it wouldn't destroy R/D, as I pointed out above.

This is one of the most valid points raised this entire thread, and yet there was not one response to it? Please, oh wise raiders, tell me why this is, that you can force your game on us, but we can't lift a finger to you with our game? Something there doesn't quite add up.

1. We can't force you to play our game. 2. You don't even have to recognize that raider delegates exist. 3. You could even have offsite forums (gasp!) where you store all necessary RP information which the raiders couldn't touch. Them you'd be able to RP freely (although no one was stopping you from doing that before) and not worry about R/D. 4. Alternatively, you could have two or three endos on your WAD and be safe from the Black Riders forever.

1. Except you have, and you are.

2. Blatant bullshit.

3. Again, offsites aren't as active, and aren't as readily avaliable. To say nothing of the fact that it comes across as too involved for newcomers. Newcomers to an RP group (especially ones that just joined NS) don't want to join half a dozen different OSFs just to get involved with a community here.

4. Bullshit. Because if that were true, then every region would do it, and no region would be able to be raided. It would ruin R/D.

There's a fair question that's been asked several times:

Why do raiders feel they have to deface everything on waltzing in and taking over where they aren't wanted? For that matter, where's the challenge in going after unprepared regions? It does often come off as a situation of some jock walking along the beach bragging about how many others he managed to kick sand into the faces of.

It's not my thing, I don't get the appeal, simply understand many of the rules that govern it. Might be nice to have some insight, especially considering some of the comments along the lines of 'the RPers are griping, lets get 'em' that have been made. Smacks of griefing and such right there, no?

1. The heart of it is being able to do something against another's wishes. Getting a raise out of natives or defenders. 2. It simply isn't fun if someone isn't pissed by the raids, that's why the attempt to have Warzones as official R/D areas failed.

My assumption of the bigger picture is that some players have fun doing that (raiders), some players have fun preventing that (defenders) and combined more players are able to have fun being able to R/D then those being intruded by R/D (given the various precautions available). Not everyone is happy, but there is a net gain.

So the game allows it, with some regulation to stop it going too far.

1. So it is basically legalized trolling.

2. Why can't raiders get rises out of each other raiding each other? I mean, what's the difference between raiding another raiding region and raiding a region that doesn't want to give half a flying shit about R/D? Is there not just as much cause for butthurt by pissing off the natives of a raiding region than a non-R/D region? And don't give us the "raider unity" crap, because that doesn't fly any more than the "we only raid founderless regions" crap.

[SquareDisc City]

2. Why can't raiders get rises out of each other raiding each other?

I'd guess it's because raiders know better than anyone else what it takes to protect a region from raiding, and are willing to ensure it. I've no doubt raider groups would raid each other if they could.

[Grenartia]

2. Why can't raiders get rises out of each other raiding each other?

I'd guess it's because raiders know better than anyone else what it takes to protect a region from raiding, and are willing to ensure it. I've no doubt raider groups would raid each other if they could.

You'd think it would reflect more on their 'uber raiding skills' to successfully raid another raiding region.

[Ruzan]

That's actually one of my NS peeves. There's no way to strike back at the raiders, however obnoxious they are, because their own regions are Foundered Fortresses. I'd love to see that changed if it could be done without opening up non-GP regions more than they already are.

[Morrdh]

I should point out that I kindly asked TBR to cease harassing Minoa the region after this incident, even though there was an active founder, and necessary security features were already in place, such as WAD access being off. Yet they ignored it and persisted. How does it relate to this? It is causing concern for those who have already taken the necessary measures. I know it is not an excuse for a blanket opt-out feature, but there has to be a review of checks and balances.

Actually, this is an excellent example of what I've been talking about, that Delegate Controls being off makes you safe from all the consequences of a raid. TBR hit the region and then could do absolutely nothing with it. No WFE changes were made, no RMB posts were suppressed, no embassies where closed, literally nothing happened other than they were in the region and they became delegate in an utterly worthless and futile gesture on their part. They didn't even leave any posts on the RMB.

Who cares, even from a RPing stand point, that they became the delegate in Minoa? The Controls were off, TBR couldn't, and didn't, do anything to that region. It's not even worth asking them to stop, what they did was pointless. They just did it simply to show that they could.

If anything it just shows we need an alternative to the WAD like the proposed Regional Officers, tis a way of handling the day-to-day stuff without having to relay on a Founder being active.

Seen 'on just refound the region if your Founder goes inactive' suggested a few times, the issue I have with this is that there is nothing to say the new Founder won't go CTE and requiring another refounding.

To be frank if the R/D stuff was kept amongst the R/D community then we wouldn't have to be seeking ways of making sure people who want to be excluded from R/D are excluded. I mean if raiding was kept amongst the R/D community then I and quite possibly a fair number of others wouldn't be having the issues with it as we do now.

[Andacantra]

I'd guess it's because raiders know better than anyone else what it takes to protect a region from raiding, and are willing to ensure it. I've no doubt raider groups would raid each other if they could.

You'd think it would reflect more on their 'uber raiding skills' to successfully raid another raiding region.

It's actually more of a cultural thing - not only are most raiding regions foundered with non-exec (so technically pointless to raid), raiding another raiding region is seen as well, simply not on, for various reasons.

I would like to drop in my thoughts on why some (not all, but at least me personally) raid. Personally, for me, it's about what happens around, during, and after update. Prepping, planning, watching the clock as it ticks down to jump and often those raids which go horrendously wrong for reasons completely non-NS related (computer failures, internet failures, MSN deciding that sending messages is optional), and dealing with that. Holding a region against liberation attempts is also /bloody/ good fun - watching, waiting, and then everyone showing up at once. The chatting to, and friendly rivalry (at least for me) between myself and defenders also is a big factor in it for me. I'll admit to having done things to get a rise out of people - R/Ders, though (going from leading a raid and trying to stop a lib attempt to being part of a liberation attempt on another region within the same update certainly gets some fun responses). The region-building element, which doesn't have to involve R/D, is also something I can get good fun out of.

It's not all about getting a rise out of natives, not for everyone. There's certainly an element of it for a chunk of raiders, but a combination of the above contributes in varying amounts for everyone. The point that with the R/D Summit changes, RPers and other natives will have plenty of tools with which to defend themselves is a good one and one that I hope is taken on board.

[Delmonte]

You'd think it would reflect more on their 'uber raiding skills' to successfully raid another raiding region.

It's actually more of a cultural thing - not only are most raiding regions foundered with non-exec (so technically pointless to raid), raiding another raiding region is seen as well, simply not on, for various reasons.

I would like to drop in my thoughts on why some (not all, but at least me personally) raid. Personally, for me, it's about what happens around, during, and after update. Prepping, planning, watching the clock as it ticks down to jump and often those raids which go horrendously wrong for reasons completely non-NS related (computer failures, internet failures, MSN deciding that sending messages is optional), and dealing with that. Holding a region against liberation attempts is also /bloody/ good fun - watching, waiting, and then everyone showing up at once. The chatting to, and friendly rivalry (at least for me) between myself and defenders also is a big factor in it for me. I'll admit to having done things to get a rise out of people - R/Ders, though (going from leading a raid and trying to stop a lib attempt to being part of a liberation attempt on another region within the same update certainly gets some fun responses). The region-building element, which doesn't have to involve R/D, is also something I can get good fun out of.

It's not all about getting a rise out of natives, not for everyone. There's certainly an element of it for a chunk of raiders, but a combination of the above contributes in varying amounts for everyone. The point that with the R/D Summit changes, RPers and other natives will have plenty of tools with which to defend themselves is a good one and one that I hope is taken on board.

If RPers could come to a gentleman's agreement with the various raiding groups that their links, maps, and various world-building devices would survive a raid unscathed, that would eliminate 99% of our problems, it seems, with our regions being raided. Can we make this happen? And obviously this is not directed specifically at you, but whoever can answer it. Because this sort of agreement would solve the main problem we have with raiding without decreasing the adrenaline rush for you. Because what does it really add to the raid to delete our precious, precious links?

[Anemos Major]

If RPers could come to a gentleman's agreement with the various raiding groups that their links, maps, and various world-building devices would survive a raid unscathed, that would eliminate 99% of our problems, it seems, with our regions being raided. Can we make this happen? And obviously this is not directed specifically at you, but whoever can answer it. Because this sort of agreement would solve the main problem we have with raiding without decreasing the adrenaline rush for you. Because what does it really add to the raid to delete our precious, precious links?

Whether we need to come to a gentleman's agreement in the first case is made questionable by the fact that there hasn't been a single good explanation defending the conduct of raiders within raided regions, something that I'm bringing up for the third time without a single answer from any raider, or anybody with a working understanding of what raiders do. RMB post suppression, RMB harassment and griefing, WFE wiping, embassy cancellation; from petty vandalism to considerable annoyances to veiled threats on RMBs that have convinced people in the past to leave their regions, is there actually a valid reason why NSers have to suffer through this somewhat excruciating facet of raiding when the act of being raided is already a mattering of suffering through for the most part for those involved? What we're not proposing is the complete abolishment of raiding, not by any standards, but it would be nice if the members opposite could make note of the fact that they cannot, in fact, have their cake and eat it.

[The Fanboyists]

Okay, R/D'ers, we understand that Defenders exist to help people who don't want to be raided, and not all Raiders are just looking to annoy the natives. We get that. I think most RP'ers aren't trying to argue that the R/D subgame is somehow less-valid than ours. What we're asking for is a way to keep ourselves insulated from that aspect of gameplay that negatively affects us.

As mentioned before, the key difference between RP and R/D in a gameplay sense is that RP is completely optional, and only affects your nation if you let it. R/D has the potential to affect your nation and region, whether or not it was something you 1) knew existed coming in to NS (which I personally didn't, six-odd years ago) and/or 2) wanted to take any part in. The fact is, while R/D is an aspect of Gameplay, it isn't the only part of Gameplay.

Just like RP, it's a subgame within what someone else called (IMO the best analogy so far) the larger playground of NationStates. To run with that metaphor, RP'ers are the kids playing wall-ball or something. In a RL playground, those kids should have the reasonable expectation that a group of other kids aren't going to come over, knock them all over, drive them off, steal and deflate their ball, and then run off to do it to someone else.

We get that there are already reasonably-effective countermeasures against getting Raided. Seriously, we do. And we get that, as Dread Lady said before, that because of where the subgames intersect, we'll have to be the ones to safeguard ourselves against getting Raided, either through gentlemen's agreements or through those countermeasures. What most of us are asking for is a way to make those countermeasures a little more permanent and a little less fallible than they currently are (see: Transferable Foundership, which North Polish Union, in particular, for some reason keeps insisting will destroy R/D).

What are the arguments against strengthening those protections I've heard?

The first one is that it will destroy R/D because everyone will decided to opt out of R/D, and that because we're butthurt, we're trying to ruin the R/D community's fun. To that I say:

1) You're acting like people being able to opt out of something that is not explicitly mentioned as part of the game when you register for NationStates (because when I signed up, or created puppets, R/D is not mentioned as part of NS, just like RP isn't, either) is a bad thing. But beyond that:

2) You're acting like everyone already uses the existing countermeasures (password protection, non-exec WA delegate, founders). This is clearly not the case, because the existing ones, if everyone used them, would make raiding pretty freaking hard if not impossible otherwise. So clearly, there's no shortage of targets who either don't care enough to insulate themselves from R/D, or who actually enjoy playing that part of the game. So unless the existing countermeasures have "destroyed R/D", there's no reason to think making those same protections more durable will do that, either.

3) You're acting like R/D and RP are completely analogous. As I mentioned before, although both are valid in that they're fun for groups of people, the way people derive their fun from them are somewhat different. Also as mentioned before (numerous times), the fact is that RP is 100% optional. Even RP'ers don't have to be affected by something that happens in an RP if they aren't okay with it. However, there is no option to completely opt out of R/D (which, again, due to areas of overlap, isn't possible for practical reasons). The situation is not analogous. The only way it would be is if things that got RP'ed could somehow affect non-RP'ing nations without their consent. And believe me, if the R/D community as a whole were forced to RP to cover from getting screwed over by RP'ers, we would definitely be hearing at least this much complaining about how unfair it was.

4) As it is, we're resigned to having to devote at least some peripheral attention to a part of the game we don't find enjoyable, so how is it fair that you demand that we take up more time to do that, away from the subgame that this community actually stays for?

The second thing I hear is to the effect of "well, you can [password protect/move things off-site/back-up copies] if you're so worried about it."

1) Those are smart things to do, yes, especially backing up copies. That said, that should be a smart option for cautious RP'ers. We shouldn't be essentially required to do it because if we don't, the Black Riders will come in and delete our stuff and we'll lose it.

2a) Password Protection. Password protection, while it does insulate a region to R/D to an extent, can be beaten by sufficiently-motivated/bored Raiders. We don't want to have to worry, when recruiting people or accepting applicants, that they might be Trojan Horsing for Raider friends who are then going to come in and deface our stuff.

2b) Password Protection should also be a precautionary action. However, while it insulates regions from R/D, it also insulates them from a flow of newbies who might be looking to join a community. Application processes and off-site forums can be frustrating and intimidating to new players, and it means that RP regions are forced to choose between being able to easily bring in new players or be vulnerable to attack (again, from a subgame that we want no part of).

3) Moving off-site: like password protection, it's a solid precautionary measure against getting Raided. Like password protection, it can be intimidating and frustrating to new players, making it harder for RP regions to sustain themselves by bringing in new people. Beyond this, off-site RPing is significantly more-insular, limited to your region-mates and a handful of others. A lot of RPers, however, like being able to RP with other members of the RP community who may not be in their region. They shouldn't have to choose between getting to play with who they want and regional security.

The recently-mentioned possibility of a "gentlemen's agreement" that RP regions be left alone.

It's true, this would address the biggest practical problem that RP'ers have with the R/D subgame. And it's an effective solution, for as long as R/D'ers keep to the agreement. The basic problem I can foresee with this is that RP'ers don't have any deterrent abilities to help keep some of the less-scrupulous Raiders from violating the agreement for shits and giggles. Essentially (as I understand it), the agreement would probably be that RP regions won't be raided in exchange for... what? If it's based on altruism, all it takes is a few less-altruistic Raiders deciding the agreement doesn't apply to them to completely destroy that agreement, and RP'ers will be left with the same problem. But the only recourse we have is to complain on here.

In short, any such agreement still leaves RP'ers entirely at the Raiding community's mercy, which is precisely what the main problem with the status quo is; while it's a viable temporary solution, it just scoots the problem further down the road without actually fixing anything. So while such an agreement would be useful while a more-permanent solution is worked out, the fact is that that agreement by its nature will either only temporarily necessary, or it'll only be temporarily effective.

Sorry this turned out so long.

[Delmonte]

It's true, this would address the biggest practical problem that RP'ers have with the R/D subgame. And it's an effective solution, for as long as R/D'ers keep to the agreement. The basic problem I can foresee with this is that RP'ers don't have any deterrent abilities to help keep some of the less-scrupulous Raiders from violating the agreement for shits and giggles. Essentially (as I understand it), the agreement would probably be that RP regions won't be raided in exchange for... what? If it's based on altruism, all it takes is a few less-altruistic Raiders deciding the agreement doesn't apply to them to completely destroy that agreement, and RP'ers will be left with the same problem. But the only recourse we have is to complain on here.

In short, any such agreement still leaves RP'ers entirely at the Raiding community's mercy, which is precisely what the main problem with the status quo is; while it's a viable temporary solution, it just scoots the problem further down the road without actually fixing anything. So while such an agreement would be useful while a more-permanent solution is worked out, the fact is that that agreement by its nature will either only temporarily necessary, or it'll only be temporarily effective.
Sorry this turned out so long.

Obviously we would need to provide a consideration for them in order for them to agree. And I can think of only one thing we have that they would desire enough to sit at a table with us and that would be... our manpower. Needless to say, the thought is unsavory and we have to consider whether or not that sort of thing is something we're even willing to entertain in order to protect what matters to us. Are we too principled to pose such a suggestion or is our writing our principle. I'm unsure, but I think it's something worth considering. And to be perfectly clear: Writing this post made me feel slimy all over.

[The Fanboyists]

It's true, this would address the biggest practical problem that RP'ers have with the R/D subgame. And it's an effective solution, for as long as R/D'ers keep to the agreement. The basic problem I can foresee with this is that RP'ers don't have any deterrent abilities to help keep some of the less-scrupulous Raiders from violating the agreement for shits and giggles. Essentially (as I understand it), the agreement would probably be that RP regions won't be raided in exchange for... what? If it's based on altruism, all it takes is a few less-altruistic Raiders deciding the agreement doesn't apply to them to completely destroy that agreement, and RP'ers will be left with the same problem. But the only recourse we have is to complain on here.

In short, any such agreement still leaves RP'ers entirely at the Raiding community's mercy, which is precisely what the main problem with the status quo is; while it's a viable temporary solution, it just scoots the problem further down the road without actually fixing anything. So while such an agreement would be useful while a more-permanent solution is worked out, the fact is that that agreement by its nature will either only temporarily necessary, or it'll only be temporarily effective.
Sorry this turned out so long.

Obviously we would need to provide a consideration for them in order for them to agree. And I can think of only one thing we have that they would desire enough to sit at a table with us and that would be... our manpower. Needless to say, the thought is unsavory and we have to consider whether or not that sort of thing is something we're even willing to entertain in order to protect what matters to us. Are we too principled to pose such a suggestion or is our writing our principle. I'm unsure, but I think it's something worth considering. And to be perfectly clear: Writing this post made me feel slimy all over.

I want to make sure I'm understanding correctly: offering our manpower to the Raiders? While I suppose that would be an (incredibly-unpleasant, but possible) option, could maybe working out a more stable arrangement with Defenders be workable?

I get what you're saying, and I'm sure it would be acceptable to other members of our community, but I'd personally rather leave NS or just take my chances with the status quo than compromise with Raiders if it means having to actually work with them just to guarantee our safety. But I also understand that I don't speak for everyone, and others might find that more palatable.

[Esternial]

If RPers could come to a gentleman's agreement with the various raiding groups that their links, maps, and various world-building devices would survive a raid unscathed, that would eliminate 99% of our problems, it seems, with our regions being raided. Can we make this happen? And obviously this is not directed specifically at you, but whoever can answer it. Because this sort of agreement would solve the main problem we have with raiding without decreasing the adrenaline rush for you. Because what does it really add to the raid to delete our precious, precious links?

Whether we need to come to a gentleman's agreement in the first case is made questionable by the fact that there hasn't been a single good explanation defending the conduct of raiders within raided regions, something that I'm bringing up for the third time without a single answer from any raider, or anybody with a working understanding of what raiders do. RMB post suppression, RMB harassment and griefing, WFE wiping, embassy cancellation; from petty vandalism to considerable annoyances to veiled threats on RMBs that have convinced people in the past to leave their regions, is there actually a valid reason why NSers have to suffer through this somewhat excruciating facet of raiding when the act of being raided is already a mattering of suffering through for the most part for those involved? What we're not proposing is the complete abolishment of raiding, not by any standards, but it would be nice if the members opposite could make note of the fact that they cannot, in fact, have their cake and eat it.

I'd actually support a system that replaces the R/D games and makes more sense with Regions in mind, takes more effort by making it more complex and hopefully increases the fun.

Add more mechanics that make the term "Region" actually make sense. The "associations" that [violet] once mentioned may be the first step towards revolutionising R/D from just a game where some people get off by either ruining people's days and some others by playing the white knights (I'm not speaking in general here) to something more complex that may involve a more complex progress to both invade and liberate regions.

Stuff like Empires, Alliances, etc. may open up a whole new path for the Game itself, which might also increase the amount of participants in this "new game", whereas now it mainly encompasses people who can be bothered to use the updates and employ timing to instantly command the fate of a region that isn't sufficiently protected. It should be more challenging than that. I'm thinking sieges that take longer than a minute after a game update and covert actions.

That's my view on the matter at this point in time. For now, I'd suggest waiting to see what the current updates to R/D will offer.

[Evil Wolf]

To be frank if the R/D stuff was kept amongst the R/D community then we wouldn't have to be seeking ways of making sure people who want to be excluded from R/D are excluded. I mean if raiding was kept amongst the R/D community then I and quite possibly a fair number of others wouldn't be having the issues with it as we do now.

2. Why can't raiders get rises out of each other raiding each other? I mean, what's the difference between raiding another raiding region and raiding a region that doesn't want to give half a flying shit about R/D? Is there not just as much cause for butthurt by pissing off the natives of a raiding region than a non-R/D region? And don't give us the "raider unity" crap, because that doesn't fly any more than the "we only raid founderless regions" crap.

The fundamental lack of understanding regarding GP by some of the RPers in this thread is absolutely breath taking. Raiders invading other active raiders is practically unheard of, it doesn't happen, ever. I can't even think of a single time where two raider groups declared a war on each other or attacked each others home regions. It just simply doesn't happen. Raider Unity is not some bullshit phrase we sling around to piss off Role Players, it's something that's very real, a common cause that unites us all and forms a general truce amongst all raiders against our common enemies, Defenders.

Raiders can, and do, raid Defender regions, we usually make a point of hitting them. However, there are not enough of those regions to make it into a very interesting game. To highlight my point, the Warzones didn't just fail because they are worthless, empty, ADMIN created regions no one gives a damn about, it's also because attacking the same targets over and over and over again is boring. Very boring. Even outside of Nationstates in other games to do so would be boring.

On another note, RPers don't have even the slightest right to call us "trolls" unless they've first lead a raid themselves. Raiding can be extremely challenging, depending on the goals you set out for yourself, and a very rewarding experience. Nothing like taking some huge 150+ nation region after a month or so of prep work, coordination, recruitment, troop training, and intelligence gathering. You really get to see all the fruits of your labors come together. If that's trolling, its some of the most elaborate trolling in gaming history.

However, the RPers here ask all these questions, like "Why can't raiders just raid other raiders forever?" and yet I'm not seeing them truly interested in the answers. I can pretty much guarantee the person who asked the previous question will respond to my answer by utterly dismissing it. This thread doesn't seem to be about RPers and GPers comprising or getting a better sense of what makes the other tick. What this thread has largely become, from my perspective, is a few RPers , not all mind you, demanding to ADMIN that they get exactly what they want, 100% of it, without compromise, and other parts of the game be damned so long as RP gets whatever it wants.

To me, that sort of attitude is not very productive, and will likely not gain RPers even a single one of their wants.

[Delmonte]

Obviously we would need to provide a consideration for them in order for them to agree. And I can think of only one thing we have that they would desire enough to sit at a table with us and that would be... our manpower. Needless to say, the thought is unsavory and we have to consider whether or not that sort of thing is something we're even willing to entertain in order to protect what matters to us. Are we too principled to pose such a suggestion or is our writing our principle. I'm unsure, but I think it's something worth considering. And to be perfectly clear: Writing this post made me feel slimy all over.

I want to make sure I'm understanding correctly: offering our manpower to the Raiders? While I suppose that would be an (incredibly-unpleasant, but possible) option, could maybe working out a more stable arrangement with Defenders be workable?

I get what you're saying, and I'm sure it would be acceptable to other members of our community, but I'd personally rather leave NS or just take my chances with the status quo than compromise with Raiders if it means having to actually work with them just to guarantee our safety. But I also understand that I don't speak for everyone, and others might find that more palatable.

We ought to have a caucus among the RPing community on IRC or something to see exactly what we want to do.

[Anemos Major]

RPers don't have even the slightest right to call us "trolls" unless they've first lead a raid themselves. Raiding can be extremely challenging, depending on the goals you set out for yourself, and a very rewarding experience. Nothing like taking some huge 150+ nation region after a month or so of prep work, coordination, recruitment, troop training, and intelligence gathering. You really get to see all the fruits of your labors come together. If that's trolling, its some of the most elaborate trolling in gaming history.

However, the RPers here ask all these questions, like "Why can't raiders just raid other raiders forever?" and yet I'm not seeing them truly interested in the answers. I can pretty much guarantee the person who asked the previous question will respond to my answer by utterly dismissing it. This thread doesn't seem to be about RPers and GPers comprising or getting a better sense of what makes the other tick. What this thread has largely become, from my perspective, is a few RPers , not all mind you, demanding to ADMIN that they get exactly what they want, 100% of it, without compromise, and other parts of the game be damned so long as RP gets whatever it wants.

To me, that sort of attitude is not very productive, and will likely not gain RPers even a single one of their wants.

To which I have to point out that you're seeing what you want to see and ignoring everything else. There are plenty of RPers showing a fairly close-minded understanding of what raiding constitutes, which is sad and won't get us anywhere. That's absolutely correct. But on the other hand, what you're doing here illustrates the other side of the same problem; you've come up with a very eloquent explanation of why what some RPers have stated aren't productive or particularly understanding while completely ignoring those RPers who're actually making an effort to consider compromise and understand that raiding, as a basic form of gameplay, is long established and has every right to exist for the sake of those players who enjoy it. Your concerns are absolutely noted, but to what you've written, consider this - what exactly does raiding do to other players, and why exactly is it that RPers have come out in such force to speak this forcefully about something that patently affects them? The 'other side's' approach to this whole issue has quite consistently been 'RPers need to stop bitching and get real, raiding is going to stay the way it is' without attempting to understand the reason we ask the questions we do or actually considering the answers we give (how many times have raiders referred to the 'usual forms of protection' I, and many others, have made note of and explained between the OP all the way up to the bottom of page 32)?

We're not discounting the effort raiders put into what they do, and you're absolutely failing to understand why it is that some frustrated RPers have started referring to you as trolls. A month or so of prep work sounds daunting indeed, but from the point of view of the RPer, the result is a somewhat different one - something raiders haven't really considered at all during the course of this thread. From the point of view of the average RPer, for whom the region is the hub, the heart, of their activity and identity on the forums, and their relationship with the other players with whom they RP, it's a very different deal. Regions provide in-character ties and exposition, they provide out-of-character player development (Greater Dienstad's lack of a functioning password and fluid nature with players coming in and out on a consistent basis was what made it such an attractive location for new players looking for help getting into RPing, and the birthplace of some very, very proficient writers on the forums today - until they were forced to adopt a password after the raid the other day), they provide an informal meeting space, a wall on which to put up vital information and keep members updated concerning the tos and fros of the forums on a particular day. For RPers, regions aren't there to be invaded, or defended - they're vital hubs for RPers that're continually updated and referred to by those managing them and playing within them alike, and what that means is that the culmination of your months of prep work, to an RPer, is really just a host of people crashing into the heart of their RPing experience, occupying it, vandalising the front page and trashing the RMB, the means by which they communicate with each other.

I don't particularly like allegories, but let's try one here. Somebody smashes down my door, breaks the vase I have by the entrance and runs off. Regardless of how many people were involved in planning that, or executing that, or the time spent doing either, my door has been smashed down and my vase broken. Just because you devoted more resources to doing so doesn't justify it in the slightest.

Which is why I really have to ask - if the thrill you get is from the meticulous preparation, and the enjoyment from the experience of working in a group, and all the other aspects of preparing a complex raid against another region, what exactly is it that necessitates the rampantly disruptive and offensive behaviour of raiders once they get into those regions? Or would there be no objection to the suggestion that wiping away regional WFEs, griefing on the RMB, randomly suppressing posts and cancelling embassies (as all raiders inexplicably seem to do) is completely superfluous, unnecessarily offensive and is a practice that ought to be stopped?

I don't object to the basic practice of raiding, and I fully understand and appreciate that R/D is an exciting and rewarding form of gameplay for many. But there seems to be a fundamental mismatch between what raiders enjoy about what it is they do and what RPers (and others) find offensive about what raiders do to them, and yet raiders don't seem to be able to explain the latter at all, instead continually levelling the same fingers and complaints towards us without spending a single moment actually considering what we've said and replied with. Why is this the case?

[Mahaj]

On another note, RPers don't have even the slightest right to call us "trolls" unless they've first lead a raid themselves. Raiding can be extremely challenging, depending on the goals you set out for yourself, and a very rewarding experience. Nothing like taking some huge 150+ nation region after a month or so of prep work, coordination, recruitment, troop training, and intelligence gathering. You really get to see all the fruits of your labors come together. If that's trolling, its some of the most elaborate trolling in gaming history.

Please.

Raiding is not that hard. Almost anybody could do it.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Fact: Raiding is, and has always been, about going in and trashing other people's stuff for $reasons. Don't care if you call it amusement, play, challenge, or what have you, that is what it is. Don't try to sugarcoat it.

Fact: There are tools in place that can insulate regions from being raided. Yes, they are not always ideal, no, some do not want or feel they cannot utilize them due to various factors, but they do exist and can be used. Don't ignore that fact.

Fact: RP and GP are not the same things, cannot be measured by the same stick, and involve entirely different rule sets and motivations. One cannot blithely compare one to the other, and assume that their argument is going to hold any real weight. They are different beasts entirely. And it is only on the GP side that they interact at all.

Fact: RPers would rather not be bothered by GPers at all. This has been made very clear, I can't think of a single post I've seen stating otherwise. They are being forced to participate in a portion of the game they do not wish to be a part of. There is no getting around that point, however one might like.

Fact: GPers maintain the right to involve any region they choose, regardless. This is not an attitude held by RPers, and again, illustrates some of the differences between the two game methods.

Fact: Raiders have not been marginalized, but often marginalize others through their standard actions. If 'marginalized' means 'rules have been put in place', then I'll have to respectfully disagree. What raiders do is disruptive, often comes across as gloating, and invariably upset the natives. It is what it is.

Fact: Defenders disrupt a region every bit as much as raiders do, and we have had multiple reports of natives requesting they be removed as well. Let's not mistake the fact that in both cases, outside players and groups are entering a region based on their own ideologies and aims. The only difference is that sometimes defenders are invited. They can still be an unwelcome presence, and often have been.

Fact: All these arguments have been made before. Raiding/Defending is now a valid part of the overall game, whether some like it or not. It is not going to be eradicated in favor of another part of the game. It can however, be modified, due to its nature, and the the changing needs of the site overall.

Fact: The forums, the game itself, and other aspects have been around since the beginning, or very close to it. R/D was a player-developed portion that became a valid portion of the game. It was never an initial intent. It has grown into something, and has been granted validity by the site creator - if anything, the site has bent over backwards to keep it valid, to allow its continuance, and to balance the negatives it has created for those uninterested in participating.

Fact: We are going to have to figure out how best to get along with one another in spite of our differences in opinions, wants, and needs. If raiders choose to continue to purposefully involve RP regions in their games, they also choose to invite the possibility of new rules, changes, mod action due to potential griefing, etc. If RP regions choose to continue to ignore the tools currently available while discussions are ongoing as to how everyone might better be accommodated, they will continue to put themselves at risk of being raided. And thus the level of complaint will continue to grow. It's a lovely little vicious circle, and like it or not, the simplest solution is 'don't raid RP regions'. Your appetite for raiding has created the issue, you now have a large group of players upset on account - and rightfully so - and thus you have invited them to take part in the R/D discussions where previously they had no concerns, with their own agendas and wants. Think on that before you get too uppity about 'damn whiny RPers, just deal with it'.

Folks, ya gotta keep the tone civil here. Anything else is just going to get people into trouble, and that's the last thing I want to see here.

RP players: Protect yourselves while the talks are ongoing, in spite of the inconvenience. It will at least cut down on the bigger problems short term. I know it isn't what you want to hear, but for now, it may be your best option while things are discussed, an suggestions looked into. Don't intentionally make yourselves victims if you can avoid it.

R/D players: Do not target RP regions for giggles, purely to push them around or 'make the RP folks cry', out of any silly sense of vendetta for daring to speak up. Not cool. And as pointed out, you're creating your own problems with it, and drawing more attention to how the whole R/D thing works, and what behaviors have become 'accepted', and how much closer we need to be looking at them. If griefing and trolling have become the norm, I would respectfully suggest something has gone wrong, and we need to address it.

Everyone: Report anything you feel is breaking the rules. Links to RMB posts, tg's, forum posts, what have you. We'll take a good look at it. And in the meantime, try to come up with solutions, rather than continually pointing fingers. People are ticked - we get that. We get why. What we need to keep in mind is the overall balance of the site, and reasonable compromise all around so that players at large can continue to enjoy the game in their own way, while not targeting any one group for smiting/smothering.

Hopefully something good will come out of all the discussions, but the possibility lessens when emotions are allowed to run rampant, and sense goes out the window. I wish I had all the answers for everyone, but again, there's ample that needs admin and up attention and consideration, not to mention the programmers and coders. It isn't a quick fix, and it will no doubt take time. Try to have some patience, and work through the system.