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

[Morrdh]

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.

Seriously though, why can't raiding be kept amongst the R/D community?

You say Warzones failed, ok then what can be done to fix them?

The main issue is that raiding is being forced upon people who don't want any part of it, yes it has been stated that are different means of protection against raids but it has been pointed out that these measures simply aren't practicable for alot of RP regions.

But I have actually suggested a compromise solution, granted it only partially addresses the issue. Some valid input from the R/D community would be welcome long as it isn't "oh it'll destroy R/D" or anything along those lines.

[Esternial]

I no longer see the issue, provided that Regional Officers are implemented. They'll allow Founders to turn of access for WA Delegates while Regional Officers can still edit the WFE and manage the region.

[Evil Wolf]

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.

I, as per usual, can assume this is your personal opinion on raiding and not the official Moderation stance, Nathicana?

[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.

I, as per usual, can assume this is your personal opinion on raiding and not the official Moderation stance, Nathicana?

Are you seriously going to sit there and claim anything different? It is all about going in, messing with tags/WFE/Embassies, and thumping chests on the RMB.

If not ... why is it done that way repeatedly? You can assume whatever you like, there is no getting around how raiding is done.

[Anemos Major]

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.

I, as per usual, can assume this is your personal opinion on raiding and not the official Moderation stance, Nathicana?

If this isn't true, it'd be nice if you could respond to the query many have made and I echoed on the last page -

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?

You're presenting us as being inconsiderate and stubborn, but this really doesn't seem to be an unreasonable question to ask.

[Evil Wolf]

I, as per usual, can assume this is your personal opinion on raiding and not the official Moderation stance, Nathicana?

Are you seriously going to sit there and claim anything different? It is all about going in, messing with tags/WFE/Embassies, and thumping chests on the RMB.

If not ... why is it done that way repeatedly? You can assume whatever you like, there is no getting around how raiding is done.

I very much disagree with that viewpoint, and I think if you ever tried to raid you'd find it to be a much harder and different experience than you think, especially on some of these more well protected targets.

I do not raid to fulfill some primal need to thump my chest. I don't do it as some sort of "legitimized bullying", Nathicana. I do it because it presents a challenge and I truly enjoy that challenge. That's not me sugarcoating raiding, that's the truth of the matter. I am sorry that you, personally, do not agree with me, but you're entitled to you personal opinion and I to mine. I do assume that what you said here was, in fact, your personal opinion and not the opinion of NS Moderation.

[Crazy girl]

What do you think, Wolfie?

I'll give this a try here with the risk of getting the whole "we don't want anything to do with R/D period" thing again...I mean I get that. You don't want it. Still, it's not going away, so I'm trying to find something which might help you in other ways based on comments I have seen in this thread.

A suggestion I believe someone else already mentioned. Would it be helpful if you could block delegate access, and appoint 1 or 2 regional officers who get a fancy title and the power to edit the WFE (and just that)? Since I've read that people keep track of threads in their WFE.

Another thing, which I don't know if it's possible, is maybe a history of WFE edits? Like how you have an edits page on wikipedia.

Just throwing out some suggestions here which won't hurt R/D but might help RPers....

[Esternial]

Are you seriously going to sit there and claim anything different? It is all about going in, messing with tags/WFE/Embassies, and thumping chests on the RMB.

If not ... why is it done that way repeatedly? You can assume whatever you like, there is no getting around how raiding is done.

I very much disagree with that viewpoint, and I think if you ever tried to raid you'd find it to be a much harder and different experience than you think, especially on some of these more well protected targets.

I do not raid to fulfill some primal need to thump my chest. I don't do it as some sort of "legitimized bullying", Nathicana. I do it because it presents a challenge and I truly enjoy that challenge. That's not me sugarcoating raiding, that's the truth of the matter. I am sorry that you, personally, do not agree with me, but you're entitled to you personal opinion and I to mine. I do assume that what you said here was, in fact, your personal opinion and not the opinion of NS Moderation.

We can sit here and talk euphemisms and sugercoat raiding by telling us how much of a challenge it is, but in the end you do upset a region's structure, mess with tags/WFE/Embassies and gloat over your victory.

How hard this is for your is irrelevant to what you eventually do when you succeed. You don't have to mess with these things when you succeed, do you? You can simply add a line to the WFE without removing anything, cancelling embassies or removing tags.

What do you think, Wolfie?

I'll give this a try here with the risk of getting the whole "we don't want anything to do with R/D period" thing again...I mean I get that. You don't want it. Still, it's not going away, so I'm trying to find something which might help you in other ways based on comments I have seen in this thread.

A suggestion I believe someone else already mentioned. Would it be helpful if you could block delegate access, and appoint 1 or 2 regional officers who get a fancy title and the power to edit the WFE (and just that)? Since I've read that people keep track of threads in their WFE.

Another thing, which I don't know if it's possible, is maybe a history of WFE edits? Like how you have an edits page on wikipedia.

Just throwing out some suggestions here which won't hurt R/D but might help RPers....

Aye, I've already put forward the suggestion of using Regional Officers, and I believe it's the best and least disruptive solution to this issue.

I'm not sure about histories. If they really want to annoy you, Raiders can just edit and edit the WFE until the last delegates version of the WFE is "kicked off the board", unless you intend to allow the amount of "older versions" of the WFE to be infinite.

[SquareDisc City]

I'm not sure about histories. If they really want to annoy you, Raiders can just edit and edit the WFE until the last delegates version of the WFE is "kicked off the board", unless you intend to allow the amount of "older versions" of the WFE to be infinite.

A date or update based archiving would fix that.

[Anemos Major]

What do you think, Wolfie?

I'll give this a try here with the risk of getting the whole "we don't want anything to do with R/D period" thing again...I mean I get that. You don't want it. Still, it's not going away, so I'm trying to find something which might help you in other ways based on comments I have seen in this thread.

A suggestion I believe someone else already mentioned. Would it be helpful if you could block delegate access, and appoint 1 or 2 regional officers who get a fancy title and the power to edit the WFE (and just that)? Since I've read that people keep track of threads in their WFE.

Another thing, which I don't know if it's possible, is maybe a history of WFE edits? Like how you have an edits page on wikipedia.

Just throwing out some suggestions here which won't hurt R/D but might help RPers....

To be honest, it's probably understood by most that R/D is hardly going to go away - it's a form of gameplay, people enjoy it, but certain aspects of R/D infringe upon our ability to enjoy our part of the game.

In fact, the notion of a 'WFE history' would be completely unnecessary if raiders could subscribe to a code of conduct; there *are* things, described countless times above, that raiders commonly do that the raided object to consistently and considerably, and don't seem to have anything to do with what Evil Wolf described as the reasons why raiders enjoy raiding and R/D in the first place. As a starting point, it'd be nice if we could all come to some sort of understanding over the fact that, amongst other things, the complete editing out of regional WFEs (as Esternial noted, a single line at the top ought to be more than enough, to be quite frank), the cancellation of embassies, the removal of regional tags, griefing and spamming on RMBs and the suppression of RMB posts are unnecessary and disruptive actions that can and should be considered unacceptable offences during the course of raids.

You'll get to keep your thrilling organisation and planning, and we don't have to put up with rampantly offensive behaviour during the course of something that we already have to put up with against our wills. Sounds good to me?

[Esternial]

I'm not sure about histories. If they really want to annoy you, Raiders can just edit and edit the WFE until the last delegates version of the WFE is "kicked off the board", unless you intend to allow the amount of "older versions" of the WFE to be infinite.

A date or update based archiving would fix that.

Ah, true! Haven't thought about that!

[Constaniana]

What do you think, Wolfie?

I'll give this a try here with the risk of getting the whole "we don't want anything to do with R/D period" thing again...I mean I get that. You don't want it. Still, it's not going away, so I'm trying to find something which might help you in other ways based on comments I have seen in this thread.

A suggestion I believe someone else already mentioned. Would it be helpful if you could block delegate access, and appoint 1 or 2 regional officers who get a fancy title and the power to edit the WFE (and just that)? Since I've read that people keep track of threads in their WFE.

Another thing, which I don't know if it's possible, is maybe a history of WFE edits? Like how you have an edits page on wikipedia.

Just throwing out some suggestions here which won't hurt R/D but might help RPers....

That solution would work fine for regions with an active founder, but how would that work with founderless regions?

[Evil Wolf]

In fact, the notion of a 'WFE history' would be completely unnecessary if raiders could subscribe to a code of conduct; there *are* things, described countless times above, that raiders commonly do that the raided object to consistently and considerably, and don't seem to have anything to do with what Evil Wolf described as the reasons why raiders enjoy raiding and R/D in the first place.

Years ago a good number of raiders used to send the prior delegate the WFE entry in a TG. I've even seen the practice written into Invasion Guides as a "must do" step. That tradition stopped when mass update tagging became popular.

[Esternial]

What do you think, Wolfie?

I'll give this a try here with the risk of getting the whole "we don't want anything to do with R/D period" thing again...I mean I get that. You don't want it. Still, it's not going away, so I'm trying to find something which might help you in other ways based on comments I have seen in this thread.

A suggestion I believe someone else already mentioned. Would it be helpful if you could block delegate access, and appoint 1 or 2 regional officers who get a fancy title and the power to edit the WFE (and just that)? Since I've read that people keep track of threads in their WFE.

Another thing, which I don't know if it's possible, is maybe a history of WFE edits? Like how you have an edits page on wikipedia.

Just throwing out some suggestions here which won't hurt R/D but might help RPers....

That solution would work fine for regions with an active founder, but how would that work with founderless regions?

Custodians.

If you don't know how to write an SC proposal, contact the mentors to help appoint a Custodian.

Or better yet, appoint a Mentor as Custodian to appoint Officers.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

I very much disagree with that viewpoint, and I think if you ever tried to raid you'd find it to be a much harder and different experience than you think, especially on some of these more well protected targets.

I do not raid to fulfill some primal need to thump my chest. I don't do it as some sort of "legitimized bullying", Nathicana. I do it because it presents a challenge and I truly enjoy that challenge. That's not me sugarcoating raiding, that's the truth of the matter. I am sorry that you, personally, do not agree with me, but you're entitled to you personal opinion and I to mine. I do assume that what you said here was, in fact, your personal opinion and not the opinion of NS Moderation.

I've taken part in exactly this sort of thing in other PvP games, along with the politics, the planning, the long hours of discussion, the plotting out points of entry and exit, coordinating multiple players and their strengths against groups of others. I've utterly destroyed the bases and fleets of said players - the result of months of work in the building. And I've had mine destroyed as well.

I think you'll find I understand exactly what goes into it, and what's involved, as well as the motivations behind it.

You still haven't answered the questions, I'll note. Simply chosen to disagree. I find that rather telling.

Per usual, I hope that those actually willing to discuss will continue to do so, as well as put forward ideas for compromise and improvement all around. It would be great if some way of keeping both sides satisfied could be achieved.

[Anemos Major]

What do you think, Wolfie?

I'll give this a try here with the risk of getting the whole "we don't want anything to do with R/D period" thing again...I mean I get that. You don't want it. Still, it's not going away, so I'm trying to find something which might help you in other ways based on comments I have seen in this thread.

A suggestion I believe someone else already mentioned. Would it be helpful if you could block delegate access, and appoint 1 or 2 regional officers who get a fancy title and the power to edit the WFE (and just that)? Since I've read that people keep track of threads in their WFE.

Another thing, which I don't know if it's possible, is maybe a history of WFE edits? Like how you have an edits page on wikipedia.

Just throwing out some suggestions here which won't hurt R/D but might help RPers....

That solution would work fine for regions with an active founder, but how would that work with founderless regions?

To be honest, if we're referring to the Regional Officers proposal made in the summit earlier this year, I'm pretty fine with it in the empowered form most people seemed to agree upon. It'd be better for founderless or otherwise inactive/intermittent founder RPing regions if we had founder succession and regional officers with the power to change WFEs and ban by spending influence. It'd remove our objections to the notion of virtually requiring a powerless delegate, for one, and probably sort out the continuity issues a lot of older RPing regions face in the process.

[Anemos Major]

In fact, the notion of a 'WFE history' would be completely unnecessary if raiders could subscribe to a code of conduct; there *are* things, described countless times above, that raiders commonly do that the raided object to consistently and considerably, and don't seem to have anything to do with what Evil Wolf described as the reasons why raiders enjoy raiding and R/D in the first place.

Years ago a good number of raiders used to send the prior delegate the WFE entry in a TG. I've even seen the practice written into Invasion Guides as a "must do" step. That tradition stopped when mass update tagging became popular.

That's admirable, but that also doesn't answer the fundamental issue at hand. You wouldn't actually have to send the prior delegate the original WFE, I note, if you didn't thoroughly vandalise the WFE in the first place.

[Evil Wolf]

That's admirable, but that also doesn't answer the fundamental issue at hand. You wouldn't actually have to send the prior delegate the original WFE, I note, if you didn't thoroughly vandalise the WFE in the first place.

Putting your groups name in the WFE is tradition too. Dates all the way back to the first recorded raid in NS, I suspect. Sometimes certain raiders will honor native requests to restore links in the WFE, if there is enough room. Some even try to preserve most of the existing WFE.

If not ... why is it done that way repeatedly? You can assume whatever you like, there is no getting around how raiding is done.

It's not done that way repeatedly every time. In tagging, it almost surly is, but that's one type of raiding, and one I personally don't enjoy. I like holding regions, and thus I have time to customize the WFE for every raid, not just stamp the same manufactured WFE up there over and over again as I run from region to region trying to hit as many regions as I can in an update, like what tag raiding involves.

It is a gross generalization to say that all raiders act the same and none of us operate differently from our peers. It's also deeply untrue.

[Anemos Major]

That's admirable, but that also doesn't answer the fundamental issue at hand. You wouldn't actually have to send the prior delegate the original WFE, I note, if you didn't thoroughly vandalise the WFE in the first place.

Putting your groups name in the WFE is tradition too. Dates all the way back to the first recorded raid in NS, I suspect. Sometimes certain raiders will honor native requests to restore links in the WFE, if there is enough room. Some even try to preserve most of the existing WFE.

Being tradition, unfortunately, doesn't exempt a questionable practice from reform or critique - that said, I have nothing against putting your group's name in the WFE. What's worth noting is that there's a fairly big difference between a line with your group's name/motto, another line with your delegate for that particular region, an [hr] divider and the original regional WFE left undisturbed below, and painting over the entire native WFE with some grossly inappropriate spiel about your 'victory', replete with gloating and borderline griefing, before plunging into the usual business of defacing the rest of the page. Say what you will about different raiders adopting different modi operandi (and that's probably a valid point, to be honest), but if this is the only experience most of us have with raiders, that raises a few questions in its own right. Regardless, it is an issue, and it'd be best resolved - by both sides, if at all possible, because it'd be nice to have an explanation from the raiders who do engage in the above as to why it shouldn't be branded an offence here and now.

To brand raiders as being singular in their approach to raiding would be unfair, in the same way that the same generalisation couldn't possibly hope to encapsulate the variety of ways in which RPers interact and engage with each other and the game (which is why, I note, we've been arguing strongly against the notion that all RPing regions can be reasonably expected to password protect their regions and remove delegate powers outright without any changes to the game as it is) - but that doesn't change the fact that the conduct seen in quite a significant number of raids, by quite a significant number of raiders, is arguably problematic.

[Evil Wolf]

To address something I skipped over before:

Seriously though, why can't raiding be kept amongst the R/D community?

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.

I totally saw that coming.

You say Warzones failed, ok then what can be done to fix them?

Nothing. They were the brain child of one ADMIN to serve as a way to try and get Raiders to stop attacking other regions. They are an insult to the raider game and just goes to show how very little the Game Administration team understood the Gameplay community at that particular time in Nationstates history. I refuse to even acknowledge their existence or hit them as targets.

[Ruzan]

Nothing. They were the brain child of one ADMIN to serve as a way to try and get Raiders to stop attacking other regions. They are an insult to the raider game and just goes to show how very little the Game Administration team understood the Gameplay community at that particular time in Nationstates history. I refuse to even acknowledge their existence or hit them as targets.

I know, from personal experience, that not all raiders agree with that. In fact, it seems to me like the Warzones are often getting hit by some group or other. I know they were ignored for a long time.

[Jenrak]

It might be best to see how the Officers implementation works.

Any implementation of...well...anything, would require a bit of time anyhow.

I really, really don't like the whole incident either, but this might be the best option. At the moment, it is strongly encouraged that any ideas and proposals for additional security without major compromises are suggested.

[Anemos Major]

It might be best to see how the Officers implementation works.

Any implementation of...well...anything, would require a bit of time anyhow.

I really, really don't like the whole incident either, but this might be the best option. At the moment, it is strongly encouraged that any ideas and proposals for additional security without major compromises are suggested.

Would it be workable to require all raiding groups to subscribe to a more explicit code of conduct concerning what they can and cannot do during the course of a raid to a region?

[Morrdh]

To address something I skipped over before:

Seriously though, why can't raiding be kept amongst the R/D community?

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.

I totally saw that coming.

You say Warzones failed, ok then what can be done to fix them?

Nothing. They were the brain child of one ADMIN to serve as a way to try and get Raiders to stop attacking other regions. They are an insult to the raider game and just goes to show how very little the Game Administration team understood the Gameplay community at that particular time in Nationstates history. I refuse to even acknowledge their existence or hit them as targets.

Had been thinking about that question for the past day or so.

Though I haven't seen an answer for it yet.

I get that people wish to do the R/D side of things, but I don't get why non-R/D regions still get dragged into it when they have no wish to be part of it. Nobody's forcing the R/D crowd to take part on the roleplay side of things, yet the RPers get very little choice when it comes to being raided. Yes there are measures against raiding but they've been proven not to be 100% foolproof and for alot of RP regions they aren't practicable.

[Evil Wolf]

Yes there are measures against raiding but they've been proven not to be 100% foolproof and for alot of RP regions they aren't practicable.

The reality is that you're never going to get a 100% foolproof way to 100% of the time be protected from raiders, unless you're in a Class Region, which seemingly most RPers are against doing. Founders can CTE, Delegates can lose endorsements, players can be kicked from the site for rule violations, or struck by lightning, or just simply stop playing, all of which has the potential to open a region up for a raid, if you want to be ridiculous about it. The only way to be 100% raid free is to ban raiding, and I obviously strenuously object to destroying the GP game just so that RP never has to be sullied by our presence.