Discussion about R/D Game and RP Opting Out

[Pollona]

YES YOU ARE. By being left alone, it will slowly die over the course of a year when there are no regions left to raid or defend.

And stop naming random fallacies and saying I'm using them. It's not a very effective way to form a counter argument, as seen by today's politicians.

I will say this one more time, you are using a fallacy. (Nice try with the politician deflection though) I am perfectly within my right to point it out because I am refuting it.

For example:

"By being left alone" (X) "it will slowly die off over the course of the year" (Z) "when there are no regions left to raid or defend" (Y)

X to Y to Z

The weak point in your chain of argument is in the final segment, namely that there will be no regions left to raid or defend, thus causing the R/D mechanic to die away. As evident by how prevalent raiding already is in NS, it's pretty foolish to argue that raiding will die off simply because RPers want regions to have the option of opting out of the game. Raiding will continue because certain people think it's fun, unless of course you are actually arguing that the R/D community is so very small that it cant support a few people withdrawing. In which case why do we even have the mechanics to support this at all? Regions opting out of play simply means they will not get involved in the little charade that R/D clicks around with on the site. How is that so bad? How will that cause the mechanic to die out in the course of a year? We're not the one's arguing that the sky is falling, you are.

You act as if this is an all or nothing, when the real moderate ground is that there can be a compromise between those who will use an 'opt out' to cheat, and those who want to opt out sincerely. A real conversation would start there, rather than accusing RolePlayers of destroying your little point and click "action game".

[Northrop-Grumman]

I'll admit that one argument that I've gotten tired of seeing over the past 10 years by folks is that allowing people to opt out (or whatever is being introduced) will kill off R/D. If you're right and everyone truly hates R/D that much, then why is it still around? Seriously. Every time I see that argument pop up, I then see it shot down right afterwards with basic logic, because all you're saying is that everyone must be forced to play R/D at the behest of a tiny minority or no one will play it at all. That should tell you something about what you're supporting. That argument blows enormous holes in your side all the time, really makes you look bad, and yet it's constantly being used. I don't get it.

My other point is that in my time here, I've seen tons and tons of suggestions being made on how to protect regions and they always result in the same argument from the other side that it will "kill off R/D". I remember founder succession being one of them. It gets to the point that no matter what the non-R/D communities suggest, it will always have the same effect, shouted down, and that we're killing off R/D. Why bother negotiating at all if that's the result?

Finally, I personally don't see anything coming out of this. This topic always comes up every so often ever since I can remember and it'll go like it usually does: the proposal or what have you will fail, the rage will eventually die out, everyone will return to their communities, and it'll happen again a year down the line to the same result. *sigh*

[Wisconsin9]

I just did.

No you didn't.

Liberations were instituted to help save regions. Had nothing to do with preserving R/D and everything to do with possibly saving raided regions that were given a password.

Maybe not at the time. That doesn't change the fact that the mods are ignoring this ridiculous twist, essentially legitimizing the use of liberations for raiding.

[Esternial]

No you didn't.

Liberations were instituted to help save regions. Had nothing to do with preserving R/D and everything to do with possibly saving raided regions that were given a password.

Maybe not at the time. That doesn't change the fact that the mods are ignoring this ridiculous twist, essentially legitimizing the use of liberations for raiding.

Give them time. They're probably discussing it or whatever. Let's not scrutinize them before they've acted.

[Nierr]

No you didn't.

Liberations were instituted to help save regions. Had nothing to do with preserving R/D and everything to do with possibly saving raided regions that were given a password.

Maybe not at the time. That doesn't change the fact that the mods are ignoring this ridiculous twist, essentially legitimizing the use of liberations for raiding.

So go suggest a change to how liberations are looked at by the moderators. That's actually something I'd support and I encourage you to do it.

[Esternial]

It's pretty unfortunate that it had to be a Mod's actions to raise the issue. It sets a bad example for the rest of the community, so it's essential that this is handled both quickly and carefully.

First order of business would be to lock the thread and for Mallorea to excuse himself for making a mistake.

Apologising is more important than you think. Every time a Mod fails to apologise for their mistakes they just raise more resentment. Making mistakes in human, and being in a role of authority also means you need to own up to them to maintain a degree of respect.

I'm just really concerned about setting a precedent in which we, as players, are forced to cater to the whims of one group when many of us do not involve ourselves with Gameplay in any way. I'm also concerned about forcing many RPers to cater to the whims of this one group when it's clear that by password protecting their regions, many of them have opted out of the R/D dynamic.

Just because the region lacks a founder because this person has CTEd or moved to another region, doesn't mean the members should be left unprotected.

They're working on means for that, iirc. The R/D Summit has resulted in some countermeasures for that, but I have no idea when they'll get around to implementing them.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I'm just really concerned about setting a precedent in which we, as players, are forced to cater to the whims of one group when many of us do not involve ourselves with Gameplay in any way. I'm also concerned about forcing many RPers to cater to the whims of this one group when it's clear that by password protecting their regions, many of them have opted out of the R/D dynamic.

Just because the region lacks a founder because this person has CTEd or moved to another region, doesn't mean the members should be left unprotected.

They're working on means for that, iirc. The R/D Summit has resulted in some countermeasures for that, but I have no idea when they'll get around to implementing them.

I guess all we can do now is wait for a decision to be made. I'm a bit unnerved, I'll tell you that.

[Nierr]

Finally, I personally don't see anything coming out of this. This topic always comes up every so often ever since I can remember and it'll go like it usually does: the proposal or what have you will fail, the rage will eventually die out, everyone will return to their communities, and it'll happen again a year down the line to the same result. *sigh*

Which is why I've given up on suggesting anything, and instead focus on using my influence in gameplay to negate any proposals on that side and try to reign in some of the reactions from RPers that go over the top and damage the discourse. Angry suggestions of getting rid of entire portions of the game that hundreds of nations take part in do nothing for the conversation and causes the mods to, largely, not take our concerns as seriously as they perhaps would.

[Pollona]

They're working on means for that, iirc. The R/D Summit has resulted in some countermeasures for that, but I have no idea when they'll get around to implementing them.

It might take a few full years to get the any new countermeasures written, adopted, and tested before it will be fully implemented in game. We've herd from moderators in the past saying how long the process can take, it's best for us to know, as soon as possible, what decisions will be implemented and when we can expect the results.

[Gristol-Serkonos]

I'll admit that one argument that I've gotten tired of seeing over the past 10 years by folks is that allowing people to opt out (or whatever is being introduced) will kill off R/D. If you're right and everyone truly hates R/D that much, then why is it still around? Seriously. Every time I see that argument pop up, I then see it shot down right afterwards with basic logic, because all you're saying is that everyone must be forced to play R/D at the behest of a tiny minority or no one will play it at all. That should tell you something about what you're supporting. That argument blows enormous holes in your side all the time, really makes you look bad, and yet it's constantly being used. I don't get it.

My other point is that in my time here, I've seen tons and tons of suggestions being made on how to protect regions and they always result in the same argument from the other side that it will "kill off R/D". I remember founder succession being one of them. It gets to the point that no matter what the non-R/D communities suggest, it will always have the same effect, shouted down, and that we're killing off R/D. Why bother negotiating at all if that's the result?

Finally, I personally don't see anything coming out of this. This topic always comes up every so often ever since I can remember and it'll go like it usually does: the proposal or what have you will fail, the rage will eventually die out, everyone will return to their communities, and it'll happen again a year down the line to the same result. *sigh*

It's like choosing to shoot the starchild of Mass Effect 3.

The Cycle Continues.

[Nephmir]

YES YOU ARE. By being left alone, it will slowly die over the course of a year when there are no regions left to raid or defend.

And stop naming random fallacies and saying I'm using them. It's not a very effective way to form a counter argument, as seen by today's politicians.

I will say this one more time, you are using a fallacy. (Nice try with the politician deflection though) I am perfectly within my right to point it out because I am refuting it.

For example:

"By being left alone" (X) "it will slowly die off over the course of the year" (Z) "when there are no regions left to raid or defend" (Y)

X to Y to Z

The weak point in your chain of argument is in the final segment, namely that there will be no regions left to raid or defend, thus causing the R/D mechanic to die away. As evident by how prevalent raiding already is in NS, it's pretty foolish to argue that raiding will die off simply because RPers want regions to have the option of opting out of the game. Raiding will continue because certain people think it's fun, unless of course you are actually arguing that the R/D community is so very small that it cant support a few people withdrawing. In which case why do we even have the mechanics to support this at all? Regions opting out of play simply means they will not get involved in the little charade that R/D clicks around with on the site. How is that so bad? How will that cause the mechanic to die out in the course of a year? We're not the one's arguing that the sky is falling, you are.

You act as if this is an all or nothing, when the real moderate ground is that there can be a compromise between those who will use an 'opt out' to cheat, and those who want to opt out sincerely. A real conversation would start there, rather than accusing RolePlayers of destroying your little point and click "action game".

Just because you don't see my logic doesn't mean it's fallacious.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Finally, I personally don't see anything coming out of this. This topic always comes up every so often ever since I can remember and it'll go like it usually does: the proposal or what have you will fail, the rage will eventually die out, everyone will return to their communities, and it'll happen again a year down the line to the same result. *sigh*

Which is why I've given up on suggesting anything, and instead focus on using my influence in gameplay to negate any proposals on that side and try to reign in some of the reactions from RPers that go over the top and damage the discourse. Angry suggestions of getting rid of entire portions of the game that hundreds of nations take part in do nothing for the conversation and causes the mods to, largely, not take our concerns as seriously as they perhaps would.

Nobody made an angry suggestion to ban raiding. The suggestion was an opt-out for regions; pretty innocuous infact. The only people screaming about how it will kill raiding... are the raiders.

As someone pointed out, there seem to be a lot of raiders already using the founder opt-out, so what exactly is the issue?

[Esternial]

They're working on means for that, iirc. The R/D Summit has resulted in some countermeasures for that, but I have no idea when they'll get around to implementing them.

I guess all we can do now is wait for a decision to be made. I'm a bit unnerved, I'll tell you that.

As am I. It's very sensitive ground, and I genuinely hope the "big players" make an effort to pay attention to their actions and not do something to clog up the drainpipe even further.

I swear, whomever can successfully navigate NS "politics" can probably run Belgium.

[Nierr]

Which is why I've given up on suggesting anything, and instead focus on using my influence in gameplay to negate any proposals on that side and try to reign in some of the reactions from RPers that go over the top and damage the discourse. Angry suggestions of getting rid of entire portions of the game that hundreds of nations take part in do nothing for the conversation and causes the mods to, largely, not take our concerns as seriously as they perhaps would.

Nobody made an angry suggestion to ban raiding.

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners.

The suggestion was an opt-out for regions; pretty innocuous infact.

The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

[Wisconsin9]

Nobody made an angry suggestion to ban raiding.

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners.

The suggestion was an opt-out for regions; pretty innocuous infact.

The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

Aye, that's the problem. In another thread, I suggested moderator oversight, similar to how things work forumside. Someone attempts to liberate an RP region, someone requests a moderator look at it, if it's clearly an RP region the lib gets removed.

[The Orson Empire]

It's not that simple. It would require altering the game's code completely.

And? The game's code has been altered before.

And it would prevent us from having to have these threads that sow hostility and resentment between various NS communities every so often, as we currently seem to.

Why don't you try altering that complex code that forms the basis of this entire website?

It is not that fucking simple.

[Pollona]

The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

That should be were the real consultation takes place. As we have so far there have been proposals to make that sort of tag irrevocable, or only modifiable every few months or so. As many have said, the potential solutions exist to clamp down on potential cheating, but we'd fool ourselves by claiming any solution would be completely 'exploit' proof.

Just because you don't see my logic doesn't mean it's fallacious.

"To say that an argument is fallacious is, among other things, to claim that there is not a sufficiently strong logical connection between the premisses and the conclusion."

It's nice to have a bit of confirmation from your own link.

[Nephmir]

Nobody made an angry suggestion to ban raiding.

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners.

The suggestion was an opt-out for regions; pretty innocuous infact.

The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

Plus Raiders disguised as natives could just coup the region, remove the tag, and then invite in all of their friends. So no, that would not work.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Nobody made an angry suggestion to ban raiding.

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners.

The suggestion was an opt-out for regions; pretty innocuous infact.

The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

We don't need a tag because we have passwords. What we need is for the password to act as a complete opt-out from the raiding game because, as seen from the Sapphire raid, it's not. If the password somehow becomes known to raiders and they take the region, it's worthless.

[Pollona]

Why don't you try altering that complex code that forms the basis of this entire website?

It is not that fucking simple.

People have offered in the past to help the NS team modify the code.

Sadly they have all been rebuffed.

[Nierr]

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners. The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

Aye, that's the problem. In another thread, I suggested moderator oversight, similar to how things work forumside. Someone attempts to liberate an RP region, someone requests a moderator look at it, if it's clearly an RP region the lib gets removed.

But then you run into another problem.

What if an F7er region or NSGer region or non-NSforumusing region wants to opt out? Do we let them?

[Esternial]

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners. The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

Plus Raiders disguised as natives could just coup the region, remove the tag, and then invite in all of their friends. So no, that would not work.

Best solution would be an alternative, separate from regions, that preserves the game functions that Roleplayers use.

So that, when a roleplaying region gets invaded, they don't receive a significant impact to their ability to continue coordinating their Forumside activities.

[Vitaphone Racing]

Anyway, the real issue at hand here is far more than Raiding and Defending and unfortunately it seems like moderation will move heaven and earth to stop that issue from being discussed on these forums.

[Northrop-Grumman]

There's been suggestions to 'gut game mechanics' from a few corners. The opt-out tag is a decent idea that needs looking out. How, however, do you stop defenders going around putting the tag on every region?

Aye, that's the problem. In another thread, I suggested moderator oversight, similar to how things work forumside. Someone attempts to liberate an RP region, someone requests a moderator look at it, if it's clearly an RP region the lib gets removed.

That sorta was the system before Influence came about. From what I recall, the moderators were constantly being pulled in to determine if there was or wasn't griefing going on (e.g. the ejection of natives), but that was such an ungodly mess because you had fun questions like "What is a native?" that could be answered in various ways. I can see why they wouldn't want to touch that. I wouldn't want them to touch that. It'd be a clusterfuck to be blunt. How do we define RP? What is the minimum required to RP? What about Generalites? What about the WA people?

[Stevid]

By being left alone, it will slowly die over the course of a year when there are no regions left to raid or defend.

Is there really a chronic shortage of regions on NS? Enough to topple a whole element of gameplay.

Don't be silly.

Haven, like what happened with Greater Dienstad, is a BIG scalp. It's got a name, a reputation - look at the link and shit-storm that followed the invasion. Exactly the same thing is happening here with just the idea of invading another huge RPing region.

Raiders want to say they toppled Haven.

Do you really think we are all that naive to believe that is another agenda to this? Better yet, do you think those opposed to this are naive enough to believe the amount of regions you can invade is running low?

Give me five minutes on the The World page while I type something random, I'll link the region to you. I bet I can find you an obscure region right now for you fellows to invade instead of Haven.