Discussion about R/D Game and RP Opting Out

[Luziyca]

I was here since 2009 as Iraqialand, then Khorata, then Syvorji, and now, I am on this nation.

2009 is still not the good old days. Try harder.

Well, whatever. Point is, nobody really complained in 2009.

When, and more importantly, why did this change?

People complaining about it, probably

Exactly. This is why the whole issue has come up in the first place.

[Questers]

2009 is still not the good old days. Try harder.

Well, whatever. Point is, nobody really complained in 2009.

They've been complaining long before 09 son. My first nation was deleted for trying to refound Haven. I was the UN delegate and I kicked everyone. That was considered griefing.

The rules should've never changed. Protesting my deletion was a giant mistake.

[Luziyca]

Well, whatever. Point is, nobody really complained in 2009.

They've been complaining long before 09 son

Not as bad as this.

[Lux Santus]

I'm sure everyone can keep the matter as civil as possible. No need to bash from players to moderators, moderators to players, or players to players.

Please consider my account of a simple observation from the sidelines on this matter of Mall and his SC resolution. Seeing the ill effects the community is experiencing because of this issue.

As mentioned by Fris and I'm sure it was the stance that is supported by moderators (at least officially because it's posted, even if it's not in full agreement between members) that:

1. Mallorea and Riva is almost certainly not going to be asked to step down, nor is he likely to choose that outcome himself. The point has been made. Move on.
2. It should be blatantly obvious at this point that there is a great deal of resistance to the passage of the proposal. It's not a resolution. It hasn't even been submitted. Given that, all this heat over something that most likely will never happen is getting more than a bit annoying.

1. The decision seems pretty clear that Mallorea and Riva is not going to be taken down. While hard to accept by many, the decision is there and been pass down and must be accepted. As NERV had said, only Max or [violet] has that capability.

2. Being blatantly obvious, that it's never going to happen and that is getting more than a bit annoying can we consider the thread, non-relavent and in many sections, actions that is considered "flaming" and therefore be, with good reason, locked. I'm sure many threads in the past has been locked for similar reasons and I'm sure many warnings or more severe penalties has been issued.

For players, due to the large number of players sensitive to the matter and how deep the issue can get, it is not simple enough to be concluded in a day. I implore players to be patient. (As a fellow role player, as new as I am, I understand these sentiments. Having all the hard work anyone done for something to just vanish into thin air is not small talks, this is serious.) I deeply respect all the work the Mentors from II are doing in representing the RP community in discussing with the moderators. We should wait for an appropriate response, a more detailed explanation once talks has been concluded. It's holiday season very soon for many (the US) and there's no need for anyone to not enjoy a day or two with family or with friends.

Back to moderators, I'm sure everyone knows severity of this case. The sight of the mentioned proposal for many players (role players specificially) is seen as unacceptable, regardless of its validity. The debate whether or not can be seen in the proposal thread, has been ongoing for many posts, and on multiple sub forums and probably on other mediums as well, but the end result (at least on the forums) is pretty clear: a division role players wanted for their community in NS. More many RP regions, passwords are their only option for an "opt out" in the "raiding game".

If we are not to discuss the game mechanics because they are set, we should discuss the other issue at hand, Mall's SC proposal itself. I would take into consideration what I had said before: the closing/locking the mentioned SC thread. As discussions on the matter seems to be conclusive and further debate only seem to fuel the two sides longer. I think many would agree its continuation would only worsen relations. As Fris has mentioned, the matter is not simple..

I do implore moderators to do their best in addressing the issue more in-depth when time is available after the holidays.

[The Grey Wolf]

I just want there to be a good way to opt out of it. I don't see why that's such a controversial idea.

It's controversial because it's a significant change to the game mechanic, and threatens the entire R/D game. We can't provide an opt-out to a single community of players (role play) without also offering it to other communities. So the GA authors and Generalites opt out. Then the kids running regional messageboard mini-chatrooms for their buddies (and NEVER appear on the forums) opt out. Eventually you're going to have nothing but one-nation, passworded regions left (of which there are thousands, with no way in), and you've killed the R/D game.

It's NOT simple. You want privileges not offered to other players, and that's just as unfair as your complaint about them forcing YOU to play.

This is known as the slippery slope argument, also known as a logical fallacy.

Maybe they should be provided an opt-out as well. Not everyone wants to play a pointless point-and-click game that is meant for little more than an ego boost. I personally have no problem with R/D, but I can understand how some people don't want to have to worry about having their hard work being undone for no reason.

[Registug]

There's a very specific reason - and not one we can fight sadly.

What's that, Questers?

[Questers]

You were six years old when I started playing NS. I'm not going to have a discussion with you about its history, or Haven's, for that matter. (Luziyca)

[The Dark Star Republic]

Well, whatever. Point is, nobody really complained in 2009.

Yes, we absolutely did:

Regions removed from gameplaying that wish to stay so (for example, Haven). For them, their region is essentially an RP club and the password a means of ensuring not only regional security from gameplayers, but also regulating their membership. Doing so violates no old or new gameplay rules, yet a resolution could override this to no apparent benefit to anyone.

These exact arguments were made against Liberations when they were introduced in 2009, and the gameplay arguments predate them by years. None of this is new, and it is irresponsibly optimistic to think that the admin response will be new, either.

[Pollona]

It's controversial because it's a significant change to the game mechanic, and threatens the entire R/D game. We can't provide an opt-out to a single community of players (role play) without also offering it to other communities. So the GA authors and Generalites opt out. Then the kids running regional messageboard mini-chatrooms for their buddies (and NEVER appear on the forums) opt out.

Great, that sounds like a wonderful idea! Let everyone decide if they want to take a part in the R/D game. That way the right of anyone to swing their fist stops at the other person's nose. Everyone can choose if they want to compete in the game or not, raids can still happen and the RP community gets an exemption.

Despite the slippery slope argument, you've actually just solved the entire problem.

EDIT: I'm serious, why is this not being implemented?

[Oaledonia]

Why should the mods care, they'll just up and do whatever they want anyways :3

[Benuty]

Why should the mods care, they'll just up and do whatever they want anyways :3

Well aren't you just hopeful?

Nevertheless...

[The Orson Empire]

It's controversial because it's a significant change to the game mechanic, and threatens the entire R/D game. We can't provide an opt-out to a single community of players (role play) without also offering it to other communities. So the GA authors and Generalites opt out. Then the kids running regional messageboard mini-chatrooms for their buddies (and NEVER appear on the forums) opt out. Eventually you're going to have nothing but one-nation, passworded regions left (of which there are thousands, with no way in), and you've killed the R/D game.

It's NOT simple. You want privileges not offered to other players, and that's just as unfair as your complaint about them forcing YOU to play.

This is known as the slippery slope argument, also known as a logical fallacy.

Maybe they should be provided an opt-out as well. Not everyone wants to play a pointless point-and-click game that is meant for little more than an ego boost. I personally have no problem with R/D, but I can understand how some people don't want to have to worry about having their hard work being undone for no reason.

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

[Bone Fort]

Why should the mods care, they'll just up and do whatever they want anyways :3

Which is why human history consists of absolutely nothing, as no one bothered to get out of bed in the morning, since it was all pointless.

Wait, scratch that. No one bothered to invent the bed.

[Benuty]

Why should the mods care, they'll just up and do whatever they want anyways :3

Which is why human history consists of absolutely nothing, as no one bothered to get out of bed in the morning, since it was all pointless.

Wait, scratch that. No one bothered to invent the bed.

I suppose death is the only thing in that alternate world that has a point?

Unless of-course everyone is defacto immortal.

[Avenio]

For the life of God, we had an R&D summit several months ago.

Several months? The majority of that summit occurred in late 2012. It sat relatively unused until August 2013, when a series of changes were announced;

Influence in feeders and sinkers retained for six months rather than indefinitely.
Delegate Elect, with certain delegate changes resulting in the new delegate having limited access to regional controls for a short period of time.
Regional Officers, with the ability to use regional controls.
Annex, which gives a formal in-game recognition to one region's control over another.
Reformation SC proposal which targets a region and removes the ability of its Delegate to access regional controls for a short period of time.
Custodian SC proposal which gives a nation access to the controls of a region, but requiring them to spend influence to use them.
Estimated update times displayed on regions but with a "window of uncertainty" as to when they'll actually update.

Of those, a grand total of 1 has been implemented - the first one. Sedgistan himself said, and I quote, "the Summit didn't work quite as planned and took much longer than intended."

So yeah. Kindly stow your condescension, particularly in light of the fact that you didn't even bother to do a minimal amount of research before sounding off.

[Euroslavia]

Why should the mods care, they'll just up and do whatever they want anyways :3

Which is why human history consists of absolutely nothing, as no one bothered to get out of bed in the morning, since it was all pointless.

Wait, scratch that. No one bothered to invent the bed.

This rock is starting to get pretty comfy...

[Oaledonia]

Why should the mods care, they'll just up and do whatever they want anyways :3

Which is why human history consists of absolutely nothing, as no one bothered to get out of bed in the morning, since it was all pointless.

Wait, scratch that. No one bothered to invent the bed.

> Implying that mods have morals.

[Bone Fort]

Which is why human history consists of absolutely nothing, as no one bothered to get out of bed in the morning, since it was all pointless.

Wait, scratch that. No one bothered to invent the bed.

> Implying that mods have morals.

>implying that morals aren't unique to one's perspective.

[Oaledonia]

> Implying that mods have morals.

>implying that morals aren't unique to one's perspective.

> Implying that what I implied isn't common fact.

[Wordy]

I have been defending the whole of my NS game life. I have long advocated for Native rights. Invaders are disruptive as are defenders to communities so I understand the outrage of most of the posters here.
My unrealistic ideas to overcome the problem.
Rather than an opt out from R/D it would be more effective to make it an opt in. Those that want to take part in R/D gameplay should opt in.
Founder inheritance :
A founder can nominate a nation to be placed into founder position should they CTE and remain that way for a certain amount of time. During that founderless window the region is locked down. Nations cannot enter. No one knows the password.
Regions that choose to opt in to R/D lose the founder. They are open to invade and be invaded. Their regions become warzones.

Regions that currently have no founder can apply for founder status (that would have to be admin / mod / GHR and pass a standard set by those) within 6 months the chance to gain founder status is closed and the region becomes a warzone.

To defenders posting here : Please do not use this thread in order to recruit others to your gameplay arena. Enough said.

[Registug]

You know I've just realised that raiding is against the rules in 4chan of all places

hmm

[Bone Fort]

>implying that morals aren't unique to one's perspective.

> Implying that what I implied isn't common fact.

>implying that that wasn't EXACTLY what I was implying.

[The Grey Wolf]

> Implying that what I implied isn't common fact.

>implying that that wasn't EXACTLY what I was implying.

Let's not start this game, please.

[Wisconsin9]

You know I've just realised that raiding is against the rules in 4chan of all places

hmm

I don't have a problem with raiding. What I have a problem with is that the safeguard against being raided is being circumvented and that the mods are basically telling the people who are understandably upset about that that it's not their problem.

[Oaledonia]

I have been defending the whole of my NS game life. I have long advocated for Native rights. Invaders are disruptive as are defenders to communities so I understand the outrage of most of the posters here.
My unrealistic ideas to overcome the problem.
Rather than an opt out from R/D it would be more effective to make it an opt in. Those that want to take part in R/D gameplay should opt in.
Founder inheritance :
A founder can nominate a nation to be placed into founder position should they CTE and remain that way for a certain amount of time. During that founderless window the region is locked down. Nations cannot enter. No one knows the password.
Regions that choose to opt in to R/D lose the founder. They are open to invade and be invaded. Their regions become warzones.

Regions that currently have no founder can apply for founder status (that would have to be admin / mod / GHR and pass a standard set by those) within 6 months the chance to gain founder status is closed and the region becomes a warzone.

To defenders posting here : Please do not use this thread in order to recruit others to your gameplay arena. Enough said.

Support.