World Assembly Endorsement Removal

[The Hinterplace]

Hey All!! I wonder if it would be possible if a function is added to allow Nations to remove endorsements they have received. Right now, it is hard to keep in regulation with endorsement caps without this function.

[The Hinterplace]

Bumping this.

[United Calanworie]

Hm. Not sure I agree with the premise, you can simply just telegram people endorsing you asking them to unendorse you. This type of feature would have major implications for R/D as well, deltipping an active invasion would be substantially more difficult.

[Quebecshire]

Hm. Not sure I agree with the premise, you can simply just telegram people endorsing you asking them to unendorse you. This type of feature would have major implications for R/D as well, deltipping an active invasion would be substantially more difficult.

It would also have implications in GCR security, I think.

Definitely opposed to this suggestion - it would be an outlier in that nation X can control nation Y's actions pretty directly, which seems unfair one way or another.

There are plenty of tools at one's disposal for enforcing endorsement caps, chiefly unendorsement campaigns and ejections.

[The Hinterplace]

I was thinking more along the lines of yourself, as your own nation, being able to take off an endorsement someone has given you. Instead of waiting on someone else to unendorse you, you have more agency over being in compliance with caps. I am not proposing that an RO has the power to remove endorsements from someone.

[Quebecshire]

I was thinking more along the lines of yourself, as your own nation, being able to take off an endorsement someone has given you. Instead of waiting on someone else to unendorse you, you have more agency over being in compliance with caps. I am not proposing that an RO has the power to remove endorsements from someone.

If you don't want someone to endorse you, then you can either telegram them or resign from the WA and rejoin.

This would basically be a god-button for delegacy transitions and as Aav mentioned, have implications for R/D strategy in favor of invaders.

[The Hinterplace]

I was thinking more along the lines of yourself, as your own nation, being able to take off an endorsement someone has given you. Instead of waiting on someone else to unendorse you, you have more agency over being in compliance with caps. I am not proposing that an RO has the power to remove endorsements from someone.

If you don't want someone to endorse you, then you can either telegram them or resign from the WA and rejoin.

This would basically be a god-button for delegacy transitions and as Aav mentioned, have implications for R/D strategy in favor of invaders.

I suppose I am confused as to how it would effect R/D if individual nations have control over who endorses them. Telegramming not only takes time but relies on the other person to remove their endorsement. Resigning the WA is also not the best solution, because you would lose all of your other endorsements. If someone has to be kicked from a region, they, also, will lose their endorsements.

I feel like having agency over who endorses you would be a great quality-of-life change.

[United Calanworie]

If you don't want someone to endorse you, then you can either telegram them or resign from the WA and rejoin.

This would basically be a god-button for delegacy transitions and as Aav mentioned, have implications for R/D strategy in favor of invaders.

I suppose I am confused as to how it would effect R/D if individual nations have control over who endorses them.

Effectively: You can only appoint border control officers once every twenty-six hours. One way that defenders have to delay raiders being able to appoint another border control officer (and by extension, add another person who can watch updates and ban liberators) is to tip the delegacy at update. If you could remove endorsements at will, the person who has the second-most endorsements could keep their gap equal to or greater than liberators + 1, meaning that deltipping wouldn't work. This would fundamentally shift the balance of power to invasion forces, as they would be able to get a border control officer much faster in hotly contested liberations than they otherwise would, potentially preventing a liberation entirely, and also enabling the practice of region destruction to occur on a faster time scale.

Telegramming not only takes time but relies on the other person to remove their endorsement. Resigning the WA is also not the best solution, because you would lose all of your other endorsements. If someone has to be kicked from a region, they, also, will lose their endorsements.

I feel like having agency over who endorses you would be a great quality-of-life change.

It would be a good QOL change, I agree. I'm just personally convinced that, as a player who's done both raiding and defending, that it would tip the scales in favor of raiders by a very large amount on occupations. Any sort of change here would require some other changes made to let defenders have more of a chance at succeeding.

[Fort Concord]

Beyond everything Aav said above, I also think it's just a bit much besides that. Part of gameplay with endorsement cap enforcement and security/delegacy transitions is having to actually devise strategies and work to keep things in order. I'm not convinced we need a button to make that this easy, even if it didn't have serious implications for R/D strategy.

[The Hinterplace]

I am sorry that I am not understanding. But I am not advocating for a change to allow Border Control ROs to remove endorsements, only that nations can control the endorsements that they themselves have received. Would this still affect RnD? In RnD, I don't see the Point removing endorsements from themselves?

[United Calanworie]

I am sorry that I am not understanding. But I am not advocating for a change to allow Border Control ROs to remove endorsements, only that nations can control the endorsements that they themselves have received. Would this still affect RnD? In RnD, I don't see the Point removing endorsements from themselves?

The point wouldn't. The second-highest endorsed nation in the region would, thereby preventing a delegate tip. In a hypothetical occupation, invaders have 125 endorsements on their point nation. One of the people who is supposed to become a border control officer has 100. They have the second-most endorsements in the region. Defenders cannot pull 126 (+ a margin for ejections) endorsements to liberate the region, but they *can* pull 40. Those 40 would jump and make the 100-endorsement nation the delegate, thereby resetting the 26hr timer before the delegate can appoint border control officers. That's how this creates a serious and significant impact. If the second-most endorsed nation in the occupation can see the 40 members stage for the delegate tip, they can then remove 15 endorsements from themselves, making it so that they will not become the delegate, thereby preserving the border control timer.

Does that make sense?

[Riemstagrad]

Is it an option to allow players to set a cap on the maximum numbers of endorsements they want? Just in the settings.
The game then doesn't add endorsements if the self chosen cap was reached.

[Quebecshire]

Is it an option to allow players to set a cap on the maximum numbers of endorsements they want? Just in the settings.
The game then doesn't add endorsements if the self chosen cap was reached.

That would have the same implications for R/D as Aav explained, it would guarantee invaders could maintain mathematically unbreakable gaps between the point and regional officers.

Changes like that would ultimately diminish the feasibility of more interesting strategy in R/D, beyond giving a direct advantage to one side anyway.

[Honeydewistania]

how about rate limit removing endorsements to like one a minute. Then raider ROs cant mass remove defender endorsements during deltipping.

[Quebecshire]

how about rate limit removing endorsements to like one a minute. Then raider ROs cant mass remove defender endorsements during deltipping.

During an active del-tip, as in within the trigger, sure, but as Aav said, they could look at the stage ahead of time and know how large the gap would need to be to make a tip completely impossible, or could otherwise adjust things for better odds if they weren't sure, etc.

Again I'm entirely unconvinced people should be able to remove their own endorsements. A nation should mechanically be able to endorse any other nation (within the same region, that is).

[The North Polish Union]

I think this has merit. As someone who's WA nation has spent reasonable amounts of time in regions such as TRR for various reasons it tends to collect endorsements from rather unsavory nations whose names I would rather not have loudly splashed across my nation page

[Galiantus III]

I think this has merit. As someone who's WA nation has spent reasonable amounts of time in regions such as TRR for various reasons it tends to collect endorsements from rather unsavory nations whose names I would rather not have loudly splashed across my nation page

How is that an issue? If the concern is how others perceive you, this change would be counterproductive, since it takes something you currently have no control over and makes it your responsibility. If it's a matter of not personally wanting to see those names, just move to a region where you or someone you trust will screen them out.