Won wars (closed to spam)

[Anarchic States]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

[Alris]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

why would we need to know this

[Amigosa]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

why would we need to know this

So that you don't go to war with him cause he's scary stuff.

[Neibeskiya]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

De-Canonised,

We didn't participate in that CSL War thingy you madeup

[Greater Rostoria]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

why would we need to know this

Biggest nothing-burger in history

[Anarchic States]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

De-Canonised,

We didn't participate in that CSL War thingy you madeup

Cause I blew you all up right after I declared war. Ya.

[Kenmoria]

Hello, everyone. The following is, of course, OOC.

Roleplaying in International Incidents is not exclusively, predominantly, or even mostly about winning. Winning is very easy. This is how to win: “Kenmoria releases the unblockable, unstoppable, uncounterable multiverse-destroying hyper-giga-mega bomb and irrevocably destroys the multiverse.” That wins, for a given sense of winning. Without contradicting that post, nobody has any further options. Hypothetical Kenmoria has just completely stopped the roleplay, in a way that hypothetical Kenmoria wins. This is also incredibly dull, and also astonishingly easy. Most importantly, it is not fun for anyone involved.

We are not operating in a videogame, where all the participants have a fair chance and where war is a matter of skill in controlling units or clicking very quickly. The purpose of NationStates is rather different, because players can play whatever they want. One can play as an FT Empire which controls multiple solar systems, or as a PT backwater struggling to handle the switch from letters to telegrams. Some enjoy playing large, superpower nations, while others enjoy paying small, developing countries. This means that any fight over who wins or who loses becomes a matter of who can write the most absurd statistics in factbooks.

The person who has truly considered his or her military, giving it realistic flaws and weaknesses, and setting the size and budget at what is realistic for that nation in question, has put genuine effort into creating verisimilitude. On the other hand, it is very possible to state: “Examplestan has 19374101039472 tanks, all of which are completely invincible, piloted by immortal, hypercompetent zealots.” That is what Examplestan has, and it does not involve much effort at all. I am not saying that a powerful nation is always worse, that making a strong state is always a mistake, but rather that realistic levels of power are appropriate. This creates more opportunities for storytelling. A fight where both sides have a chance to lose is simply more fun.

Where am I going with this? Well, I sometimes look at the topics appearing on the sidebar on the left, and I have seen more than a few topics being fought between Anarchic States and others. In doing so, I have noticed that these wars don’t seem to be cooperative. You all don’t appear to be interested in telling a good story that is enjoyable for everyone involved, writing realistic characters and exploring a fictional universe together. Instead, the focus appears to be on winning. This will not work. It will not work because there are no limits on power. Any nation can just take inspiration from Mario and one-up the other, by adding more soldiers, better weaponry, or stronger shielding. It’s rather like playing chess by arbitrarily adding more pieces to the board. You might win, but that’s not challenging, genuine, or interesting.

Decanonisation is not something to be done as an offensive tool, one of the many things in the arsenal of a roleplayer to win. It is a measure taken OOC when players in a roleplay are unable to respect one another to the extent that the story is meaningful. If I were writing a character-driven roleplay focussing on a single character, into which I have invested a lot of time and effort, then someone turns up and writes that said character has a cardiac arrest, this does not respect my character or my worldbuilding. Therefore, I am entitled to ignore this in the future. Doing so because a side loses is simply poor etiquette. It also is not binding on anyone else.

Snip.

If I were in any of those roleplays, I would not find that my nation has been respected. Invincible enemies do not make for good stories. I recommend that you look through some roleplays of players with experience roleplaying, either in this subforum or in P2TM, for some inspiration of how to write well. Sombreland’s threads covering the Wenchuanese Problem are great but accessible examples of good roleplaying. If you want to continue doing what you are doing, then nobody can stop you, but I very much doubt that you will find any meaningful enjoyment from it.

Now, I am no expert. Nor am I any sort of mentor or moderator. However, I have been roleplaying here for over six years, through various accounts, and I think that I’ve gained just a little experience in the matter, enough to speak fairly confidently about it. Do have a look at the pinned threads in F&NI, NS, and II.

[Ashotu Three]

De-Canonised,

We didn't participate in that CSL War thingy you madeup

Cause I blew you all up right after I declared war. Ya.

You can't force someone to participate in an RP.. If they haven't joined role play than they aren't involved. Also, Instantly blowing up a nation is kinda unfair.

[Mongyolia]

Cause I blew you all up right after I declared war. Ya.

You can't force someone to participate in an RP.. If they haven't joined role play than they aren't involved. Also, Instantly blowing up a nation is kinda unfair.

No, not kinda, just is unfair.

[New Stonen]

Hello, everyone. The following is, of course, OOC.

Roleplaying in International Incidents is not exclusively, predominantly, or even mostly about winning. Winning is very easy. This is how to win: “Kenmoria releases the unblockable, unstoppable, uncounterable multiverse-destroying hyper-giga-mega bomb and irrevocably destroys the multiverse.” That wins, for a given sense of winning. Without contradicting that post, nobody has any further options. Hypothetical Kenmoria has just completely stopped the roleplay, in a way that hypothetical Kenmoria wins. This is also incredibly dull, and also astonishingly easy. Most importantly, it is not fun for anyone involved.

We are not operating in a videogame, where all the participants have a fair chance and where war is a matter of skill in controlling units or clicking very quickly. The purpose of NationStates I rather different, because players can play whatever they want. One can play as an FT Empire which controls multiple solar systems, or as a PT backwater struggling to handle the switch from letters to telegrams. Some enjoy playing large, superpower nations, while others enjoy paying small, developing countries. This means that any fight over who wins or who loses becomes a matter of who can write the most absurd statistics in factbooks.

The person who has truly considered his or her military, giving it realistic flaws and weaknesses, and setting the size and budget at what is realistic for that nation in question, has put genuine effort into creating verisimilitude. On the other hand, it is very possible to state: “Examplestan has 19374101039472 tanks, all of which are completely invincible, piloted by immortal, hypercompetent zealots.” That is what Examplestan has, and it does not involve much effort at all. I am not saying that a powerful nation is always worse, that making a strong state is always a mistake, but rather that realistic levels of power are appropriate. This creates more opportunities for storytelling. A fight where both sides have a chance to lose is simply more fun.

Where am I going with this? Well, I sometimes look at the topics appearing on the sidebar on the left, and I have seen more than a few topics being fought between Anarchic States and others. In doing so, I have noticed that these wars don’t seem to be cooperative. You all don’t appear to be interested in telling a good story that is enjoyable for everyone involved, writing realistic characters and exploring a fictional universe together. Instead, the focus appears to be on winning. This will not work. It will not work because there are no limits on power. Any nation can just take inspiration from Mario and one-up the other, by adding more soldiers, better weaponry, or stronger shielding. It’s rather like playing chess by arbitrarily adding more pieces to the board. You might win, but that’s not challenging, genuine, or interesting.

Decanonisation is not something to be done as an offensive tool, one of the many things in the arsenal of a roleplayer to win. It is a measure taken OOC when players in a roleplay are unable to respect one another to the extent that the story is meaningful. If I were writing a character-driven roleplay focussing on a single character, into which I have invested a lot of time and effort, then someone turns up and writes that said character has a cardiac arrest, this does not respect my character or my worldbuilding. Therefore, I am entitled to ignore this in the future. Doing so because a side loses is simply poor etiquette. It also is not binding on anyone else.

Snip.

If I were in any of those roleplays, I would not find that my nation has been respected. Invincible enemies do not make for good stories. I recommend that you look through some roleplays of players with experience roleplaying, either in this subforum or in P2TM, for some inspiration of how to write well. Sombreland’s threads covering the Wenchuanese Problem are great but accessible examples of good roleplaying. If you want to continue doing what you are doing, then nobody can stop you, but I very much doubt that you will find any meaningful enjoyment from it.

Now, I am no expert. Nor am I any sort of mentor or moderator. However, I have been roleplaying here for over six years, through various accounts, and I think that I’ve gained just a little experience in the matter, enough to speak fairly confidently about it. Do have a look at the pinned threads in F&NI, NS, and II.

I'm being honest, you should write a book on this topic. I would buy it.

De-Canonised,

We didn't participate in that CSL War thingy you madeup

Cause I blew you all up right after I declared war. Ya.

Your entire nation just got destroyed with all of your citizens, resources, and weapons. You now are powerless. How does it feel to have just lost your "roleplay"? By the way, just to let you know what I used, I launched a marshmallow at light speed, killing all of your citizens. You can't stop me, HAHHAHAHAHA

[Ashotu Three]

Hello, everyone. The following is, of course, OOC.

Roleplaying in International Incidents is not exclusively, predominantly, or even mostly about winning. Winning is very easy. This is how to win: “Kenmoria releases the unblockable, unstoppable, uncounterable multiverse-destroying hyper-giga-mega bomb and irrevocably destroys the multiverse.” That wins, for a given sense of winning. Without contradicting that post, nobody has any further options. Hypothetical Kenmoria has just completely stopped the roleplay, in a way that hypothetical Kenmoria wins. This is also incredibly dull, and also astonishingly easy. Most importantly, it is not fun for anyone involved.

We are not operating in a videogame, where all the participants have a fair chance and where war is a matter of skill in controlling units or clicking very quickly. The purpose of NationStates I rather different, because players can play whatever they want. One can play as an FT Empire which controls multiple solar systems, or as a PT backwater struggling to handle the switch from letters to telegrams. Some enjoy playing large, superpower nations, while others enjoy paying small, developing countries. This means that any fight over who wins or who loses becomes a matter of who can write the most absurd statistics in factbooks.

The person who has truly considered his or her military, giving it realistic flaws and weaknesses, and setting the size and budget at what is realistic for that nation in question, has put genuine effort into creating verisimilitude. On the other hand, it is very possible to state: “Examplestan has 19374101039472 tanks, all of which are completely invincible, piloted by immortal, hypercompetent zealots.” That is what Examplestan has, and it does not involve much effort at all. I am not saying that a powerful nation is always worse, that making a strong state is always a mistake, but rather that realistic levels of power are appropriate. This creates more opportunities for storytelling. A fight where both sides have a chance to lose is simply more fun.

Where am I going with this? Well, I sometimes look at the topics appearing on the sidebar on the left, and I have seen more than a few topics being fought between Anarchic States and others. In doing so, I have noticed that these wars don’t seem to be cooperative. You all don’t appear to be interested in telling a good story that is enjoyable for everyone involved, writing realistic characters and exploring a fictional universe together. Instead, the focus appears to be on winning. This will not work. It will not work because there are no limits on power. Any nation can just take inspiration from Mario and one-up the other, by adding more soldiers, better weaponry, or stronger shielding. It’s rather like playing chess by arbitrarily adding more pieces to the board. You might win, but that’s not challenging, genuine, or interesting.

Decanonisation is not something to be done as an offensive tool, one of the many things in the arsenal of a roleplayer to win. It is a measure taken OOC when players in a roleplay are unable to respect one another to the extent that the story is meaningful. If I were writing a character-driven roleplay focussing on a single character, into which I have invested a lot of time and effort, then someone turns up and writes that said character has a cardiac arrest, this does not respect my character or my worldbuilding. Therefore, I am entitled to ignore this in the future. Doing so because a side loses is simply poor etiquette. It also is not binding on anyone else.



If I were in any of those roleplays, I would not find that my nation has been respected. Invincible enemies do not make for good stories. I recommend that you look through some roleplays of players with experience roleplaying, either in this subforum or in P2TM, for some inspiration of how to write well. Sombreland’s threads covering the Wenchuanese Problem are great but accessible examples of good roleplaying. If you want to continue doing what you are doing, then nobody can stop you, but I very much doubt that you will find any meaningful enjoyment from it.

Now, I am no expert. Nor am I any sort of mentor or moderator. However, I have been roleplaying here for over six years, through various accounts, and I think that I’ve gained just a little experience in the matter, enough to speak fairly confidently about it. Do have a look at the pinned threads in F&NI, NS, and II.

I'm being honest, you should write a book on this topic. I would buy it.

"How to not trash your nations history by trashing other nations"
AKA chapter one.

[New Stonen]

I'm being honest, you should write a book on this topic. I would buy it.

"How to not trash your nations history by trashing other nations"
AKA chapter one.

5/5 stars would rate higher if I could

[Communist Beijing Must be China]

yall ruined the seriousness of this

[New Stonen]

the stuff I wrote up there up there ^^^ is for show, and to show what a godmodder is like

[The Rio Grande River Basin]

Not only have you chosen to ignore the advice of just about every single RPer, from old to summie, you have succeeded in getting me and Ashotu to agree on something. So, with all due respect, zip it, and learn some etiquette. Learn how to RP with even the modicum of competence, the most basic military understanding, and at least attempt to not appear to be the most self confident, smug, Dunning-Kruger curve proving, “RPer”, if it is even possible to categorise you as one, and take other’s advice.

[LFPD Soveriegn]

Not only have you chosen to ignore the advice of just about every single RPer, from old to summie, you have succeeded in getting me and Ashotu to agree on something. So, with all due respect, zip it, and learn some etiquette. Learn how to RP with even the modicum of competence, the most basic military understanding, and at least attempt to not appear to be the most self confident, smug, Dunning-Kruger curve proving, “RPer”, if it is even possible to categorise you as one, and take other’s advice.

Oh poor anarch... He used to be a good member. Unfortunately because of things like this (and outright disrespecting you) He's been kicked out of his positions. From what I can tell the decline started after marine girls, as he then Holy Spanished everywhere at once.

[LFPD Soveriegn]

-epic detailed snip-

That's it, I'm adding my weaknesses to my military overview. Thanks for this.

[Utquiagvik]

You should probably write a factbook on your wars like I did.

[Ashotu Three]

-epic detailed snip-

That's it, I'm adding my weaknesses to my military overview. Thanks for this.

My weakness is that I have about the power of a very PT military, just more lethal if the weapons hit you.

[Ashotu Three]

You should probably write a factbook on your wars like I did.

One time I tried to make a factbook for a "war" but I got uninspired.

[Jilia]

That's it, I'm adding my weaknesses to my military overview. Thanks for this.

My weakness is that I have about the power of a very PT military, just more lethal if the weapons hit you.

I may have a cool futuristic military, but I lack in numbers and labor, that’s why Jilia is desperately try to get hold of slaves, also Jilia might take place in like 200 years in the future, but I’m to scared to equip my armies with Futuristic weapon art since it might be considered OP.

[LFPD Soveriegn]

My weakness is that I have about the power of a very PT military, just more lethal if the weapons hit you.

I may have a cool futuristic military, but I lack in numbers and labor, that’s why Jilia is desperately try to get hold of slaves, also Jilia might take place in like 200 years in the future, but I’m to scared to equip my armies with Futuristic weapon art since it might be considered OP.

Our weaknesses are that we're very motorised, which means we're oil gulping noises oil guzzlers. Fortunately we have Russia. And we also take a while to 'mobilise' fully. Around 6m-1y, which means we often get pushed back and then just destroy the enemy.

Oh, and one more thing. We have a intelligence/secret police branch called the SIRS. They are what I said they are, but they also keep the army in check. So often times they would keep curbstomping each other to death until a 06 comes in and is like 'dude stfu both of you' or a war starts.

[Gorvonia]

Canon Wars
The Bigtopian Civil War
X&J War
Multiversal conflicts
Liberation of the Racalimari
Anarchic-CSL War

Un-Canon wars
Anarchic German War (cope German man.)

Bro please stop, you are ridiculizing yourself

[Neonian Technocracy]

De-Canonised,

We didn't participate in that CSL War thingy you madeup

Cause I blew you all up right after I declared war. Ya.

THEN, WHY DO YOU MADE THE THREAD IF WE ARE NOT ALIVE AND CAN'T DO ANYTHING????????????????

[Anarchic States]

Hello, everyone. The following is, of course, OOC.

Roleplaying in International Incidents is not exclusively, predominantly, or even mostly about winning. Winning is very easy. This is how to win: “Kenmoria releases the unblockable, unstoppable, uncounterable multiverse-destroying hyper-giga-mega bomb and irrevocably destroys the multiverse.” That wins, for a given sense of winning. Without contradicting that post, nobody has any further options. Hypothetical Kenmoria has just completely stopped the roleplay, in a way that hypothetical Kenmoria wins. This is also incredibly dull, and also astonishingly easy. Most importantly, it is not fun for anyone involved.

We are not operating in a videogame, where all the participants have a fair chance and where war is a matter of skill in controlling units or clicking very quickly. The purpose of NationStates I rather different, because players can play whatever they want. One can play as an FT Empire which controls multiple solar systems, or as a PT backwater struggling to handle the switch from letters to telegrams. Some enjoy playing large, superpower nations, while others enjoy paying small, developing countries. This means that any fight over who wins or who loses becomes a matter of who can write the most absurd statistics in factbooks.

The person who has truly considered his or her military, giving it realistic flaws and weaknesses, and setting the size and budget at what is realistic for that nation in question, has put genuine effort into creating verisimilitude. On the other hand, it is very possible to state: “Examplestan has 19374101039472 tanks, all of which are completely invincible, piloted by immortal, hypercompetent zealots.” That is what Examplestan has, and it does not involve much effort at all. I am not saying that a powerful nation is always worse, that making a strong state is always a mistake, but rather that realistic levels of power are appropriate. This creates more opportunities for storytelling. A fight where both sides have a chance to lose is simply more fun.

Where am I going with this? Well, I sometimes look at the topics appearing on the sidebar on the left, and I have seen more than a few topics being fought between Anarchic States and others. In doing so, I have noticed that these wars don’t seem to be cooperative. You all don’t appear to be interested in telling a good story that is enjoyable for everyone involved, writing realistic characters and exploring a fictional universe together. Instead, the focus appears to be on winning. This will not work. It will not work because there are no limits on power. Any nation can just take inspiration from Mario and one-up the other, by adding more soldiers, better weaponry, or stronger shielding. It’s rather like playing chess by arbitrarily adding more pieces to the board. You might win, but that’s not challenging, genuine, or interesting.

Decanonisation is not something to be done as an offensive tool, one of the many things in the arsenal of a roleplayer to win. It is a measure taken OOC when players in a roleplay are unable to respect one another to the extent that the story is meaningful. If I were writing a character-driven roleplay focussing on a single character, into which I have invested a lot of time and effort, then someone turns up and writes that said character has a cardiac arrest, this does not respect my character or my worldbuilding. Therefore, I am entitled to ignore this in the future. Doing so because a side loses is simply poor etiquette. It also is not binding on anyone else.



If I were in any of those roleplays, I would not find that my nation has been respected. Invincible enemies do not make for good stories. I recommend that you look through some roleplays of players with experience roleplaying, either in this subforum or in P2TM, for some inspiration of how to write well. Sombreland’s threads covering the Wenchuanese Problem are great but accessible examples of good roleplaying. If you want to continue doing what you are doing, then nobody can stop you, but I very much doubt that you will find any meaningful enjoyment from it.

Now, I am no expert. Nor am I any sort of mentor or moderator. However, I have been roleplaying here for over six years, through various accounts, and I think that I’ve gained just a little experience in the matter, enough to speak fairly confidently about it. Do have a look at the pinned threads in F&NI, NS, and II.

I'm being honest, you should write a book on this topic. I would buy it.

Cause I blew you all up right after I declared war. Ya.

Your entire nation just got destroyed with all of your citizens, resources, and weapons. You now are powerless. How does it feel to have just lost your "roleplay"? By the way, just to let you know what I used, I launched a marshmallow at light speed, killing all of your citizens. You can't stop me, HAHHAHAHAHA

I can. Using this. VOIDED