NationStates Jolt Archive

Lead in – IC
The first world and its leaders
This first NationStates world is being torn apart by perpetual war. It is a Hobbesian version of reality where rages 'a war of all against all'. Epic battles are fought, involving innumerable hordes of troops thrown each other, battles raging across its troubled continents. All over this world, the dominantly Anglo-Saxon culture and mindset has produced highly homogeneous and militarised societies who often tolerate no political opposition and rally around strong men with simple creeds. These men, in turn, are part of intensely rivalling clan-based structures.

These mighty heads of hordes of men live in constant uncertainty despite their seemingly limitless power as foreign challenges to their dominion can always come, seemingly out of nowhere. Honour is extremely important, and nations have invaded others over mere perceived insults. The clan-system of military alliances means that anyone can be drawn into a war at any time, and such massive conflicts regularly rage across the world. Diplomacy, insofar as real attempts to it are made at all, is not held in high regard as todays allied warlord may be an enemy tomorrow. Weapons proliferation is rampant, and the arms trade is the largest trade around.

To cope with this dynamic international environment, the leaders whip their societies into being highly competitive with other nations. Even the more peaceful nations field vast armies that gobble up ever more resources. Bigger guns, bigger ships and more inflammatory rhetoric are to safeguard the leaders position in the world. The people know that, in the event of war, quarter is given nor expected and in war they always remain fiercely loyal to the leader and their clan to the very end.

The second world and its leaders
The second world of NationStates is smaller, but arguably more pleasant for its inhabitants. This world is home to a number of very diverse cultures, led mostly by olicharcies or other pluralistic forms of leadership such as corporate monopolies, monarchies, technocracies and republics. While this world has many dictatorships, its societies tend to be les burdened by total militarization as there is some room for elements of civil society to develop such as a civilian economy or unique languages.

The leaders of this world have a very different life indeed. Some of them have more in common with each other then with a commoner from their own nation as they spend most of their time travelling: from a high-class party to an international conference, then on to a season-themed ball with a state dinner before heading off to an elaborate alliance meeting. Arms deals and economic pacts are often made during such meetings and this has lead to a level of international cooperation between different oligargies. In international affairs, there are established groupings and the predictable international exchanges result in only small changes to the established World Order - even if the formal name of an alliance may change occasionally. A high emphasis is placed upon diplomacy, and at the very least lip-service is paid to it by those who are casually ignoring it.

Inspired by these international contacts, a lot of states are not as competitive and they maintain smaller, but more professional defence forces. This world has been scarred by massive wars in the past, but nowadays such wars are mostly undertaken to restore the fragile balance of power.

Nationstates forum vs International Incidents forum
Below I have presented a table with characteristics of what I see are two dominant approaches to roleplay in NS: first of all there is the character-based approach to roleplay which is predominant in the NS forum and is akin to co-operative storywriting. Second of all there is the clan-based approach to roleplay which is predominant in International Incidents and is in many respects more like an online multiplayergame (FPS or RTS). While there is some overlap between the uses of the different forums, I tend to see the separation between the forums as pretty clear. Characteristics as I see them:

http://www.fredvogels.org/images/NSvsII.bmp

Difficulty reading the image? See here. (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7571277&postcount=8)

Merging realities?
Now and then, on #nationstates IRC, there is a debate about the possible merger of the NS and II forums. After all, both forums busy themselves with Roleplay and the ‘enforcement’ of etiquette in II has proven to be a joke. The NS-forum folks tend to think etiquette in NS is better enforced, even.

Being a very arrogant NS-forum player, I will presume the character-based approach to be “better”. Or at least I will consider it a good thing if more people would adopt this playing style for my own amusement. Take whichever explanation you prefer. I will now present a number of possible reasons for the differences as they have arisen.

- The newbies argument: some people who stumble on NS have no idea of roleplaying rules and tend to ‘go with the flow’. With most newbies going to International Incidents, they pick up their habits there – thus reinforcing the current practices in II. Likewise, the newbies going to NS pick up the roleplaying style of the players there. If they do not, they are most likely forced to go to II for attention. This is an argument for merger, as the ‘NS’ crowd would provide ‘good’ examples.
-Learning: you learn to RP in a specific way from others. Good RPers could teach 'bad' RPers manners. By exposing not-so-good RPers who are willing to learn to 'better' RPers, they improve. This is a good argument for merger.
-Negative selection: people are forced to adapt themselves to the lowest common denominator of RP going on in a forum. Behaviour by one player is forcing others to follow suit: to be more aggressive in military matters, to ally-wank, to claim larger armies, etc. This is an argument against merger from the perspective of the NS-forum players as they would be forced to adapt to lowest common denominator of the II crowd. However, if you subscribe to the theory that people learn (as described above) it could actually help ‘pull up the standards’ of the clan-based RPers a bit.
-Choice: this argument presumes that people consciously choose to RP differently. It is just a preferred playing style, for IIers who do not want complicatedness of characters and detailed treaties but just want to have fun playing a competitive game.
-Incapability: Not everyone is capable of the character-based approach to RP in NS even if they tried. Trying to ‘better’ other RPers is pointless so it is best to leave them alone.

Thoughts?

OOC: Holy God, Knoot... to phrase this in an II manner:

"ph34r this p0st"

Or, as I might say:

"This is really great work, and deserves a lavish TAG, rather than a quiet bookmark. My real post shall follow in a short time."

Wiki that chart, Knoot!

I agree with you on many points, however, I would hate to see the fine roleplays of NS overun per-se with the many hundreds of short rants and stupid jokes that consume the entity that is II. I view NS as higher-calibre, although I do enjoy some of II, therefore needing seperation.

On the other hand, maybe NS could do better at making new players feel more welcome. My first try at making a roleplay here was utterly ignored, even though a good few told me it was a well written story.

Your breakdowns seem true....if we're talking about the lowest common denominator on II. Although it is true many nations that really have no reason to be playing a collaborative, freeform RP are on NS, the problem is most of them are on II.

From inter-alliance rivalries to massive armies to godmoding in the extreme, the warmongerers and despots of NS gather to II. And I wouldn't have it any other way.

Though many are idiots, there are even more nations renowed for their excellent RPs and policies. Iuthia, for their diplomacy. Schultaria Prime, for their technology. AMF, for his military triumphs. And this is a group that a great majority of people on NS want to be with. I personally want to stay with II, or at least the II mindset.

Huge armies. Epic clashes. Backroom scheming against your closest allies, diplomacy a potent weapon for the few that use it well. If I wanted to only do character RPs, I'd move to NS. I don't.

I want the massive, only partly planned RPs. I want the freedom to simply go to war with anyone at any time without having to extensively plan out the RP. I like the fact that there are few single-person RP threads. And I want the freedom to have my nation's many wars. That is why I and the majority of IIers are here. It's a far cry from the NS crowd, a crowd that most of us don't have any reason to want to be with.

So, in conclusion, your analization, though OK, is overlooking a few significant areas. Maybe II doesn't want to change. Maybe a great majority of IIers are of a higher standard of RPer then what you've presented. And amybe- just maybe- you overlooked a few major flaws of RPs on NS. Because it seems like you're looking at NS through rosy glasses. Very rosy glasses, from my perspective.

Edit- And all the replies have thusfar re-einforced the "NS is the snobby" forum syndrome among IIers. Good job gentlemen. You're just pushing nations taht would reasonably talk about this away from you.

*SIGH* It's the same old story, isn't it? Being a regular in NS makes you a better person then if you're in II. Better at RPing, better manners, better sex lif....errrr, what I meant to say was better........better at.....not godmoding and techwanking.

But the post that really rankles me is the one comparing NS to a book and II to a comic strip, especially the "five line posts." Since when is quantity better then quality? Since when does having a longer post make you a better RPer? It doesn't. So why don't you compare the actual meat of the RPs, instead of your contrived, snooty idaes about what makes an RP good.

Oh damn. There I've gone and acted like an ill mannered, idiotic, noobish godmoding crazy II RPer. Why can't we all just grow up and stop these forum-centered phallic competitions.

Or in so-called "II" speak, "WOOT! II and NS r0xxors the 81G 0N3! 010101! W3 T0G3TH3R 1Z 2 1337 4r U! W3 PWND G3N3rAl F0RuM N3W8S!

More in depth than my first congradulations, this is my theory against the merger:

NS is a very (compartively) civilized and cultured world, where as II is fast-moving and violent. This applies to not only the RP topics (stories about life versus WARZ!), but to the way RP is approached. In NS, a misunderstanding or player-driven conflict is most likely to be resolved through instant messenging, IRC, or TGs, where as in II, the response would rapidly come in the form of OOC/IC blurry ranting and maybe even wank/godmodding/straigh-up-flame. The players in II are in a competition for domination in an OOC manner as well as IC.

Now, imagine this mess being hurled upon the cooperative world of NS. The attempts at reason would fall on deaf ears as armies of drones swarmed over nations that simply attempted to ignore the idiocy. It would be somewhat on par with having an elderly University Dean and his entourage being dropped into the heart of urban decay. The NS players would either die (quit), get robbed (brutallized by the sheer mind-numbing horde of moronic behavior), or learn to fight back (countering fire with fire).

I say, keep it apart, for the forums are like filters. The best material stays in NS, the chaff falls to II, and the absolute crap falls all the way into General.

(By the way, I am a hugely biased NS player primarily, hence the opinions.)

I disagree.
I find there are many II RPs character based.
I found when I first came to NS that the NS forum was unwelcoming, and intolerant of my particular idea of what I want to roleplay.
I do not see any more skill in the NS forums as compared to the II forums-what do see is this:
II-more new players, less snobery, increased relaxation of rules of etiquette.
NS-unwelcoming to new player, a common sense of elitism-as if simply RPing in NS one is a superior RPer.
II-an anti-elite of sub standard RPers who number wank and ignore the enjoyable charachter based possibilities of WAR RPs.
NS- A verbose group of self important Elitists who perceive themselves as above the bar in comparision to II forum members.

What you have here is very simple-
War RPers Vs. Diplomats

I named the lowest common denominator in both forums because the creme of both forums is the same--good, polite RPers of both Large scale Campaigns and Personal Character based RPs.

A merger of forums could be very healthy- it would reduce down the snobery of NS, and re-introduce etiquette to the II forum as a whole.

If NS was to be made the Diplomatic Character driven forum and II to be the campaign style forum.
We could have a very interesting place here, with much less division.

*Quiet, educated applause*

Yes very well done Knoot, very intresting read, but don't forget, we do have nation on here that are highly militaristic.

Aslo i'd classify the "thread" column as
II:Comic Strip.
NS: Novel.

Think about it, while the short "five lines or less" posts of II would come out to around that of the length of a comic strip, the posts of NS should be read [and treated] like chapters of a book, and each new one would give a new twist, or continuing a peice that left you in suspence.

Alternative table:

II: FPS Clan-based approach to RP | NS: Character-based approach to RP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Out of Character approaches:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts speaking in the first person | Posts speaking in third person or using
| sources
|
Many short posts | Fewer but longer posts
|
A thread is a game |“A thread is a story”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Competitive inter-player relationships vs less-competitive inter-player
relationships
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weak separation of OOC-IC | Strong separation of OOC-IC
Assuming away many problems |Assuming away less problems
(such as internal opposition) |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristics of roleplays:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military-oriented RP | Character-oriented RP
|
Describing large groups (RPG game) | Describing individuals or small groups
| (Adventure game)
|
Storefronts | Threads describing deals
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Typical nations for the approach:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anglosaxon culture dominant | Diverse cultures
|
Highly militarised societies | Room for a civil society
|
Leadership formed around a single | Pluralistic leadership
leader |
|
No fundamental political opposition | Political opposition
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristics of relations between nations:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uncertain challenges coming out | Established groupings and
of nowhere | predictable exchanges
|
Dynamic environment | Incremental changes
|
Highly competitive | Often non-competitive
|
Low trust in diplomacy | High emphasis upon diplomacy
Military alliances (clans) only | Broader range of intergovernmental
| cooperation
Massive wars still going on regularly | Massive wars only to restore the
| balance of power

Nice post, but doesn't really seem to have an end, or conclusive statement. Are you writing this in an attempt to get the two merged? From the post, it seems more like suggesting getting rid of II and hoping everyone goes to the NS way.

I disagree.
I find there are many II RPs character based.
I found when I first came to NS that the NS forum was unwelcoming, and intolerant of my particular idea of what I want to roleplay.
Then your way of roleplay is fast-paced, poorly written, seemingly random wars?

I do not see any more skill in the NS forums as compared to the II forums
Then you haven't read the posts properly, NS has better grammar and punctuation, aswell as actual storylines

-what do see is this:
II-more new players, less snobery, increased relaxation of rules of etiquette.
Less Snobbery? Have you not met the likes of Dr_Twist, Credonia and Communist Missippi?


NS-unwelcoming to new player, a common sense of elitism-as if simply RPing in NS one is a superior RPer.
Absolute rubbish! I progressed from II to NS rather nicely, I have not been spoken down to, and have been generally accepted by the "NS" community.
Another example is Holy Vatican See, who was a very new RPer and was welcomed with more than open arms.


II-an anti-elite of sub standard RPers who number wank and ignore the enjoyable charachter based possibilities of WAR RPs.

Mainly true, however Credonia and a few others have done a character based war thread.

NS- A verbose group of self important Elitists who perceive themselves as above the bar in comparision to II forum members.

Many of whom write publish-worthy stuff.


A merger of forums could be very healthy- it would reduce down the snobery of NS, and re-introduce etiquette to the II forum as a whole.
If anything it would annoy the NSers and make them call for their/our beloved forum to be re-instated.

If NS was to be made the Diplomatic Character driven forum and II to be the campaign style forum.
We could have a very interesting place here, with much less division.
This was true untill about July of 2003, when the "newer" players flooded in, their lack of writing skills and jumping to war instead of going through offical diplomatic channels is what has caused the divide. [This is what I managed to peice together myself from various "older" players.]

I dont come here too often. I think Samtonia has it all perfectly in his post so I will not rant for too long.

There are some co operative alliances, there are some great RP's.

Im RPing a civil war with one of my other nations (notquiteaplace) and while I am not the greatest of II players, it still manages huge posts with lots of detail, detail that is relevant and functional and not excessive.

What is wrong with fast moving games of power between nations? Who said they arent semi co operative? A lot of the good RPs (yes the ones you have totally ignored while replying) are partially cooperative, people have a brief discussion of what they want to get out of the RP and maybe a few details and then just fly in, improvising. A good game is like a musical jam, someone hits a good riff and everyone locks on,trying to contribute. Sometimes you get a wonderful and inspiring piece, sometimes a load of rubbish. Often somewhere in the middle but its exiherating to do and very refreshing. It's not all about e penis size, but about improvising a story.

You seem not only to wear rose tinted glasses for NS, but seem to be looking through Dirty public transport train windows at II.

I wouldnt want a merger, it would be better just to incinerate the useless posters from II. All the 13 year old wannabe "H4XX0rs", which is what you have type cast the forum as. Though, indeed it would be nice to see more diplomacy in II, but it does happen. My other nation has only been at war twice in its 6 month life, and once was it's civil war.

Oh and 1337 speak in II is used in an ironic sense by most posters. For a forum so obsessed with language and stories you seem a little light on the context spotting.

Sadly the jokes part is often true, but its amusing not take everything so seriously.

II does apparently have one thing NS doesnt, a sense of fun. Stories, pieces of beauty are great to admire, but sometimes its just fun to run around a bit and get your hands dirty.

EDIT: So much for no rant....

The United African Republic of Lusaka resides primarily in "II" and I am generally with you in, well, looking-down on the sort of first person posts that seem to come from nowhere or anywhere. Of course that would seem in itself to indicate that there's a lot of II RP where it doesn't apply, or I wouldn't be there.

I'm sure that lots of people are going to be saying that, and so I'm not going to dwel on it. My main point is that getting bogged down in a few characters is, to me, boring and pointless. I am at Nation States, not Some Government Minister And His Butler. I see people every day, I interact with people every day. Screw people, there's billions of them, and none matter more than others. I'm not here to write a tedius gothic novel. Lusaka's all about the conspiracies, which are ideas before individuals. I can't be arsed sitting around in NS for days, waiting for somebody's Mr.WellDeveloped to come along and stamp his influence on a story or the state of a society.

There's good and bad RP in both forums, it's just that people seem to get some satisfaction out of pretending that the bad in "I" is actually good. Pah, there are different kinds of arrogance. The kind that has something backing it up, and the kind that Vanilla Ice exhibited on The Farm (okay, I know, nobody saw that, but it was funny, all right?).

Erm, and then, what Chellis said. I'm certainly not abandoning worthwhile ideas in favour of fawning over some over-inflated individuals.

Ah, screw it, I've got modern issues to address and ridicule.

Well, yes. I would have to say all points in this thread have excellent reason behind them. Each forum has it's Pros and it's Cons, and that's something that should be taken into account. II is much more brutal in the way things are paced, and NS much more serene. In II one could have a post declaring war swarmed on as if stagnant carrion on a savanna. People often do tend to blur in fits like this, and yes that's very irksome. However, posts in NS are often left sitting there, untouched as if Linux in Bill Gate's office. I remember once in NS I created a thread dealing in the assassination of my Minister of Security, and the outlaw evading capture. Well written, and well thought out. Even had a background thread! I posted, and it evaporated. I heard from it a month later, and that evolved into a six plus page Role Play of blood, blood, and more blood. Very spiffin' indeed. Heavens knows it's one of the only threads of mine in NS that gained attention, mind you. II, I'm just not so sure about. I'm trying to get used to the NS forum, but when things written go ignored it sort of dissuades you from staying. In II, there are those who actually Spell correctly, and can form well written paragraphs! Yet, they are rare and tend to stick to a certain group of people they RP with. If everyone were just a bit more open and RPed with different people, who weren't complete morons, I think most of this [ Tension/Snobbery/Idiocy/Cliquism/Elitism ] would dissipate.

Ich! If there were a merger, the NSers would get hassled by n00bs with n00ks, which I'm sure most don't want, and the idea that the NSers can or should force their etiquette* on the rest of the IIers is either offensive or hillarious, depending in what kind of mood we're in. There are vast credible RPing swathes of II that certain posters here have obviously either A)Never seen, or B)Never understood... but if where B is not true, you're welcome to come and join in, if you like.

All right, now I'm done.

*Assuming that NSers are a unified force and even agree that such a standard exists.

An interesting post. I've a few thoughts myself (imagine that!!!).

Remember when II was new? It was made because many felt flooded out by the storefronts and wanking (leggo o' my throat!) that were taking place in NS. I'm not sure what it was that switched this.

Whatever it was, I am happy with the results.

Have you noticed, there are far fewer ignores then there have been in the past. I think the two communities are happier seperate.

As you have stated, there is some overlap, and there should be! But I don't think it is wise to force more overlap then the two schools of RP naturally want. I think that would only invite the ignores again.

There is one other reason I can think not to combine the two forums. Scrolling. At times there are so many posts that people have to "scroll" to other pages just to see them all. Imagine if the two forums were combined! Not only would we players have to scroll further (more page loads? more lag?!), but we would have to shift through the dirt we think the other forum posters make!

I do agree with your analysis that two communities have developed, and I see no reason why we should Frankenstein the two creatures together.

Ah, I remember the days before II even existed. Then one day it popped up, don't ask me why for I don't know, and now I had two boards to look through for threads. I didn't mind that so much at first.
But more and more people started paying less attention to the name of the II board and started posting more and more storefronts. Some days I had to search through 3 pages of storefronts just to find a roleplay, and then often the roleplay didn't even interest me or it wouldn't be of interest to my nation.
Eventually I started paying less interest to II untill I gave it no interest. Then I also took my few month break from NS (Ah what blissful relief of stress that was) but I returned with a new nation, this nation.
With my new cleansheet I went for it and I gave II no interest and NS just a little. But being on IRC I still had talked to people from NS and II regurally. But II just doesn't seem like my thing. Especially due to the apparent worshipping of AMF.

Now I can take two approaches about this. One of which I call my NAZI NS approach: The II roleplayers are lesser-roleplayers and they should alll be deported to II in order to cleanse NS of their filth.
(It's all just a joke, don't take it serious)
And my other approach I call the open-mind approach: II roleplayers are just roleplayers with a different interest then NS roleplayers. So let them have their fun and let the NS roleplayers have their fun. Both forms of roleplay have their good and bad points, it all just depends on yourself and your own interests. It's like modern-art, you either hate it or you love it.
(I hope you all take up this approach)

Something I noticed overlooked so far is the wealth of interaction on II. There arent just wars and civil wars in it, there are economic collapses and calls for aid, there are embassies, romances played out with many nations accidentally getting involved, comedies (TIOR's romance thread was hilarious and well written), and trade agreements.

There are two types of II posters, bad ones and good ones. You seem to have focused on the bad ones. Which is understandable, they tend to post excessively, while most good posters tend to post more sparingly, or selectively. But if you actually watched II for a few hours for a few days before giving up you would spot them. Some posters are shinign examples to us all. TIOR for instance, for his sense of humour but good RPing ability, AMF and his friends (yes Im a fanboy, but I dont worship his nation, I just really look foward to the next installment of each of his RPs), who do character and war RP's better than most novelists could hope for. Euroslavia and sarzonia who rarely intervene directly but are always trying to educate weaker posters and understand RPing better than most. And more, many more very good Rper's, they are just names that are harder to spot than the average moron.

OOC: I'd probably put myself in the second world. But, I RP in II, I RP in II because I find it more interesting and more Nation States related, I see that NS is clogged up with "Holy shit! ELVES!" and the like.

I like my RP realistic and when I see an unnatural character, it should be a centre for the RP, therefore spicing it up but what I hate is RPing with those "anime-wannabes" who try and replicate the anime feel which makes me think "Shame, another potential writer, consumed by the rot that is anime."

Of course, that is because I personally hate anime...anyway, away from my anime bashing and back to II versus NS.

I prefer II because it is more II related, however, just because it isn't roleplay related, that doesn't mean I don't role play. Whenever I join an (II) RP, I rarely announce the numbers I'm using, I just like to RP the characters fighting and dying, no one has had a problem with this in the past.

And, sadly, I believe that Knootos is right about II being a "numbers game," it should be an area for more, realistic RP but that sadly is not the case.

Good thread, by the way.

And, sadly, I believe that Knootos is right about II being a "numbers game," it should be an area for more, realistic RP but that sadly is not the case.
Oi! The plotless wars! I remember a week or so ago there was a thread regarding a war between Red Sox and Yankess fans and the World Series. I assumed this one would be of humour, with hoardes of fans in White and Blue and Red flooding the streets with Bats and clocking each other. Yet no. I read through six pages of Number-Wanks and political statements. Not one post even mentioned baseball. It was as if Yankees and Red Sox just happened to be what the two opposing sides called themselves.

Dissapointment was an understatement.

I often use numbers in my posts, but often as part of the events. I like to say what died and didnt, but good tactics and clever use of units is often far more telling. As is the ability to describe what you are doing. These factors are more likely to win an RP than number wanking.

I dont think it hurts to announce numbers. Unless they are inflated and ill thoght out. Sending 50,000 men to another nation is a huge endevour and a lot of people chuck men around like toys with little thought to anything bar numbers. This is not acceptable, so dont think it's endorsed in II.

But "I attack with 1,000,000 infantry" is irritating to most people.

"10,000 Mechanised infantry dismounted from their APCs calmly and began advancing on the enemy lines occasionally sopping and carefully aiming and firing their assault rifles. They weaved through available cover and took shots before advancing further, the enemy return fire dropping five hundred as they acelerated to a jog, but failing to break their nerve."

On the other hand would be fine (well hopefully, and yes the number difference was deliberate). A post with numbers which are only as important as what is done with them. Which in my opinion is how it should be afterall what is the point of hurling men at the enemy and then them not doing much? They do actually use weapons when attacking.

Anyway the point is, that you just seem to see the first type of post I can understand the way you perceive II. However you are wrong. The second type of post (or part of a post) is often far below the standard of many II RPers. You just missed them.

NS and II are entirely seperate worlds with seperate continuities that barely cross over; nations that are superpowers in II can be unheard of in NS and vice versa. It would destroy both if they were combined, which is why they never will be.

Well, I tend to post in NS style on *both* forums... O_o oh dear, maybe the reason some of my threads are being ignored is I posted them in the wrong place...

In the beginning, God created the Heavens (NationStates forums) and the lands of Man (International Incidents), what he say was good. Then Satan fell from the Heavens, and strife rendered the lands of Man. Endless wars and misery plagued the lands of Man, the demons from land of Man tried to infitratate the Heavens. A war was fought and the Demons were cast back to Lands of Man.

God decreed Satan and the Demons shalt not return and sought to destroy those who oppose this will. Those who did were cast into Hell (General).

OOC

That's my opinion (and I know II was created later than NS).

Please, less of the 'II IS GREAT NO IT'S NOT NS IS GREAT' debate. Each to their own, as long as 'they' don't come trying to ram their style of play down everyone else's throats.

Are you people insane?

The key difference between NS and II is that NS is described as "Where nations come together and discuss matters of varying degrees of importance. [In-character]" and II is described as "A staging-point for declarations of war, international trade, and other major diplomatic events. [In-character; role-playing etiquette enforced]." II is located roughly a centimeter or two below NS in terms of distance on screen.

Other than that, you are all confusing the dichotomy of style with the dichotomy of forum cliques you are familiar with. By no means are the clique/styles attached to the forum itself.

Why is it people have to take polar opposites whenever there's a possibility of difference? People have to take to their tribes. Especially if you get to hate and spit on the other tribe.

NS is in perpetual war, II too. Both NS and II have diplomacy, and both NS and II feature the two styles, character oriented RP and nation oriented RP. Both NS and II have their sub-cliques, aka 'clans,' and both NS and II have talented writers.

Merger? They never separated. It's all part of NS.

*applause*

*ahem*

Vastiva plays in both. We see no reason anyone else who wanted to, could not. For that matter, we also play in the United Nations.

Three forums, three perspectives, three different ways of being, one game.

Placing them together? Chaos.

Nay. Vastiva votes as it shall always vote - leave the three separate. Though the walls between are only as real as the belief they are there, they serve their purpose well - a breech of ideology is only a click away, and yet, while their is a belief in the distance, it remains. But only so long as the belief is there.

We vote Nay.

*he sits*

I have only one line to say about this debate:

"It ain't broke? Don't fix it!"

[OOC: I agree largely with Samtonia about his arguments on the "snobbery" that resides in NS as compared to I.I. I spend most of my nation RPing time in I.I. while I do mostly sports RPs here.

It's beginning to look a lot like people who mostly reside in I.I. are automatically branded as n00bs whether they can RP or not. I.I. is not devoid of storytellers (I do a lot of character development in I.I.) and just because someone posts on NS instead of does NOT make them a better RPer. By only RPing with a select circle of players, you miss out on potentially good RPers and possibly a great RP experience because there are good players out there that you haven't "met" yet.

Now, do I think that the two worlds should be merged? Probably not. The last thing anyone needs is elitism in a game that should be fun for everyone who partakes in it.]

Ok, enough of this. II players: If you don't want to be called n00bs, stop complaining all NS players are snobs. NS players, if you don't want to be called snobs, stop saying II is full of n00bs.

It is pointless, it is not productive, and if you only post in one forum, why the hell does it matter what the other forum is full of?

Thread locked.