NationStates Jolt Archive

Alright. It has come to my attention that there is a band of 80 or more nations going around and deleting regions. Even though I'm a psycotic dictator, I know when people go too far. These people are kicking innocent nations out of their homes, and for no good reason. People, I know you hate this idealistic crap, but please, you gotta stand up for the weaker nations who are being de-homed. (I realize that's a made up word but I don't care.) And most of the people who are the with the region-crashing band are or were members of the Imperial Council. I advise you to kick any strange nation out before it's too late. Please people, ya gotta stop these monsters! :!:

..damn i posted it twice... curse my browser

I reported the Imperial Council for griefing of Zombie Paradise, still haven't got a response from the mods after 2 or 3 days

Thank you, Omz222. Finally someone noticed. They've also crashed several others. So far the only region that's survived is the AAA Aliance. They've killed all the others.

I've witnessed their second griefing---reported it.

Also watch for the New World Empire. Not good players, I'd say.

We really need to do something... How about a temporary alliance until we can sort this out?

WE ARE NOT GRIEFERS! We just crash, and thats not against the rules. Yeah, I know that we greifed once, but that was a mistake, and we were warned for it. There is nothing wrong with what were doing.

But we all hate you region-screwing bastards.

Sure there is. There are many things wrong with what you're doing.

I don't care how many times you yell "free form roleplay" at me. If anyone and I mean anyone ever "crashes" my region, I'll kick their ass IC and get their ass banned OOC. Stay the fuck away.

Most the people in my region try to defend against it... though personally I've never got into that side of NS....

Which is precisly why I put in a password.

I may be next in the password as well.

Should a nation need a new home, they are welcome to stop by Blammus. I am willing to assist in this manner as best I can. But, after a recent incident that has recieved attention on this board, I will do a background check to insure that it is not a multie.

Could someone please state what we are doing that is illeagal?

WE ARE NOT GRIEFERS! We just crash, and thats not against the rules. Yeah, I know that we greifed once, but that was a mistake, and we were warned for it. There is nothing wrong with what were doing.

Actually, you griefed twice:

Zombie Paradise: Ex-nations passworded region, you spammed regional board, mods informed

0000000: Ex-nations passworded region again, Ex-nations warned by mod

Passwording a region without the natives knowing the password is griefing, FYI.

Could someone please state what we are doing that is illeagal?

The consensus regarding the norms of accpetable behavior is this:

- Ejecting nations after an invasion is illegal.

- Messing about with the password settings after an invasion is illegal.

- Message board and telegram spamming is illegal.

- Changing the World Factbook Entry to boast of your conquest is OK, provided you then leave.

So if you want to invade places, you had better do nothing other than "running up your flag" once you succeed, and leave immediately.

Could someone please state what we are doing that is illeagal?

The consensus regarding the norms of accpetable behavior is this:

- Ejecting nations after an invasion is illegal.

- Messing about with the password settings after an invasion is illegal.

- Message board and telegram spamming is illegal.

- Changing the World Factbook Entry to boast of your conquest is OK, provided you then leave.

So if you want to invade places, you had better do nothing other than "running up your flag" once you succeed, and leave immediately.

Just to clarify a couple of things.

-You can eject a few nations that threaten your delegacy (but you may not ban them)

-You can password the region, but you must give the password to all natives (and continue to do so if you change it)

-Spamming is NEVER allowed

-You can "run up your flag", but you don't have to leave immediately.

Hope that helps. Also if you have any more questions about invasions, feel free to contact me. :wink:

Glad you cleared that up. I am taking every step I can to prevent any harm to my region.

I haven't actually seen a Mod ruling on occupying regions (though I'm wearing my wollen eyes at the moment so I may have missed on.)

Can invaders indefinately occupy an invaded region and if so is it still the case that they can never become natives.

If this question hasn't come up before; Mods may feel free to talk amongst themselves, mutter about annoying goody-two-shoes nations asking pointlessly annoying questions, and then amend my flag to a swastika and delete me for rule violations.

We didnt spam. It was clearing the boards. And password protecting is leagal. If it wasnt, the entire NWE would be deleted. Its only illeagal if you ban someone and then password protect it. We were told that we had to infom the banned natives of the password. And the banned nation was actually an IC crasher! So we really didnt do anything wrong! Were doing something you may not want us to doing, but its legal!

"Clearing spam" by means of a quick succession of content-light messages posted by the same person is still spamming.

Natives are natives - if you turned up in force and took over, you can never be considered a native.

Monopolising the UN Delegacy and ejecting anyone who attempts to elect a native Delegate is griefing.

Tactical Grace is correct. Invaders can NEVER be considered natives. This rule was stated by Neut in another thread.

Sure there is. There are many things wrong with what you're doing.
What, exactly?
"Many Things" is not a great definer(sp)

Okay, I have decided to make a move that will make you all happy. All future Imperial crashes will be the same as the one in Blammus. We will not password protect the region, we will not spam, and we will only ban one nation, the former delegate, then immediately remove him/her from the ban list. Happy?

Okay, I have decided to make a move that will make you all happy. All future Imperial crashes will be the same as the one in Blammus. We will not password protect the region, we will not spam, and we will only ban one nation, the former delegate, then immediately remove him/her from the ban list. Happy?

It's a start. What if you only crash region of people who do the same. Crashing a region of other people is most of the time just party-crashing! You obviously don't care about other people! :evil:

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

if you want to crash a region, crash The Holy Alliance. They crashed my region so they deserve it.

if you want to crash a region, crash The Holy Alliance. They crashed my region so they deserve it.

He can't do that. He can only crash if nobody is able to defend :P

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

oh yeah, I forgot

You obviously don't care about other people! :evil:
Nope! If you want to crash, you gotta be unmerciful. Oh, and Draztonia, Im currently busy (crashing). But if The Holy Alliance has no or an inactive founder... Hahaha! :twisted:

Ah, never mind. The Holy Alliance is dead. And Holy Alliance has an active founder.

You obviously don't care about other people! :evil:
Nope! If you want to crash, you gotta be unmerciful. Oh, and Draztonia, Im currently busy (crashing). But if The Holy Alliance has no or an inactive founder... Hahaha! :twisted:

"unmerciful" = just another word for "lamer" and "nerd"!

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

You obviously don't care about other people! :evil:
Nope! If you want to crash, you gotta be unmerciful. Oh, and Draztonia, Im currently busy (crashing). But if The Holy Alliance has no or an inactive founder... Hahaha! :twisted:

"unmerciful" = just another word for "lamer" and "nerd"!

Plus a bunch of other "unpleasant" terms.

Ah, never mind. Holy Alliance has an active founder.

Oh yeah that's right, your kind only goes after the EASY targets

"unmerciful" = just another word for "lamer" and "nerd"!

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.
Not in Oxford English.

Draztonia, shut up. If you knew anything about crashing, then you'd know that crashing a region with an active founder is a useless, and just plain dumb, act. Theyd just undo everything you did.

"crashing" a region is just moving in there with a large group and seizing delegacy ... the part which is dificult when there's an active founder is called GRIEFING, ie banning people and taking controll of a region to spite the natives.

We didnt spam. It was clearing the boards. And password protecting is leagal. If it wasnt, the entire NWE would be deleted. Its only illeagal if you ban someone and then password protect it. We were told that we had to infom the banned natives of the password. And the banned nation was actually an IC crasher! So we really didnt do anything wrong! Were doing something you may not want us to doing, but its legal!
Your way to clear the boards in a crashed region is spam.

Draztonia, shut up. If you knew anything about crashing, then you'd know that crashing a region with an active founder is a useless, and just plain dumb, act. Theyd just undo everything you did.
What's the point in crashing an inactive region with only 2-8 nations anyways?

Not in Oxford English.

"Shut up" isn't an "Oxford English" term either.

This is becoming a flame war in "almost" Oxford English :P

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

Okay, I have decided to make a move that will make you all happy. All future Imperial crashes will be the same as the one in Blammus. We will not password protect the region, we will not spam, and we will only ban one nation, the former delegate, then immediately remove him/her from the ban list. Happy?

That's much better. It is still harshing on someone else's mellow, but at least it would show appropriate restraint. And it would be better still to restrict attacks to expansionist regions, rather than quiet ones which want to be left alone.

Listen, if you want to crash a region, you do more than get delegacy. And all of that can be undone by the founder if its active.

Listen, if you want to crash a region, you do more than get delegacy. And all of that can be undone by the founder if its active.

I've witnessed their second griefing---reported it.

Also watch for the New World Empire. Not good players, I'd say.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Ask Blamgolia what we did with his region. I have never griefed a region. I always give out the password and I never "kill" the region. Don't go throwing slanderous comments jsut because I'm good at what I do, and I play fairly. You might want to put a password up in your region.

It's a start. What if you only crash region of people who do the same. Crashing a region of other people is most of the time just party-crashing! You obviously don't care about other people!

You know, if I never hear anything from you again on this topic It'll be too soon. I seem to remember a little region called AnimeNations and a lot crap you gave me about being deleted and all of my troops aswell for griefing. Please note that we ALL survived your pitful threats. Contact a mod and get your facts straight.......All of you.

Face it, I'm here to stay. And as long as I don't cheat and don't spam and don't flame in your messageboards, the mods will never do anything about it. So stop acting all high and mighty. I am a driving force in this game as much as any of you and that makes you nervous. I'll be seeing some of you very soon. :twisted:

I've witnessed their second griefing---reported it.

Also watch for the New World Empire. Not good players, I'd say.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Ask Blamgolia what we did with his region. I have never griefed a region. I always give out the password and I never "kill" the region. Don't go throwing slanderous comments jsut because I'm good at what I do, and I play fairly. You might want to put a password up in your region.

It's a start. What if you only crash region of people who do the same. Crashing a region of other people is most of the time just party-crashing! You obviously don't care about other people!

You know, if I never hear anything from you again on this topic It'll be too soon. I seem to remember a little region called AnimeNations and a lot crap you gave me about being deleted and all of my troops aswell for griefing. Please note that we ALL survived your pitful threats. Contact a mod and get your facts straight.......All of you.

Face it, I'm here to stay. And as long as I don't cheat and don't spam and don't flame in your messageboards, the mods will never do anything about it. So stop acting all high and mighty. I am a driving force in this game as much as any of you and that makes you nervous. I'll be seeing some of you very soon. :twisted:

Yeah, and we all have a big laugh about your foolish attempts :P You just stick to no0bs, and don't enter one of my regios :P


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

Hmmm...wouldn't it be funny when one of your "natives" gains UN status pretty soon and it turns out to be me? I'll be seein ya. Cheers!

Eshek

Hmmm...wouldn't it be funny when one of your "natives" gains UN status pretty soon and it turns out to be me? I'll be seein ya. Cheers!

Eshek

Lol, I am always in for a good laugh. If you want to know which regios are mine, just go to my site. I dare you :P
If you can do that, you get my respect. But if I was you, I should stick to invading no0bS.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

Your regions aren't even worth invading. I'm obviously wasting my time. Ejecting one nation would be griefing your little sleeper regions. And I know that you'll be replying in a minute because someone with mutltiple nations and multiple regions obviously has more time on their hands than me. So let me just say that you can pretend to be whoever you want but when the power goes out, and the computer turns off and I'm off having a life you'll be still be waiting in front of the screen praying it'll turn back on so you can exact your revenge with your petty sarcasm and empty headed remarks. I am not a cheater, nor have I ever griefed while invadng a region. You can have the last word. Have a nice life, though we all know it'll be mediocre at best. I'm done with you.

And as long as I don't cheat and don't spam and don't flame in your messageboards, the mods will never do anything about it.

Speaking of flaming, this is coming close:

So let me just say that you can pretend to be whoever you want but when the power goes out, and the computer turns off and I'm off having a life you'll be still be waiting in front of the screen praying it'll turn back on so you can exact your revenge with your petty sarcasm and empty headed remarks.

I suggest that you exercise more caution when posting, Eshek.

Corinthe, don't provoke Eshek. Understood?

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Corinthe, don't provoke Eshek. Understood?

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

I feel like having a Guardian Angel now :lol:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

*

Corinthe, Queen of Eternity.

Thank you so much, Eshek! Some reinforcements! Hey, could a mod pleeeease lock this? This is becoming a thread of flame. And in the moderation forum, too.

Thank you so much, Eshek! Some reinforcements! Hey, could a mod pleeeease lock this? This is becoming a thread of flame. And in the moderation forum, too.
I think this is a good thread for proving region crashing is good or not, no need to lock.

Oh, and Im going to kill Sims (Montross Fyarr. I know him personally). Or at least put a password on his $100 calculator.



( :wink: J/k. I wont do anything to mad, but Ill do something, like start a rumor about you. Lets see, well you were cruel enough to make one about me liking -=-=-, so Ill... damn, you really have liked Beth. Ill find someone, though. Promise.)

I think this is a good thread for proving region crashing is good or not, no need to lock.More like a thread for shouting at crashers.

I agree with Omz222; I'll keep this topic open. However, if the flaming continues, then I'll lock it.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Well could someone at least move this to the NS forum. This really doesnt belong under Moderation.

I think this is a good thread for proving region crashing is good or not, no need to lock.More like a thread for shouting at crashers.
There are good point here about region crashing is bad or not... Many people are annoyed with region crashers, anyways, no offense.

Sims, Ill leave you alone. I wont make any rumors about... wait, I havent got you back for that yet, have I?

EDIT
Thats the last thing i want to say!

Well could someone at least move this to the NS forum. This really doesnt belong under Moderation.

I'll think about it, but I won't promise anything. I feel that it should stay here because it's related to Moderator duties (namely, invasions being legal or illegal).

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

I think that Ill bring in a few more crashers. Make this more interesting!

Well, invasions are definately leagal. Its in the FAQ. Were debating if its right or not.

Well, invasions are definately leagal. Its in the FAQ. Were debating if its right or not.

...which would make it a discussion related to Moderator duties. :wink:

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

Invading regions is not only legal, it is fun :D . It adds a whole new dimension to the game. I mean the issues and UN stuff is fun, but the invading is better. We all have to remember this is just a game. :wink:

Invading regions is not only legal, it is fun :D . It adds a whole new dimension to the game. I mean the issues and UN stuff is fun, but the invading is better. We all have to remember this is just a game. :wink:

Roleplayed war is a million times mroe fun than endorse someone.

Invading regions is not only legal, it is fun :D . It adds a whole new dimension to the game. I mean the issues and UN stuff is fun, but the invading is better. We all have to remember this is just a game. :wink:

Roleplayed war is a million times mroe fun than endorse someone.

I beg to differ. I gave up make believe when I graduated 3rd grade. I would much rather have some proof that I outplayed someone, not just saying "HAHA, I nuked you first".

As well, being a sucessfull invader for a long period of time (meaning having far more sucesses then failures + not being modbombed as most are)-->

To me this is one of the most difficult things to achieve in the game. Very, very few have accomplished this.

Well, invasions are definately leagal. Its in the FAQ. Were debating if its right or not.

...which would make it a discussion related to Moderator duties. :wink:

--The Democratic States of CogitationIt seems that you know more about your job than I do (duh! :roll: ), so Ill just stop arguing and go with what you say. :)

RPing is good, but not as fun as crashing. I mean, when you crash, your actually doing something in RL. And plus, if you do it enough, you get a reputation of being strong. Like the EoP. Wait, there dead. Bad example. Id talk longer, but I really have to go to school. Bye.

Endorsing people doesn't make you strong

Endorsing people doesn't make you strong

If they become delegate and take over the region it does.

Declaring power as a delegate doesn't make you strong either. Even being a founder doesn't make you strong. NOTHING in this game makes you strong or even powerful. But outsmarting a delegate or simply making a name for yourself in a community, now thats strength. My name is up on the most wanted board of many regions. I am loved, feared, hated and admired. Thats power. Its all basic human psycology. Founders and delegates rarely want to give up their spot of their own accord. Why? for the same reason crashers invade.

Look at the Pacific. There was no "true" government or leader. Its a spawn region for crying out loud. But why did literally dozens even hundreds of people get all worked up? Franco didn't invade the Pacific. He was elected. Why does it matter if he was the delegate and not someone else. The solution was simple; Move to a new region. But the Pacific Army and many others couldn't ignore it because of basic human psychology. Invading a region and taking control doesn't give me power. Its the people that make a big deal out of it that give me power. Some have it, some don't. Sorry.

Bashing region crashers really isn't different than what I said earlier. I could cry about it and say RP gamers are cheating because they're making up their own rules. But I don't. And, I don't complain about the elitist attitude of some RP gamers either. They play their way I play mine.

And I reiterate; as long as I don't spam, and I don't cheat, and I don't grief, The mods will never "DEAT" me. Its part of the game. Pure and simple.

Invading regions is not only legal, it is fun :D . It adds a whole new dimension to the game. I mean the issues and UN stuff is fun, but the invading is better. We all have to remember this is just a game. :wink:

Roleplayed war is a million times mroe fun than endorse someone.

I beg to differ. I gave up make believe when I graduated 3rd grade. I would much rather have some proof that I outplayed someone, not just saying "HAHA, I nuked you first".

outplayed, I see no evidence that you outplayed them, only that you spoilt their enjoyment of the game. Where is the skill? All you do is endorse each other, no skill at all

You've obviously never invaded a region. It takes cunning and timing. It requires skill alright. Send me a Tgrama nd I'll hook you up with a great experience.

this game is such a worthless waste of time. what point to this game is there except invasion?

Your post confused me. You say that being the delegate doesn't give you power, but the fact that everyone and their brother is trying to get the seat back is the power? Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you are saying.

Invading regions is not only legal, it is fun :D . It adds a whole new dimension to the game. I mean the issues and UN stuff is fun, but the invading is better. We all have to remember this is just a game. :wink:

Roleplayed war is a million times mroe fun than endorse someone.

I beg to differ. I gave up make believe when I graduated 3rd grade. I would much rather have some proof that I outplayed someone, not just saying "HAHA, I nuked you first".

outplayed, I see no evidence that you outplayed them, only that you spoilt their enjoyment of the game. Where is the skill? All you do is endorse each other, no skill at all

It takes more skill, planning, and timing than you will ever know.

Your post confused me. You say that being the delegate doesn't give you power, but the fact that everyone and their brother is trying to get the seat back is the power? Maybe I'm just misunderstanding what you are saying.

What I meant by that was that nothing that pertains to this game makes you powerful or strong. Its just a game. A silly website built to sell a book and so people can talk online. Its the people that make it real. The reason being a delegate makes you powerful is because others don't want you to be or really want you to be. See what I'm saying? These non crashers don't understand because they're version of the game, although I'm sure very satisfying, is no where near as exciting. Without people who like and hate you there is no power in this game anywhere. Thats why I used Franco Spain as an example. He's probably one of the most controversial nations in the game recently because of such a stir he caused. But he's not an invader. He was elected. Had he been elected anywhere else, no one would have cared. Do you see what I'm saying?

OK, I was refering to in game power and you were talking about power in real life. I understand now.

BTW, I like your stand on invasions. Maybe we should talk further.

Endorsing people doesn't make you strong
Roleplaying that you are srtong doesn't make you strong. Spinach does.

I am of the opinion that roleplaying and invading are two very different things, but that neither one is necessarily better than another. Each has attractive qualities that draw people to that kind of activity.

In roleplay, there's a kind of creative artistry that goes into the roleplay, in writing stories. Many people find enjoyment in crafting characters, settings, environments, and plots and then immersing themselves in what they have created and playing around with the modifications and contributions offered by other players. It's a realm of imagination that, for those who can appreciate it, is very deep and very entertaining.

In region invasions, (and I'm limiting my discussion to invasions that remain within NationStates rules), organization and coordination are key. Gathering a large group of nations and coordinating them to operate as one is not by any means easy, especially considering that things happen in real life that might cause particular memebrs of the group to suddenly become unavailable. The bigger the group, the harder it is to control. Invasions are essentially a sport.

Both activites are interesting activites to those who participate in them. Each is a different mode-of-play in NationStates, essentially almost a different game. Where we have problems and complaints seems (to me) to be where these two groups clash with one another. This is why I advocate lifting most existing restrictions on invaders, but putting one very important restriction in place: Invaders can only invade other invaders. Keep the roleplay people segregated from the invader people and define acceptable and unacceptable behavior for each. Let each nation choose which activity they want to be involved in.

Note that my opinions are not necessarily the opinions of the other moderators or of Max Barry or NationStates Administration. I might advocate certain things, but ultimately, it would have to be approved by Max.

--The Decmoratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder of The Realm of Ambrosia

I never did this, I never did that...Whatever. you may find a mod who believes ypou but I sure don't. I have monitored multiple crasher groups and thus far you are all pretty much the same, griefers, some more than others. According to the game there are ways to do it "right", I have yet to see more than one or two. of course that is according to the game rules. OK. Personally I think that disrupting others small and infrequent chats is just plain mean, and for what purpose? So that you can claim to be powerful and try and recruit? To me the ends do not justify the means. If you want power, earn the respect of others by creating something not by tearing others down. I fully expect the nasty TGrams and harrassment that will follow this, so go ahead. I am not here to change your minds, just voice my opinion. BAM is a great vehicle for you guys, That is creative and effective.
Wishing you all Good Clean Hunting

I have never been part of an invasion or a role playing game, although I'm checking both out.
Although this makes that I don't have an inside view, it might make me a bit more objective.

As far as I see it, there's one major difference between roleplaying and invading. In a roleplay, you and your opponent(s) have choosen to play that particular game, with it's ups and downs. When you invade someone, your opponent is probably just a random fellow who wants to play NationStates, not the game "Defend yourself from an invasion of other NationStates players".

Of course, you can argue: "But those guys choose to play NS! They must be aware of the fact they could be invaded."
My answer to that is simple: "No, they probably didn't know, and may very well be unaware of the possibilty to this day." And even if they DID know, there's not much choice to play a game similar to this anyplace else on the internet.

So basically, I agree with Cogitation. Let the invaders invade each other. That would certainly make their lives more interresting (and difficult of course ;) ) because they now face equal opponents. (In my mind's eye, I see some beautifull, longlasting or fast-paced invasion-wars taking place :) )

That only leaves the question about how you could possibly keep an eye on that...

If they didn't know that they could be invaded then they probably should have read the rules. They checked the little box saying they understood, so I have no sympathy.

I never did this, I never did that...Whatever. you may find a mod who believes ypou but I sure don't.

You'll find a mod or all of them who believe me. How do I know? I'm still here.


Of course, you can argue: "But those guys choose to play NS! They must be aware of the fact they could be invaded."
My answer to that is simple: "No, they probably didn't know, and may very well be unaware of the possibilty to this day." And even if they DID know, there's not much choice to play a game similar to this anyplace else on the internet.

So basically, I agree with Cogitation. Let the invaders invade each other. That would certainly make their lives more interresting (and difficult of course ) because they now face equal opponents. (In my mind's eye, I see some beautifull, longlasting or fast-paced invasion-wars taking place )

Ofcourse I can. Its just like Blues said. They were supposed to read the FAQ and agree to the terms of play. Period. And there aren't sufficient numbers of regions who will declare themselves invaders to keep to that sort of play. As soon as I get invaded I'll simply report to the mods that "I'm not a region crasher and I'm being griefed." And how ould the mods be able to track who really was an invader who wasn't?

Even if we played that way, after you get ejected once youcan never re-enter a region. Invaders would be more so than ever tempted to cheat with UN multis, and puppets. It just won't work that way.

So basically, I agree with Cogitation. Let the invaders invade each other. That would certainly make their lives more interresting (and difficult of course ) because they now face equal opponents. (In my mind's eye, I see some beautifull, longlasting or fast-paced invasion-wars taking place )


...there aren't sufficient numbers of regions who will declare themselves invaders to keep to that sort of play.

You know why that is? Because people HATE what you’re doing!

I'm continually amazed that there are still nations who believe that they have a right to destroy the fun of others playing this game, by invading their region. I'm also amazed that when faced by the prospect of playing against only other invasion regions, they crumble. It sickens me that they enjoy causing misery to other innocent players of this game.

Cold Springs, thats what makes the game so interesting, and also so realistic. It shows that you are always in danger of something happening. And anyway, sometimes the regions we attack have been complained about. There not all innocent.

For all of you who think that what we do is easy and simple, then you should learn about the Blammus invasion. We were completely unnoticed. The delegate even made special ajustments to the region so it couldnt be invaded agian. But we were already in. Talk to Blamgolia. He shouldnt be all to annoyed at us, since Blammus is now back in good condition (we didnt completely crash it), and probably will talk to you.
*Prepares for next anti-crasher comment.*

The Cold Spring, while I sympathize with your point-of-view, I would like to ask you to retain some degree of civility.

Losing one's cool is how flamewars start.

This is just a reminder.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Losing one's cool is how flamewars start.
Yeah, and we want to keep this thread alive now. So shuuuuuuu... please be quiet.

Losing one's cool is how flamewars start.
Yeah, and we want to keep this thread alive now. So shuuuuuuu... please be quiet.

Remaining civil is not the same thing as refraining from speaking.

"Think about it for a moment."

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Of course, you can argue: "But those guys choose to play NS! They must be aware of the fact they could be invaded."
My answer to that is simple: "No, they probably didn't know, and may very well be unaware of the possibilty to this day." And even if they DID know, there's not much choice to play a game similar to this anyplace else on the internet.

So basically, I agree with Cogitation. Let the invaders invade each other. That would certainly make their lives more interresting (and difficult of course ) because they now face equal opponents. (In my mind's eye, I see some beautifull, longlasting or fast-paced invasion-wars taking place )

Ofcourse I can. Its just like Blues said. They were supposed to read the FAQ and agree to the terms of play. Period.

When I created my nation, I had to full out some opinions about some statements. No faq's no rules, no checkboxes. Period. (And sure, everybody reads faqs to the tiniest details, and immediatly knows what they mean when they first play the game. Oh, and let's not forget the eternal memory.)
But for the sake of the arguments, let's say I agree.


And there aren't sufficient numbers of regions who will declare themselves invaders to keep to that sort of play. As soon as I get invaded I'll simply report to the mods that "I'm not a region crasher and I'm being griefed."


Why wouldn't you dare state "I am an region invader"? You seem so proud on what you're doing, as I read in your posts in this topic.
But let's continue.



And how ould the mods be able to track who really was an invader who wasn't?


I already memtioned this, but I am certain that something could be worked out if we really wanted to.


Even if we played that way, after you get ejected once youcan never re-enter a region. Invaders would be more so than ever tempted to cheat with UN multis, and puppets. It just won't work that way.


So you are saying, that when your opponent would be a little tougher than the average NS player, you need to use cheats to get things done? I'm sorry if I sound a little harsh, I mean no offense, but I just have to say "losers". That is NOT a game spirit.


All in all, it seems to me that your arguments for not restricting invasions are almost identical to the one the non-invaders use to back up their point. Which makes me read it as if you're affraid someone does to you what you do to us. (note: maybe if this discussion doesn't work out, the non-invaders could form a team and start invading the invaders. Let em have a taste of their own "pleasure".)
I also see that you have more than once said "It's just a game". I agree, I very strongly agree. So why don't you guys stop spoiling the fun for others, and enhance the fun for yourself? That is, if you really see invading as a game...

You know why that is? Because people HATE what you’re doing!

I'm continually amazed that there are still nations who believe that they have a right to destroy the fun of others playing this game, by invading their region. I'm also amazed that when faced by the prospect of playing against only other invasion regions, they crumble. It sickens me that they enjoy causing misery to other innocent players of this game.

:x Let me explain this to you. There are rules against ruining a region. They get you DEATed! When invading a region, smart invaders like me only occupy for a day or two and leave. Spamming, UN cheating, and using profanity are all griefing and will get you DEATed. We shouldn't be limiting crashers on where and who they can invade. We just need more invaders to be forced into following the rules. I've invaded something like 8 regions in the last 5 or 6 weeks, 2 of which were unsuccessful, but I haven't been DEATed because I didn't grief. I have native allies in regions that I've invaded. Region crashers do not ruin regions. Griefers do. Nations elected to delegate can be griefers too if they abuse their power.

Making harsh remarks really don't enlighten anyone about region crashers. You're intensity only makes us look stronger.

What region did you say you were from again? :wink:

[Moderator Edit - Cogitation] This post was a duplicate of Juana's post, above. [/modedit]

So basically you started playing the game with uot even reading the rules? That right there tells me you didn't know what you were getting yourself into. Invasions are in the rules, I can't help the fact that you don't like them, but you agreed to the terms and conditions (yes you have to check the little box before you create your nation) when you started. The rules probably aren't gonna change just for your taste.

When I created my nation, I had to full out some opinions about some statements. No faq's no rules, [b]no checkboxes. Period. (And sure, everybody reads faqs to the tiniest details, and immediatly knows what they mean when they first play the game. Oh, and let's not forget the eternal memory.)
But for the sake of the arguments, let's say I agree.

So what, you didnt agree to the sites terms and conditions? And dont say you did, because you just said that there were no checkbockes.

Cogitation: I would make one pathetic mod, wouldnt I? :D

I beg to differ. I gave up make believe when I graduated 3rd grade. I would much rather have some proof that I outplayed someone, not just saying "HAHA, I nuked you first".

People should realize what's bad RP and good RP. "Haha I nuked you first" is bad RP.

I must admit, good RPs rock. But invasions are cool, too. But thats not what this is about. Im going to tell Monty to put a poll on this.

I must admit, good RPs rock. But invasions are cool, too. But thats not what this is about. Im going to tell Monty to put a poll on this.
Well, roleplaying and this "physical" region crashing are just... different.

Have to agree with you there. Im ready for more comments/shouts/agreements, so Ill... BUMP

Cogitation: I would make one pathetic mod, wouldnt I? :D

No offense intended, but I have my doubts. :wink:

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

Endorsing people doesn't make you strong

if you value delegate control, then it does. And if it didn't then nations wouldn't mind too much when they are invaded.

I would say, despite an attempt to de-emphasize it that it is rather important. Otherwise are you saying you wouldn't mind it if your region was invaded?

Invading regions is not only legal, it is fun :D . It adds a whole new dimension to the game. I mean the issues and UN stuff is fun, but the invading is better. We all have to remember this is just a game. :wink:

Roleplayed war is a million times mroe fun than endorse someone.

I beg to differ. I gave up make believe when I graduated 3rd grade. I would much rather have some proof that I outplayed someone, not just saying "HAHA, I nuked you first".

outplayed, I see no evidence that you outplayed them, only that you spoilt their enjoyment of the game. Where is the skill? All you do is endorse each other, no skill at all

This kills me. So now there is going to be a fad of players suggesting that it is easy and non-game played to take over a region while at the same time players run around with heads cut off every time their region is invaded.

If it is easy, then players should stop just whining in the forums when they are invaded (mind you I am not referring to cheating in your region by invaders), should instead try to invade and regain their region.

Look, you may not like invasions. You don't. That's fine. But to suggest it is easy tells me you have done little to consider the lagistics of the issue.

I am of the opinion that roleplaying and invading are two very different things, but that neither one is necessarily better than another. Each has attractive qualities that draw people to that kind of activity.

In roleplay, there's a kind of creative artistry that goes into the roleplay, in writing stories. Many people find enjoyment in crafting characters, settings, environments, and plots and then immersing themselves in what they have created and playing around with the modifications and contributions offered by other players. It's a realm of imagination that, for those who can appreciate it, is very deep and very entertaining.

In region invasions, (and I'm limiting my discussion to invasions that remain within NationStates rules), organization and coordination are key. Gathering a large group of nations and coordinating them to operate as one is not by any means easy, especially considering that things happen in real life that might cause particular memebrs of the group to suddenly become unavailable. The bigger the group, the harder it is to control. Invasions are essentially a sport.

Both activites are interesting activites to those who participate in them. Each is a different mode-of-play in NationStates, essentially almost a different game. Where we have problems and complaints seems (to me) to be where these two groups clash with one another. This is why I advocate lifting most existing restrictions on invaders, but putting one very important restriction in place: Invaders can only invade other invaders. Keep the roleplay people segregated from the invader people and define acceptable and unacceptable behavior for each. Let each nation choose which activity they want to be involved in.

Note that my opinions are not necessarily the opinions of the other moderators or of Max Barry or NationStates Administration. I might advocate certain things, but ultimately, it would have to be approved by Max.

--The Decmoratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
Founder of The Realm of Ambrosia

Let's not forget a third aspect-- actually doing both.

Firstly, I can’t understand any invasion group that doesn’t RP in some way. I can’t imagine it would be fun at all. I ain’t mad atcha, just saying I don’t see how it would be fun.

That said, to me the problem with your limiting it just to those who claim to want to acknowledge invasion rules is that it limits the game possibilities. I want this site to grow. And the more the game is pigeon-holed, the less a chance is has of doing so. Why is this site so popular now? Because Max was smart enough to leave the right holes in the game, both accidentally and for somewhat unintended purposes. And because of that, it was able to grow in a way other then just by his vision.

Cog, if your only playing by all the rules if declared idea were in place two months ago or more, there would not be all these anti-invader invaders or protector groups that there are now. That means that this game would be missing a dynamic. This means that there are people who wouldn’t have what now keeps them in the game, and possible means less invaders.

Look at The Heartland if you want. It seems the most active period it and it’s allies had was during the invasion. I am not saying that some don’t drop out because of invasions. But I do feel that even more drop out from boredom when not presented with new stimulus as well, I am saying that invasions dedicate people in ways they would not think of being dedicated to the game otherwise.

I have never been part of an invasion or a role playing game, although I'm checking both out.
Although this makes that I don't have an inside view, it might make me a bit more objective.

As far as I see it, there's one major difference between roleplaying and invading. In a roleplay, you and your opponent(s) have choosen to play that particular game, with it's ups and downs. When you invade someone, your opponent is probably just a random fellow who wants to play NationStates, not the game "Defend yourself from an invasion of other NationStates players".


Invasions are in the FAQ. You are suggesting people should be able to pick and choose from the FAQ?

Please don't paint it as if invasions were not game rules. This is what it seems your attempt may be.

Thanks.

So basically, I agree with Cogitation. Let the invaders invade each other. That would certainly make their lives more interresting (and difficult of course ) because they now face equal opponents. (In my mind's eye, I see some beautifull, longlasting or fast-paced invasion-wars taking place )


...there aren't sufficient numbers of regions who will declare themselves invaders to keep to that sort of play.

You know why that is? Because people HATE what you’re doing!

I'm continually amazed that there are still nations who believe that they have a right to destroy the fun of others playing this game, by invading their region. I'm also amazed that when faced by the prospect of playing against only other invasion regions, they crumble. It sickens me that they enjoy causing misery to other innocent players of this game.

Then the rules of this game make you sick.

That you insist invading only destroys the game is either because A) you do not have a complete perspective on this B) you have considered this from only a very baised perspeective C) you have only encountered cheating invaders D) you are not willing to honestly look into the issue, despite your intial feelings on the subject.


Regardless it is not purely intelectually honest. It would be the equivalent of an invader constantly posting that RPing is just a bunch of geeks who can't get their stuff together to actually do something.

Please don't take me wrong, I do not in anyway feel this. But it would be the same. Just because invasions are not popular, please don't only paint as negative as an image as you can. I know you are msarter then that. I hope you can disagree with it without painting such a broad stroke.

I would ask the Invaders here to think about this:

Say you were having a nice chat in your messageboard, and playing a nice game in a region you can call your own. Then some other nations come in uninvited, and throw your delegate out, and start having chats in your region, ban you and your friends and put a password on your region.

Sounds like a lot of fun, doesn't it?

I am not saying you mean any harm at all. But it simply is a fact that there are people who don't like what you are doing. (I can just hear you thinking, "too bad for them then".)

Someone once said "If you have the power to do something, should you use that power?". I mean to say that just because you can, you don't have to invade other people. (but of course, the only thing that matters is that YOU want it, and f*** the rest of the world.)

I have no prolem with invasion in itself, if you just enter a reion, seize control and "put up your flag" by changing the world factbook entry.
But I do have a problem with banning regions, also the ones who are a "threat" to your so-called "power".
I am still convinced that it would be a real challenge to invade the region of other invaders. Why don't you try it? At least those guys would know how to fight you. You could call it the difficulty level "hard" (too hard maybe?).

I have an idea. There's a good possibility that NS2 will have a war-feature. Let invaders play there, when it comes out, and make invasions illegal in NS1.
But then you say "But then we would have to pay!". Good, that will let you consider how badly you want those regions. ;)
(yes, I also think NS2 shouldn't have a pricetag, but who am I to complain, they seem to have made up their minds :cry: )

I am still convinced that it would be a real challenge to invade the region of other invaders. Why don't you try it? At least those guys would know how to fight you. You could call it the difficulty level "hard" (too hard maybe?).

Those are the ones we call "HardCore". All others are just wannabees. In NationStates you find very few real "HardCore" players :cry:

I would ask the Invaders here to think about this:

Say you were having a nice chat in your messageboard, and playing a nice game in a region you can call your own. Then some other nations come in uninvited, and throw your delegate out, and start having chats in your region, ban you and your friends and put a password on your region.

Sounds like a lot of fun, doesn't it? )

No, this would be cheating. Invaders are not allowed to kick you out and password protect the region. You will see me defend LEGAL invasions only.

As to others coming in and talking about other thins on your regional board, if you want to be an isolationist region then use a password. If not, then you should expect immigration as well as outside influence may have an effect on regional board happenings.

As to the “fun” of being invaded… take the region back. It is just as possible for you to do it as for the invaders. If you care enough about it, you’ll fight for it. Then once it is yours, you will appreciate it that much more, no?


I have an idea. There's a good possibility that NS2 will have a war-feature. Let invaders play there, when it comes out, and make invasions illegal in NS1.
But then you say "But then we would have to pay!". Good, that will let you consider how badly you want those regions. ;)
(yes, I also think NS2 shouldn't have a pricetag, but who am I to complain, they seem to have made up their minds :cry: )

This seems to me that you want to pick and choose which rules you abide by. Invasions are legal, so why should it be okay to only choose the morsels you find tasty?

I think there is a delicate balance to be reached between invasions and non-invasions, I agree with that.

And I think far too many invaders are idiots who cheat or are too stupid to do anything else, I will grant you that. To the same degree, and not directed to you per se, I feel far too many non-invaders are too whiny who prefer to complain over and over again then use the numerous tools and resourced provided by the game to hold their region or take the region back over.

The ball is really in your court. It should be quite easy, with just a bit of gusto, to take the region back most of the time. It is simply easier not to make the effort to play part of the game.

I do see your point, and hope you see this perspective as well. Thanks for the discussion.

I would ask the Invaders here to think about this:

Say you were having a nice chat in your messageboard, and playing a nice game in a region you can call your own. Then some other nations come in uninvited, and throw your delegate out, and start having chats in your region, ban you and your friends and put a password on your region.

Sounds like a lot of fun, doesn't it?

I am not saying you mean any harm at all. But it simply is a fact that there are people who don't like what you are doing. (I can just hear you thinking, "too bad for them then".)

Someone once said "If you have the power to do something, should you use that power?". I mean to say that just because you can, you don't have to invade other people. (but of course, the only thing that matters is that YOU want it, and f*** the rest of the world.)

I have no prolem with invasion in itself, if you just enter a reion, seize control and "put up your flag" by changing the world factbook entry.
But I do have a problem with banning regions, also the ones who are a "threat" to your so-called "power".
I am still convinced that it would be a real challenge to invade the region of other invaders. Why don't you try it? At least those guys would know how to fight you. You could call it the difficulty level "hard" (too hard maybe?).

I have an idea. There's a good possibility that NS2 will have a war-feature. Let invaders play there, when it comes out, and make invasions illegal in NS1.
But then you say "But then we would have to pay!". Good, that will let you consider how badly you want those regions. ;)
(yes, I also think NS2 shouldn't have a pricetag, but who am I to complain, they seem to have made up their minds :cry: )


This commet simply proves that you have never finished a single one of my comments. I really don't know how to explain this to you any simpler than I already have. If you feel the need to perpetuate a stereotype go ahead. But we're trying to have a discussion on invaders and region crashers, NOT CHEATERS. So if you can't bring up any valid points except to accuse me and those like me of cheating then you need to find a new thread as your comments are OFF-TOPIC.

We do invade eachother. I've already told you that. Obviously you were too busy rereading your own comments. My region was invaded just last week. So was Empire of Power. But we won't invade eachother because we are allies. Are you implying that regions shouldn't be allies/friends? Invaders are not allowed to to do the things you describe. If that were to happen you should report them to the mods on the getting help page.

I'm just going to ask you one more time to please be rational and stop stereotyping region crashers as cheaters and spammers. I'm an invader but I do NOT grief or cheat.

I am still convinced that it would be a real challenge to invade the region of other invaders. Why don't you try it? At least those guys would know how to fight you. You could call it the difficulty level "hard" (too hard maybe?).

Those are the ones we call "HardCore". All others are just wannabees. In NationStates you find very few real "HardCore" players :cry:

This is false. We DO invade eachother! Its like some people just don't listen. Some of us have alliances and help one another others we don't. Usually split by politics or existing relationships with enemy regions. We also attack one another during an invasion of somewhere else. I'll send troops to help out a delegate because he's being invaded by another region. You people just don't know what you're talking about. Invaders have a much more exciting and realistic experience in NS than any of you chatters and RP gamers.

I am still convinced that it would be a real challenge to invade the region of other invaders. Why don't you try it? At least those guys would know how to fight you. You could call it the difficulty level "hard" (too hard maybe?).

Those are the ones we call "HardCore". All others are just wannabees. In NationStates you find very few real "HardCore" players :cry:

This is false. We DO invade eachother! Its like some people just don't listen. Some of us have alliances and help one another others we don't. Usually split by politics or existing relationships with enemy regions. We also attack one another during an invasion of somewhere else. I'll send troops to help out a delegate because he's being invaded by another region. You people just don't know what you're talking about. Invaders have a much more exciting and realistic experience in NS than any of you chatters and RP gamers.

In NS2 I will teach you a lesson you'll never forget. Right now I drop this issue, because you are full of hot air. And you don't care what the other players like. You are only out to get your own satisfaction. Believe me, you have allot to learn of real HC play!

Ps. I hope I can use my own name in NS2, so you can see who's kicking your butt 8)

Oh please....save your grandstanding for someone who cares.

I was simply reiterating the fact that stereotyping invaders as cowards because they don't invade eachother was false. Don't get you knickers in a twist! :?

And don't talk trash about kicking someone's butt unless you can back it up. Being as that there is no NS2 right now, maybe you should stay on topic. I'll be seeing you soon. :twisted:

Ackbar, I've read your reply to my post; I'm still thinking about it.

...

In NS2 I will teach you a lesson you'll never forget. Right now I drop this issue, because you are full of hot air. And you don't care what the other players like. You are only out to get your own satisfaction. Believe me, you have allot to learn of real HC play!

Ps. I hope I can use my own name in NS2, so you can see who's kicking your butt 8)

Oh please....save your grandstanding for someone who cares.

I was simply reiterating the fact that stereotyping invaders as cowards because they don't invade eachother was false. Don't get you knickers in a twist! :?

And don't talk trash about kicking someone's butt unless you can back it up. Being as that there is no NS2 right now, maybe you should stay on topic. I'll be seeing you soon. :twisted:

Please keep the discussion civil.

What I've quoted above is not terribly bad in terms of forum etiquette, but it's starting to get close to the borderline in terms of what's Mod-actionable. I don't want it getting any worse.

If you can keep it polite, then by all means, carry on.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
NationStates Forum Moderator

When I say that I drop the issue, I'll drop it. But I will pick it up in NS2 again. I was not angry, and certainly not ready to flame or flamebaiting :wink:

Please keep the discussion civil.

If you can keep it polite, then by all means, carry on.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."
NationStates Forum Moderator

Aarrrrrrgggghh!! I know I know......
Its just so frustrating sometimes. :x
What I can I say? I'm very passionate.

I would ask the Invaders here to think about this:

Say you were having a nice chat in your messageboard, and playing a nice game in a region you can call your own. Then some other nations come in uninvited, and throw your delegate out, and start having chats in your region, ban you and your friends and put a password on your region.

Sounds like a lot of fun, doesn't it?

I am not saying you mean any harm at all. But it simply is a fact that there are people who don't like what you are doing. (I can just hear you thinking, "too bad for them then".)

Someone once said "If you have the power to do something, should you use that power?". I mean to say that just because you can, you don't have to invade other people. (but of course, the only thing that matters is that YOU want it, and f*** the rest of the world.)

I have no prolem with invasion in itself, if you just enter a reion, seize control and "put up your flag" by changing the world factbook entry.
But I do have a problem with banning regions, also the ones who are a "threat" to your so-called "power".
I am still convinced that it would be a real challenge to invade the region of other invaders. Why don't you try it? At least those guys would know how to fight you. You could call it the difficulty level "hard" (too hard maybe?).

I have an idea. There's a good possibility that NS2 will have a war-feature. Let invaders play there, when it comes out, and make invasions illegal in NS1.
But then you say "But then we would have to pay!". Good, that will let you consider how badly you want those regions. ;)
(yes, I also think NS2 shouldn't have a pricetag, but who am I to complain, they seem to have made up their minds :cry: )


This commet simply proves that you have never finished a single one of my comments. I really don't know how to explain this to you any simpler than I already have. If you feel the need to perpetuate a stereotype go ahead. But we're trying to have a discussion on invaders and region crashers, NOT CHEATERS. So if you can't bring up any valid points except to accuse me and those like me of cheating then you need to find a new thread as your comments are OFF-TOPIC.

We do invade eachother. I've already told you that. Obviously you were too busy rereading your own comments. My region was invaded just last week. So was Empire of Power. But we won't invade eachother because we are allies. Are you implying that regions shouldn't be allies/friends? Invaders are not allowed to to do the things you describe. If that were to happen you should report them to the mods on the getting help page.

I'm just going to ask you one more time to please be rational and stop stereotyping region crashers as cheaters and spammers. I'm an invader but I do NOT grief or cheat.

If I made it look like I was stereotyping, I am sorry, as I tried not to.
I was merely trying to make you understand what I think it feels like when someone takes over your region (I am curious if your region ever got invaded?). But maybe I exagerated a bit.
But still, those things happen, and you have to admit it's not much fun for the people you do it to. (I am definitly NOT adressing you personally, don't get me wrong.)
But yes, I agree that you can take all sorts of precautions to try and prevent it from happening. it is my opinion that a region take over shouldn't last more than a week (at max) and the only thing happing should be that the factbook entry is changed, and maybe (if REALLY nescesarry) a few "dangerous" nations ejected (definitly not banned).
The invaders could use that week by planning a next attack, maybe using the regional messageboard, or telegrams. This would keep the fun in invading (not that i don't say "fun" :wink: ), and still would keep it short enough for the invaded region to keep playing the game. Because of course it isn't the game to get as much as possible nations to quit NS.


PS:
I'm still wondering, what excactly is the fun in invading? Just to see your name as UN Delegate? Or maybe to have power over others? Or for the ones that do cheat, maybe it's just because they like destructing what others have build? But I think you should telegram me about this question, as it's just a personal question, and a bit off-topic. I certainly don't want this discussion to stop :)

Ok, here it is. Yes, my region has been invaded. It wasn't successful.

I understand your arguments and I am in full agreement regarding the punishment needed for cheaters. Man of Valour and the NS Mafia were jus DEATed, for griefing and I'm all for that.

I disagree however that a week should be the max amount of time for an occupation. Unless its a full on government overthrow in a region, I actually say go less. If a region is being invaded just for the sake of doing so, the crashers involved should take off as soon as they have established control. I rarely stay in a region for more than two days after taking over. The reason being that I don't want to ruin the game for anyone. The last place my forces invaded, we left in two days. There was no spamming, and no cheating. Only one person was ejected and was consequently unbanned. The delegate is now our ally. If we can just get more regions to follow these philosophies of invasion setup by the New World Empire, we would probably hear less complaining.

As for the fun of invading, "don't knock it till you try it", is the best explanation I can give.

I disagree however that a week should be the max amount of time for an occupation. Unless its a full on government overthrow in a region, I actually say go less. If a region is being invaded just for the sake of doing so, the crashers involved should take off as soon as they have established control. I rarely stay in a region for more than two days after taking over. The reason being that I don't want to ruin the game for anyone. The last place my forces invaded, we left in two days.


Glad to hear at least some invaders have principles :D Keep it up :)
And I accually wanted to say three days or so, but I thought that would really get the invaders here against me, and I am trying to keep reasonable.


As for the fun of invading, "don't knock it till you try it", is the best explanation I can give.


I am trying to try :), with another nation of mine (no, it's not in the UN, because I don't want to break rules, but I can change this, and resign this one ;) ) But the leader of the guys I'm with, isn't getting of his **s, so I left the region in search for another, more active one.

So you see I'm looking into invading for a more clearer view. But I don't know where to go for that roleplaying memtioned earlier in this thread :(

I am trying to try :), with another nation of mine (no, it's not in the UN, because I don't want to break rules, but I can change this, and resign this one ;) ) But the leader of the guys I'm with, isn't getting of his **s, so I left the region in search for another, more active one.

So you see I'm looking into invading for a more clearer view. But I don't know where to go for that roleplaying memtioned earlier in this thread :(

Contact me by telegram with your new nation when it receives UN status. Make sure you tell me who you are. I'll set you up with an assignment and the full invasion experience.

Juana, maybe you would like to crash with us once. Experience it. And answer my question, did you agree to the terms and conditions or not?

Ackbar, I've read your reply to my post; I'm still thinking about it.

...



Thanks. You may disagree with where I am leading, but I think it is impossible to discredit that the promise of the Protector groups would not even exist if your rules where in place. And as such, it would limit game play and potential, which should be an enemy to all of us.

Juana, maybe you would like to crash with us once. Experience it. And answer my question, did you agree to the terms and conditions or not?

Accually, I don't like the word "crashing", but I'll certainly consider it.
And uhm, to what terms and conditions exactly are you referring?

(edit:)

Oops, silly me, of course you mean the general NS terms and conditions, when I signed up first ;)
Yes, Of course I did agree to them (otherwise I couldn't be playing NS), and I even read them, but I couldn't make out much about invasions at that time (But of course, it could be that I haven't read it THAT carefully ;) ).
And even if I HAD seen everything about invasions, I don't think I would have known what it all meant, because naturally I hadn't started playing at that time.

Oh, silly me, theres a bit of a problem with you crashing with us. Your not in the UN :an emoticon with a guy hitting himself on the head: ! Maybe you can watch.l By the way, have you (referring to everyone) noticed that Blammus is now in good condition?

Just a moment of 2 cents worth....

When many of us older nations joined, there were no rules regarding invasions, it was NOT part of the FAQ or written up anywhere else either. Many regions feel that they were destroyed by invaders and crashers because the social environment was changed, roleplaying was disrupted, or serious discussions turned into bickering/HAX0r/ridicule. And these regions have a right to be angry about their hard work being destroyed REGARDLESS of whether the invading nations followed the letter of the law. Invading nations surely recognize this - I believe it is part of the appeal for many.

Granted, given that invasions have since been considered legal, the invading groups have the right to play the game their way - but other regions should also have the right to not participate in region crashing. This has, to some extent, been addressed by giving regions founders, as founder powers protect a region from being taken over. Yes - there are founders and delegates that abuse those powers, but at this time it is the only effective counter for regions who don't want to be vulnerable to region crashing.

My advice is this: If you just want to roleplay or chat, or whatever it is that you do with your nation but do not want want to be involved with invaders, join a region with a founder or create one of your own. Password protecting is an option, but a poor one, given the extra work involved in vetting nations interested in joining your region, the fear of having the password handed out, or not getting enough new nations to make up for the old ones dying.

With a founder who does NOT give controls to the delegate, you are free to allow anyone to enter your region, suspected invader or otherwise. If the new nation behaves inappropriately you can boot them at any time, even if all their buddies show up just before the game update and somehow manage to oust your delegate. In such a case, the founder and region natives can monitor and discuss the situation, hold a referendum, etc to decide whether the delegate takeover was legitimate and take action if it is appropriate.

While I sympathize with regions formed before the advent of founders (and shake my head at the arguments over who is native and who isn't when someone tries to gain founder status) who want to maintain their original region, you have to ask yourself whether it's worth it. Is it more important to keep the same place, or have a safe, inviting, entertaining region to play in? I know it's hard to build/rebuild a region, but at least then you wouldn't be a target anymore.

Just a moment of 2 cents worth....

Excellent post, I agree.

Only thing I'd like to point out in addition is that folks tend to get emotionally attached to a particular region name, and end up identifying it with their community. This makes moving to a different region sometimes very, very hard to do for them.

Ballotonia

So, should regions that exist before the creation of rules have the ability to choose which rules no to follow?

Should you also choose to ignore the rules on Griefing just because they did not always exist?

No. If you, and by that I mean all who disagree with invading, wish to continue the disucssion and point out wholes that I or other invaders have left on the subject, please do. But this argument you present now is weak, and it is easy to see that it only flies on the one issue you want it to. I do not believe you would suggest that you should get to choose which rules you want to follow for regions that existed before the rule.

So, really, I am enjoying the discussion, and would love to contine it. But if you merely wish to end at "We disagree" then that is cool, just be more open about that being the reason.

Either way, good luck to you in the game.

Although I have tp agree that no-one should be able to chose wich rules to follow, it is a fact that when rules change after someone joines, that person did no, repeat, not agree to those rules. I don't want to insinuate anything, I am just pointing out a fact.

That's incorrect. You agreed to all the rules, past and future. There wasn't a 55 mph speed limit when I was born, but I have to obey it now.

Although I have tp agree that no-one should be able to chose wich rules to follow, it is a fact that when rules change after someone joines, that person did no, repeat, not agree to those rules. I don't want to insinuate anything, I am just pointing out a fact.

NationStates does not allow nations to "grandfather" their way out of rules they don't like.

It seems to me that this discussion was held some 2600 years ago (though somewhat more eloquently). Without stating my opinion on game rules, the outcome of that discussion is, famously, "...the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

The fun aspect of this game, for me, is playing with how that theory (and others), hold up in loose simulation. With equal weapons (i.e. invading/protecting states at your disposal), an alliance of peace-loving, liberal states can easily rebuff an agressive alliance.

I have not participated in, or been a victim of, any invasion. However, if realist theory still lives, should that time come I should deal with it. What's the point of a simulation if no adverse action can be thrown in?

Incidentally, I think real life and real international relations would be better if there was no "crashing," but 20-odd years of me whigning about it in similar forums has done me no good. I presume the same outcome will be met here.

(Secretly wishing this game could mix with Civ III, and be free, and...yeah.)

Although I have tp agree that no-one should be able to chose wich rules to follow, it is a fact that when rules change after someone joines, that person did no, repeat, not agree to those rules. I don't want to insinuate anything, I am just pointing out a fact.

NationStates does not allow nations to "grandfather" their way out of rules they don't like.

As I said, I am just pointing out a fact. I know that this is not a reason for not obeying (or not wanting to obey) the rules.

Let me give an example, by using that speed limit example.
When you are used to driving a maximum of 120 kmh (the max speed in the country I live in), and of course "agreeing" to that rule while getting your drivers licence (similar to agreeing to the terms and conditions in NS). Then, all of the sudden, the rules change without you knowing it, and every day you see other drivers doing a good 200 kmh.
That would of course annoy you (at first ;) ).

And of course it's not like argueing about it will change immidiatly, but you can disagree about it, and make arguments to the contrary, in the hope that at least people will understand what you mean, and maybe, just maybe, might change their opinion.

Otherwise, one could just say, "It's legal, so stop whining and accept it." People still have a freedom of speech, don't they? So we can argue about this, and maybe make our disagreement a little more understandable. And/or get to understand the ones who do agree better.

It seems to me that this discussion was held some 2600 years ago (though somewhat more eloquently). Without stating my opinion on game rules, the outcome of that discussion is, famously, "...the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."



I agree with this only under 1 condition-- this is true as long as people acknowldge that the greatest strength in this game, long term, is political strength.

Look at all of the people who complained about Francos on the boards. I hope, if people were looking to build a strong alegiance, that all of these nations were contacteing personally (not as a spam), as well as groups such as the RRA, The Pacific Army, the AAC, and all of the other Protector groups.

This is stength. For today, and for the future. Make friends. Punish a dictator. Then, form a long term allegiance so that this doesn't happen again.

That, my, friend is strength. Don't forget that invaders are the minority. And the minority is only as strong as the majporty allows.

Although I have tp agree that no-one should be able to chose wich rules to follow, it is a fact that when rules change after someone joines, that person did no, repeat, not agree to those rules. I don't want to insinuate anything, I am just pointing out a fact.

NationStates does not allow nations to "grandfather" their way out of rules they don't like.

As I said, I am just pointing out a fact. I know that this is not a reason for not obeying (or not wanting to obey) the rules.

Let me give an example, by using that speed limit example.
When you are used to driving a maximum of 120 kmh (the max speed in the country I live in), and of course "agreeing" to that rule while getting your drivers licence (similar to agreeing to the terms and conditions in NS). Then, all of the sudden, the rules change without you knowing it, and every day you see other drivers doing a good 200 kmh.
That would of course annoy you (at first ;) ).

And of course it's not like argueing about it will change immidiatly, but you can disagree about it, and make arguments to the contrary, in the hope that at least people will understand what you mean, and maybe, just maybe, might change their opinion.

Otherwise, one could just say, "It's legal, so stop whining and accept it." People still have a freedom of speech, don't they? So we can argue about this, and maybe make our disagreement a little more understandable. And/or get to understand the ones who do agree better.

I have bolded what I believe to be the condition that makes your example different then from most who complain. Most are aware that invading is legal.

That said, yeah, I strongly support open discussion about rules that do and do not exist, so don't see this as simply "stop whining."

Let me give an example, by using that speed limit example.
When you are used to driving a maximum of 120 kmh (the max speed in the country I live in), and of course "agreeing" to that rule while getting your drivers licence (similar to agreeing to the terms and conditions in NS). Then, all of the sudden, the rules change without you knowing it, and every day you see other drivers doing a good 200 kmh.
That would of course annoy you (at first ;) ).

And of course it's not like argueing about it will change immidiatly, but you can disagree about it, and make arguments to the contrary, in the hope that at least people will understand what you mean, and maybe, just maybe, might change their opinion.

Otherwise, one could just say, "It's legal, so stop whining and accept it." People still have a freedom of speech, don't they? So we can argue about this, and maybe make our disagreement a little more understandable. And/or get to understand the ones who do agree better.


Juana, come on. Just because you didn't know the speed limit changed doesn't mean it wasn't posted. You just have to be a responsible driver(player) and keep yourself updated on the laws(rules) by reading the road signs(forums/faq). And the argument of "It's legal, so stop whining and accept it." will always be viable because you're responsible for knowing the rules. Freedom of speech is great and all but in NS, there's no such thing (read the faq, its in there). And somehow I doubt that you will ever convince a bunch of avid players that their legal method of play is wrong. And if thats not what you've been tryng to say throughout this thread, then I don't know why you're even arguing these points. :?

I am not saying it is wrong. Let me get that straight. I can't say that because it's in the game rules. But I am trying to say that there are people who don't like what you do. But of course that doesn't really bother you, right? I am only trying to make you see that maybe you should stick to invading people who find that amusing.

And about that "It's up to yourself to know all the rules" stuff: Sure, I know what you mean, but come on, it's not like even you know every little rule there is.

That may be true. I don't know every single ittle rule. But that doesn't mean I will claim ignorance for making offense. Its just not a good excuse. And not to be mean but yeah, I don't care if not everyone likes it. Its part of the game. Thats just like me asking for people to stop RPing as soon as I enter their region because I don't like it. Or telling the mods they can't intervene, because I don't like it. Its all part of the game.

Obviously, you are not getting my point. But that could also be my mistake, so I'll try to formulate it once more, as clearly as I can.

I don't see anything wrong with invasions that keep to the rules, and only "rig up their flag", and refrain from kicking nations and so fort.
But I don't believe that everyone keeps to that. Maybe the ones participating in this discussion do, and maybe they don't. I can't judge that here and now.

All I am saying is that invading clearly causes enough trouble for people to complain about it. Which makes me wonder if invading is such a great idea in general. I won't try to argue about the possible fun of invading, but I will say that invaders apparently decrease the fun of other people who are trying to play the game another way. (In my very PERSONAL opinion, the way it SHOULD be played, but that hasn't got anything to do with this discussion). I've read before in this topic, that everyone should consider this as that what it is - a game. In my opinion, a game should be (a lot of) fun for everyone participating, and although invading may make a portion of NS players happy, it makes another portion of those players UNhappy.

A solution would be, in my opinion, that there were ways to do it more in the middle of the rulebook, not just along the side. Make very clear rules about what's allowed and what's not. And I don't mean a simple "don't spam". Because those rules are still victim to different interpretations.

Ok, well in game terms then;
I have never played a "game" where there were not winners and losers or any event a question of someone whos plays less or more aggressivley, or with less skil or more skill, etc,... The point is, that there is no game that guarantees all players will have fun or be successful. Including this one. I know you're looking for limits to insure everyone's enjoyment of the game but what about my enjoyment? I'm playing this game too and this is my role, an invader. By putting limits on me you take away my enjoyment. So I restate my previous message, you can not ask invaders to stop(or limit) their actions without forcing everyone else to. Its simply hypocritical. What we need are stricter punishments on invaders who go too far. There's a thread-poll somewhere about, "could an invader be a mod." Perhaps we need a game mod who's main responsibility is checking up on invaders, but not limiting them beyond the scope of the rules. Any thoughts?

That's what I'm talking about! Maybe I haven't been to clearly, but still, I think that's the idea we've been waiting for. :D

Maybe there could be a group of mods that are entirely (or mainly) dedicated to finding invaders that cross the lines?
That would increase the chance for an offender to get cought, and therefore stimulate them to play according to the rules. And in combination with more severe punishment (UN sanctions? :wink: ) it would have a huge inpact on the ammount of illegal actions.

And the responsible mods would learn a lot about invaders, and maybe even find a way to make illegal invasions impossibe?
*keeps on dreaming*