Contradicting rules
Aaronotopia
01-01-2005, 22:32
I was reading the FAQ, when I noticed a strange contradiction in the rules. The rules state you can only have one nation in the UN, but that it is legal to perform Region Crashing. In the act of Region Crashing, it is nessecary to have a nation be in the UN. The only way to be within the guidlines for this would be to send one naton from one region to another. Thus, a big region can only invade other regions because it has enough people to send them out. This is unfair to litte regions, who cannot send there members out to invade other regions as effectively and efficiently. Could someone explain how this works?
There is no contradiction. You can only have one UN nation. You have to find other players who do region crashing to perform game invasions. It is true that big invader regions can gang up on smaller regions. But, there are also defender regions who, if they notice an invasion, will try to proctect the defending region. A lot of regions do not participate in the whole invasion thing. If it's a small region, they very well may not be into that part of the game.
Tuesday Heights
01-01-2005, 23:44
Region crashing is much more sophisticated than just UN nation A moves to region A, endorses UN nation B, etc.
It takes planning, attention to detail, and a keen sense of the game mechanics of the NationStates engine.
Unfree People
02-01-2005, 02:54
That's why you don't see small regions organizing invasions.
Dan-worshippers
02-01-2005, 03:13
Uh also, nowhere in the rules does it say you canonly have one nation. jsut that you can only have one UN nation. small regions make one UN nation per player and one normal nation and then they can invade. plus that is more realistic; you don't seen nepal unvading india, do you?