NationStates Jolt Archive

Hello everyone on the on site! My name is The Faeyas and I'm from many regions, the main one being TWP. I am a representative from the Off Site Game play, which works a little different from what on site knows and is aware of.

This is a Thread for all Members from off site forums to come and discuss this sudden, and highly impact on how we manage the game, Change to our game play. There will be a lot of "Well this just totally killed what we did here." and maybe some "Ok so How are we going to adapt to this to keep our sovereignty!"

I hope the on site enjoys this peek into the thoughts and feelings of players who run Regional Governments Off Site.

Frankly, I like it. I mean, I'm more an RPer then an OOCer, but still...I think it adds a new level to the game. Makes the whole OOC aspect a bit more interesting and fun. I'd give a high five to the mods...

Except that, despite having lived in TEP for around three years, I'm still considered a "minnow." Don't get me wrong, I know endorsements are important and all, but really, you'd think those of us that aren't endorsement swappers could get some real influence for just hanging around as long as we have...

despite having lived in TEP for around three years, I'm still considered a "minnow."
# The "Regional Influence" label reflects how much Influence a nation has compared to others in its region only. TEP is a big region. Lots of fishies to share influence with ...

# Nations have been invisibly accumulating Influence since the start of March 2006. Since we can't tell how long nations were resident in their region, or how many endorsements they had, before then, the amount of Influence nations have now is not affected by what they did prior to that date. Sorry about your three years, but that's life. We had to start somewhere.

I don't understand people who say that offsite players have different issues. I've participated in offsite play, but still answered issues, posted in UN and General, and moved around every once in a while. How does being 'offsite' differ in any meanful way from a region of RL friends in a passworded region? Sure, you have outside friends, but nothing they do or say has any impact on the actual playability of your nation.

'Splain it to me. I don't get it.

I, for one, am against the implemented change. This really throws a wrench into the way our regional government is going to operate. Whatever happened to status quo?

# The "Regional Influence" label reflects how much Influence a nation has compared to others in its region only. TEP is a big region. Lots of fishies to share influence with ...

# Nations have been invisibly accumulating Influence since the start of March 2006. Since we can't tell how long nations were resident in their region, or how many endorsements they had, before then, the amount of Influence nations have now is not affected by what they did prior to that date. Sorry about your three years, but that's life. We had to start somewhere.

I don't understand people who say that offsite players have different issues. I've participated in offsite play, but still answered issues, posted in UN and General, and moved around every once in a while. How does being 'offsite' differ in any meanful way from a region of RL friends in a passworded region? Sure, you have outside friends, but nothing they do or say has any impact on the actual playability of your nation.

'Splain it to me. I don't get it.

We have regional governments. Power and law baises built around the game. The Delegate is the head of the government, and due to this new law, it is almost impossible for the Delegate to secure the region from an invader who would just as soon take over the region and destroy our hard work.

Currently experiments are being taken to figure out how we can still defend the region from being uprooted, while keeping the Delegate we elected and the governement we built.

I, for one, am against the implemented change. This really throws a wrench into the way our regional government is going to operate. Whatever happened to status quo?

I agree its taking away soverignty. How are we soverign if a computer figures out who has power, when before we simply voted on it.

I, for one, am against the implemented change. This really throws a wrench into the way our regional government is going to operate. How? Whatever happened to status quo?
A) It wasn't working. Too much depended on opinion and analysis of the mods, and griefers were causing problems for lots of players
B) Changes / clarifications in the invasion ruleset is the most requested change in the game. We spend 4 months coding it to be as fair as possible to all players.
C) Sometimes you need to shake stuff up to keep it interesting. Have you ever played any other online games that periodically updated stuff, added stuff, or changed stuff? Have you ever bought a sequel to a game that was better than the original? I have.

Tell us what's wrong instead of vague complaints, and we'll discuss it.

The Delegate is the head of the government, and due to this new law, it is almost impossible for the Delegate to secure the region from an invader
Really? Have you tested this theory? Show me all the dead and dying regions in the game since we changed over.
How are we soverign if a computer figures out who has power, when before we simply voted on it.
The computer doesn't replace you, it replaces us - the Mods. We no longer have to guess intent. The code does it for us.

You still have to elect a delegate, and the guy with the most endorsements wins. How is that different?

By the way, there is a channel on IRC for discussing this topic with mods and other players.

It's on irc://esper.net/#influence

How?
A) It wasn't working. Too much depended on opinion and analysis of the mods, and griefers were causing problems for lots of players

the only time we contacted the mods where when our RMB's were being illegally spammed. I do not recall any other time. Griefers need mod contact because of the reinstating of citizens, thats it. If a Delegate needs to kick a groupd of invaders (who are just as shocked as we are, just give it time for them to act, and they will I'm a Defender, its a given.)

B) Changes / clarifications in the invasion ruleset is the most requested change in the game. We spend 4 months coding it to be as fair as possible to all players.

Thats due to either individual nations not liking the fact that they were kicked from their region, or Defenders attempting to make Invading illegal, not give it an easy path way to the delegacy.

C) Sometimes you need to shake stuff up to keep it interesting. Have you ever played any other online games that periodically updated stuff, added stuff, or changed stuff? Have you ever bought a sequel to a game that was better than the original? I have.

The shake things up happens all the time off site, governments collapse and need to be rebuilt, someon calls martial law and destroys our hard work so we need to spend what 6 months re doing everything? trust me its not boring. The only people this game is boring without a game shake up, are those who are soley issue focused, nation focused. People who don't get involved in their region. Now there it is easier for a newb to run in say "I own the place!" and cause these chaotic spress to happen more OFTEN. I foresee it happening way to ofen for us to be able to rebuild enough to continue off site game play. Or was that the point of the new rule? Force Off siters On site?


Tell us what's wrong instead of vague complaints, and we'll discuss it. Sorry what we have been saying is quite clear in the exactness of a problem for us. I think it may be that you have not built a government, or tried to defend an elected Delegate from Ivasion.

Feeder governments have always simply depended on the delegate. If the delegate watches, they shouldn't have any trouble identifying people and kicking them out. I think Ivan is proving that in the Pacific today. :p

The North Pacific is discussing possible security measures, but it shouldn't need to be more then an endocap. And I don't think even that is really necessary until someone gets to about 200-300 endos. Assuming the delegate is competent enough to stay above that mark. ;)

By the way, there is a channel on IRC for discussing this topic with mods and other players.

It's on irc://esper.net/#influence

The point friend, of bringing this all onto THESE forums is to start pushing our representation onto this game. For everything that goes on, including this new change, the on site was consulted, but not the off site. We knew nothing until it was announced by max. We need representation, and a voice here on the forum, not on IRC where only a small amount of people can see.

This is only the begining. do not forget, this is the reaction of the off siters.

Feeder governments have always simply depended on the delegate. If the delegate watches, they shouldn't have any trouble identifying people and kicking them out. I think Ivan is proving that in the Pacific today. :p

The North Pacific is discussing possible security measures, but it shouldn't need to be more then an endocap. And I don't think even that is really necessary until someone gets to about 200-300 endos. Assuming the delegate is competent enough to stay above that mark. ;)

oh we know, there is a theory on the off site that if the delegate loses enough influance they will lose the ability to kick people, and since you lose influance with every kick, more for people with mor endos (like invaders) it could be a problem.

Once again, jsut a reactionary page.

Glad to see you here BTW. *works on getting everyone over here to chat it up instead of on the off sites so that everyone can see*

For everything that goes on, including this new change, the on site was consulted, but not the off site.The fact that YOU weren't consulted doesn't mean no one who has extensive offsite experience was asked. Trust me, we got a lot of very useful input from players that rarely post here. We knew nothing until it was announced by max. Neither did anyone else, except the mods. It's not called 'secrecy' for nothing.

We got ideas from a wide variety of sources, and all the work was done behind the scenes. You had every bit as much representation as the other 111,168 nations in 14,310 regions.

How?
The possibility of our current delegate being overthrown has just increased dramatically. Once that happens, the individual who has thereby assumed power will do what it takes to maintain the delegacy, and though obviously limited, will put forth an effort to rid the region of its immediate threats (such as older UN members, or those with a high endorsement count). With a rogue delegate in place, the foundation of the region's government will crumble, and all we have worked for and maintained will be lost, unless luck would have it that we somehow manage to gain back the delegacy. But even then, it would again be difficult to maintain.

Tell us what's wrong instead of vague complaints, and we'll discuss it.
Our region, as many others, have tight security measures, when it comes to the delegacy. Now we are going to have to tighten them even more, which will in turn be more difficult to do, as with the new limitations/restrictions. In other words, we are essentially fighting an uphill battle, now, and there really is no stability anymore. At least maintaining a strong, long-lasting delegacy and the region was an easier task, than it is going to be now.

The fact that YOU weren't consulted doesn't mean no one who has extensive offsite experience was asked. Trust me, we got a lot of very useful input from players that rarely post here.Neither did anyone else, except the mods. It's not called 'secrecy' for nothing.


From what I have read from members in my region, none of them were consulted. I have gotten that complaint from a Great DEAL of prominent players, its not just a selfish thing. :-p

The possibility of our current delegate being overthrown has just increased dramatically. Once that happens, the individual who has thereby assumed power will do what it takes to maintain the delegacy, and though obviously limited, will put forth an effort to rid the region of its immediate threats (such as older UN members, or those with a high endorsement count). With a rogue delegate in place, the foundation of the region's government will crumble, and all we have worked for and maintained will be lost, unless luck would have it that we somehow manage to gain back the delegacy. But even then, it would again be difficult to maintain.

The melodrama doesnt much help your argument for one. And for two, if you read all the rules in the new change you would see that to eject older nations (with more influence) it takes more influence to do. So a 'rogue nation' would lose the power that they have (even if as little as that may be) with the more damage he does to the region as a whole. It balances things quite well and I have to give the Admins/Mods a round of applause at that point.

The possibility of our current delegate being overthrown has just increased dramatically. Once that happens, the individual who has thereby assumed power will do what it takes to maintain the delegacy, and though obviously limited, will put forth an effort to rid the region of its immediate threats (such as older UN members, or those with a high endorsement count). With a rogue delegate in place, the foundation of the region's government will crumble, and all we have worked for and maintained will be lost, unless luck would have it that we somehow manage to gain back the delegacy. But even then, it would again be difficult to maintain.


Our region, as many others, have tight security measures, when it comes to the delegacy. Now we are going to have to tighten them even more, which will in turn be more difficult to do, as with the new limitations/restrictions. In other words, we are essentially fighting an uphill battle, now, and there really is no stability anymore. At least maintaining a strong, long-lasting delegacy and the region was an easier task, than it is going to be now.

Agreed. We voted in the delegate, but we have no way of ensuring they will be delegate now? We have term limits in place, how can we now ensure that the delegate will be in place for that term? How can we stop a rouge from stealing the delegacy, without proper support from the people?

From what I have read from members in my region, none of them were consulted. I have gotten that complaint from a Great DEAL of prominent players, its not just a selfish thing. :-p

Some of the Mods (as Fris even said he was) are off siters too you know...

The melodrama doesnt much help your argument for one.
There is no need to begin insulting one's expression. Actual opinion and fact were used in the creation of my posts; they were not placed for dramatic purposes. Please do not misconstrue my statements.

Like Fris, I play both on- and off-site. Unlike Fris, I'm a mere peasant to whom the new system is a total surprise, so what follows is guesswork based on reading the threads that have been posted since The Change.

If you want to protect your region against invasion, you can still password it.

As I understand it, a delegate can either password-protect with the password unknown to other natives, or password-protect with the password visible to all residents of the region, but not to passers-by who just read the RMB. The second form is less 'expensive' for the delegate (again, as I understand it).

If I've got this right, that means you could choose the second form and still be reasonably safe. If you're all friends and know each other from interaction in an off-site government, anyone who wanted to give the password to a newcomer would presumably consult the others. What I'm getting at is, those of you who have been settled there for some time aren't likely to be 'spies' who will give out the password to invaders.

Add to that, anyone who wants to join you now will be the subject of fairly close scrutiny, so you'd be likely to recognise any invasion moves. Off-site activity also usually implies an active delegate or founder who could act quickly to kick them out.

I know many people dislike passwording a region, but if your interest comes from offsite RP it seems worth the inconvenience. All you lose is the chance to be a 'featured nation', and your delegate (I hope?) can make up the influence lost briefly by passwording the region.

It does seem that this isn't the longed-for opt-out clause that would give total freedom from all invasions (though I'd be overjoyed to hear from any in-the-know person who can prove it is), but I can't see we're worse off than before.

Anyway, there's a bright side: according to the Mods-from-Hell posts, there's a fair bit of pleasure to be gained from kicking out huge numbers of idiots.

My opinion on this is varied. On the one hand, it's an interesting change and I'm curious to see how it plays out. On the other... I don't like the removal of all invasion rules. This may be because I'm used to them, but griefing of all natives in a region seems to me not okay... Even though "griefing" and "natives" are now defunct terms.

I guess now we wait and see how invaders take this change - do they remain honorable opponents who delight in capturing a region, or do they turn into what would formerly be called griefers and destroy regions they take? It may very well change the defender side of the game... are we counter-invading, or are we actually protecting regions from destruction?

Time will tell, I suppose.

The melodrama doesnt much help your argument for one. And for two, if you read all the rules in the new change you would see that to eject older nations (with more influence) it takes more influence to do. So a 'rogue nation' would lose the power that they have (even if as little as that may be) with the more damage he does to the region as a whole. It balances things quite well and I have to give the Admins/Mods a round of applause at that point.

You are still thinking on site. Just because there is a rouge delegate doesn't mean that the only chaotic effect is kicking people. We don't have power to protect the region w/out the delegate, and so long as they have it, the region is at risk. W/out the delegate we can no longer keep the Government stable (as we wouldn't have a leader would we?) Also it stops us from being able to democractically vote on issues. In addition should that delegate come to our offiste forum they could assume power in the delegates seat in the off site, and destroy the off site government. with the new rule we have no way of protecting against this since one of the influance meters is Endos. Should a nation run and and endo swap and not be caugt till they have about 100+ then it gives a hard blow to our delegates ability to do that a second time for the next invader who comes in. And invaders are not above planting for a few days. It is a tactic they like to use alot. This means they have MORE protection when trying to steal the delegacy. Soon all regions will be "caverns of the Wolfs" ect. they wont even be regions any more, just controled territories for sport. "Lets kill that one *POW* gotta love this new rule."

There is no need to begin insulting one's expression. Actual opinion and fact were used in the creation of my posts; they were not placed for dramatic purposes. Please do not misconstrue my statements.

As I showed in the rest of my post which you have yet to comment on, you were not basing your expression entirely on fact. This is why I started with telling you that posting how this is ruining everything and a rogue is going to hold all power and not be able to be stopped is a falsity.

(as I have read from the rules. Fris would know better than I.)

Simply my two cents, dont get overworked. ;)

Like Fris, I play both on- and off-site. Unlike Fris, I'm a mere peasant to whom the new system is a total surprise, so what follows is guesswork based on reading the threads that have been posted since The Change.

If you want to protect your region against invasion, you can still password it.

As I understand it, a delegate can either password-protect with the password unknown to other natives, or password-protect with the password visible to all residents of the region, but not to passers-by who just read the RMB. The second form is less 'expensive' for the delegate (again, as I understand it).

If I've got this right, that means you could choose the second form and still be reasonably safe. If you're all friends and know each other from interaction in an off-site government, anyone who wanted to give the password to a newcomer would presumably consult the others. What I'm getting at is, those of you who have been settled there for some time aren't likely to be 'spies' who will give out the password to invaders.

Add to that, anyone who wants to join you now will be the subject of fairly close scrutiny, so you'd be likely to recognise any invasion moves. Off-site activity also usually implies an active delegate or founder who could act quickly to kick them out.

I know many people dislike passwording a region, but if your interest comes from offsite RP it seems worth the inconvenience. All you lose is the chance to be a 'featured nation', and your delegate (I hope?) can make up the influence lost briefly by passwording the region.

It does seem that this isn't the longed-for opt-out clause that would give total freedom from all invasions (though I'd be overjoyed to hear from any in-the-know person who can prove it is), but I can't see we're worse off than before.

Anyway, there's a bright side: according to the Mods-from-Hell posts, there's a fair bit of pleasure to be gained from kicking out huge numbers of idiots.

you are NOT correct sir!

Alot of Off siters are the Feeders TNP TEP TSP TWP TP RR and Laz. I'm a member of TWP, so no, we can't password our region.

As I showed in the rest of my post which you have yet to comment on, you were not basing your expression entirely on fact. This is why I started with telling you that posting how this is ruining everything and a rogue is going to hold all power and not be able to be stopped is a falsity.

(as I have read from the rules. Fris would know better than I.)

Simply my two cents, dont get overworked. ;)

I can give you example of what has previously happened when these factors were weakned. How many do you want? I'm sure the ADN has a strong hold of historical examples. Most certainly over at least 50.

Fae, I'm going to have to disagree that this will weaken the feeders. The delegate of The Pacific has proven today that he had enough influence to kick out two older members (Unlimited and Mammothistan) and a ton of smaller members of The Pacific.

Assuming you have a delegate that is watching and not spending their influence on random kickings or other such things, it shouldn't be too hard to kick out a couple people (even hundreds) that are trying to take over the region "illegally".

As to delegate handovers, they always have to be watched carefully. And that's the responsibility of the outgoing and incoming delegates. I know Flemingovia and I planned it, as I did to Honeysheep.

http://s8.invisionfree.com/The_West_Pacific/index.php?showtopic=5386

The Tabolia Rosa and the PRP, "Things Fell Apart" an article by the mighty Sir Paul.

The Thorin Guard, powerless to stop the destruction of the Senate Chambers

Francograd, The Pacific: It’s all gone. The monuments to Franco. The Court of Justice. The Palace of the People. The Pacific Gallery of Art. Gone. The institutions build over two years ago, protected with the blood of Pacific soldiers are lying in ruins as the Pacific Senate has been dissolved and Ivan Moldavi has assumed power over The Pacific.

Premier Black Adder, without taking a vote of the Senate, issued the following statement:

QUOTE (Black Adder)
Comrades. In light of the winding down of this game several of the Senate have come to the conclusion the August Revolution has come to its logical end where the power is to be reverted to the People. The Senate has served its purpose, we kept the Pacific safe now its yours to do with as you will.

Thank you for your faithfulness and your loyalty. Use that wisely in the future. We in the Senate will fade away.

Hail Franco, Hail the August Revolution!


His statement baffled several prominent Francoists, who believe that the August Revolution is unending, and that while the Senate will eventually fade away, the flame so protected by the senate will burn always.

Perhaps, however, the Premier was referencing the new tactics of battle that were recently crafted to benefit the Userites. While the Pacific delegates are now restricted in their right to ejection by the “influence” rules, regions with founders are not held to the same standard. Thus, the battle-hardened troops of The Pacific will be bogged down and fatigued by endless waves of Userites who are completely protected from any recourse.

“The worst part of this whole situation is that the feeders are weakened and the founders are strengthened” noted Comrade Mammothistan. “Max took a fundamental problem with Nationstates and made it worse.”

Ivan Moldavi, from Black Adder’s throne, however, has had no problems enforcing his will on The Pacific. Thus far, he has cast out former Pacific Senators Unlimited and Mammothistan along with 340 non-UN nations. His WFE reads “The Revolution is over. Time to pay the piper. Now is the time to choose sides. You are either for the Delegate and The Pacific or you are against.” The last two sentences were added after the ejection off the former senators of the delegacy.

Some speculate that the purges are for the treatment Ivan received one year ago, after he seized control of the North Pacific and was court marshaled by the Pacific Senate. He was eventually re-instated to his former rank. Others speculate that Ivan simply has an unquenchable thirst for destruction, and wishes to see a feeder region burned to the ground and rebuilt in his image. Regardless of the cause, “Behold, Ivan Cometh.”
-----
Written by Sir Paul
The Pacific Press – A Newspaper with Issues
Proudly Part of PNN

Fae, I'm going to have to disagree that this will weaken the feeders. The delegate of The Pacific has proven today that he had enough influence to kick out two older members (Unlimited and Mammothistan) and a ton of smaller members of The Pacific.

Assuming you have a delegate that is watching and not spending their influence on random kickings or other such things, it shouldn't be too hard to kick out a couple people (even hundreds) that are trying to take over the region "illegally".

As to delegate handovers, they always have to be watched carefully. And that's the responsibility of the outgoing and incoming delegates. I know Flemingovia and I planned it, as I did to Honeysheep.

since "Age" is judged from march, they really wern't "Older" so no this does quite proove the point. Tests are being ran in many regions. I posted the link above to give people an idea of what happened in the PRP if on siters are not fully aware. in addtion it will be ever so muhc more tricky to turn over the delegate and KEEP them there each time, don't you imagine? who knows, one of the smaller changes might be that Time in region will effect who can be delegate? There where will we be....

The point of this tread is a perspective check. Nothing more. Its a concern that on site does't consider off site play.

I can give you example of what has previously happened when these factors were weakned. How many do you want? I'm sure the ADN has a strong hold of historical examples. Most certainly over at least 50.

*sigh* With the new rules and changes in place? Thats what I was referring to.

*sigh* With the new rules and changes in place? Thats what I was referring to.

I gave you one, look above to the link.

You are still thinking on site. Just because there is a rouge delegate doesn't mean that the only chaotic effect is kicking people. We don't have power to protect the region w/out the delegate, and so long as they have it, the region is at risk. W/out the delegate we can no longer keep the Government stable (as we wouldn't have a leader would we?) Also it stops us from being able to democractically vote on issues.

If your talking off-site, trust me, I understand Off-site politics, The Honor Guard has them. And there is no reason why not having a delegate 'in-game' means you dont have a leader 'off-site'. The Honor Guard has no delegate, but we have regional leaders. We are stable without it. You too it seems are thinking on site.

In addition should that delegate come to our offiste forum they could assume power in the delegates seat in the off site, and destroy the off site government.

If a delegate is illegitimately elected, why would the off-site mods/admins give access to this new player to the powers of your seat? If an invader was to ever try to take the delegacy from The Honor Guard, he would not be allowed to access our forum I can tell you that.

with the new rule we have no way of protecting against this since one of the influance meters is Endos. Should a nation run and and endo swap and not be caugt till they have about 100+ then it gives a hard blow to our delegates ability to do that a second time for the next invader who comes in. And invaders are not above planting for a few days. It is a tactic they like to use alot. This means they have MORE protection when trying to steal the delegacy. Soon all regions will be "caverns of the Wolfs" ect. they wont even be regions any more, just controled territories for sport. "Lets kill that one *POW* gotta love this new rule."

I will allow Fris to take this one because I submit to the fact I dont know much about how this works in every single way. I do agree with it and I think that it is in our best interests, but I will await a Mod/Admin's words.

Point taken. I got out of the feeders as fast as I could, since I didn't like being part of such a huge region, so I didn't realise how it would affect them. At least I now understand better what some of the fuss is about, so thank you for the explanation.

It does seem to me that if you were successfully invaded onsite you could just password the offsite and carry on RPing there, but I'm sure there are reasons why this isn't possible and I don't wish to annoy you with dumb questions, so I'll bow out of the discussion.

with the new rule we have no way of protecting against this since one of the influance meters is Endos.

It's also time spent in-region. Run an endo-scanner fairly regularly (and don't pretend feeder delegates don't have them), and you'll be all set.

This influence thing also draws in regions who don't want to play the invader/defender game. If they do get invaded, what's to stop the invaders from completely destroying the region? Only level of influence, and that will rise and replenish.

Poor neutrals. :(

I dont know much about how this works in every single way.
The only real answer I can give to you is that "nobody knows how it works in any way at all."

The only thing I see here is a bunch of players getting their exercise by jumping to conclusions based on deliberately vague facts. Your initial assumption is that we designed the system to make it difficult to play, or that we've built an entire system to allow griefing and promote the invasion game.

While I'll neither confirm nor deny any of the theories floated out there, I'll ask you to consider the direction of this site over the past several years, and point out that management has remained the same. True, we've added a coder, and true, there has been a small amount of mod turnover, but ultimately the new people were chosen by management in consultation with the earlier mods.

The only thing that seems to be consistent between the various factions of invaders, defenders, isolationists, roleplayers, UNers, Generalites, and all the other factions in this game can be summed up in a single sentence: "You're OMG biased against US, because you're all a bunch of THEM!" Apart from the physical and existential improbability of that statement, it's simply not true. Mods and admins were drawn from a variety of sources, and our best interest lies in making the game stronger and better ... for EVERYONE.

If you don't want to give the new rules a chance, that's your call. If you make up your mind with no tangible evidence to back up your claims (and you haven't had enough time to figure it out - nobody has), I'm not going to change your mind with logic or reason. Play or don't play. It's up to you.

Your initial assumption is that we designed the system to make it difficult to play, or that we've built an entire system to allow griefing and promote the invasion game.

I'm just saying that it happens (happened recently) and that I'm not a fan of griefing, not that it was deliberately set up to promote griefing as a tactic.

I find all of this half-crazy/half-smart.

This new rules will require us all to start brainstorming to try to beat or work best with the system.

It seems though that this was mostly angled towards the Invader/Defender aspect of the game, and making the Feeder Delegate's job descriptions equal to their workload.

Frisbeeteria, if in fact my opinion is proven to be wrong, then I will offer you my sincerest apology for being close-minded. Otherwise, I will hold to my beliefs, as I fear they will become all too true. Meanwhile, I would not quit the game over this change; that would be absurd. I'm simply opposed to it, and am afraid I, among others, will not like how it affects our well-established operations (i.e. governments).

I rather dislike the concept of griefing too. Its hard to protect against, and I agree Asta, those of us who wish to be neutral no longer have much of a choice now do we?

Furthermore, It states in the new rules that a new delegate is automatically weaker than the previous. There is NO WAY for this to change, for us to compensate for this, for as it was pointed out, TIME is a valuable variable.

So we are weakened for an invader to come take the delegacy.

For the RPer, who made a worth while post. Most of what we do, isn't RP, sorry. TEP now there is some RP. But you'll notice on most off site forums, RPing, in the national and regional instance, is in a sub forum all of its own. We don't RP. These are communities, the work is real (in as much as game work is real) The people we deal with are real. The foreign affairs department does have to recruit and train diplomats to send to other regions to act as evnoys of knowledge between allies.

The Defensive Endo scan programs we run are real. the defensive procautions are as real as they get. There has been times where someone had to have their IP provider contacted.

The battles are even real. You run off to a region being attacked and either liberate it by stratigically endorsing a lead without getting that lead kicked, or you defend it by pulling numbers of users and their UN into the region to endorse the delegate. being up to update, anticipating update, ect. all takes planning.

Except we can no longer really do that, with the new rules.

The Legislature we make governs the actions of people in the region, we cht as collegues, you can't really control who takes part in these governments as we are feeders, people come in and join in the government like everyone else.

So no its not a group of friends.

I have yet to see a mod really take part in off site governments. It would be nice, even if they only held a minor role, or even if they were only a citizen and chatted with us, saw what we do :-p

Frisbeeteria, if in fact my opinion is proven to be wrong, then I will offer you my sincerest apology for being close-minded. Otherwise, I will hold to my beliefs, as I fear they will become all too true. Meanwhile, I would not quit the game over this change; that would be absurd. I'm simply opposed to it, and am afraid I, among others, will not like how it affects our well-established operations (i.e. governments).

I will ditto this.

Once again stating the intent of this thread:

Normally changes are discussed among off siters on the off sites, so this forum never hears of the thoughts, problems whathave you. I'm trying to bridge this gap by putting a place to talk for all off siters (who have currently been informed, more to come) on this issue. Soon there should be threads for just general, ok this is what off site is doing, and what off site thinks, on just an array of things. This seemed prominent enought to deserve its own thread. Now On site hears what we think, and our veiws on the issues. This is a good change no?

These changes do nearly nothing to the feeder regions. The delegates in those regions are still - by far - the most powerful figures within the game construct. The diligent monitoring of endorsement levels, the careful vetting of delegate candidates, and the constant endorsement swapping practiced by the feeder governments are all still the best defense against an outside menace. If anything, this makes situations like the one that happened a couple years back with UPS Rail / Great Bight in The North Pacific even less likely to happen. The feeders are more stable now. The current goings-on in The Pacific are more the symptom of a siege mentality gone over the edge than any weakness in the position of the delegate. The original owner of the nation Blackadder Goes Forth was so disgusted with the weakening of his power while the player created regions that were constantly in conflict with them retained their founders that he turned his nation over to someone else and walked away. The new owner decided some redecorating was in order. It is not indicative of a larger problem at all.

Thank you Uni for your opinions.

Of course, there are a handful of us with reasonably high post counts on both on-site and off-site forums (953 on ADN, nearly 5000 here). Also....
I have yet to see a mod really take part in off site governments. It would be nice, even if they only held a minor role, or even if they were only a citizen and chatted with us, saw what we do :-p
Tactical Grace? Erastide?

EDIT: I'm inclined to agree with Unistrut, incidentally, although I'd like to see how it all plays out. I have yet to see any clear evidence of increased feeder instability except for the Pacific....and that's due to BlackAdder's decision, not a forced action by the game mechanics.

Of course, there are a handful of us with reasonably high post counts on both on-site and off-site forums (953 on ADN, nearly 5000 here). Also....Tactical Grace? Erastide?
Post counts just mean you talk too much. :p

Post counts just mean you talk too much. :p

TG might be modish you may be right, saw him earlier in Modcave...

The feeders arent necessarily more stable now. If anything, we're going to see a lot more people eyeing for endorsements - which means delegates may be forced to expend their own influence to remove risks from the region - to the point where they don't have enough influence to remove the real threat when it comes. But either way, I don't care how you look at it, limiting kicking in founderless regions does not help with security. It makes it more difficult.

Founder Delegates are going to need to be very careful as to who they eject. Odds are, rather than taking on the big fish, they'll eject their endorsers first to reduce the influence blow they'd take by trying to eject them.

Founder Delegates are going to need to be very careful as to who they eject. Odds are, rather than taking on the big fish, they'll eject their endorsers first to reduce the influence blow they'd take by trying to eject them.

You mean Feeder Delegates? Founder Delegates don't have to worry about a thing, ejection doesn't impact their Influence.

The feeders arent necessarily more stable now. If anything, we're going to see a lot more people eyeing for endorsements - which means delegates may be forced to expend their own influence to remove risks from the region - to the point where they don't have enough influence to remove the real threat when it comes. But either way, I don't care how you look at it, limiting kicking in founderless regions does not help with security. It makes it more difficult.

Founder Delegates are going to need to be very careful as to who they eject. Odds are, rather than taking on the big fish, they'll eject their endorsers first to reduce the influence blow they'd take by trying to eject them.
We have just seen the delegate of The Pacific eject nearly 800(?) nations from that region. I don't think there is a conceivable threat that big within Nationstates. In my memory there never has been, either. Ejecting a couple nations here or there isn't going to make much of a dent in the influence levels.

I still think it makes things more interesting, specifically because of the reasons those against the change have stated. Invasions of the traditional sense don't happen anymore; nowadays, it's almost always internal conflict that brings down government. A minister goes: "You know what, that's not cool" and tries to overthrow the delegate.

Except, whereas in days past, a fast-acting delegate could just ban a minister and his supporters, nowadays, the delegate can only ban the minister and his top supporters. The delegate must then try to sway, our outswap until he can ban the remnant supporters. Makes things much more interesting if you ask me.

And yes, I know, it makes things unstable. And, being an avout RPer and defender, mind you, I'm not a big fan of that. But, looking at it from a nuetral perspective, I gotta say, the change is for the better.

Excepting that it doesn't recognize older members as special. Grr!

I hate the system. I am (well at least was until yesterday) an offsite admin in a major (one on the major region list) region. I have contributed so much to this game in my region and I am rewarded with being refered to as a minnow. I am extremely disappointed with the new system and liked the old one much better. I also found that it seems easier to invade with the new system, something I do not like.

Mods, the enforcement of the Invasion Griefing rule is better than Regional Influence IMO.

I live in the same region as Northern Sushi.

I have had this nation for ages now and have a pop of about 750 mill and it has spent most of its time in Liberalia. I moved out for a month to create a delegate elsewhere where no-one else could be bothered and had just lost its founder but came back promptly.

I contribute massively to the off-site forum and my objection is that it doesnt really recognise the efforts that many nations put into managing their nations and the length of time they have been doing this. The length of time someone has been playing this is reflected in the population stats and I could not see where this is taken into account. As a result, I too was annoyed to be called a minnow.

They stated very clearly that they only counted influence starting from March. You can't honestly expect them to go through ALL of their logs to find when every naton entered every region and give them back-influence.

In terms of age, I have a population of 3.8 billion, and I'm a minnow. Big deal.

Off-site activities are your fault. You chose to put in extra effort than the game itself requires. In terms of game mechanics, why should this be taken into account? And how would you have proposed they managed it?

I'm growing rather fond of the influence idea, to be honest. It's innovative. My only problem is that regions who have absolutely no interest in playing the invader/defender game could be invaded and griefed, which would suck for them.

You can't honestly expect them to go through ALL of their logs to find when every naton entered every region and give them back-influence.Especially since such logs don't exist.

In terms of age, I have a population of 3.8 billion, and I'm a minnow.Heh. My puppet in the West Pacific has a population of 4.8 billion, and it's a 'minnow'.

I'm growing rather fond of the influence idea, to be honest. It's innovative.Thanks.

My only problem is that regions who have absolutely no interest in playing the invader/defender game could be invaded and griefed, which would suck for them.That's where Founders come in. And, again, influence makes "griefing" more difficult. While we've only been generating influence since March, that gives the "native" a solid month jump start on an invasion that would start today. A year from now, the nations would be even more secure.

Hm. On an unrelated note, the title of this thread is really disengenuous. This is hardly a "sudden" change...

The Most Glorious Hack
Hm. On an unrelated note, the title of this thread is really disengenuous. This is hardly a "sudden" change...

Sudden in quotes? It certainly was sudden as well as totally unexpected, and undocumented.

I've read this entire thread, and no body seems to have a real clue.

At one point there was a mention that it was four months in the works, yet a new and definitive guide is not to be found.

In a post somewhere among the many disassociated threads. It was asked about the costs of Pass wording (notifying or not notifying), ejecting or ejecting and banning. The reply as I recall was It is a calculated complex formula. So answer was not provided.

Not one has a clue of what the new classifications of nations and regions, are or there rankings. But everyone speculates on the list.

I guess it all comes down to the point of where is the sticky, or Official Threads explaining these items?

Even a book of matches gives details instructions. "Close Cover before Striking Match", "Close Cover Before Striking" or "Strike on Back".

Where are the new instructions for Nation States?

(Posted with full respect.)

It's more fun doing tests and figuring it out on your own :p

Sudden in quotes? It certainly was sudden as well as totally unexpected, and undocumented.We've been working on this for close to a year. We've mentioned for months that we were working on something to "solve" the griefing problem. There was also a News post a few days to a week before the change went live.

In a post somewhere among the many disassociated threads. It was asked about the costs of Pass wording (notifying or not notifying), ejecting or ejecting and banning. The reply as I recall was It is a calculated complex formula. So answer was not provided.What, exactly, are the effects on your nation for each option in the "Whips, Chains, And Leather, Oh My!" issue? We've never given exact, numerical answers for how things work on this game. Why should this be any different?

Not one has a clue of what the new classifications of nations and regions, are or there rankings. But everyone speculates on the list.Can you prove that "Frightening" is the highest ranking for Economy? Can you prove that "Imploded" is worse than "Basket Case"? Again, we've never given these sorts of lists out, there's no reason to start now.

Even a book of matches gives details instructions. "Close Cover before Striking Match", "Close Cover Before Striking" or "Strike on Back".Not to belabor the obvious, but NationStates is not a book of matches.

It's not like we're running Wizardary or Hacker here; we've given some hints. We're just not going to give everything away.

Off-site activities are your fault. You chose to put in extra effort than the game itself requires. In terms of game mechanics, why should this be taken into account? And how would you have proposed they managed it?



I would have included a weighting to include population levels because that measures how long you have been doing the game.

I would never have expected a formula of calculating off-site activity which would have been impossible.

I would have included a weighting to include population levels because that measures how long you have been doing the game.

I would never have expected a formula of calculating off-site activity which would have been impossible.

Population measures how long you've been in the game, but not how long you've been in a region, or how active you've been. Countries of the same age can have very different levels of commitment to their region.

Originally Posted by The Most Glorious Hack
We've been working on this for close to a year.... There was also a News post a few days to a week before the change went live.


My point exactly! After a year, there is yet a definitive guide. News post? Where was that posted?


What, exactly, are the effects on your nation for each option in the "Whips, Chains, And Leather, Oh My!" issue? ... Why should this be any different?


I don't know? This is what I am attempting to find out. How many other unrelated and diverse threads exist?

You don't consider this a major change to the Game, worthily of a consolidated, comprehensive thread?


Can you prove that "Frightening" is the highest ranking for Economy? Can you prove that "Imploded" is worse than "Basket Case"? Again, we've never given these sorts of lists out, there's no reason to start now.

Honestly what real effect did these classifications actually have on day to day game play? When was "Frightening" or "Basket Case" ever a consideration as to whether a region was able to eject one or one hundred nations or a good or bad target for attack?

But "minnow" or "dominator" seem to be major factors relating to nations. "Backwater" or "Very Safe" also seem to be major factors relating to regions. And both apparently are going to effect day to day game play.

To me at least, these major changes appear to be a very good reason to start giving these sort of lists out.

Indeed Nation States is not a Book of Matches, the book of matches has a set of instruction.


It's not like we're running Wizardary or Hacker here; we've given some hints. We're just not going to give everything away.

Wizardry and Hacker are basically Static Games, Nation States is dynamic, and whether it is realized of not most regions are communities of people from throughout the world interest in a wide variety issues, other than obsessed in whether they can attack or have to defend their regions. It fact alone warrants a concise, unified and informative GUIDE.

All lazy people want a guide, they don't want to test stuff out :p

Seriously, some of us like running test and puzzling things out for ourselves, instead of getting everything presented on a silver platter.

Not a problem you can chose not to read the guide.

NS is about making of it what you will. You want a guide? Make one! CG seems to be trying to make some tests to see what's possible. Create some puppets, some test regions, commit your UN for a length of time to testing... It's all doable.

The news post is here (http://www.nationstates.net/news/). Under the News link in the sidebar. Read more and learn about influence.

News post? Where was that posted?

You fail at NS site navigation.

Saw that! Also found these other related Threads.

Now don't you think if it would be much easier if there was "ONE informative Thread To Rule Them All"?

[hr]

This new influence thing allows griefing on an incredible scale (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477401)

The Off Site Response to the Sudden Game Play Change (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477314)

The Regional Influence Rankings (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477251)

Regional Influence (NSv1.9 changes) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477177)

All About Influence (http://www.nationstates.net/pages/influence.html)

N/S news (http://www.nationstates.net/news/)

WTF... Regional Power??? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477262)

Are we all under a Monopoly (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477389)

Test of the new system (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477497)

Rethinking The Ruleset (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477482)

OMGWTF changes suck!!11!! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477500)

New version of NationStates means: Game Mod Olympics! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477352)

Regional Influence Rankings.... (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477457)

The One-Stop Rules Shop (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023)

Ooops forgot one.

For all nations who have been affected by the new game feature (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477523)

My point exactly! After a year, there is yet a definitive guide. News post? Where was that posted?News page, ironically enough.

You don't consider this a major change to the Game, worthily of a consolidated, comprehensive thread?No, it is a major change. However, this game has never explained every bit of code to the players. We expect them to figure things out. We've never spoon-fed our players before, and we aren't about to start now.

Honestly what real effect did these classifications actually have on day to day game play? When was "Frightening" or "Basket Case" ever a consideration as to whether a region was able to eject one or one hundred nations or a good or bad target for attack?Well, before the ejection function even existed, it was how nations competed with each other. And considering far more people interact with their nation stats than the invasion game, I'd say explaining those rankings would be more important.

But "minnow" or "dominator" seem to be major factors relating to nations. "Backwater" or "Very Safe" also seem to be major factors relating to regions.It's been in a few days. Have you been affected? I haven't. Then again, I'm in a region with a Founder who has locked Delegate controls. Handy things... Founders...

To me at least, these major changes appear to be a very good reason to start giving these sort of lists out.To borrow the phrasing from another game: start spading. Crazy Girl is trying to set out a logical, rational method of researching how influence works. You've chosen to demand it be given to you. Which method do you think is more likely to work?

Indeed Nation States is not a Book of Matches, the book of matches has a set of instruction.Sigh. False analogy and you know it. NationStates is also not: a porn star, a rib-eye steak, $42 in quarters, a shoe, a hat, a coffee cup, Prime Minister of Canada, a wombat, a delicious treat made from chocolate, a hammer, a bic lighter, a flying rodent, an amorpheous horror from beyond space and time, a camera, a tissue, a weather station...

Perhaps you would get more traction comparing NationStates to other games, as it is, indeed, a game. Unfortunately, that doesn't help your arguement in the slightest (re: Wizardry and Hacker).

Wizardry and Hacker are basically Static GamesAnd neither one told its players a damn thing. Hacker was especially evil at this; it was years after my C64 crapped out on me that I found out the full plot of the game. We've given more information than either of those games did, and there's a forum for players to brainstorm in. No, we're not telling you everything, but we never have.

Nation States is dynamic, and whether it is realized of not most regions are communities of people from throughout the world interest in a wide variety issues, other than obsessed in whether they can attack or have to defend their regions.See above. Founder. Disable Delegate control. Poof. Invasion-proof. Most players never interact with invaders. Don't turn them into some kind of boogy-man that torment all the players of the game. Even without Founders, most people never have to worry about invaders.

It fact alone warrants a concise, unified and informative GUIDE.No.

Ah yes, this...

This new influence thing allows griefing on an incredible scale (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477401)Discussion of the implications of the new system on a social level. Not the mechanics of it.

The Off Site Response to the Sudden Game Play Change (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477314)Social responce. Not mechanics.

The Regional Influence Rankings (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477251)Attempt to figure out the various rankings.

Regional Influence (NSv1.9 changes) (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477177)Official stickied thread in Tech.

All About Influence (http://www.nationstates.net/pages/influence.html)Not a forum thread at all. How do you propose it gets merged?

N/S news (http://www.nationstates.net/news/)Ah, you've found the news link.

WTF... Regional Power??? (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477262)One of the first reaction threads.

Are we all under a Monopoly (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477389)Complaining about the power of the feeders.

Test of the new system (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477497)Someone doing what you aren't willing to: figure the system out.

Rethinking The Ruleset (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477482)This is for UN Proposals and has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

OMGWTF changes suck!!11!! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477500)Joke thread. Locked.

New version of NationStates means: Game Mod Olympics! (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477352)Compiling the stats for what the GM's have been doing. Has nothing to do with influence.

...

Did you actually read any of these threads, or are you just throwing up links in the desperate hope that any of this is actually relevent to the point you're trying to make?

I don't get it. What's different about how a delegate is elected, invader or otherwise? I hear a lot of complaining that this somehow makes invasion easier, but how? The invader still has the exact same task for becoming delegate and upon becoming delegate cannot likely eject the old delegate or any powerful nation really, due to lack of influence.

It seems like the invaders should be bitching. They can no longer do many of the things they were able to do as soon as they got the delegacy in the past. Also, before they could eject fendas basically forever, but now they eventually won't have enough influence to do so.

I can see how we have to watch more closely for griefing once an invasion is successful, but it seems like prior to invasion and immediately after invasion all of the power goes to the regional natives.

It seems to me that most of the current problems are because the changes are new. An invader who popped into a region in March has as much influence as a guy who has been there since dinosaurs roamed NS. The balance of power is as good for the invader as it gets, but it will gradually go the other way.

Also, before they could eject fendas basically forever, but now they eventually won't have enough influence to do so.The crux seems to be the password.

II can see how we have to watch more closely for griefing once an invasion is successful, but it seems like prior to invasion and immediately after invasion all of the power goes to the regional natives.

That has happened in the Indian Ocean region.

It's been in a few days. Have you been affected? I haven't. Then again, I'm in a region with a Founder who has locked Delegate controls. Handy things... Founders...

I wish you had allowed my Durnia regional controls...

The Most Glorious Hack
Did you actually read any of these threads, or are you just throwing up links in the desperate hope that any of this is actually relevent to the point you're trying to make?

Yes, I read them! And they are as you report! And they were change related! Would it not be eariser and say you and everyone time and trouble to consolidate and provide some information?


Someone doing what you aren't willing to: figure the system out.

As I understand Multi-UN is still Illegal, Correct? So how do you propose I try?

A new thread

All Against Regional Influence (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=477596)

And they were change related!How was the Game Moderator olympics or changing UN Proposal rules even remotely related the the influence system? Because they mention the word "change"?

Would it not be eariser and say you and everyone time and trouble to consolidate and provide some information?And how do you propose we merge the News page with forum threads?

As I understand Multi-UN is still Illegal, Correct? So how do you propose I try?Oh... I don't know... get a few friends together and experiment? Maybe actually read Crazy Girl's thread? If your UN nation is too tied up, contribute a non-UN puppet; they generate influence too. You can't test a Delegate's ejection ability without anybody to eject.

Edit:I wish you had allowed my Durnia regional controls...Yeah... but with the Centre-generated WFE, you wouldn't have been able to do much anyway. Unless you just wanted to kick me out :p

I really don't understand all of the fuss. This isn't an entirely new dynamic for NS. Endorse your delegate, endorse your veteran nations and you'll be safe, just like always. Seriously folks, stop being lame.

I really don't understand all of the fuss. This isn't an entirely new dynamic for NS. Endorse your delegate, endorse your veteran nations and you'll be safe, just like always. Seriously folks, stop being lame.

It's quite a comprehensive change

It is a new dynamic of NS, probably the biggest change the game has ever under gone. Determined enough invaders could still topple a region like that unless there was a Founder in place.

Yeah... but with the Centre-generated WFE, you wouldn't have been able to do much anyway. Unless you just wanted to kick me out :p

The thought crossed my mind...

A few thoughts to those that are concerned.

First, I must say (and those that know me know this is difficult) that I was mistaken. I believed from the very beginning that this change would immediately spell the end of feeder politics and what I perceive as my way of life in this game. I was wrong. I shared this erroneous view with several other players and convinced them of my "rightness" as I am prone to do.

This change has not killed the game.

I feel very confident in stating that of the players in the game I have the most "active" experience with the influence factor and its uses from a Delegacy standpoint. I ejected between 1300 and 1350 nations by my counts in The Pacific.

You read that right 1-3-0-0. Plus.

I believed that I would start ejecting nations and hit 200 and be forced to stop.

I believed after I hit 200 that it would be impossible for the game to allow me to continue and yet it did. As I approached 600 nations on my first night it started to dawn on me that the power of the feeder Delegate, especially with the eject and not ban option was nearly infinite in regards to the game itself.

So, I state again, this change has not hurt the game from the feeder politics aspect. If anything it has made the Delegacy an even stronger position within the constructs of the game.

Can I ask why you ejected so many?

Paranoia or lunacy perhaps?

Neither and no. :)

Well Ivan, you certainly helped us figure out how the system works. That's an insane amount of ejections, considering just how behind TP's endorsements were to say Minineenee back in October (500+endorsements). I'm beginning to wonder whether its the level of the Delegate's influence or how far ahead they're ahead of the person with the next highest endos (or regional average).

Seems like a lot of us overreacted to the changes without bothering to see them in practice. A shame that the PRP had to take a blow because of it, as well. But the NS pot has definitely been stirred.