Gameplay Discussion

As much as those who oppose the ADN, for no reason whatsoever, may wish to make mountains out of thin air, what I have said about the ADN is 100% accurate.
The ADN is not "trying to" clear its name. The member regions of the ADN want to defend each other against invaders, that is the primary objective. The members got tired of ES (well some others too) trying to push the ADN into stuff that its regions were not for. The new incarnation, around for over a year, is just as I describe. And it is unfortunate for those ADN conspiricists that they are having such a hard time blaming something on the ADN. Maybe some in the game will just have to take responsibility for their own actions.
The ADN is only concerned with interregional affairs inso far as someone is threatening an ADN region. The ADN members also run defense missions on a voluntary basis, but under ADN leadership, for the protection of neutral regions. It has no policies regarding regional conflict excepting to defend its members and to interact with others with an eye towards possible new members. What is so hard to believe?
It is what it is, the fact that you deny it does not make it so.
 
to keep gameplay as positive as we'd like it to be we have to find the balance between the situation we had before regional controls and having organisations like the ADN become too powerful. When certain groups feel so powerful they do as they like, even if they dont go to extremes (like the RLAs recent actions), it still creates a less positive experience for everyone.
 
That is a fair enough assessment.
I would only like to point out that the advent of defenders, or defense based organizations was only a reaction to regions and individual nations reacting to the less than positive experience that they had had. The ADN is as large as it is because enough regions do not desire some of the "influences", they are many and varied, that they attract.
The ADN does not desire to influence other's gameplay, only to protect those who desire to protect themselves from less than positive experiences.
 
*Deputy Minister's announcement*

All persons who wish to discuss Gameplay here, please do so in a civil fashion. I never like issuing warnings, but I will do that and more if this gets too out of hand.

Continue on.
 
prehaps the game would regain some balance if we, in a way, took a step back. If there was alarge enough invader group or alliance to take on teh adn. I like the suggestions of having some regions able to declare themselves 'non-gameplay' however.
 
It's quite simple for a region to make itself non-gameplay. There's a little check-box in the Regional Control that eliminates Delegate access. It's as simple as that. Problem is, people don't do that when they found regions, and then when founders CTE there's a big vulnerability there. Not much to be done about it at this point.
 
I don't think that that is the answer FL.
The Defender groups are not an anomoly or a conspiracy, they are reactionary. If an invader/dominating group that was large enough to contend with the ADN were to appear, it has occurred before to some extent, there would simply be more NS nations and regions becoming defender to counter it. It really is that simple. The way to get rid of the ADN is to get rid of the less than positive influences that nations in NS band together to protect themselves from.
 
Gaspo:
It's quite simple for a region to make itself non-gameplay. There's a little check-box in the Regional Control that eliminates Delegate access. It's as simple as that. Problem is, people don't do that when they found regions, and then when founders CTE there's a big vulnerability there. Not much to be done about it at this point.
Click to expand...
When a Founder ceases to exist Regional Control access is automatic for the Delegate even if they were turned off beforehand.
 
Joop:
As much as those who oppose the ADN, for no reason whatsoever, may wish to make mountains out of thin air, what I have said about the ADN is 100% accurate.
Click to expand...
I oppose the ADN in that I disagree with it on several levels and believe that all the old empires need to die off for the good of the game.

I think "for no reason whatsoever" is a bit much. I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why people find themselves in opposition to the ADN and/or various leading influences within it.

I disagree that what you have said is 100% accurate because it logically cannot be so. The ADN does not have a foreign policy only because you say it does not -there is little backing that up in practice.

Maybe some in the game will just have to take responsibility for their own actions.
Click to expand...

Hopefully that will happen someday.

The ADN is only concerned with interregional affairs inso far as someone is threatening an ADN region. The ADN members also run defense missions on a voluntary basis, but under ADN leadership, for the protection of neutral regions. It has no policies regarding regional conflict excepting to defend its members and to interact with others with an eye towards possible new members.
Click to expand...

Then you have just admitted it has a capacity to exist, and in fact does exist, on a foreign policy level.

The Defender groups are not an anomoly or a conspiracy, they are reactionary.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. There once was a concept known as "defender unity", championed by the likes of Free4All and others, who believed that an invader's ultimate goal was world domination and so they were in natural conflict whereas two defenders could not be in a position to conflict with one another.

Then the game evolved and things changed. The RLA broke away from the ADN (it was not a portion of the ADN but it was clearly aligned with it), and took the EAA with it. The result was a civilized world in a tri-polar position between the ADN, RLA and The Pacific. For "civilized world" I exclude small isolationist regions and invaders, who have little credibility or contact outside their own spheres.

I will count the RLA as defenders because they have always claimed to be and until the schism the ADN has always claimed them to be and I do not favor a "no true Scotsman' mess.

The ADN and RLA are motivated by similar forces that make distinguish them from The Pacific (which does not have a foreign policy favoring abstract ideological terms such as "freedom", "democracy" or "defenders"), which makes it possible for them to be swung on an axis centered on Francograd.

It is then entirely possible that the game will evolve, spawn a new situation and the ADN/RLA/CoBD will align together again to meet that new threat.
 
Joop:
I don't think that that is the answer FL.
The Defender groups are not an anomoly or a conspiracy, they are reactionary. If an invader/dominating group that was large enough to contend with the ADN were to appear, it has occurred before to some extent, there would simply be more NS nations and regions becoming defender to counter it. It really is that simple. The way to get rid of the ADN is to get rid of the less than positive influences that nations in NS band together to protect themselves from.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing though: if you remove the things that the ADN bands together against, what does the ADN do, make cookies?

It'd end up doing nothing.

The solutions to the problem are simple. Either:

Have a huge "arms race" between Invaders and Defenders in an attempt to build up a massive NS war between everyone constantly.

OR

Return to the time before the I/D dichotomy and simply have roving raiders, imperialists, and vigilantes.


Of the two, the former is more likely to happen, although the latter has the longer benefits to actual gameplay.
 
Return to the time before the I/D dichotomy and simply have roving raiders, imperialists, and vigilantes.
Click to expand...


Ooooh.... That sounds fun.... I dare say that if that were the case I would be a "vigilante" instead of a raider.
 
but still, IMO as long as a cour group of players maintains the illusions teh ADN have built up, they will stay around. you know what they say about power corrupting and, for better or worse, the adn is about as close as we players get to absoloute power.




Disclaimer: not including mods. *leaves quickly while bowing to the ModCave*
 
I like it there :P
The people are nice, we all get along, we work to do positive things in NS...All in all it is one of the best organizations in NS. :tb2:

The fact that some see it as a negative only tells me that you are working at cross purposes, and as the ADN is nowhere near an empire, where that one came from is dizzying, and will not die due to all of the negative things going on that regions need protection from, and will not lose its core motivation to "find another reason to exist" as it has only one purpose, defense, leads me to believe that rational conversation regarding the ADN is hopeless here.

I leave you to your ADN bashing, and your big bad invader org building. I might suggest before I leave you to your bashing that you base your ideaology on real NS dynamics, it is far easier to keep an org vibrant when the membership has something that is real to rally around, otherwise you just have the same core and a bunch of sattelite members that come and go. Well anyway, good luck with that whole ADN must go thingy.

Oh and I was there when there were no defender orgs, I helped form them and their strategies, we are completely reactionary and voluntary, the more havoc and oppressive/hawking/imperial/you know the list the game gets, the more motivated the down trodden and nations who have been screwed get, thus more members for defenders. I guess this is the "positive" influence to the game I have been hearing about. The invaders used to say "we make the game interesting" , I do not believe that is true, but it does sure increase activity. :clap:
 
I would have been happier doing what I was doing prior to "discovering" the gameplay portion of NS. There is a whole lot to do without defender /Invader games. The game has many facets. The political, regional game is even more interesting and challenging.
In the begining when defending was new it was exciting to create it, to see it gain momentum and to change the strategies employed to insure continued success. Now it is just work for most who have done it for as long as I have, rewarding work, but repititious none the less.
I truly see the more positive aspects of NS, building a region, building communities, and not for further influence, as the more productive, and ultimately the route with more longevity in the game. I see defenders and defender orgs as the way to insure that the work that nations put into these positive aspects of the game will not be hindered or disrupted.
as an aside I do not see the RLA (a "political" org that uses defedense to boost membership) although they do defend, strategically, the EAA, who's main goal is influence after the defense is done and a few others as true defender orgs.
In fact, until a little over a year ago I did not consider the ADN as a true defender org, although prior to the "reloading' they were a resource for true defences that could not be ignored.
The ADN is not the game, The ADN is a org that insures that the game that some choose to play is nor unneccesarily molested.
 
The EAA when it first formed and for a good portion of its history thereafter...
Of course it is dead now.

The ADN reacts to a game to protect...oh whatever :duh:
 
But what the ADN does, in this case reacting to a game to protect, is itself a game.

The ADN's actual function is a game to its members.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top