The way I see it

King Durk the Awesome

King Durk the Awesome

TNPer
is that region destruction is fun and good for the game, and those who grief regions are patriots. I am especially hopeful that Unibot's region, Eastern Islands of Dharma, is permanently destroyed by the present occupying force.

Thoughts?
 
I believe that without R/D that this game would be a shell of what it currently is. I personally hope that Dharma is destroyed to deliver a huge blow to defenders, but as long as raiding and defending continues Nationstates will continue to grow, those are my thoughts.
 
R/D is a natural part of the game, an exploit out of inherent freedoms of nations in NS just like any conflict would be IRL. Both region destruction and griefing are consequences of that, so they are not necessarily good nor bad for the game. They are part of it, that's the game.

We can, however, empathize which either side, as I do to defenders nowadays.
 
Blue Wolf II:
I don't believe the destruction of Dharma will be so much as a blow to Defenders as it will be a boost to Raider morale.
Click to expand...
Yes, I can see how raider morale would need a boost at this time.

While the Raider / defender dynamic is part of the game. Destroying regions is the most puerile aspect of it. It simply confirms my opinions of some raiders.
 
flemingovia:
While the Raider / defender dynamic is part of the game. Destroying regions is the most puerile aspect of it. It simply confirms my opinions of some raiders.
Click to expand...
Defenders are enemies of Raiders, and I hold no illusions that they wouldn't do the very same to us if they had the opportunity. I have seen it with my own eyes far too many times.
 
Blue Wolf II:
flemingovia:
While the Raider / defender dynamic is part of the game. Destroying regions is the most puerile aspect of it. It simply confirms my opinions of some raiders.
Click to expand...
Defenders are enemies of Raiders, and I hold no illusions that they wouldn't do the very same to us if they had the opportunity. I have seen it with my own eyes far too many times.
Click to expand...
Also, since you can refound the whole thing again... What's the big deal about that?
 
In wars there are casualties.

I agree with Venico and not just five mins ago wrote as much on the R/D Summit comment thread on the NS Forums. The game is weighted towards defenders, imo. Raiders should have the game mechanics in their favor. When they do, i think the game will be at its best because a raider leaning game is the most fertile ground for defenders.
 
Moderation is keeping a close eye on this thread. Because of the divisive nature of the topic, please refrain from flaming. If you have nothing of substance to contribute to the discussion, DON'T POST.
 
The tide needs to sway both ways through time. Give both sides hope for fighting and to keep it going. I think Nationstates should live on and in order for it to flourish R/D needs to keep going. So whether or not I'm winning, as long as I'm fighting I'm happy.
 
punk d:
In wars there are casualties.

I agree with Venico and not just five mins ago wrote as much on the R/D Summit comment thread on the NS Forums. The game is weighted towards defenders, imo. Raiders should have the game mechanics in their favor. When they do, i think the game will be at its best because a raider leaning game is the most fertile ground for defenders.
Click to expand...
When's the last time you were active at an update, Punk Daddy, or involved in R/D?

Please let me know, I'd like to know where you're getting your evidence as to what side the game is slanted to.

IMO, I have no problem with raiding--I dislike it but it gives me something to fight against twice a day, so meh. I'd never argue for raiding to be destroyed, that's impractical and ridiculous. Griefing, on the other hand, I don't think is fair to natives of regions or the communities that exist there. I agree that defenders -have- griefed in the past and that there are some defender groups and singular defenders that hold the belief that raider regions should be raided, but I personally disagree with this notion. I also disagree with the premise that the UDL has griefed a region, which I'm assuming is where the tie of Dharma = defenders comes from, even though Dharma was a WA powerhouse, not a gameplay region. Community destruction is harmful to the game and unfair to people that have put efforts into protecting their communities. I think it's especially unfair to regions not focused on gameplay, such as Dharma or roleplay regions.
 
I still say that we can combine the R/D paradigms in a way that both can serve the region. But, alas, no one seems interested in that approach. Oh, well.
 
When was the last moment I was active at update?

I'd say it was about 10 months ago, when some friends were trying to take a region. Read: It's been a while.

As far as evidence that the game is tilted towards defenders, I see the dwindling of raiders (despite both the game's overall resurgence in recent months) as evidence that defenders have the upper hand. In discussions with some raiders in the past year, I feel that raiders have to have sophisticated methods just in order to keep pace with defenders.

You might have a different opinion, but from what I have seen, raiders and especially imperialists do not have the upperhand in the R/D game.
 
The targeting of Dharma was inevitable as soon as Unibot II was deleted, considering that he was founder and that the region was an ex-FRA member - though, despite what some people keep claiming, not associated with the UDL in any way. However, I don't think that this should be considered a major victory; the region was shut down several months ago, the active members all left for other regions, such as the IDU or Gholgoth, and all that is being raided and destroyed is a WFE. The community of Dharma was never about the region - we moved a number of times in the past - but our friendships, and those remain.
 
Eluvatar:
So... have you ever discussed difficulty with defenders?
Click to expand...
Not since the waning days of the RLA and ADN? I may have had offhand conversations with Unibot or Sedge in the past 2 years but nothing of real substance.
 
punk d:
Eluvatar:
So... have you ever discussed difficulty with defenders?
Click to expand...
Not since the waning days of the RLA and ADN? I may have had offhand conversations with Unibot or Sedge in the past 2 years but nothing of real substance.
Click to expand...
The prevailing view in R/D nowadays amongst both defenders and raiders is that raiders possessed a game-breaking advantage until about a month ago. When they transitioned the game to the new servers not only did we get a shorter update but variance was eliminated. That meant that raids could be done with pinpoint accuracy, making defences impossible. The game was essentially R/L, not R/D, and all raiders were fighting against was the clock. Ballo recently added artificial variance to the game, which has evened things out, and made it more fun for both sides.

So, the point is R/D game mechanics to not currently favour defenders and until recently favoured raiders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top