Land and Power

[Evangeline Anovilis]

To my fellow Role-players of this community,

 

Over the last couple months, I have made a good few observations, which I find quite uncomfortable. I for the most part thought I'll just keep quiet about it, given that knowledge is power, not saying anything will a. spare me the debates, b. prevent there being more enemies than I really need (which is every enemy above 0 really). Because honestly, who likes competition? But I thought I'd at least provide some insight to people, as it seems that some people have strange ideas, which might be good for me on the basis of competition, but if it makes the RP less enjoyable, because they find it frustrating to be worse off and blame god knows what on it (favourite is Tricent), then I feel like it is on an OOC base, not really in my interest, when in the end, people just up and leave, after being frustrated. I can RP on my own (I do RP on my own), but I'd prefer some other active people around me as well.

 

Now, for starters, land... It's nice to have land, no? Look at all this land I have. We all love land, to have borders we deem adequate, to have a nice name on the map and to matter globally, because, let's face it, at some point, people need to acknowledge you. Sadly... this hardly works out as it should. And it most likely will end up badly. Why? Because land is not as much providing security, as lack of it is diminishing security. But once you got an adequate amount, it's basically worthless to get more. As a good example, I might bring up city states, or quasi-city states (like my Croatia, which had 50 km diameter, was not a city but a number of towns, but still small), which are hardly defensible and even with a million soldiers and hundreds of planes, will run into issues, as Mogar and I did. Lack of strategic depth is an issue. But there is also a point, where you are just over-extenting. And over-extension is not a matter of "x square kilometres, everything above is too much", but it is relative to three things: What are you expanding in? What is your standing in the community? What is the strength of your armed forces? Certain areas will be counting less, some more. Owning the sahara desert is not the same as owning Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Austria, despite the former being about as much territory, if not more. If you are Greater Germany, people might call you a landhugger, if you are the Bedouin confederacy, people will just admit, noone really wants to be the Sahara Bedouins anyway. Next, if you have high standing in the community, taking some land can be easy. If you have no standing, don't even bother. And I don't mean you need to be having tons of friends (though it makes it certainly easier), but for example, one reason Foch constantly fails, is that he has no standing whatsoever. And his claim to faraway territories is kind of crap. He is undermining his own standing in a way. Lastly, all land gains that cannot be defended are pretty much a liability. If you cannot defend your new posessions, you pretty much picked up a territory that provides nil to your defense. And the worst part - it also does not help you. Because influence is not determined by who has the most land, but by who has the greatest strength. If people look at Tianxia, they don't take it seriously because it's Qing China+some extras. They take it seriously because it has 3 million soldiers that are actually competent and their territory is the proof of martial prowess. Meanwhile, if you annex a whole continent by expanding into white land, you pretty much prove nothing, people will look upon you as a landhugger and even worse, your expansion, at some point, will ensure that people will collide with you. It is kind of hard to ignore a continent-spanning Empire. There is a reason, I seek refuge in backwaters, when I want to be alone.

 

Next, I would like to clarify something about allies. First things first, noone allies you because you write nice RP. sorry, if I burst bubbles, but that is not what treaties are for. And it is not going to be that, ever. Any treaty signed because "I like your RP" is most likely a worthless scrap of paper in the greater picture. And understanding that is the first step to actually conducting proper diplomacy. People normally have certain criteria for an ally. These are:

• Common objectives: You'd want to ally a country that has a common agenda on which you can cooperate.
• Low diplomatic opportunity cost: You'd want to ally people that provide more than you'd risk losing if you ally them. In proper terms, alliances carry the risk of entanglement, meaning, getting caught up in conflicts you actually get nothing from.
• Willingness and ability to commit: You ally someone normally, when you know they are willing to cooperate and able to do so. An ally that fails at either of the two is a bad ally and not worth the paper. I mean, why would you tie yourself to a person that doesn't benefit you in the least? And this needs not be a general ability to commit, it needs only be the ability to commit in a useful fashion. If the US allied Japan, it didn't do so, expecting Japan to send troops to Desert storm or other theatres, where Japan cannot commit. But in the very specific theatre where Japan is, the East asian one, the US knows, it has a reliable partner. This generally would be the second risk alliances carry, abandonment.

If Dillon would come up to me in RP2 and ask whether he wants to ally Romania, I'd say no. Not because I hate Dillon, but because there is no common agenda, there is no benefit to my security, there is no reason to sign anything. Worst case, I get dragged into American and Pacific affairs. And this is also, why people ally Triyun. People in the RP might think he is an asshole. Now, without discussing whether he is or not (I personally don't think he is, but well), people, friend and foe, know that Triyun is a skilled tactician. People get told that Triyun can and will roll you, so they know, this person has some skill. Whether it is a skill they value or not, it is the skill that matters for a military alliance. you aren't signing a marriage form, where you need love and fidelity. You are signing a military pact, where it's about trust and military support. And you might write the best character RP, the sad thing is, it is military RP that is judged when deciding whom to ally.

 

Next, I'm going to say something about Triyun. I know, people might not like it very much, but it sadly is what it is. Triyun is not RPing unrealistically. In fact, what makes Triyun successful (and to some unlikeable), is that he RPs realistically. It is easy to say Triyun is aggressive and ruthless. But same could be said about others. It's a quality also of people like Cent. Or even me. Yet, we are actually successful. People like complaining about how Tricent is always allying each other and relying on these ties to keep them strong. Yet, it is not that way. Sure, Triyun and Cent are allied at the moment, maybe. But Cent's powerbase is not Triyun. Just like my own influence would not be derrived from Triyun and Triyun's influence is not derrived from Cent, nor me, nor Horo, nor Voodoo, nor someone else. Centurius has his connections in Africa to look upon, I have my connections in Europe, Triyun has his special location and all three of us have some sort of military might. And before people start wondering why I group myself in with Triyun and Cent, it is not because I want to pretent to be special and others aren't, because there are a couple more influential ones, however, Tricent are notorious examples, and I myself think it worth pointing out that even my own person is not that much different. The way we work is quite similar, the way we work out treaties is similar. And it is achieves results. To state that Tricent only matter because they are tied to each other pretty much ignores that Cent can look upon the AL for support, who apart from Voodoo aren't known for being too supportive of Tricent. But people in the AL seem to trust Cent enough to work with him and Cent is cooperative, because like other AL members, he has benefits from being cooperative. Cent isn't an anti-social person mistreating all others after all. Yet, because Cent isn't, yet he can accurately gauge international relations, Cent has a certain influence in the Med and Africa. I think that in light of this, to just go and talk of the good old circlejerk is rather simplistic.

 

Similarly, it is not unrealistic if strong people ally each other, provided they fit above criteria. Thing is, Triyun and Cent might have overlapping objectives, they have little problems supporting each other and there's little to lose this way. In CNRP2, it can be directed against someone, r noone. In CNRP, their alliance is pretty much the cementation of the status quo. It is two status quo powers, allying each other to uphold said status quo. There has been some tensions between them in the past, but both hold onto peaceful mediation, because it isn't worth a war. This is not against realism, this is perfectly realistic. This is the crux of the argument really. People like Triyun base their policies not on good or bad RP. They base it on political realism. They base it in cold hard political theory of power and security, and when people say that this is unrealistic, it is actually wrong. It's not unrealistic. At most, I personally might concede Triyun to be too offensive and hawkish, but he is not unrealistic. Millenia of political theory, reaching back to Thukydides and his Melian Dialogue support him. Which is why polemic accusations of unrealistic RP might cause some uproar, but at the end of the day, little can be done... the GMs cannot rule out a policy that ICly is actually sound. And let's face it, FHIC will have a hard time once she returns. I'm not saying Triyun is actually gunning for her, for I do not know. If he does, I have no idea. But I personally would trust him to at least wait till FHIC fucks up in some way. The issue for FHIC is simply, she will need to act with caution and finesse, or she will trip and get entangled in the European treaty web. But this is true for everyone. It is just as true for Rudolph, Ty, Markus or me. Someone outside Europe and the Med might not realise, but the diplomacy recently has changed. For better or worse. One might recall the time when PD accused Rudolph of not doing enough to counter Sparta... I'm just going to mention it as an example of what I see as a good example of outsiders ignorance and what caused me to chuckle back then, because the sole thing Rudolph could do, was to admit in frustration that he cannot do a thing. Now, I'm not saying FHIC deserves getting shot at. I don't particularly care. But I do think she will have to rework diplomacy and I do hope, personally, that she does so well. She can either be Napoleon or Louis quatorze (or Talleyrand), who managed to demonstrate great wit and make France a great power. Or she can be Napoleon III, who managed nothing but get outsmarted till his rule ended in the catastrophic defeat of Sedan and the subsequent revolution, bringing about the Third Republic. I would say, it certainly is hard, but it is not undoable and it is a taunting task, a challenge that hopefully will get accepted.

 

Now, I talked for a long time about things I did not want to spend so much time on. Actually, I just wanted to point out that people should be more humble with map claims. I guess, people should just be more humble overall. And with that, I mean everyone. I'm not the defender of Empires. I will defend Triyun's Chinese Empire solely because it actually mostly sticks to China and Mongolia, occupying one cultural region, but I still hold that people should do more RP in their holdings and that they should not take up tons of land for no apparant reason. It isn't doing anyone a favour, especially not the one with lots of land. In CNRP, at best I can appeal to people's consciousness to decide for themselves to step down, in CNRP2, where elites are less entrenched, I'll just say that land can be a liability and hardly anyone who matters will be deterred by it.

 

In general though, we need to do something with CNRP. I think, it's important we do something that actually works, as a community. Not just talk big. Because Melech might consider CNRP2 garbage and CNRP great, but I might point out that apart from the Foch drama (which doesn't qualify as quality RP really), I produced more content the last week than the rest of you combined. Feel free to think about that. I did state that new continents alone won't cut it, nor will cultural freedom. Might we actually start something meaningful?

 

Lastly, Melech, can we downsize Pasirung a bit? My territory has the size of India and I'm on the same laditude as Taiwan and much of the Middle East. While I don't mind the climate that much, I think the continent is a bit large and could be resized, so it is a bit more reasonable. I'd hope that this won't be an issue? I'd argue that if we resize it to the point where our territories are more akin to Germany or Poland in size, not to a whole subcontinent, we both won't be too hurt, will we?

 

With this, I'll finish this up and wish you a nice day,

your lovely Evangeline

[Captain Enema]

this would be useful if it weren't for the fact that logic need not apply. 

[Triyun]

People can say what they want, but I think Eva hit it dead on.  

 

Its hard to argue that what she's observed has not come to pass and always will come to pass.  I did not play in CNRP2 for months and people aimed for massive expansion.   Most people define good RP as them getting land and prestige, bad RP as them losing either.  Its just a cold hard fact.  I'd add on the fact that what I look for in an ally is someone who is chill and not just 'me me me'.

 

They view the story they have in their head and people who cooperate it towards good, but if someone disagrees with them, especially when they join the story later as bad.  Personally this is not how I view it.  I view stories that should be left alone as RPs between characters, but if it involves getting more land, more space, what everyone wants is the same.  And yeah two people may want Germany or Japan, but neither has any right to it more than the other.  

 

Some say that's Risk.  That's frankly wrong.  Risk is a game where territories have zero value aside from spawning bonuses.  Territories in CN RP have value.  But what needs to be understood is that nobody has any more right to them than anyone else.  And people I'd argue more others than me or Cent, will roll people to get them through whatever means necessary, IC or OOC.  The principle difference is most people really suck at trying to execute plots, executing 1914 early WW I tactics as their grand strategy, then go OOC when they start losing.  

 

The other thing is that nothings going to get better because people respond to incentives and OOC works.

[Mogar]

The problem is you can lose a war and not have the person who is victorious be a complete prick about it, as well as actually collaborate beforehand to find a conclusion that you can both agree to, for someone who complains about not wanting allies who are "me me me", I have rarely ever seen you compromise. Land has value due to the locations it provides, which provide the background for the character RP developed there, Cent and yourself rarely ever RP outside of a very limited amount of the land you control, but you require that land still? I would have happily done a very similar RP to my current story line in RP2 but without an Empress in RP1, but you'd never have granted me Tokyo.

 

It is essentially a game of Risk or diplomacy, the problem lies within the fact a few people are always going to be allies no matter what, so it's kinda pointless to partake if you know it's going to end up with one of those same three as the winner every time, regardless of their position on the map.

 

And I realize I have plenty of land in RP2, but I'm willing to donate any of it (including Japan-Tokyo), to a new nation should they wish to be in Asia, because I believe the entire purpose of a collaborative RP game is to collaborate and not just dick people over for the sake of trying to "win". As I said to Eva on IRC earlier, I could position myself diplomatically to simply roll the rest of SEATO and get new nations in those positions to further benefit myself, but at the cost of those people losing on on their own RP.

 

After reading this a second time, I'm reminded of Sarah's whine about us permanently keeping out 50k nations.

 

 

I think most people on here write well and have great contributions, but for large sweeping global narratives, which we like to remember so fondly, come with an antagonist. Beyond the fictional element, people need to be able to communicate better. We may not all like each other, but at times, for the good of the community and in public, we should try to take a deep breath, and realize, we both want the same thing, a good story.

 

The real question we have to ask ourselves is whats more important to a good story, an enjoyable global storyline, or one in which the same few people are the "winner?"

[Evangeline Anovilis]

First off, I think there is a way to be left alone as a country. That is, to stick to yourself, to not be prominent, to not pose a threat, to not poke others. I got told today, that my actions killed a country, because due to me, Alvonia is having a hard time. Well, the way I see it, I joined this RP, Alvonia was ordering around Hungary-Slovakia and Belarus over Poland, leveraging them due to its alliance to Babylon, with an additional tie to Zapadnaya. Markus pretty much forced the Carthage Accords at gunpoint, with the consequence that had they not been approved, the Wehrmacht would come. The Carthage Accords came to pass. Now, you might say subsequent events of mine, that is, allying Sparta, forging the Eastern Bloc and forcing Markus into a corner were aggressive moves, which by far are not collaborative RP efforts. I'm not going to deny, what I did to Markus is by far not cooperative. But honestly, why would I be cooperating to a person that is himself leveraging others? I'm not going to take apart Markus any further, provided he isn't going batshit insane on us, but there is a certain point where I think we should not assume that this is collaboration vs competition, because a lot of people are out there looking for competition. Just, they don't want to lose. I admit, some are not necessarily out there for competition and merely join in on the sidelines, in order to secure themselves their survival in a world that has its good few less noble inhabitants. To mind come my two non-allied neighbours Rudolph and IA, both which I respect their territorial integrity and which I'm happy to be on somewhat decent terms with.

 

There was a point in CNRP, when I was fed up with how the RP was running, that was when I packed up, left my occupied country in premier RP land france and went to secondary RP real estate Southern Ontario (yes, that's the populated half of the largest Canadian province, still only about 10 million people). I neighboured Kankou, who was willing to guarantee my security, MGL, who did not even realise we were neighbours and PD, with whom I had some RP. Otherwise, I was isolationist and pretented that outside Faraway, and its immediate neighbourhood, the world was large and dangerous, so I stayed away. And see there, it worked. Up to the point when I slowly opened up again, growing myself into one of North America's three powers, with Tanis and MGL. But once I rejoined and actually looked beyond my borders, I also accepted the responsibility that interaction has risks. I spent a few weeks learning from MGL, Tanis and Shammy on how to get my military from a WWI standard to a modern standard and to not be completely useless.

 

People say this is risk. It isn't. Risk is about global domination. What we are doing is pretty much the logical consequence of political realism and the basic desire of all states - survival. To maximise security, we strive for influence, find allies, secure our homeland, corner threats. Similarly, there is no "winner". Unless you count me as one for every day I'm close to volatile people and still survive.

 

And maybe I'm conservative, for thinking that I myself worked my way to where I am, others could do so too. When I joined, I got rolled by Lynneth of all people. And in the name of a good story, I gave up before anything bad happened. Consequences were that Mara kicked me from our bloc channel and I went my own way. For the months that followed, I slowly worked out how to utilise my armed forces and now I am here... Almost three years later. I'm hardly the best, but I at least consider myself decent enough to not throw the towel as I did in the past. It was not easy. It was not great. But I did not just give up on the RP and worked till I came to be where I am now. Good, ok, I had the great motivation that Kankou was around and I felt I should try to be a help to her for all the times she had been a help to me, but honestly, the times when Kankou needed help, those were the actual dark ages of CNRP from the time I was there, when people actually bashed each other's nations in for extermination, when OOC/IC split was a joke and when we finally got rid of mod-appointed GMs (People, use your democratic rights to nominate and elect GMs. We fought hard for these rights and they were a hard-earned victory. you make me sad by throwing away this hard work of those who fough TSI and the GM court for years). I grew up in this RP with two principles: "You can trust others as far as your objectives align" and "War is a mere continuation of politics by other means". And I would like people to please properly interprete the Clausewitzian second principle, before I'm accused of being a warmongerer, ok?

 

Anyway, long story short, people like to say they are here for collaborative RP, but collaborative RP is not sitting around on your Empire, concluding treaties and messing in foreign affairs and provoking others, then throwing a tandrum, once it bites you in the ass. That's being whiny. To me, it already is collaborative, if everyone keeps to the rules and isn't trying to OOC screw me over, because then there is a storyline stemming from the interactions of everyone, where we may not all get 100% of what we want, but we influence each other and produce something, with a certain competitiveness, that however should not spoil OOC relations. I concede, this is not the kind of collaboration others think of, which is why I am perfectly fine to leave alone countries that really keep to a profile of not whoring for attention and not trying to matter in international relations.

 

And yes, the first sentence of the last paragraph was a reference to a recent Japanese attempt to stir trouble in Savoy and Switzerland. Mogar, I'm not in East Asia anymore, so I have no interest in what you do or don't do with jesbro. I'm not in the Indian, so I don't even care what islands you annex there. But if you cause trouble for Romania in Europe, goodness, I would really hope that you will not OOCly complain if this carries IC consequences, because at some point "I want to just be left alone" is no longer a credible excuse. If you go out of your way to screw with my policies halfway around the world, that would be that point and as much as I have no issue with you or FHIC being around, I'm not ging to just let others sabotage my policies.

[Yerushalayim]

My two cents, as something of an outsider to CNRP's community, is that "competitive" and "collaborative" aren't mutually exclusive styles of RP. The CNRP community, odd as it is to me, is significantly more tame than what I'm used to dealing with. Y'all might kvetch, but for the most part people are actually RPing in good faith. Sure some folks (myself included) might be playing more competitively than others, or be more nationally oriented as opposed to character oriented, but none of these styles are superior to the others. The issue isn't what style of Rp you use, but whether or not you're playing the game in good faith. For the most part, folks do just that, and play in good faith. There have been a few incidents that I've felt were in bad faith, but have either lacked the evidence to act, or were deemed to be acceptable by the reigning GMs at the time. Sure, I'm not happy about that, but it's not a game breaker, either.

 

There's nothing wrong with a political storyline, or a war storyline, or a competitive play style that pits nations against one another. There are ways to avoid storylines that you're not interested in, as Eva's said. If you do jump into a story line, though, you're in it. So, I'd consider Zoot's random attack on Mogar in the Indian to be a piss poor example of RP, but Mogar's blockade from Vektor to be perfectly acceptable, as Mogar entered the story line willingly.

 

All in all, this community's not absolutely horrible. :P Could use some improvement, but it's lots better than what I'm used to (no real RL death threats yet, at least). RP and have fun people. Don't be OOC dicks. Etc.

[Triyun]

The fundamental issue with that is what I'm driving at.  You take Mogar saying, 'Oh I need Tokyo.'  Well a lot of people 'need Tokyo'.  What happens when one guy wants to play the PRC, one guy wants to play the Mongol Empire, one guy wants to RP WW II Japan, one guy wants to RP the Tokugawa Shogunate, and one guy just has a wholely fictional nation?  If you're RPing true to any of those save for the last one, a lot of those states are simply mutually exclusive if you're true to those ideologies or world views.  The problem in my view there is not bad RP, people are doing good RP they are honest about what they are doing.  I certainly always tell people what I'm doing if asked.  The problem is people cry OOC, or Bad RP, or bullying when the other person has an IC worldview they dislike.

 

If someone wants to RP One China, that's a very fair thing to do, thats a big idea in Chinese history.  If someone sees manifest destiny that's a fair thing to do.  If someone ideologically believes in workers of the world unite, or the preservation of divine right on the other side, in my view none of these are 'bad things'.  To turn them into OOC issues is the problem.  By the same token the idea of an antagonist is true, I've often been seen as playing that role by some, but I see them often as an antagonist.  You can't define who is and who is not an objective antagonist.  

 

I believe in CN RP 1 in a world where little north koreas shouldn't have nukes.  I believe that's being the good guy IC.  IC others believe little north koreas should have nukes to confront the oppressive global Tianixa and its universal liberal values.  Neither's right, neither though makes the storyline bad.  

 

At the end of the day Eva's overwhelmingly right in her explanatory analysis.  This is how things tend to work.  People don't like it, but it is predictive and proven.  The bigger issue is that when you don't get the narrative you want out there IC how do you handle it.  Personally I think so many issues go to GM courts that have no business there.  Especially how leaders do diplomacy and what arguments they like or do not like.  That should be left to IC, while OOC it should remain respected.

[Greywall]

Well this couldn't have been said better, nice post Eva.

[Markus Wilding]

First off, I think there is a way to be left alone as a country. That is, to stick to yourself, to not be prominent, to not pose a threat, to not poke others. I got told today, that my actions killed a country, because due to me, Alvonia is having a hard time. Well, the way I see it, I joined this RP, Alvonia was ordering around Hungary-Slovakia and Belarus over Poland, leveraging them due to its alliance to Babylon, with an additional tie to Zapadnaya. Markus pretty much forced the Carthage Accords at gunpoint, with the consequence that had they not been approved, the Wehrmacht would come. The Carthage Accords came to pass. Now, you might say subsequent events of mine, that is, allying Sparta, forging the Eastern Bloc and forcing Markus into a corner were aggressive moves, which by far are not collaborative RP efforts. I'm not going to deny, what I did to Markus is by far not cooperative. But honestly, why would I be cooperating to a person that is himself leveraging others? I'm not going to take apart Markus any further, provided he isn't going !@#$% insane on us, but there is a certain point where I think we should not assume that this is collaboration vs competition, because a lot of people are out there looking for competition. Just, they don't want to lose. I admit, some are not necessarily out there for competition and merely join in on the sidelines, in order to secure themselves their survival in a world that has its good few less noble inhabitants. To mind come my two non-allied neighbours Rudolph and IA, both which I respect their territorial integrity and which I'm happy to be on somewhat decent terms with.

 

I would like to point out that during the Carthage Accords negotiations, Euphaia and Mr. Director were both demanding terms that were absolutely insane for any rational person to agree to, much less sign into a codified treaty. I actually tried my best to prevent a war (despite what you and others may think) and I conceded a LOT of what I originally asked for. In the end, your actions got them what they wanted anyway. What did I get in return for trying to stop a war and defend my territory? I get suspicion from Euphaia almost daily and threats almost weekly from you and your allies and Euphaia seems convinced I'm nothing but a troll.

 

Not that any of what I said really has much to do with your broader argument or the subject of this topic even, but I just thought you'd like to know. Thanks a bunch.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Markus, your initial position was that both keep out of Poland. Naturally you'd need to conceed on that, because that demand is completely unreasonable. Point still stands though - You saw it fit to apply military pressure on your neighbours to project power beyond your borders. With the results as you know it, when others think you shouldn't have that much influence in Eastern Europe. You can give yourself as much legitimacy as you want to invade other states based on "ultranationalism" or "bolshevism", but it's hardly saying "Hey, I'm a peace-loving cooperative guy who wouldn't harm another person". Not that you particularly complained that I hit you. Just others did.

[Markus Wilding]

I'm not proclaiming to be some peace-lover. Never made that claim, never will (as Alvonia, at least). I don't shy away from war unless it's pointless, or unless situations force me otherwise as you so willingly demonstrated when you demanded I withdraw from my Polish lands and M-V. Keep in mind this isn't a condemnation of your actions, I honestly didn't have much a reaction to it other than "well %*&$, here we go" and yeah, I'll keep pushing IC to take it back any way I can, because in my eyes IC I've been robbed, and there's no greater justification for war than revanchism.

[Triyun]

 I don't see why being extreme and stubborn in your initial negotiating position is a bad thing.  Its an excellent negotiating tactic and the definition of 'hardball politics' IRL, especially if you know the guy across the table wants or better yet has to compromise.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Triyun

[PresidentDavid]

I do not have time right now to read the entire thread, but I did read your initial post Eva - I don't disagree with anything you said, including when I was accusing Rudolph (though I was accusing all of Europe really, Rudolph was just the one foolish enough to interact with my rant). 

 

You shortly mentioned CNRP and how cultural freedom and new continents wont cut it - I have written long posts about this before and covered a large number of topics, I am sure you remember some of them. I have always been in favor of a map-reset because that is what gets people to come in initially, but you need to make them stay. You would most likely need to restructure the war mechanics/rules so that it could nerf the disabilities smaller nations have, but maybe not to the extend CNRP2 has done if it makes y'all feel uncomfortable. That what I think would need to be done initially. 

 

There will always be the stigma against Triyun because he has strategic defensive and offensive positions for virtually every continent and almost every subregion on the planet, which is why I think a map-reset would be necessary, but then you have people like Melech that hate the idea of it. So I'm not sure how y'all will make that work. But I commend you two on keeping CNRP alive. If you are willing to make some painful changes, you can see more people join and it become relevant again, but if you like the seclusion (which I think you particular do) then the status quo should suffice. 

 

Anyway, good read.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

I do not have time right now to read the entire thread, but I did read your initial post Eva - I don't disagree with anything you said, including when I was accusing Rudolph (though I was accusing all of Europe really, Rudolph was just the one foolish enough to interact with my rant). 

Give me a reason why supporting other people in the region profits me more than supporting Triyun in Sparta. It is easy to talk from where you are, but I'd rather not work on countering some not yet present, maybe never present, future threat, when the cost is my immediate security towards my immediate surroundings.

 

If you are willing to make some painful changes, you can see more people join and it become relevant again, but if you like the seclusion (which I think you particular do) then the status quo should suffice.

I don't get how you think I like seclusion. I make do with what I have. I'm also not going to advocate map resets, rule changes, pretty much all the crap that is floating around, but will not solve issues much. Feel free to continue calling for map resets, it's a one-time short-term measure that solves pretty much nothing. And Triyun's global capability to strike is hardly the issue. Just look at CNRP2, where Zoot causes terror in the Indian Ocean with nothing more than Iceland.

 

And I don't really give much of a damn whether you think it is a good read, when a. you haven't actually read it, b. you aren't understanding the point that is being made or the circumstances you are commenting on. Something that's hardly new, by the way, which might be why I am hardly appreciative of your praise. We already had similar issues before, notably when discussing the United Nations Security Council and its implications for the RP.

 

Which actually kind of highlights two things that I found this community to be quite poor at: People adopt the most retarded narratives regarding the community of CNRP(s) and people have less of an idea what they actually want, than what they don't want, which are vague terms that take on the form of catchphrases of which most people got no clue whatsoever what they actually mean. Most notably "Hegemony", which is most often not used in the correct manner, is most likely being pointed out as the state of affairs that people do not want to have in existence, yet is a reality in certain regions of CNRP2, just that noone calls it what it is. Of course, to a person like me, who would appreciate an actually worthwhile hegemony, this is all the more aggreviating, but well.

 

People here might be partly very friendly and nice, but honestly, at times I wonder whether people are actually serious...