[Zarfef]

Now, there are some who would say that due to recent events, I am somewhat biased. That I will admit is true, as I wouldn't normally think about procterates on a day to day basis unless the stupid things started affecting me, especially when I feel they never should. But it does beg the question in CN, why do procterates exist to begin with?!

As far as I can see, procterates only act as land claims by large scale nations without them looking like they are land hogs (It's a way for them to claim land without claiming land). The claim that players can ask for the regions the same as white space is wrong because it implies that the new nation should never cause any trouble for the other country contrary to potential IC play, it is a way of effectively influencing IC interactions through OOC affairs. "Asking" also implies that you can be turned down essentially allowing these players to pick and choose definite allies into the RP. The result only seems to further a rather clichish nature which I am seeing more and more of on these boards that borders on high school level teenage groups, it also seems to limit potentially interesting plots that (while not in line with the ego-centric americana viewpoint) are quite interesting.

That stated, why not state that all procterates are really other states which don't interact with world affairs and leave them as white space to be claimed within reason by any new players? Only when the map is filled, THEN would there be the need to have some larger states give up land to new players. Currently though, if we keep being meant to them like some kind of Cliche we're not going to get any new ones that stay for long.

And if fantasy RP is just a way to boost the egos of larger nations by giving them a cliche' it no longer has a purpose within the forums as it would seem to me.

[V The King]

The main reason why North America isn't all filled and has room is because of its protectorates (largely mine and Mudd's some are Pravus', some are JED's) - the reason why I have them is to prevent excessive expansion by nations and ensure there always is room for newcomers - sometimes, I endorse expansion of veteran nations if they can back it up with good RP.

[Tahsir]

I don't like protectorates. Its a form of imperialism. It is bad enough that most nations cannot drop off the world map into white space, but its getting really bad that places where NO nation has ever been are being claimed as protectorates.


Really I try to do everything I can to cripple the spread of protectorates.

[Imperium of Poliz]

I figured that taking Protectorates stopped one or two nations filling up space where ten or twenty normal-sized ones would fit

[Tahsir]

Imperium of Poliz, on Sep 3 2009, 02:12 AM, said:

I figured that taking Protectorates stopped one or two nations filling up space where ten or twenty normal-sized ones would fit

Sometimes. I'd rather it was all white space though.

[Teriethien]

Protectorates feel like a necessary evil to stop one or two landhogs from taking up all the space on the map, but I agree it feels just like another form of imperialism, for stronger nations to basically claim a piece of land without consequence. New nations should be claim a part of any protectorate without the protector's permission, IMHO.

This post has been edited by Teriethien: 03 September 2009 - 01:32 AM

[Markus Wilding]

Consider it this way, guys: If all that land was white space and not a protectorate, people like LVN would control half the damn world by now, leaving literally NO space for new players. As a nation that started out in Antarctica (probably THE hardest place to RP next to Europe) I waited what I thought a long time to get some new land because I had no fricken' clue how protectorates worked.

I'm not arguing against protectorates, no. I'm just saying that if a new player doesn't know how protectorates work (like I did) then they're likely to go to Antarctica, which Tahsir has graciously gobbled up.

[Voodoo Nova]

They are a legit IC move, in my opinion. If you don't like it IC, do something about it IC.

[King Kevz]

Voodoo Nova, on Sep 3 2009, 02:26 PM, said:

They are a legit IC move, in my opinion. If you don't like it IC, do something about it IC.

But what of the OOC implications? if a new player would like to set up a nation in the area but is denied by the person controlling the land what can they do other than complain and moan?

[Generalissimo]

I’m my stance against map protectorates isn’t merely an extension of my absolute distain of the CNRP World Map.
Now there is nowhere in the world a new nation can start without the explicit permission of another nation, it’s tyranny against new players.

[Sarah Tintagyl]

Honestly protectorates make me laugh...cause when I had my empire, no one asked for my protectorates they just asked for my land. So I mean I think for the most part people are pretty good as long as you ask nicely. No, you aren't going to get everything your heart desires, but this game is about patience, you wait long enough, you'll get it.

[Centurius]

Zarfef, on Sep 3 2009, 07:30 AM, said:

Now, there are some who would say that due to recent events, I am somewhat biased. That I will admit is true, as I wouldn't normally think about procterates on a day to day basis unless the stupid things started affecting me, especially when I feel they never should. But it does beg the question in CN, why do procterates exist to begin with?!

As far as I can see, procterates only act as land claims by large scale nations without them looking like they are land hogs (It's a way for them to claim land without claiming land). The claim that players can ask for the regions the same as white space is wrong because it implies that the new nation should never cause any trouble for the other country contrary to potential IC play, it is a way of effectively influencing IC interactions through OOC affairs. "Asking" also implies that you can be turned down essentially allowing these players to pick and choose definite allies into the RP. The result only seems to further a rather clichish nature which I am seeing more and more of on these boards that borders on high school level teenage groups, it also seems to limit potentially interesting plots that (while not in line with the ego-centric americana viewpoint) are quite interesting.

That stated, why not state that all procterates are really other states which don't interact with world affairs and leave them as white space to be claimed within reason by any new players? Only when the map is filled, THEN would there be the need to have some larger states give up land to new players. Currently though, if we keep being meant to them like some kind of Cliche we're not going to get any new ones that stay for long.

And if fantasy RP is just a way to boost the egos of larger nations by giving them a cliche' it no longer has a purpose within the forums as it would seem to me.

The system has been in effect ever since we worked with filled maps(the time way before you joined where if you wanted to play you were condemned to Africa) and has always worked as supposed to, should we open up to land maps will be filled and you cant force a nation to give up land. As such my vote is to keep Protectorates. The profits are bigger than the losses.

Imperium of Poliz, on Sep 3 2009, 09:12 AM, said:

I figured that taking Protectorates stopped one or two nations filling up space where ten or twenty normal-sized ones would fit

That is the exact goal of protectorates yes.

King Kevz, on Sep 3 2009, 03:55 PM, said:

But what of the OOC implications? if a new player would like to set up a nation in the area but is denied by the person controlling the land what can they do other than complain and moan?

Roleplay a rebellion, gather international support, a protectorate only works if the protector can back it up.

[King Kevz]

Centurius, on Sep 3 2009, 03:24 PM, said:

Roleplay a rebellion, gather international support, a protectorate only works if the protector can back it up.

But if the land is protected but someone does that mean that the land is classed as theirs? Because if it does then the person asking for the land needs the protectors permission which they obviously won't get. If it isn't classed as theirs then there would be no problem just this point needs clarifying.

[Centurius]

King Kevz, on Sep 3 2009, 04:55 PM, said:

But if the land is protected but someone does that mean that the land is classed as theirs? Because if it does then the person asking for the land needs the protectors permission which they obviously won't get. If it isn't classed as theirs then there would be no problem just this point needs clarifying.

I've always considered Protectorates white space and a courtesy of requesting the protector(s). They serve as occupied land for those already established not those still not in the game.

[King Kevz]

Centurius, on Sep 3 2009, 04:29 PM, said:

I've always considered Protectorates white space and a courtesy of requesting the protector(s). They serve as occupied land for those already established not those still not in the game.

Hmm thats what I thought but I think we need a community decision on it so that we know what it is for everyone.

[Generalissimo]

Centurius, on Sep 3 2009, 10:29 AM, said:

I've always considered Protectorates white space and a courtesy of requesting the protector(s). They serve as occupied land for those already established not those still not in the game.

It still means a new player’s entry into CNRP is entirely dependent on the goodwill of an established player.

This post has been edited by Generalissimo: 03 September 2009 - 11:47 AM

[Subtleknifewielder]

N Reeki, on Sep 3 2009, 04:28 AM, said:

Consider it this way, guys: If all that land was white space and not a protectorate, people like LVN would control half the damn world by now, leaving literally NO space for new players. As a nation that started out in Antarctica (probably THE hardest place to RP next to Europe) I waited what I thought a long time to get some new land because I had no fricken' clue how protectorates worked.

I'm not arguing against protectorates, no. I'm just saying that if a new player doesn't know how protectorates work (like I did) then they're likely to go to Antarctica, which Tahsir has graciously gobbled up.

Sarah Tintagyl, on Sep 3 2009, 06:23 AM, said:

Honestly protectorates make me laugh...cause when I had my empire, no one asked for my protectorates they just asked for my land. So I mean I think for the most part people are pretty good as long as you ask nicely. No, you aren't going to get everything your heart desires, but this game is about patience, you wait long enough, you'll get it.

Now, this woman speaks the truth...it is true not everyone will give you what you want...but the same is true of anything in real life. And just like in real life, some people are going to be snobs...

Generalissimo, on Sep 3 2009, 09:52 AM, said:

It still means a new player's entry into CNRP is entirely dependent on the goodwill of an established player.

As N Reeki Stated earlier...they are the lesser of two evils, really. Do you want the limitting factor of a protectorate, or the bigger limit of a nation actually laying claim to all the land?

[Pravus Ingruo]

The only reason I have a protectorate is to keep land open for new players, instead of leaving it as white space that established players can just expand into. Any new player who comes to me will never be turned away. Established players, yes. New players, no.

[Generalissimo]

Subtleknifewielder, on Sep 3 2009, 01:11 PM, said:

As N Reeki Stated earlier...they are the lesser of two evils, really. Do you want the limitting factor of a protectorate, or the bigger limit of a nation actually laying claim to all the land?

A lesser of two evils is still evil, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s feudalism.

This post has been edited by Generalissimo: 03 September 2009 - 12:14 PM

[Subtleknifewielder]

Generalissimo, on Sep 3 2009, 11:19 AM, said:

A lesser of two evils is still evil, it doesn't change the fact that it's feudalism.

Yes, it's still evil...but I asked...which evil do you want? It's going to be one or the other, so which do you dislike less?