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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.




That is the exact goal of protectorates yes.



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.

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.

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

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...


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?

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.

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?

I'll be ditching that massive protectorate soon enough I hate having them.

Protectorates keep greedy nations from expanding too large and enable newcomers to join the RP. The Scottish protectorate in Spain/France has been a very good example of this as I have granted territory to five brand new nations that could not have existed otherwise (Euzkadi, France, Conti, Portugal, and Blackjack's nation).

Another positive aspect is that we as protectors can keep psychos like Krieg from ruining the CNRP. I would have never allowed him to join the game.

And thats the problem no player should have the right or the ability to decide whether a player can join or not if some phsyco wants to join then they can regardless of what others think.

It's not the end of the world if somebody doesn't get the EXACT spot of land they want. When I first started RPing, I wanted Illinois. I saw it was taken and went to Antarctica. It's not that hard for a person to accept the fact that maybe, just MAYBE their land isn't available and they can find some new land. It's also not hard to go to another person holding a different protectorate and ask them.

Don't tell that to Tom Litler I think we know how well that turned out.

Dude, you're crossing the IC/OOC barrier. His Rp's were not all the best, I'll admit, but he DID improve quite a bit before the end. He was anything but "psycho," and NOT fascist.

Protectorates should act as regions that you can RP in, but new nations have the right to claim them, even without thw owner's consent (but rather a PM). Besides, what can you do if they RP a rebellion (other than squishing it)? I do not see them useful in their current state becaume they effectivly ARE your country (other than roleplaying much inside of them).

So here is an idea: ditch protectorates and make them "Occupied Territory" [Ignore this name!]. Its effectivly the same thing, but it implies more of the "protecting" part and implies that therfe are actual people there (IMO anyway; Protectorate sounds like your defending your interests for me anyway). I.e. Afganistan. Stastisticly speaking, they would mean that old nations would only be able to take it through force, while new nations could take it through multiple ways. [/s]But I think the lesser evil is to have only white space; any good (and hopefully well-respected) roleplayer will not take up as land as possible, and land-grabbers often get penalised by other nations.[/s] Nevermind the strikethrough; too many implications.

It must always be remembered that new RP'ers may not have RP'ed before and may make many mistakes; like getting angry. The last couple of "noobs" are very bad examples, but Arg I dont feel like defending them anymore. Don't mind this.

You have two choices.

1. Allow protectorates, and therefore stop landhogs
2. Not allow protectorates, and therefore allow giant empires everywhere.

I choose 1.

no
1. Allow protectorates, stop landhogs in an OOC matter through a loophole of the land rule
2. Not allow protectorates, and fight massive empires expanding in an IC manner

I choose 2.

...There's nothing wrong with Large Empires.
BUT.

Protectorates are necessary. So I have voted. Besides, you can get to be a big empire without gobbling them up just as easily.

The thing about protectorates is that I see it as a common courtesy to ask the person that owns it permission. It really isn't that hard to make a topic for that purpose, now that I think about it. Besides, it's not like people with enough IC backing can't take the land by force.

I use it to keep land for new nations (Ironically because V and I are two of the largest nations in CNRP and have the largest protectorates) and to make sure new players aren't commie asshats

They are a necessary evil to prevent landhogs. It's a halfway point between being an outright claim and open land.

For the record, I beleive the last completely unclaimed territory we had was Paraguay (which I ended up claiming last September for RP lulz).

I love Mudd's comments about commie asshats - that's as good a reason too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectorate

I know, I know. Just ignore what I called it.

A protectorate is not for individual advantage, but it gives you an advantage if someone wants to RP somewhere yet its under your complete control whether they can or not. There doesn't have to be a "lesser of two evils"; only a good and a evil. Sure, a PM should be sent by the said individual to the owner, but the owner should not be able to stop a new nation/player from taking the land that is meant for people like themselves.

EDIT: Thus, there should be a rule that states that new nations can take any protectorate land they want, but it is perfered that the owner is contacted and worked with.

Opinions?

Well this is one place where I say it should be sorted ICly rather than OOCly. Should a protector arise that doesn't want to give up rp rebellion or other movements that will undermine his authority. The protector than has 2 choices strike back in the process ruining its pr for little gain or let it be. Most will go for the second.

Exactly! It would (and for that matter should) be sorted out ICly, instead of OOCly; the whole point of this propisition.

Again, opinions on this change?

EDIT: IMO the owner can do whatever they want, like what Centurius said.

I don't see anything to add Jerry, looks good.

I like that proposal. if it can be enforced, I'm ALL for it.

Well, if protectorates are suddenly not allowed then I'll just annex my own and note in the map that those lands could use new leaders.

lol, semantics.

I think the issue isn't about them not existing its the issue that those that have them are able to deny players from setting up in them. If some new player wants to set up in a protectorate then they should be able to regardless of whether the protectorate owner likes the player or the nation type they will be setting up.

Kevz, that's exactly what Jerry suggested. <.<

I know but I was responding to V's statement not Jerry's.

...Which means you're just saying the same thing, albiet in a different way.

Whatever...

Actually that is terribly false. A protector has the right and ability to outright deny a claim which it will always keep no matter what you do. If one cant block it through ooc means it will through ic ones. Same counts for just white land.

Thats BS and you know it. If some new player wants to set up in land that should be white unclaimed land that is now protected they should be allowed. After all it is protected for new players to be set up, all new players not just ones that the protector likes!!

It would be BS if a nation allows a nation to form that is fundamentally different and so close to their own. The ability should be there to deny people land in an ic manner.

King Kevz, its far better than just deciding it OOCly, and the protector would most likely let them be (>99% of the time). This is an IC issue, not an OOC issue.

Oh, and there is always a chance they will get attacked, just like white space.

I guess so as long as it is done correctly but I still think there should be some sort of limitation. It doesn't make us look good if some brand new RPer sets up and on day one is invaded right off the bat.