Jump to content
  • entries
    33
  • comments
    544
  • views
    14,202

Tech Raid Protection


wickedj

710 views

 Share

As i sit here trying to remove a splinter from my foot and read the 20+ pages of moralists cry over some people they dont really care about im reminded of something i brought to Fark Government nearly 2 years ago. The loudest complaint about raiding is "OMG OUR TRADES!" Well if this is enacted properly those people who dont want an actual alliance but want to stay in the game would be around to trade with you.

First you take the large alliances on one sphere, im going to use maroon for example, CSN, RIA, MA, GOD, TTK, CRAP and The Brain(lord help me if i forgot one) and you set up an AA that is protected. Since Chestnut Accords is the big bloc of maroon the AA could be "Protected by Chestnut Accords" then you proceed to spam everyone on your sphere who is unaligned and not at war to fly that AA. If a nation is being raided and wants to join then you can do your diplomatic thing and try to help them

Once they begin to fly the AA all that is needed is for one person to keep a watch on the war screen. if raids occur on this AA then again you do your diplomatic thing and if it comes down to it then someone from the protecting alliances gets some more war experience

The only requirements to be on the AA would be you have no active offensive wars and the color of the sphere(in this example, maroon). This would obviously be wildly unpopular with tech raiders but then again not everyone would fly the AA therefore still leaving plenty of fodder out there

Are there holes in this idea? Hell yes! Will many of these 'anti tech raiders' do anything to try to help their sphere? Highly doubtful, afterall how much money has Grub(or Red Dawn for that matter) donated to nations whove been tech raided

Now back to your regularly scheduled trolling, complaining, and general "Do something about it!"

P.s. i support tech raiding :)

 Share

18 Comments


Recommended Comments

Maroon actually tried this back in the Continuum time, with the 'Church of Maroon'. The raiding alliances in power at the time (Valhalla and GGA mostly) killed it. What do you think the chances are that the current raiding alliances would kill off any similar initiative today, unless a member of SG could be persuaded to be a part of it?

It is a good idea but it still relies on having enough guns to fend off the fanatical pro-raiders. The only thing of this type to be moderately successful was CTC, and that caused enough problems that I doubt Citadel alliances would want to do it again.

Link to comment

Maroon actually tried this back in the Continuum time, with the 'Church of Maroon'. The raiding alliances in power at the time (Valhalla and GGA mostly) killed it. What do you think the chances are that the current raiding alliances would kill off any similar initiative today, unless a member of SG could be persuaded to be a part of it?

It is a good idea but it still relies on having enough guns to fend off the fanatical pro-raiders. The only thing of this type to be moderately successful was CTC, and that caused enough problems that I doubt Citadel alliances would want to do it again.

the whole "discuss this with the major alliances on your sphere" probably shouldve been bolded

I said theres hole in the idea, s'not my job to do ALL the work lol

Link to comment

Maroon actually tried this back in the Continuum time, with the 'Church of Maroon'. The raiding alliances in power at the time (Valhalla and GGA mostly) killed it. What do you think the chances are that the current raiding alliances would kill off any similar initiative today, unless a member of SG could be persuaded to be a part of it?

It is a good idea but it still relies on having enough guns to fend off the fanatical pro-raiders. The only thing of this type to be moderately successful was CTC, and that caused enough problems that I doubt Citadel alliances would want to do it again.

The problem with CoM was that not all of Maroon supported it (CSN, for example, was against it), plus Maroon in general at that time was on the weaker side of things.

Today Maroon is very unified, with all the alliances anywhere close to relevance a part of MEP or Chestnut, and the sphere is very well connected and powerful. I am quite confident that if Chestnut wanted to create a protected AA, we would be able to. Hell, if CSN alone decided to attempt something like this, we could probably pull it off.

The only issue in my mind is, why bother? Unaligned nations are already bombarded with recruiting messages from alliances they choose not to join, what would be so different about a "non-alliance alliance". Besides, we wouldn't want Bilrow to have another fit. :P

Link to comment

LB, calling it a 'non alliance alliance' is a bit over complicating things. more along the lines of ghosting an AA since there would/should be no sign ups on any forums unless they wanted to come to the CA forums to chat

Link to comment

Maroon actually tried this back in the Continuum time, with the 'Church of Maroon'. The raiding alliances in power at the time (Valhalla and GGA mostly) killed it. What do you think the chances are that the current raiding alliances would kill off any similar initiative today, unless a member of SG could be persuaded to be a part of it?

It is a good idea but it still relies on having enough guns to fend off the fanatical pro-raiders. The only thing of this type to be moderately successful was CTC, and that caused enough problems that I doubt Citadel alliances would want to do it again.

Actually I'm pretty sure that while NPO was actually in power their Revenge Doctrine worked pretty well.

Link to comment

Has made clear by the Profit of Justia in times ancient and I quote: ZOMG! COLOUR WARZ!

It has been forecast and is gonna be right bad, maybe worst than globular warming.

Link to comment

Omni, yes, but that's not 'of this type' (i.e. a protected AA). A declaration by a strong power of protection of a whole colour is the only effective way (as Brendan says, you have to 'recruit' for the non-alliance alliance if you only protect a particular AA) but that power needs to be backed by the current hegemony and it's hard to see who in SG would be prepared to do such a thing, since most of them raid and all of them have allies who would throw a fit.

I am quite confident that if Chestnut wanted to create a protected AA, we would be able to. Hell, if CSN alone decided to attempt something like this, we could probably pull it off.

CSN alone? Don't make me laugh ... GOONS alone could fight you out of it if they felt like it. Even Chestnut is not really bigger than Red Dawn who are spectacularly failing right now. Like anyone, the only way you could do it is if you got the support of the hegemony of the day – and that, I agree, is plausible since you're a member of a core bloc. But it would not be CSN or even Chestnut who were doing it.

I disagree that the split in Maroon had much to do with CoM failing. The problem was simply that the hegemony of the day (Continuum/One Vision) deliberately raided the alliance to provoke you (as several alliances are doing today with red unaligned) and you did not have the power to stop that from happening.

Link to comment

Omni, yes, but that's not 'of this type' (i.e. a protected AA). A declaration by a strong power of protection of a whole colour is the only effective way (as Brendan says, you have to 'recruit' for the non-alliance alliance if you only protect a particular AA) but that power needs to be backed by the current hegemony and it's hard to see who in SG would be prepared to do such a thing, since most of them raid and all of them have allies who would throw a fit.

CSN alone? Don't make me laugh ... GOONS alone could fight you out of it if they felt like it. Even Chestnut is not really bigger than Red Dawn who are spectacularly failing right now. Like anyone, the only way you could do it is if you got the support of the hegemony of the day – and that, I agree, is plausible since you're a member of a core bloc. But it would not be CSN or even Chestnut who were doing it.

I disagree that the split in Maroon had much to do with CoM failing. The problem was simply that the hegemony of the day (Continuum/One Vision) deliberately raided the alliance to provoke you (as several alliances are doing today with red unaligned) and you did not have the power to stop that from happening.

You think GOONS would raid a protectorate AA of a SuperFriend? :huh:

Anyways, Red Dawn might be reasonably close in nation strength to Chestnut (a little over half), but they are nowhere near as powerful. NPO cannot project power without extreme danger to itself (or at least that's what they believe), we on the other hand could probably go pretty far before anyone could stop us.

Link to comment

Maroon actually tried this back in the Continuum time, with the 'Church of Maroon'. The raiding alliances in power at the time (Valhalla and GGA mostly) killed it. What do you think the chances are that the current raiding alliances would kill off any similar initiative today, unless a member of SG could be persuaded to be a part of it?

It is a good idea but it still relies on having enough guns to fend off the fanatical pro-raiders. The only thing of this type to be moderately successful was CTC, and that caused enough problems that I doubt Citadel alliances would want to do it again.

A genuinely protected AA? \m/ would not and does not have a problem with that. It's essentially like an Applicant AA or a POW AA. If they're genuine we won't touch them.

Link to comment

I was making a CTC joke. You're too noob to remember the hilarity though.

Bite me, i remember Citadel Trading Company :P

Also, Bob, Apples:Oranges. Red Dawn is trying to protect and entire sphere of unaligneds, this instance would be protecting only people who wanted to fly the specified AA. unaligneds would still be raidabl,e

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...