How to address raiding

[Moridin]

If I ever go unaligned I know for a fact I will nuke anybody who tries to tech raid me; there is nothing more joyous than watching someone go in trying to make a profit and come out behind. I'm not sure how this would justify the raider running to daddy for help though, seeing as how it could have been avoided by simply not raiding. Anyone who brings in backup because it turned out their victim defended themselves is a coward.

Edited December 22, 2009 by Moridin

[Sigrun Vapneir]

Random, your faction with Sigrun has increased +30!!

Nah, seriously, I like this. If anything you go far too easy on the scumbags though. It inspired me to write my own little impromptu version of this, I hope you dont mind, and dont consider it a thread derail.

So you have been attacked?

First, note if you have troops left. If you dont, if he got em all already, you are golden. Dont buy anymore. DO NOT READ THE BATTLE PMs - you can find out all you need to know from the message header without clicking on it for the full message.

Do take note of which sort of attacker you are facing from this - a "real tech raider" will have hit you with two ground attacks only, no CMs. Possibly a dogfight if you have an air force, but he will not have bombed you. This guy may have a misguided sense of honour (better than none at all!) and really tried to do as little damage as possible - except he erroneously decided that it was impossible to simply not attack you. Or else he's just chicken and hoping that his restraint will make it less likely for you to blow up his infra in return. No way to tell for sure which it is (I would guess a bit of both) and of course, as the ruler of the nation that was attacked it's still your job to mess him up a bit, but it may not be a total waste of time to talk to this one. He might even pay reps to hold onto his infra, but I certainly wouldnt count on it - these people tend to absurdly play the victim when their "raid" goes wrong and will most likely think that it's horribly unfair and unjust for you to defend yourself. If so, waste his nation.

The other type of attacker will have hit you with a little of everything, blowing up your infra just for kicks, and is definitely not worth talking to at all. Waste this nation no matter what.

If you neither buy nor delete anything, and dont click on the messages, there's nothing to show you have even logged in. Wait until the next update like this. Then pop a nuke on the SOB, and afterwards send your own peace offer. You have just reversed the situation and given him a taste of his own medicine. You have definitely done enough damage to make sure that the attacker is now showing a loss and realising he would have been better off to stay on his own soil, and that means you are winning. And now the attacker is the one faced with a choice - to continue throwing bad money after good, or accept your peace offer and cut his losses.

If you DO still have troops, which is likely, then you cannot hide your login, but that part was just icing on the cake for psychological effect mostly anyhow. Dont sweat it. Just sell off any remaining troops (this is called 'turtling' and while it may make it easier for the attacker to do damage to you, it makes it impossible for him to make any profit from doing so, which is the point,) then go ahead and read the battle reports if you want, and otherwise do the same. Wait till you are allowed to nuke, nuke, send peace offer.

Bear in mind that while the attacker might be smart enough to beg off at that point, that is unlikely. After all, he was dumb enough to attack you, right? So more than likely this will send him into a blue rage and he will do everything he can to damage you regardless of the risk to his own nation at this point. He will probably try to bring in his alliance, maybe even get you sanctioned. If he brings in more attackers, that's WONDERFUL. The additional attackers still get no profit as long as you are turtling, but you can now nuke 2-3 times a day, instead of just one, and REALLY make this "raid" unprofitable.

If they sanction you at this point I would definitely think about posting here on the OWF for support. Sanctioning someone for defending themselves from an unprovoked attack is generally recognised as chickenskit and dishonourable, and (as long as you dont come off like an idiot or worse yourself and distract attention from them) this will expose them to scorn and hurt their reputation. Reputation is the single most important thing anyone or any group can have in this game, it's far more important than infra, tech, or nuke count, so this is really hitting where it hurts.

As long as it stays 1v1, just have fun blowing his infra to smithereens and make sure you dont let him profit in any way shape or form. Even if you care nothing for the good of the planet as a whole, for justice and honour, or any of the other high-minded reasons one might have for this, you should still do it for entirely selfish reasons. In the long run any amount of damage to your nation is a minor setback, but your reputation is absolutely everything in this game. Far better to lose huge bleeding chunks of infra than to let it be known that you are someone who can be intimidated or extorted like that. The infra can be rebuilt easily. Your reputation (and self-respect) are more difficult to reclaim.

What if you arent nuclear capable though? This makes things more complicated, but still doesnt change the fundamentals. War is more complicated without the easy button (and more fun too, a sad thing for those of us with larger nations but it's the truth.) But no matter what the situation, it is your duty as a nation ruler to make sure that criminal attacks on your people simply do not pay. Evaluate the situation, read up on the war system if need be, gauge the nation attacking you against your warchest and capabilities. Most likely, since they hit you, they will be far larger and buying troops will only make it possible for the opponent to profit, so you wont do it. Turtle, and fire CMs. Use your air force if you have one. Even if all you can do is hurl your quota of CMs daily, that will still make sure the attacker doesnt profit. However, particularly at low ranges, you just might have an attacker so dumb that he isnt too big for you to hurt with conventional warfare. In that case, grin real big and have fun. Pound the stupid !@#$%* just as hard as you can, and realise you are not only having fun, you are helping to make the world a better place.

Also of course you should look over your attacker with a fine-toothed comb for anything that you can use for an edge. Find out immediately what AA flies, and then go verify it. If the attacker is a "ghost" - not a member of the AA being flown - then other nations that are legitimate members of that AA may even come to your aid to prosecute him. Particularly if you show up on their forum and/or irc channel and bring the case to their attention. Or possibly the attacker is a legitimate member, but his attack was without authorisation and his alliance will discipline him. Each case is different - but explore it, find a lever of one sort or another, and use it on him with extreme prejudice.

In the worst case scenario, the attacker is a member in good standing of a barbarian horde that condones his attack and will back him up. In this case, straight out military victory in the short term is an impossibility. More devious tactics might be called for if you find yourself in this situation. But remember behind every liability is an advantage, and vice versa. A bigger alliance has more backup to pound you with, but they will also have more easy targets for you to pound. And the moment they take their members side on this issue they have made all their members fair targets, as well as justifying your future use of many sorts of asymmetrical tactics that might otherwise be in bad taste or dishonourable.

So in this case you turtle, pretend to go inactive until the war(s) expire, then slip away to plan your revenge. This might involve building warchest for a couple months then laying waste to the attackers teammates, rather than just the nation that originally attacked you. NEVER DO THIS until and unless you have made contact with that alliance, attempted to make peace, and been refused, of course. But once that has happened anyone on that AA is now fair game.

Pick targets carefully, find nice juicy ones that YOU can make an initial profit hitting (tech-sellers that just accepted a bunch of cash are perfect.) You WILL be flattened, in this case, but that's ok. Make sure when the counterattacks come you turtle so they cant take anything back. When the wars expire, slink away (use of PM is very effective) with your winnings, and repeat. You caused them pain, messed up the tech sellers, frustrated the counterattackers, built your own reputation and self-respect, and the best part is you can keep doing this until the SOBs sue for peace or admin quits paying for the server. Isnt his more fun than buying infra?

(Well, in my case, no, I *like* nation building and find war annoying, but if someone annoys me that way I reckon I should at least make sure the annoyance is felt on the other end as well.)

And if you do get tired of it before you reckon you have gotten satisfaction, slink off into the shadows, research that AA a bit, figure out who their enemies are and join on there so you will have backup for the next round. It may take months or even years, but having a mission makes the game more fun anyhow.

It has been some time since I was attacked, but when my nation was tiny this did happen several times. I didnt have a fraction of the knowledge I have now at my disposal, and I still made sure my attackers never profited, and had fun doing it. I highly recommend anyone who finds themselves in that situation do the same. If not on general principles, if not to better the planet, do it for yourself.

(And, btw, I agree with those that say "raiding" has been going on here from the beginning and will likely continue forever. It's not my goal to change that, and probably wouldnt be even if I thought it was possible. There's little enough real cause for conflict as it is, and conflict can be fun. But the moral high ground is always going to go to the defender in these cases, even if every other advantage is stacked on the other side, and fighting the good fight is also a part of the game, also has been going on from the beginning, and I certainly hope will also continue as long as the game does. And so that is the side I cheer for. )

Edited December 22, 2009 by Sigrun Vapneir

[Doitzel]

I can appreciate where you are coming from. But I can't imagine a Planet Bob without raiding. There would be 25,ooo people waiting around for the top 20 guys and/or gals to tell us who we should fight.

Oh WOW....NPO had an Election!!! Let's read about that!!! Wohoo!!

Sorry man, just my 2 cents.

Then stop treating the symptoms and treat the disease. There are plenty of ways to create fun without ruining the nations of people who couldn't give a damn about CN politics, forum-established raiding etiquette, or ambiguous alliance policies on tech-raiding. Maybe instead of instant gratification at the expense of unsuspecting unaligneds we should be looking at things a bit more... long-term?

That really grinds my gears incidentally -- when people force an unwanted war on a nation and then expect them to immediately understand and comply with all of the conventions that we forum-frequenters take for granted.

[Bordiga]

As one of the few people actually unaligned and who reads the forums, I have to say I really like this guide. A very important step in deterring tech raiders is being willing to defend yourself. I've been unaligned for differing periods over the life of my nation so I feel I have at least some authority on the subject. In the last 36 days, which has been my latest stroll in the wilderness, I've been attacked at least 6 times. The only time I haven't returned fire upon my assailant was when they failed both of their ground attacks (and didn't do anything else). I've taken a bit of a beating but I've been able to chug along. Losing one of my trades was far more disruptive than the tech raiders.

There are a number of other things worth including in any guide that is addressed to small alliances and the unaligned in order to assist them in deterring tech raiders. I feel that most of this should be included in Lamuella's thread as well, since I don't really think much of what he said had much to it if someone actually wants to be unaligned other than telling people to expect to be attacked.

-Always have a complete air force. This is far and away the best deterrent to a tech raider, and even once you are in a war, having air superiority is the best way to punish your attacker. As such, all unaligned should possess a complete air force, and if they are tech traders, should build up to at least a level 4 air force (150 tech, 400 infra) before selling it off again.

-Have a fearsome bio which threatens retaliation against tech raiding scum and vouches for your activity. As I would suggest that you collect every 5 days or so in order to make swapping guerrilla camps over worth it, you should update your bio to reflect your latest log in.

-Always have maximum numbers of troops and tanks. The more you look willing to put up a struggle the less inclined tech raiders will be to attack you. Just as important is having guerrilla camps, the maximum if possible, at all times when not collecting.

-Always be in Defcon 1. You can change Defcon at update and collect at 5 if you wish, but since most raiders seem to attack around update, I personally do not. Raiders will be able to see that your nation is in a state of preparedness for battle and that can be crucial for whether or not they pass over your nation. It is advisable to set your threat level to severe as well, but this is not nearly as important as tech raiders cannot see what your threat level is, nor does threat level setting affect the odds displayed for a spy attack that one can see by clicking on the "spy" panel.

-Always have maximum spies. Many tech raiders, particularly at the ranges of more than 2,000 infra, will send spies on information gathering expeditions in your nation before they attack you, not to mention that once they choose to attack you, they will use spies to change your Defcon setting. While not the best deterrent, having enough spies to prevent a tech raider from easily using spy attacks on you can be just another way to give them second thoughts.

-Offer peace to tech raiders after replying to their attacks in kind. This means that if they used ground attacks only, so should you. It doesn't really matter since tech raiders are attacking without provocation and therefore even nuclear retaliation is completely justified, however by only replying in kind you are showing the tech raider that you are willing to defend yourself if necessary, but giving him or her a means of escape should they desire it. If you want to remain unaligned for any length of time, it really is necessary for you to avoid conflict as much as possible if you want to keep your nation in the best shape. Once someone attacks after receiving your offer of peace, however, I send in all conventional forces. Usually in ignoring your peace offer the tech raider will use Cruise Missiles and Bombers anyway.

-Do not delete your war history. By displaying the wars you have previously engaged in, you display to future raiders that you are willing to fight and not afraid to show it. Actually being involved in combat, and having a casualty figure which shows it, is also important in this regard. While not deleting your war history does mean it will be displayed in "none's" war history, the volume of wars makes it unlikely it will be easily noticed.

-I would not keep Cruise Missiles on you, as at least to my mind all it does is smack of noobishness. They can be purchased as needed.

There are other things worth talking about on which I cannot speak very authoritatively. If an opponent seems willing to attack you for 7 days because you replied in kind to their attacks (and this will almost always mean that they are in a stronger position than you), and you possess nuclear weapons while they do not, I would fire them off. I would not fire nukes first against a nation that also possesses nukes. I have yet to test out the effects of this yet, though I know a precedent exists of sanctioning unaligned who use nukes against cowardly tech raiding alliances.

[Roadie]

Problem with "nuclear retaliation policy", for small alliances, is that when it is known, it becomes a "lure and bait" for people who enjoy curbstomps rather than tech raids.

In many cases, nowadays, tech raiders are in it mostly for the fun of warring and not precisely for profit. In more trigger-happy alliances, it keeps the membership satisfied. If they can attack a small alliance and they know it will escalate in a full scale war (where you'll be, say, 150 vs 10), they will do it.

This man is 100% correct. Nukes are a bad idea if you're an unaligned and looking to get by without taking heavy damage.

If you're looking to take a piece out of your attacker no matter the cost to you, then let fly with'em.

[Schattenmann]

Works for us:

Techraiders:

The Cult of Justitia will brook no aggression from techraiders. We hold few treaties, but our friends are fast. The odd mistake by a raider will be forgiven in the presence of reimbursement for losses.

[Error Operator]

That really grinds my gears incidentally -- when people force an unwanted war on a nation and then expect them to immediately understand and comply with all of the conventions that we forum-frequenters take for granted.

Petition Admin to remove the war function then. Because Do you think the nations of alliances who join them to escape being "raided" expect war to come from another alliance if they don't frequent the CN forums, or there forums more then a few times a week?

[Näktergal]

In many cases, nowadays, tech raiders are in it mostly for the fun of warring and not precisely for profit. In more trigger-happy alliances, it keeps the membership satisfied. If they can attack a small alliance and they know it will escalate in a full scale war (where you'll be, say, 150 vs 10), they will do it.

I don't know. From what I've seen, it seems like most Tech raiders are in it for two things - quick and easy profit, or the lure of a vastly outmatched battle that they can win and get a bit of ego-stroke from without having to actually worry about losing.

The mentality of "if you're attacked, surrender peacefully, and if you fight back I'll call in my friends to help me beat you to death" doesn't seem like it's the exception, but the majority. And that is absolutely the mentality of the bully who wants victims, not challenges.

If people were actually looking for the thrill of an evenly-matched fight, we'd see a lot more wargames and less raiding.

Raid, expect to get hit back. Accept it; move on. Don't call in your friends and ZI the poor guy who was only doing what you would've done.

I know I'd look much less harshly on raiding (and have a bit more respect for people who do it) if nearly every alliance that allows raiding would have a "if you raid, you forfeit all support from the alliance until your raiding war ends" clause in their charter, and it was actually strictly enforced. Most raiders are too cocky because they KNOW they're going to be able to call in help, even if their alliance technically says they're on their own.

But nuclear escalation is an entirely different story.

The problem with nuclear escalation is, as Yevgeni Luchenkov said, that people who are looking for a curbstomping will use it as a justification for the beating that they wanted to deliver the entire time. They go into the raid looking for an excuse to flex their muscles, and welcome the nuke as the "casus belli" they wanted. In that sense, the deterrent value fails because the raider uses it as an excuse to act worse, and their alliance and the community as a whole turns a blind eye.

So yes, it makes sense for a raiding victim to passively accept their fate in an attempt to get out alive, in the same way it makes sense for a woman to not fight back against a rapist for fear of getting killed. That doesn't make it right, though. Regardless, it will continue as long as CN as a whole simply doesn't care.

From the moral perspective, though, I consider it absolutely justifiable to go nuclear if you are raided. In real life, if someone chooses to break into your house to rob you, they are fully aware of the fact that you may be armed, and are implicitly accepting the possibility that they may be shot and killed before they ever get inside. Thus, I have absolutely no problem with a homeowner shooting a burglar in self-defense and in defense of their home and property, and firmly believe that whether the burglar is wounded or killed, there should absolutely be no grounds to legally punish the homeowner. In CN terms, you are fully aware when you raid whether or not your opponent has nuclear weapons, and are implicitly accepting the possibility of being nuked before you ever raid them. If they nuke you, it's your own damned fault, and is no different than if they ground attacked you, or fired off some CMs, or whatever. Either suck it up, or admit that you're nothing more than an opportunistic coward.

If you don't want them to retaliate in any way, don't attack them in the first place. If you attack them anyway, then throw a hissy fit when they attempt to defend themselves, and have to call in friends to help you beat them down, then all you're really doing is proving that you're a coward, a weakling, and scum in general.

That really grinds my gears incidentally -- when people force an unwanted war on a nation and then expect them to immediately understand and comply with all of the conventions that we forum-frequenters take for granted.

And then wonder why the new player retention rate is lower than the old player attrition rate, so that the overall population of CN has either remained steady or slowly dropped for more than two years now.

Attacking people who don't know any better, or who just want to be left alone, is annoying to them. Once they've been attacked multiple times, it gets frustrating. Eventually, they'll just say "Oh, screw this", and there's one less player.

I said years ago that there's a disturbing trend on the forums for players to think "anyone who doesn't play the game the way I do is wrong", and to dismiss anything and everything those people think as unimportant - and that hasn't changed. There is a HUGE disconnect between most "forum veteran" players and more casual players and newer players in general, and I absolutely think it translates into fewer new players coming in and deciding to stay for the long haul.

I don't think Tech raiding is the problem. I think it's just a symptom of the real problem.

[RandomInterrupt]

Awesome additions, Sigrun Vapneir and Bordiga. While I have certainly fought in a few wars (and my casualty count is pretty decent) I am not expert in technical aspects of fighting. So your contributions are much appreciated. Especially from Bordiga, as I haven't been unaligned while out of peace mode since before June of 06. I don't know if we even had tanks yet at that point.

[Bordiga]

Awesome additions, Sigrun Vapneir and Bordiga. While I have certainly fought in a few wars (and my casualty count is pretty decent) I am not expert in technical aspects of fighting. So your contributions are much appreciated. Especially from Bordiga, as I haven't been unaligned while out of peace mode since before June of 06. I don't know if we even had tanks yet at that point.

Glad to be of assistance.

[ktarthan]

Before I continue my conversation, I would like to know whether or not you will actually accept constructive criticism and possibly revise your OP. As you indicate it is an extension to Lamualla's post, I had assumed you would consider suggestions in the same way, but thus far it seems that you'd rather respond with hilarious sarcasm.

I ask this because I'm not sure whether to critique you or debate you.

Since your question is topical I will respond with the current issue. Those wolf guys or whoever should get a protectorate. Enough people dislike the GOONS that it shouldn't be hard. They should then follow the steps above and get revenge for the initial attack.

I will, however, respond to this immediately, because it directly references my alliance, and you completely miss the point. Your topic is about the long term cessation of tech raiding. The only thing you've added past your OP is "go get a protectorate", which is a short term solution, and has already been covered in Lamuella's guide. As for "follow the steps above", we've already made it clear that your guide does not address the concept of an alliance that desires all of the things in your guide, so this does not help. Arcades057 was trying to illustrate the fact that your guide is not effective in what it wishes to do.

Edit: Grammar

Edited December 22, 2009 by ktarthan

[Dochartaigh]

The problem with nuclear escalation is, as Yevgeni Luchenkov said, that people who are looking for a curbstomping will use it as a justification for the beating that they wanted to deliver the entire time. They go into the raid looking for an excuse to flex their muscles, and welcome the nuke as the "casus belli" they wanted. In that sense, the deterrent value fails because the raider uses it as an excuse to act worse, and their alliance and the community as a whole turns a blind eye.

If you don't want them to retaliate in any way, don't attack them in the first place. If you attack them anyway, then throw a hissy fit when they attempt to defend themselves, and have to call in friends to help you beat them down, then all you're really doing is proving that you're a coward, a weakling, and scum in general.

i think i am one of the few that if i raid a nuclear armed nation and get nuked, i laugh and ask if the other nation wishes to continue the war or end it with peace. honestly, i raid but i expect full retaliation. i have never asked for alliance aid if a raid goes bad and have fun with the war. if i get nuked, it won't be used as an excuse to roll that nation (i don't raid alliances over 1 man).

[White Chocolate]

So your contributions are much appreciated. Especially from Bordiga, as I haven't been unaligned while out of peace mode since before June of 06. I don't know if we even had tanks yet at that point.

Speaking up also shows a great deal of bravery. (although knowing Bordiga via tech trades, etc. I'm not surprised ) It's not something I'd encourage unless one knows what one is doing, like in Bordiga's case. The irony with discussion such as these is that the leaders who can speak with the most authority (i.e. experienced non-aligned or under-aligned alliance members) on the matter take a risk by doing so on OWF.

[avernite]

My sig should show clearly where I stand on this issue...

The most effective tool against techraiding is, and has been, to persuade powerfull alliances to condemn it. Why did noone raid in 2006? Because it made you a pariah. Why did raiding pick up in 2007? Because the 'cool' guys did it (hell, even TOP considered it, though thankfully we never did it).

Thus, if you are in a big alliance and care: make it an issue in elections and discussions. Offer treaties to anti-raiders, suggest dropping treaties with raiders, suggest (if it's not already so) to ban techraiding, etcetera. No amount of one-man nukers is going to fully destroy the practice, the disapproval of major powers is the important step.

And, importantly, ALL the major powers. NPO never really approved, but they still didn't manage to curb it among allies.

[Opethian]

This plan of action can work, at least for a while. Though I would only suggest it for individuals who are comfortable with potentially losing their pixels eventually.

Still, if you want to have fun, and not play by the status-quo rules, then you're probably already prepared for such ends.

[Bob Janova]

Unless you think raiding is seriously detrimental to the gameplay or the community, it doesn't really need 'addressing' except through the IC politics, in my opinion.

[Doitzel]

And then wonder why the new player retention rate is lower than the old player attrition rate, so that the overall population of CN has either remained steady or slowly dropped for more than two years now.

Attacking people who don't know any better, or who just want to be left alone, is annoying to them. Once they've been attacked multiple times, it gets frustrating. Eventually, they'll just say "Oh, screw this", and there's one less player.

I said years ago that there's a disturbing trend on the forums for players to think "anyone who doesn't play the game the way I do is wrong", and to dismiss anything and everything those people think as unimportant - and that hasn't changed. There is a HUGE disconnect between most "forum veteran" players and more casual players and newer players in general, and I absolutely think it translates into fewer new players coming in and deciding to stay for the long haul.

I don't think Tech raiding is the problem. I think it's just a symptom of the real problem.

You put me at serious risk of developing Female on the Internet Syndrome sometimes.

Unless you think raiding is seriously detrimental to the gameplay or the community, it doesn't really need 'addressing' except through the IC politics, in my opinion.

Well good, because it is detrimental to the community.

[ktarthan]

While I am waiting for the OP to respond, I guess I can discuss with other people who find this an interesting topic.

One thing I think is worth discussing: I've seen the argument put forth that tech raiding drives people from the game. However, if tech raiding were to be outlawed, I would immediately stop playing the game. How can the needs of one group (those who are targets for tech raids) be put above another (those who enjoy tech raiding), when it comes down to enjoyment of the game?

Also,

Well good, because it is detrimental to the community.

I notice you did not mention gameplay, so you perhaps agree with the point I just made. Could you please elaborate on how it is harmful to the community?

[Doitzel]

I notice you did not mention gameplay, so you perhaps agree with the point I just made. Could you please elaborate on how it is harmful to the community?

See the post by Näktergal that I quoted, no need for me to rehash it. As for gameplay, I don't give a hoot. As far as I'm concerned this game is 1% about gameplay and 99% community. There's a reason I log in once every 20 days for temp trades and tax collections.

[ktarthan]

See the post by Näktergal that I quoted, no need for me to rehash it. As for gameplay, I don't give a hoot. As far as I'm concerned this game is 1% about gameplay and 99% community. There's a reason I log in once every 20 days for temp trades and tax collections.

Sorry, based on your reply I wasn't sure if you were in agreement or not with Näktergal's post.

The portion that you quoted (which I assume is what you are referring to, not the whole post) does not actually say anything about tech raiding harming the community. The first two pararaphs talk about gameplay so they are irrelevant, and the third talks about issues that are definitely not specific to the pro-raiding side.

[Dochartaigh]

While I am waiting for the OP to respond, I guess I can discuss with other people who find this an interesting topic.

One thing I think is worth discussing: I've seen the argument put forth that tech raiding drives people from the game. However, if tech raiding were to be outlawed, I would immediately stop playing the game. How can the needs of one group (those who are targets for tech raids) be put above another (those who enjoy tech raiding), when it comes down to enjoyment of the game?

Also,

I notice you did not mention gameplay, so you perhaps agree with the point I just made. Could you please elaborate on how it is harmful to the community?

in all honesty, i am not exactly sure how tech raiding is detrimental. sure it will cause a few unaligned to leave the game while still only noobs, but i have heard of many victims joining alliances and getting more involved in the community as a result. not to mention, fact is most tech raiders tend to be far more active than the victims which means the raiders will most likely be the ones who stay anyways.

as far as at my size (60k NS or so) i doubt i would drive anyone to leave the game who is not already looking to leave the game anyways.

i have seen the argument of "it is detrimental to the game/community" thrown around a lot since "raiding drives people away" but i have not seen much in the way of proof of this. i would say it is more likely boredom that drives the vast majority away while raiding makes up an insignificant portion. This game is pretty boring if you just come on every few days to click some buttons, which the vast majority of unaligned under 10k NS i suspect do. you can only take so much of that before you are bored and quit.

[ktarthan]

in all honesty, i am not exactly sure how tech raiding is detrimental. sure it will cause a few unaligned to leave the game while still only noobs, but i have heard of many victims joining alliances and getting more involved in the community as a result. not to mention, fact is most tech raiders tend to be far more active than the victims which means the raiders will most likely be the ones who stay anyways.

as far as at my size (60k NS or so) i doubt i would drive anyone to leave the game who is not already looking to leave the game anyways.

i have seen the argument of "it is detrimental to the game/community" thrown around a lot since "raiding drives people away" but i have not seen much in the way of proof of this. i would say it is more likely boredom that drives the vast majority away while raiding makes up an insignificant portion. This game is pretty boring if you just come on every few days to click some buttons, which the vast majority of unaligned under 10k NS i suspect do. you can only take so much of that before you are bored and quit.

These are very much the points I wish to make, but I like to try and ask the right questions to get my opposition to figure it out themselves. Probably more roundabout than I need to be, but it brings me enjoyment.

Edit: Not that I see you as the opposition; was referring to others.

Edited December 23, 2009 by ktarthan

[Ragashingo]

/me likes this topic. Now all we need to do is get this guide to all unaligned players. Also to all new players.

[Dochartaigh]

/me likes this topic. Now all we need to do is get this guide to all unaligned players. Also to all new players.

i hear you can PM players in game......

[Ogaden]

So long as there is one jerk left in CN raiding will continue.