Jump to content

Tech raiding, Bad?


What lines should be drawn?  

353 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Now seeing as I've been in a discussion of a solution for the past two days I see it fit to make a poll and actually gather the opinions of people throughout the planet. Although I will see more opini

Personally I am against tech raiding, there for my nation will never be involved in a raid on an alliance or a single unaligned player. But sadly with the option to raid a lot of players will take adv

Really? You're going to start with this? Joined: 2-March 09

I would like to see proof of that. As part of my new job, I've been messaging the unaligned that are being raided with assistance. Having already given up hope on Planet Bob, most of them don't even check their messages. If you want the stats, I can easily compile them from the messages I've sent. I'm just scrolling through my sent box right now, and that is what I see.

That's exactly what I mean. The people in none are just an inactive bunch of nono's. They were to lazy to get themselves protected and even when somebody actively offers them help they are either to lazy/inactive to read it or to respond to it. People like that deserve to get raided.

Tat's true but most raids happen at low ns levels; below 10 k. I disagree that raiding requires you to be 'ballzy'. Most raiders stalk and attack a nation when it's weak then use the threat of force to coerce their targets to peace out. I'm speaking as a former raider and as a former raidee. And again, you make the mistake of assuming that everyone finds war fun and that Planet Bob is all about war. War isn't fun for a lot of nations, especially when the defender has little chances of a successful retaliation.

The only force a raider should use are ground attacks. The foresight of a full blown war is reason enough to want peace for most nations. I don't know what you mean by stalking. I'd think that if you're being annoying people are more likely to attack you back, so why bother?

And no, war isn't always fun for the raidee, but as the raider I find it fun. Again, those who do not wish to become raidees should just join an alliance.

By the way, something I always like is when I attack a guy (2 GA's), and he attacks back twice (2 GA's) and offers peace. That's the way it should be done. I had my attacks, you had yours, now let's part ways without unnessecary losses or the hastle of reps. Nice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly what I mean. The people in none are just an inactive bunch of nono's. They were to lazy to get themselves protected and even when somebody actively offers them help they are either to lazy/inactive to read it or to respond to it. People like that deserve to get raided.

The only force a raider should use are ground attacks. The foresight of a full blown war is reason enough to want peace for most nations. I don't know what you mean by stalking. I'd think that if you're being annoying people are more likely to attack you back, so why bother?

And no, war isn't always fun for the raidee, but as the raider I find it fun. Again, those who do not wish to become raidees should just join an alliance.

By the way, something I always like is when I attack a guy (2 GA's), and he attacks back twice (2 GA's) and offers peace. That's the way it should be done. I had my attacks, you had yours, now let's part ways without unnessecary losses or the hastle of reps. Nice.

Try explaining that to a new nation that has never visited this forum, odds on they will see the raid as a war and respond accordingly resulting in the raider calling in their alliance and destroying them for resisting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, something I always like is when I attack a guy (2 GA's), and he attacks back twice (2 GA's) and offers peace. That's the way it should be done. I had my attacks, you had yours, now let's part ways without unnessecary losses or the hastle of reps. Nice.

From the tech raiders point of view, I'm sure you do like it.

You decide who to attack, when to attack. You pick someone smaller than you, who does not know he's about to get hit and therefore doesn't have maximum soldiers, tanks, etc. You attack him, anarchy him, and make up rules about how the only thing he's allowed to do in return is to do the same number of ground attacks you did. But you, of course, know it's coming. You've got maximum soldiers (more than he can get, since you got to pick your target) and you've got tanks. Chances are, you've got G-camps and the guy you attacked didn't. Don't make it sound like a fair fight - it wasn't, and you know it.

Honestly, anyone listening to you about how tech raids work aren't ever going to understand about how tech raids work. You're making up nonsense about how most tech raids end in reps and such. It's all bull, and you know it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I nulled my vote. Until Cybernations allows you to isolate what you steal in an ingame war, All wars are Tech raids. Period.

Thus, the only people who can say tech raiding is immoral, are the people who are neutral, and do not support any form of war.

As for the membership levels, it doesn't really matter to me how many members you have. If you can't protect your alliance, or have someone else to protect you, you shouldn't be an alliance. There are reasons that we have treaties, so that we can defend ourselves against bigger threats.

If a government can't defend it's people, then what is it's purpose?

Link to post
Share on other sites

All tech raids are wars. You, by definition, have to declare war to tech raid.

But all wars are not tech raids. Tech raids are ground only, trying to minimize the damage, and are usually short term. You can also do a war of destruction, where the goal is not to gain a little tech, but to deal out as much damage as possible. In that case, it isn't a tech raid, even though you may (or may not) gain some tech.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All tech raids are wars. You, by definition, have to declare war to tech raid.

But all wars are not tech raids. Tech raids are ground only, trying to minimize the damage, and are usually short term. You can also do a war of destruction, where the goal is not to gain a little tech, but to deal out as much damage as possible. In that case, it isn't a tech raid, even though you may (or may not) gain some tech.

But you're still stealing tech in the scenario you've outlined. There are many different ways to Tech Raid, but all wars are still tech raids, thanks to the mechanics of the Game.

Edited by Druss the Legend
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's easy to prove that all wars are not tech raids.

Find a nation. Declare war. Send CM's, air attacks, nuke them. Repeat daily until the war ends.

This is a stupid argument. All tech raids are wars, but all wars are not tech raids. Tech raids are done with the primary goal of gaining tech, and by the common definition of the term "tech raid", damage to the nation is normally kept to a minimum, at least until that nation fights back - at which time it usually turns into a war of destruction.

You are trying to change the meaning of the term.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Your points are all moot due to the in game mechanics. Until the game allows someone to isolate what you take in a war, all wars will be tech raids.

Tech Raids = War. and Wars = Tech Raid.

It's plain and simple. Cut and Dry. Until admin puts in something that gives you the option of not stealing anything, the War will be a raid. Either Tech or Land or even Money Raid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try explaining that to a new nation that has never visited this forum, odds on they will see the raid as a war and respond accordingly resulting in the raider calling in their alliance and destroying them for resisting.

Those are the really really new nations. Like <10 days and under. And after they had several attacks on them they might realize that it's a good idea to actually read a recruitment message and act on it.

From the tech raiders point of view, I'm sure you do like it.

You decide who to attack, when to attack. You pick someone smaller than you, who does not know he's about to get hit and therefore doesn't have maximum soldiers, tanks, etc. You attack him, anarchy him, and make up rules about how the only thing he's allowed to do in return is to do the same number of ground attacks you did. But you, of course, know it's coming. You've got maximum soldiers (more than he can get, since you got to pick your target) and you've got tanks. Chances are, you've got G-camps and the guy you attacked didn't. Don't make it sound like a fair fight - it wasn't, and you know it.

Honestly, anyone listening to you about how tech raids work aren't ever going to understand about how tech raids work. You're making up nonsense about how most tech raids end in reps and such. It's all bull, and you know it.

I agree that it's an uneven fight in the sense that I am ready for war and they are not. But it's BS that raiders always pick easy targets. As a raider you'll probably be high on NS because of all the land you have, so you're relatively low on infra. With every single raid I did in the last year I attacked nations with more infra than me. Simply because there were only 5-25 nations in my range with less infra than me.

And reps (in my case) aren't !@#$%^&*. I'm still paying off reps to UF and I promised OTS reps too. It keeps me from being attacked by the whole alliance.. :P

Mind you, i'm (was actually) a 90k NS nation, some targets turn out to be protected in a way, and then you have to pay reps. This obviously doesn't count for raiders in the range of 0-35k NS..

Link to post
Share on other sites

And reps (in my case) aren't !@#$%^&*. I'm still paying off reps to UF and I promised OTS reps too. It keeps me from being attacked by the whole alliance.. :P

Your words and your aid slot usage do not match.

You've got 3 open aid slots, and 3 in use doing tech deals. No sign of these reps you are supposedly paying.

I know what bull smells like, and this all smells like bull.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your words and your aid slot usage do not match.

You've got 3 open aid slots, and 3 in use doing tech deals. No sign of these reps you are supposedly paying.

I know what bull smells like, and this all smells like bull.

I'm not going to send reps to 'the other side' during a war.. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not going to send reps to 'the other side' during a war..

I'm sure you're not. Nor any other time, I suspect.

Your aid slots show (including expired stuff) back to Jan 3rd, and all of them are tech deals.

The raids on FOA took place on the 15th and 16th.

Your hole is deep enough. You should stop digging,

Edited by Baldr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tech raiding is simply playing the game. There's a reason why you join alliances, so that you DON'T get tech raided. On top of that, there's peace mode. lol

A while back I said 10/yes/no, but now I'm changing it to 10/no/no. Don't put yourself in a situation where a raider can simply go unpunished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tech raiding is simply playing the game. There's a reason why you join alliances, so that you DON'T get tech raided. On top of that, there's peace mode. lol

Athens, \m/, PC, and Goons have made it clear that simply joining an alliance isn't enough anymore. You have to be in an alliance bigger than whatever group of thugs they can get together.

Peace mode has it's uses, but playing while constantly in peace mode isn't a very good plan.

New players, in particular, need a little time to find an alliance. Sure, you can easily join one on your first day, but if you do that, you essentially know nothing about the alliance. Even experienced players may leave the alliance they are in, and need a little time to decide where they want to go next.

Tech raiding is simply bullying people smaller than you. And that wouldn't bother me so much if the tech raiders didn't cry and whine every time someone fights back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think that if someone joins a game to have fun, but they're raided immediately. Its not fair. It just seems tech raiding is a way to take pop shots at a smaller alliance without posting a DoW and looking like bullies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I am against all tech raiding. It is just a limited war (devoid of CB) against a lesser equipped opponent. Claiming it's ok because the game mechanics allow it is akin to saying EZI is perfectly ok because the game doesn't preclude it. So, while the game might allow me to punch the unsuspecting, smaller, blameless victim, I shall not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Baldr' date='28 January 2010 - 07:42 PM' timestamp='1264725745' post='2138055']
Athens, \m/, PC, and Goons have made it clear that simply joining an alliance isn't enough anymore. You have to be in an alliance bigger than whatever group of thugs they can get together.

Peace mode has it's uses, but playing while constantly in peace mode isn't a very good plan.

New players, in particular, need a little time to find an alliance. Sure, you can easily join one on your first day, but if you do that, you essentially know nothing about the alliance. Even experienced players may leave the alliance they are in, and need a little time to decide where they want to go next.

Tech raiding is simply bullying people smaller than you. And that wouldn't bother me so much if the tech raiders didn't cry and whine every time someone fights back.
[/quote]

You're approaching this the wrong way. You can either have no threat of war (peace mode), or you can put yourself at risk to gain a bonus to your income. Trying to say you have a right to not get attacked when you're in the mode that was designed for you to be at risk of attack while improving faster is silly. You can't have your cake and eat it too, as they say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Godwin' date='31 January 2010 - 02:31 AM' timestamp='1264923096' post='2147085']
You're approaching this the wrong way. You can either have no threat of war (peace mode), or you can put yourself at risk to gain a bonus to your income. Trying to say you have a right to not get attacked when you're in the mode that was designed for you to be at risk of attack while improving faster is silly. You can't have your cake and eat it too, as they say.
[/quote]

So it is the fault of the victim of a \m/ugging, for having the audacity to own a wallet, knowing full well that it could be taken by force? I suppose the girl in the short skirt is just asking for it as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='SyndicatedINC' date='31 January 2010 - 02:45 AM' timestamp='1264923952' post='2147111']
So it is the fault of the victim of a \m/ugging, for having the audacity to own a wallet, knowing full well that it could be taken by force? I suppose the girl in the short skirt is just asking for it as well.
[/quote]

If the wallet came with a big warning label that says "BY ALL RIGHTS, IF YOU OWN THIS WALLET YOU MAY GET MUGGED BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THIS WALLET IS FOR" then yes.

Again, war mode is for war. If you don't like it, there's a very feasible alternative. I don't understand how people don't get this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   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...