The Freedom of The Seas

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 09:21 PM' timestamp='1270430448' post='2248146']
A lot of "tech raids" are declared for fun. Most of the time the only time a raid is more profitable then a tech deal is when the nation is abandoned.
[/quote]

Yes I'm sure the nation whom just got hit will understand his citizens, land, infrastructure, and technology was destroyed just for "fun" and carry on with his day without turning away from this planet.


[quote]

Umm no. Your leader just said it would extend to all raiders aligned or not. Maybe it's just me but that seems to me it will extend to all raids.
[/quote]

I said anyone who got raided under our Applicant AA will be hit no questions. If you're referring to the pact, well now you're assuming it's a guarantee that the raider will be hit. If the raider is in an alliance you'll want to note the diplomatic part of the pact when dealing with raiders.

[iamwalrus]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 08:21 PM' timestamp='1270430448' post='2248146']
A lot of "tech raids" are declared for fun. Most of the time the only time a raid is more profitable then a tech deal is when the nation is abandoned.
[/quote]


Even more of an absurd reason. Thanks for bringing up an even worse nightmare. What happens when alliances attack other alliances "for fun"? They get ganged up on. Do we want people who war "for fun" in positions of power?

[Godwin]

Sweet, it's this crap again...

OH TEH NOES TECH RAIDING IS EBIL AND BAD STOP IT!

...Yeah, have fun with that.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Godwin' date='04 April 2010 - 09:29 PM' timestamp='1270430932' post='2248159']
Sweet, it's this crap again...

OH TEH NOES TECH RAIDING IS EBIL AND BAD STOP IT!

...Yeah, have fun with that.
[/quote]

We will.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='04 April 2010 - 06:25 PM' timestamp='1270430692' post='2248150']
[1]Yes I'm sure the nation whom just got hit will understand his citizens, land, infrastructure, and technology was destroyed just for "fun" and carry on with his day without turning away from this planet.




[2]I said anyone who got raided under our Applicant AA will be hit no questions. If you're referring to the pact, well now you're assuming it's a guarantee that the raider will be hit. If the raider is in an alliance you'll want to note the diplomatic part of the pact when dealing with raiders.
[/quote]

1. I'm expecting the nation to fight back. I know, what a terrible concept! Most 1v1 raids (significant raids where the raider and defender are both above ten nation strength) will end after two ground attacks. No cruise missiles, no nukes, no planes, no navies. Two ground attacks. Very little technology will be captured in this raid. Now if the defender chooses to fight back then the war will end when the defender chooses to give up. No reps or extortion or any of that crap.

2. Okay, but then what happens when diplomacy fails?

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='iamwalrus' date='04 April 2010 - 06:26 PM' timestamp='1270430751' post='2248153']
Even more of an absurd reason. Thanks for bringing up an even worse nightmare. What happens when alliances attack other alliances "for fun"? They get ganged up on. Do we want people who war "for fun" in positions of power?
[/quote]

Yes. People who war for fun are probably going to understand that [ooc] this is a game [/ooc] and won't offer crippling reps. They enjoy war and would want to have more of it.

[iamwalrus]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 08:34 PM' timestamp='1270431245' post='2248171']
Yes. People who war for fun are probably going to understand that [ooc] this is a game [/ooc] and won't offer crippling reps. They enjoy war and would want to have more of it.
[/quote]

OOC: The reason this discussion always goes OOC is because you can't rationalize the violence in Character without saying "its a game meant for war". This is my last time exiting character during this discussion. This "game" is played in character of nation v nation warfare and alliance politics. Especially in this part of the forum. Thank you sir.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='iamwalrus' date='04 April 2010 - 06:37 PM' timestamp='1270431439' post='2248173']
OOC: The reason this discussion always goes OOC is because you can't rationalize the violence in Character without saying "its a game meant for war". This is my last time exiting character during this discussion. This "game" is played in character of nation v nation warfare and alliance politics. Especially in this part of the forum. Thank you sir.
[/quote]

Guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

[White Chocolate]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 08:34 PM' timestamp='1270431245' post='2248171']
Yes. People who war for fun are probably going to understand that [ooc] this is a game [/ooc] and won't offer crippling reps. They enjoy war and would want to have more of it.
[/quote]

War should only be used as a last resort. It amazes me that there are so many leaders who go there first. Such a waste.

(OOC: This is a game. We are playing it how we like. And why anyone thinks that pointing this fact out will change anyone's mind on the matter is totally beyond me.)

[shahenshah]

Good initiative guys and Good Luck o\

[twodivine]

Only way this is going to really work is people on both sides of this get together and lay down a set of guidelines that both sides of the raiding issue can agree with. No one is going to want to except 1 sides views without having their own view heard and understood. People are trying to govern what other alliances are able to do and not do. This violates every alliance sovereign right to say how their members will or will not "tech raid" or "get war experience", and that if you don't like what a nation does you'll be there to be the judge on how it is resolved.

If you want something that just might work to protect noobs to Planet Bob, then try setting up some XXX number of days a nation exists in Planet Bob before a nation can become eligible to be (lack of a better wording) possible target practice for nations. But for it to really work then every alliance has to agree let alone every nation.

Tech raiding/war practice is going to be part of Planet Bob for as long as Planet Bob exists.

People need to just look after their own alliance members and like others that created a tech trading company to help protect their tech deals. Trying to police all of Planet Bob is not the way to go about it.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 08:10 PM' timestamp='1270429790' post='2248122']
Then tell them their options, you'll hear no complaints from me. But don't go around threatening to attack the raider and give the defender money.
[/quote]

Who are you to tell me I can't give my money to any nation I want?

You claim the right to attack people you don't know, yet expect to deny me the right to give my money away? For that matter, since you claim the right to attack anyone you want, logically, by your own rules, anyone who wants can attack you.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 08:15 PM' timestamp='1270430137' post='2248135']
Because basically you're making one of the few ways a nation can vent his pent up nerd rage into taboo.
[/quote]

War is fun. I'll agree there. But you only see the fun when you get to pick the fight and attack who you want. Then you go all "BAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW" at the thought of someone attacking you.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Baldr' date='04 April 2010 - 07:00 PM' timestamp='1270432814' post='2248196']
Anyone who wants can attack you.
[/quote]

Yes they can, but no one's going to engage in tech raiding if they know they will be completely leveled to the ground. People raid to alleviate boredom for a short period of time, not to be ZI'd.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 09:32 PM' timestamp='1270431149' post='2248167']
1. I'm expecting the nation to fight back. I know, what a terrible concept! Most 1v1 raids (significant raids where the raider and defender are both above ten nation strength) will end after two ground attacks. No cruise missiles, no nukes, no planes, no navies. Two ground attacks. Very little technology will be captured in this raid. Now if the defender chooses to fight back then the war will end when the defender chooses to give up. No reps or extortion or any of that crap.
[/quote]

If that is where it will end then that's all good. We do try to push for peace to begin with anyway. At the same time we will also offer the nation whom was attacked rebuilding help and a temporary home to be safe in.

[quote]

2. Okay, but then what happens when diplomacy fails?
[/quote]

It all depends on each situation specifically. Mostly the unaligned raiders will most likely be hit, and the one raiding whom are aligned will not be. However the optional part is there, so anything really can happen and each alliance does have their sovereign right to fight any alliance if they feel it necessary. With all that said, the first attempt will always be diplomacy, whether aligned or unaligned.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 10:02 PM' timestamp='1270432920' post='2248200']
Yes they can, but no one's going to engage in tech raiding if they know they will be completely leveled to the ground. People raid to alleviate boredom for a short period of time, not to be ZI'd.
[/quote]

Just like a bully decides to beat up a kid after school to relieve boredom only because he knows he won't get in trouble.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='04 April 2010 - 07:04 PM' timestamp='1270433065' post='2248205']
Just like a bully decides to beat up a kid after school to relieve boredom only because he knows he won't get in trouble.
[/quote]

Oh dear admin, you people really are that desperate to make a point aren't you? First off, there is a huge difference between bullying and attacking someone relatively at your strength, who has the ability to fight back and do damage, by yourself.

It's not bullying to attack someone your own size. However it is bullying to attack an alliance of ten with one hundred people and then extort them for reparations. I will never endorse that, but don't tell me a 1v1 is bullying.

[twodivine]

[quote name='White Chocolate' date='04 April 2010 - 08:50 PM' timestamp='1270432224' post='2248185']
War should only be used as a last resort. It amazes me that there are so many leaders who go there first. Such a waste.

(OOC: This is a game. We are playing it how we like. And why anyone thinks that pointing this fact out will change anyone's mind on the matter is totally beyond me.)
[/quote]
It's not a matter of going to war first. It's people trying to control what others do on Planet Bob that is the issue. If people are not violating your alliance then keep your nose out of it. If you have an AA setup you've stated you are protecting that AA for your tech deals and that nation gets raided then you have every right to seek a resolve, but if you have no stake in the mater then stay out.

Nations have to get war experience some how, let it be that they fight within the alliance via some type of war game, or by doing actual war/tech raids on unaligned nations. Then let people do their own thing, as long as it's not violating those you actually have a right to protect.

[Jgoods45]

[quote name='White Chocolate' date='04 April 2010 - 06:59 PM' timestamp='1270429155' post='2248097']
If the raider(s) did not follow your rules, what position would you take?

I ask, because having been a leader of a 10 man AA - oh, 20 months ago or so - we got raided often by various alliances and only one was within their rules. Why does this happen? My opinion is because most new nations don't know that there is a difference. I didn't until it was mentioned by our mentors.

If people look at this Pact as a public announcement stating a willingness to provide mentors to new national leaders, (which is how I really see it) there wouldn't be much of an issue.
[/quote]

Then the person(s) involved would be punished by our government following our rules and regulations with zero interference from foreign entities.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='04 April 2010 - 10:07 PM' timestamp='1270433260' post='2248206']
Oh dear admin, you people really are that desperate to make a point aren't you? First off, there is a huge difference between bullying and attacking someone relatively at your strength, who has the ability to fight back and do damage, by yourself.

It's not bullying to attack someone your own size. However it is bullying to attack an alliance of ten with one hundred people and then extort them for reparations. I will never endorse that, but don't tell me a 1v1 is bullying.
[/quote]

Like I said, and for some reason you've been missing the point, every case will obviously not be the same and we will be responding accordingly to the circumstances, as stated in the very pact itself.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Myworld' date='04 April 2010 - 09:10 PM' timestamp='1270433386' post='2248212']
It's not a matter of going to war first. It's people trying to control what others do on Planet Bob that is the issue. If people are not violating your alliance then keep your nose out of it. If you have an AA setup you've stated you are protecting that AA for your tech deals and that nation gets raided then you have every right to seek a resolve, but if you have no stake in the mater then stay out.
[/quote]

If they haven't done anything to you, then by the same logic, you should stay out of their business.

If you have the right to attack them, then anyone who wants has the right to defend them.

What you are complaining about is people responding to your actions. You want to attack whoever you want, with no repercussions, no risk.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Jgoods45' date='04 April 2010 - 10:10 PM' timestamp='1270433432' post='2248213']
Then the person(s) involved would be punished by our government following our rules and regulations with zero interference from foreign entities.
[/quote]

I just had a chuckle considering what happened with the last huge Athens tech raid.

[Jgoods45]

[quote name='WarriorConcept' date='04 April 2010 - 08:19 PM' timestamp='1270433964' post='2248231']
I just had a chuckle considering what happened with the last huge Athens tech raid.
[/quote]

It was either that or see all of our allies who backed us up harmed because of a retarded tech raid. This is why we will never interfere in situations that do not concern us. It only creates more problems in the end.

[WarriorConcept]

[quote name='Jgoods45' date='04 April 2010 - 10:22 PM' timestamp='1270434156' post='2248236']
It was either that or see all of our allies who backed us up harmed because of a retarded tech raid. This is why we will never interfere in situations that do not concern us. It only creates more problems in the end.
[/quote]

Yes, that's the whole point. That was an intervention by outside forces that put you in that position to end it and pay reps.

[twodivine]

[quote name='Baldr' date='04 April 2010 - 09:17 PM' timestamp='1270433816' post='2248225']
If they haven't done anything to you, then by the same logic, you should stay out of their business.

If you have the right to attack them, then anyone who wants has the right to defend them.

What you are complaining about is people responding to your actions. You want to attack whoever you want, with no repercussions, no risk.
[/quote]
People are not saying they want to attack whoever they want, but if they are unaligned and not under a protected AA for some reason then people shouldn't get involved.

[kulomascovia]

[quote name='Myworld' date='04 April 2010 - 07:44 PM' timestamp='1270435423' post='2248261']
People are not saying they want to attack whoever they want, but if they are unaligned and not under a protected AA for some reason then people shouldn't get involved.
[/quote]

Generally, we (at CB) ask the nations to move to our Applicant AA before we get involved. We protect anyone on our applicant AA that satisfies the qualifications to be a temporary member.