Red Raiding Safari

[Seth Muscarella]

[quote name='PotFace' date='20 July 2010 - 08:39 PM' timestamp='1279683577' post='2381953']
Am I the only one here seeing.... a role reversal?
[/quote]
Yes, it does feel that way, doesn't it. However, things seem to be getting played up more than they should. If the involved parties move on to raiding/attacking larger alliances though, ill start to be worried. This is just tech raiding as usual; only concentrated on a single color

[Alonois]

[quote name='hizzy' date='20 July 2010 - 11:59 PM' timestamp='1279688365' post='2382093']
now had to abandon his crew
[/quote]

You really have no idea what you're talking about.

And raiding does improve members of any alliance. It teaches them the basics of war and provides them technology and land. I don't think anyone on any side of the tech raid debate has claimed that tech raiding is not beneficial to the person doing the raiding. It's the degree to which it is "moral" or "immoral" or if morality applies at all to the situation.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Alonois

[KingAdam]

[quote name='mrwuss' date='21 July 2010 - 04:33 AM' timestamp='1279683169' post='2381937']
Oh, I see you don't understand the situation but somehow have formed a biased opinion on it!

Congratulations!

U.S.S.R. was a raid target, one of the members was raided and he retaliated, which is fine. Typically we let the person who provoked the counter-attack deal with their own problems.

The problem started when U.S.S.R. randomly attacked non offending nations. Which again is a choice they made and the response was to make sure they learned a lesson from it.

Anything else I can catch you up on before you spout uneducated nonsense?
[/quote]

Oh, I see you don't understand that if your pack of bullies didn't go attacking small micro alliances that can't defend themselves properly then we wouldn't need to even be having this conversation right now. This goes for those clowns in \m/ as well. You guys start the fights and the problems. Like I said before, pick on someone your own size and then I will be impressed. Until then your just the same old bullies picking on the weak that we know. Someone has to fill that role though. I'm sure eventually you guys will get what is coming to you. Until then enjoy the tech raiding of the baby nations.

[ktarthan]

[quote name='Alonois' date='20 July 2010 - 10:02 PM' timestamp='1279688517' post='2382096']
You really have no idea what you're talking about.

And raiding does improve members of any alliance. It teaches them the basics of war and provides them technology and land. I don't think anyone on any side of the tech raid debate has claimed that tech raiding is not beneficial to the person doing the raiding. It's the degree to which it is "moral" or "immoral" or if morality applies at all to the situation.
[/quote]
I think he's talking about how we like to tout the benefits of being raided by GOONS. See my signature for example testimony.

[quote name='Seth Muscarella' date='20 July 2010 - 10:01 PM' timestamp='1279688471' post='2382095']
Yes, it does feel that way, doesn't it. However, things seem to be getting played up more than they should. [b]If the involved parties move on to raiding/attacking larger alliances though, ill start to be worried[/b]. This is just tech raiding as usual; only concentrated on a single color
[/quote]
[quote name='KingAdam' date='20 July 2010 - 10:03 PM' timestamp='1279688602' post='2382099']
Oh, I see you don't understand that if your pack of bullies didn't go attacking small micro alliances that can't defend themselves properly then we wouldn't need to even be having this conversation right now. This goes for those clowns in \m/ as well. You guys start the fights and the problems. Like I said before, [b]pick on someone your own size[/b] and then I will be impressed. Until then your just the same old bullies picking on the weak that we know. Someone has to fill that role though. I'm sure eventually you guys will get what is coming to you. Until then enjoy the tech raiding of the baby nations.
[/quote]

I really wish the "anti-raiders" would make up their mind on the bolded points. It honestly does confuse me.

Edited July 21, 2010 by ktarthan

[ktarthan]

edit: whups, double post

Edited July 21, 2010 by ktarthan

[Sargun II]

I'm all for retaliating against a raiding nation, but when you start attacking guys who aren't involved you're pretty much dooming yourself and doing more harm to whatever message you want to spread than you intended.

[James IV]

Yep. This is just "might makes right" 2.0.

[KingAdam]

[quote name='ktarthan' date='21 July 2010 - 06:04 AM' timestamp='1279688662' post='2382100']

I really wish the "anti-raiders" would make up their mind on the bolded points. It honestly does confuse me.
[/quote]


"Pick on someone your own size." Yes tech raid an alliance of comparable size to your own and make things interesting. Not the micro alliances who have option 1 take their beating and run away when your finished or option 2 fight back and be crushed. I don't understand how tech raiding people like that can possibly be entertaining. To each his own though.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='KingAdam' date='20 July 2010 - 11:24 PM' timestamp='1279689836' post='2382122']
I don't understand how tech raiding people like that can possibly be entertaining. To each his own though.
[/quote]
It's not just about entertainment, but about profit. There wouldn't be much profit in attacking an alliance our size, so there wouldn't be any point to tech raiding them.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Seerow' date='20 July 2010 - 06:29 PM' timestamp='1279668545' post='2381476']
When an alliance decides to tell all other alliances "You can't do this" I would call that trying to act like they're the king of the hill. It's one of the things the NPO did to prove their superiority early in CN, and those raiding red are doing the right thing by preventing them from being able to recreate the persona of an untouchable force.[/quote]

Yes, NPO was horrible, the way they allowed people who didn't want to join an alliance to play the game without being beat down by bullies.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 July 2010 - 06:29 PM' timestamp='1279668568' post='2381477']
In this case I'd say that answer is pretty acceptable. It's a raid. One war cycle. They're not going to keep those nations at war for years, extort massive amounts of tech from each one, or do any other crap like that.

It's a little fun and games, toughen up.
[/quote]

Of course, when Goons does it, they have to grovel before GOONS and agree to whatever humiliating terms they are given, else the war continues until they delete.

[quote name='Alonois' date='21 July 2010 - 12:02 AM' timestamp='1279688517' post='2382096']
You really have no idea what you're talking about.

And raiding does improve members of any alliance. It teaches them the basics of war and provides them technology and land. I don't think anyone on any side of the tech raid debate has claimed that tech raiding is not beneficial to the person doing the raiding. It's the degree to which it is "moral" or "immoral" or if morality applies at all to the situation.
[/quote]

GOONS, the most prolific raiding alliance, has 359 nations, with an average strength of 9,386. That's a very small average. If it was as beneficial as you claim, they wouldn't all be tiny. For small nations, raiding can be profitable. But if you grow very much, then the first time you hit someone who fights back, it kills the profit from a lot of tech raids.

[hizzy]

[quote name='Alonois' date='21 July 2010 - 10:02 AM' timestamp='1279688517' post='2382096']
You really have no idea what you're talking about.

And raiding does improve members of any alliance. It teaches them the basics of war and provides them technology and land. I don't think anyone on any side of the tech raid debate has claimed that tech raiding is not beneficial to the person doing the raiding. It's the degree to which it is "moral" or "immoral" or if morality applies at all to the situation.
[/quote]

Care to elaborate about what it is that I don't know?

From your own comrade: "the person being raided was there to negotiate raid immunity for his microalliance, and instead decided to abandon them and join Schattenmann's alliance".

Is that not what I was referring to? I think it was. And I should know, because I said it.

And I don't even have to hop on the morality side of the argument to be against tech raiding, because quite frankly I don't believe in arguing subjectively.

Nueva Vida hasn't tech raided (save for a couple asshats who break the rules once in a while) in over a year. But go ahead and compare our ratio charts to yours. In fact, compare ours to yours, \m/'s, and PC's (not that they have anything to do with this, but they are rather notorious for tech raiding) and you'll see that, at best, tech raiders break even.

But hey, if you want to run around looking like a jackass all so you can maybe not gain anything, who am I to stop you?

As for the "it helps them fight better when real war comes", anyone who's actually fought a real massive war knows that's a load of crap.

[Smacky]

[quote name='Baldr' date='20 July 2010 - 10:32 PM' timestamp='1279690306' post='2382129']
GOONS, the most prolific raiding alliance, has 359 nations, with an average strength of 9,386. That's a very small average. If it was as beneficial as you claim, they wouldn't all be tiny. For small nations, raiding can be profitable. But if you grow very much, then the first time you hit someone who fights back, it kills the profit from a lot of tech raids.
[/quote]
This is so hilariously off base I couldn't start explaining your mistakes.

Edited July 21, 2010 by Smacky

[hizzy]

[quote name='Beefspari' date='21 July 2010 - 10:27 AM' timestamp='1279690023' post='2382125']
It's not just about entertainment, but about profit. There wouldn't be much profit in attacking an alliance our size, so there wouldn't be any point to tech raiding them.
[/quote]

you should probably sneak a peak at your alliance numbers before you bring up profits as the backbone of your argument.

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Baldr' date='20 July 2010 - 11:32 PM' timestamp='1279690306' post='2382129']
Of course, when Goons does it, they have to grovel before GOONS and agree to whatever humiliating terms they are given, else the war continues until they delete.[/quote]
I'd love for you to show us all these "humiliating" terms. People keep saying that but it's not true. I write them. Last one was about going to an amusement park. Humiliating? Really?

[quote]GOONS, the most prolific raiding alliance, has 359 nations, with an average strength of 9,386. That's a very small average. If it was as beneficial as you claim, they wouldn't all be tiny. For small nations, raiding can be profitable. But if you grow very much, then the first time you hit someone who fights back, it kills the profit from a lot of tech raids.
[/quote]
Or maybe our average is so low because we get a brand new day 0 nation every few days, and just merged with an alliance that have all been playing for about 60 days tops.

[Earogema]

[quote name='KingAdam' date='21 July 2010 - 12:24 AM' timestamp='1279689836' post='2382122']
"Pick on someone your own size." Yes tech raid an alliance of comparable size to your own and make things interesting. Not the micro alliances who have option 1 take their beating and run away when your finished or option 2 fight back and be crushed. I don't understand how tech raiding people like that can possibly be entertaining. To each his own though.
[/quote]
Polar tried that already. TOP and IRON supported them. I mean, I've been waiting for action for a while now, so I don't really care. You keep trying to goad alliances that tech raid into attacking, but they aren't going to. Grub may have done stupid things, but he knew that if you want to stop (or attempt to stop) raiding, you have to do it proactively.


This is the 4th or so time we've had this same debate on tech raiding (during the "Karma era" or whatever you want to call it), and it'll never go away. It doesn't matter who's in power. Tech Raiding will always exist. Using it as a talking point is like saying that soldiers ruin the world because they are required to start wars. It is always going to be there. The only way you're going to stop them is to create your own hegemony where you outlaw it and then what? Another force will gather and just shatter your own hegemony over the limits you place on their actions (the supreme irony is that they will call you just as bad as the old hegemony because you are depriving them of rights). Lest we forget that both GOONS and \m/ are back and both are tech raiding even after their loss in UJP (though both alliances are different from that time).

I have always called for debating, but there is a time where the arguments become rehashed to shreds and nothing gets done. Though you really should keep debating as that is a very large part of the structure of the community. However, there is also another important part of this community, one that hasn't changed even as certain nation rulers have come and gone. If there is ONE thing that has stayed constant on Planet Bob it is that tech raiding will ALWAYS exist and there will ALWAYS be people that dislike it.

This continued discussion on this issue has never caused anything in the entirety of being discussed. If there was one person who could have stopped raiding forever, it was Sponge, and hell, he almost did it. Why? He took action.

[KingAdam]

[quote name='Beefspari' date='21 July 2010 - 06:27 AM' timestamp='1279690023' post='2382125']
It's not just about entertainment, but about profit. There wouldn't be much profit in attacking an alliance our size, so there wouldn't be any point to tech raiding them.
[/quote]

You profit until you hit around 15k. Then people start retaliating. Past 25-30k you got people with nukes who we all know will use them. Profit is gone. One tech raid gone wrong and your back to where you started. With the most likely scenario that you could have grown your nation faster without tech raiding. I never tech raided once and I'm not doing so bad.

[anenu]

[quote name='Baldr' date='21 July 2010 - 01:32 AM' timestamp='1279690306' post='2382129']
Yes, NPO was horrible, the way they allowed people who didn't want to join an alliance to play the game without being beat down by bullies.
[/quote]
what a way to conveniently ignore the stomping of entire alliances that disagreed with them, if this was NPO in charge then it wouldn't be an organized tech raid right now it would be a curbstomp instead.

[quote]
Of course, when Goons does it, they have to grovel before GOONS and agree to whatever humiliating terms they are given, else the war continues until they delete.
[/quote]

The most common terms have already been posted in this thread before i suggest you read them.

[quote]
GOONS, the most prolific raiding alliance, has 359 nations, with an average strength of 9,386. That's a very small average. If it was as beneficial as you claim, they wouldn't all be tiny. For small nations, raiding can be profitable. But if you grow very much, then the first time you hit someone who fights back, it kills the profit from a lot of tech raids.
[/quote]

Your kidding right? You do know that a large number of goons nations are relatively new to the game or at the least have relatively new nations due to them being an invasion alliance from offworld and haven't had multiple years to grow like many other alliances meaning that a 9k average NS isn't that bad when compared to alliances that existed in 06 or 07 and only have a 20k NS average still.

[rabonnobar]

[quote name='relyt92' date='20 July 2010 - 06:15 PM' timestamp='1279649697' post='2380980']
Considering that I'm the only nation in PC that's partaken in raiding a red nation, I'm not too sure why you're lumping them in there.
[/quote]

Because I hate PC and everyone in it. (Sup Zoom and Don )

[Beefspari]

[quote name='KingAdam' date='20 July 2010 - 11:42 PM' timestamp='1279690928' post='2382144']
You profit until you hit around 15k. Then people start retaliating. Past 25-30k you got people with nukes who we all know will use them. Profit is gone. One tech raid gone wrong and your back to where you started. With the most likely scenario that you could have grown your nation faster without tech raiding. I never tech raided once and I'm not doing so bad.
[/quote]
Thanks for lecturing me on how tech raiding works. We get tons of brand new nations all the time and always have a large supply of nations below 15k who are profiting from tech raiding, who then make even more profit selling that tech to other goons or our allies. I never said we tech raid forever. Eventually we run out of targets once we get large enough. Although I did a tech raid two days ago and my NS is 22,000.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 July 2010 - 07:41 PM' timestamp='1279669260' post='2381499']
Of course, a full scale alliance war is very different than a 1v1 raid.
[/quote]
No, not really. Both are wars.

There are some differences, but essentially, a raid is a war launched with the CB being that the targetted nation does not belong to an approved alliance.

[quote name='Mr Damsky' date='20 July 2010 - 07:41 PM' timestamp='1279669260' post='2381499']
OH GOD TWO GROUND BATTLES WHICH WILL PROBABLY RESULT IN THE LOSS OF TEN TECH. [b]THE HORROR![/b]
[/quote]
You go for losing ten-thirty tech per day. See how long you enjoy it.

[quote name='Seerow' date='20 July 2010 - 07:55 PM' timestamp='1279670133' post='2381518']
To be honest, I don't remember enough about FAN's protection of yellow to comment on it, however if I recall, that ended pretty badly for them.
[/quote]
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/index.php?showtopic=71137
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/index.php?showtopic=72837
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/index.php?showtopic=73448
http://z15.invisionfree.com/Cyber_Nations/index.php?showtopic=73619

Yes, this does place MK in the position of WUT.

[quote name='Ryuzaki' date='20 July 2010 - 10:06 PM' timestamp='1279677978' post='2381752']
We aren't talking about the nations being raided here. Try and keep up.
[/quote]
Actually, that's what the OP is about.

[quote name='Ashoka the Great' date='20 July 2010 - 11:16 PM' timestamp='1279682191' post='2381895']
Surely someone is upset enough to start a war.
[/quote]
Only Athens starts wars anymore.

[quote name='Beefspari' date='20 July 2010 - 11:44 PM' timestamp='1279683860' post='2381965']
One goon tech raids one person in USSR.

Most members of USSR retaliate by attacking about a dozen goons.

We defend ourselves against the attackers.

GOONS So immoral.
[/quote]
So, if someone in an alliance raided someone in GOONS, you went to that ruler's alliance government and got told "No, the raid was authorized" your alliance would then respond "Oh OK, we won't attack anyone else in your alliance" then?

[Beefspari]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='21 July 2010 - 12:00 AM' timestamp='1279691998' post='2382172']
So, if someone in an alliance raided someone in GOONS, you went to that ruler's alliance government and got told "No, the raid was authorized" your alliance would then respond "Oh OK, we won't attack anyone else in your alliance" then?
[/quote]
What in the world are you talking about? If you're trying to analogue that to the USSR war it's not even close to what happened.

[Valerius]

Having peeped out of my hole for a moment and seen this, I feel it is necessary to contribute my 2 cents. I read about as much of this as I could be bothered (ie: the OP), so apologies if I sound like an idiot. I'm not, of course, and if you didn't already know that, you soon will.

Regardless, the situation as I so far understand it is an organized tech raid against Red nations, or something. To be honest, in the 4 years I've been in this world, tech raiding has never particularly annoyed me. However the only reason this practice has been allowed to continue lies in a convention established long ago, usually evident in the 'PM for Peace' names attached to war declarations. It has long been accepted, or so I thought, that the non-tech-raiding alliances of the world would turn a blind eye, as long as the principle that a tech-raided nation be given peace upon demand is upheld.

Red Dawn may not claim ownership of the Red team, but it can certainly claim voice of the Red team. It is with this legitimacy and the above principle in mind, that the Cult and her friends make this request. Unless tech-raiding alliances wish to further tarnish their reputation and risk future actions and public discontent against this modern mutation of the tech raiding practice, they will adhere to the age-old convention and go home. You have been PM'd for peace.

[Neo Uruk]

[quote name='Haflinger' date='21 July 2010 - 01:00 AM' timestamp='1279691998' post='2382172']
You go for losing ten-thirty tech per day. See how long you enjoy it.
[/quote]
Considering he has 6 infra I doubt he's much of a believer in how much losses hurt.

[General Scipio]

[quote name='hizzy' date='20 July 2010 - 10:59 PM' timestamp='1279688365' post='2382093']
Heh, I'm well aware of that.

I was more so calling !@#$%^&* to all the claims of how much you guys "improve" the people you raid and use anecdotal evidence to make broad generalizations in an effort to comfort yourself and give yourself a meaningful existence. It's good you recognize it for the !@#$%^&* that it really is though.

I could also get into the hypocrisy of you raiding a small alliance because "they're not really an alliance" and then taking a cheap shot at the guy who now had to abandon his crew as a direct result of your actions, while implying that his "not-an-alliance" actually needed him. But I won't.
[/quote]
Saying "I can but I won't" while saying that exact thing doesn't make you look witty btw. Kind of the exact opposite.

Edited July 21, 2010 by General Scipio

[USOFAA]

So how many people have to pay the price for you being mad at someone else. (Tom got me mad but i will go beat up mike becuse he is a wimp. And tom might just kick my blank)