Tech Raiding popularity poll

[nippy]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1291271925' post='2527880']
No, MK and Umbrella don't raid at every opportunity like GOONS. And the fact that they are smart enough not to do it is part of why they have high NS.
[/quote]

...or you could look at the real reason we have a low ANS. GOONS is a year and a half old. MK has been around since mid-2006, Umbrella has been around since the end of 2007. Having a more than two year headstart has a lot more to do with ANS than your theory on tech raids.

[ktarthan]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1291273714' post='2527902']
Your analysis of MK and Umbrella's raiding is too superficial. GOONS, as an alliance with a low ANS, has more targets than either MK or Umbrella. If there was a (good) raid target in our range, people would jump on it.
[/quote]
In fact, the whole ANS argument is self-fulfilling. The higher the ANS of an alliance the fewer raids they'll be able to find even if they are looking. Saying "Alliances with fewer raids have higher ANS" is like saying "Men who are taller grow better beards" when you count babies and children as well as adults.

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Sardonic' timestamp='1291131830' post='2526547']
We determine our policy, no one else's.
[/quote]
You make war against unaligned nations who disagree with your policy.

If that's not setting policy for them, what is?

[nippy]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1291285574' post='2527940']
You make war against unaligned nations who disagree with your policy.

If that's not setting policy for them, what is?
[/quote]

Disagreement with our policy has nothing to do with the chances they'll be raided...hence why some raided nations end up joining us.

[Poyplemonkeys]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1291285574' post='2527940']
You make war against unaligned nations who disagree with your policy.

If that's not setting policy for them, what is?
[/quote]

What policy is that setting for them? The policy of finding protection for their group of nations is the only one I can see being set, which is hardly a ridiculous policy to have?

[Mayzie]

[quote name='Australian Warlord' timestamp='1291271074' post='2527864']
Same here. That's because if I ever left my alliance I could raid those that approve of it, knowing that I wouldn't be upsetting people & destroying people's enjoyment of the game.
[/quote]

Someone has angry little man syndrome. You're right, by going rogue on those people you wont ruin their enjoyment, you'll create enjoyment for them.

[Cortath]

[quote name='Banksy' timestamp='1291273714' post='2527902']
Your analysis of MK and Umbrella's raiding is too superficial. GOONS, as an alliance with a low ANS, has more targets than either MK or Umbrella. If there was a (good) raid target in our range, people would jump on it.
[/quote]

You misapprehend the argument. It's not that MK/Umbrella lack targets, it's that they lack targets whom they could raid that would be profitable. A high NS nation cannot be profitably raided, almost by definition, because if the nation is active enough to get a high NS, it's high enough to fight back from your raid, thereby making your raid unprofitable.

Now, if you're not raiding to gain individual national monetary profit, but rather some sort of political reason, then sure, you can throw away a lot of money and time raiding high NS nations, but no one pretends you make money off of it, or that it is often properly called a "raid."

[King Louis the II]

While I don't tech raid (and I not pro-raid), I think the outrage against tech raid overrated. Newbies receive dozens of recruitment msgs a day, if you really don't want to be raided you just accept one of those....


Added: My option was 2.

Edited December 2, 2010 by King Louis the II

[Masterof9puppets]

[quote name='Cortath' timestamp='1291295004' post='2527978']
You misapprehend the argument. It's not that MK/Umbrella lack targets, it's that they lack targets whom they could raid that would be profitable. A high NS nation cannot be profitably raided, almost by definition, because if the nation is active enough to get a high NS, it's high enough to fight back from your raid, thereby making your raid unprofitable.

Now, if you're not raiding to gain individual national monetary profit, but rather some sort of political reason, then sure, you can throw away a lot of money and time raiding high NS nations, but no one pretends you make money off of it, or that it is often properly called a "raid."
[/quote]

You'd think so. But in reality, this is not true at all. I've been >60k for about two years of Bob, and a large portion of that >100k. I've raided, on average, twice a month. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Large nations. Old nations. Truth is, it's really not that hard to get to a high NS if you put enough time into it. [i]Most nations, regardless of size, will not fight back.[/i] Raid has always been profitable for me, regardless of the size. To the best of my knowledge, the only nations that fight back are those that drop AA purely to get raided, and fight back. One can generally tell which nations are these nations by their amount of casualties. I am one of those nations, and a few people have fallen for the trap

Regarding the OP, I am 100% pro-raiding, and have probably raided more than most.

[threefingeredguy]

Cortath is right to say there is more risk though, if simply because of nukes.

[Solaris]

I love tech raiding, while we don't participate in such behavioral patterns.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1291271925' post='2527880']
Your nation.
http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=326579

Nation Created: 5/6/2009 9:51:19 PM (574 days old)
Technology: 50.22
Infrastructure: 1,127.44
Nation Strength: 5,329.725

Your growth raid is not very impressive.
[/quote]

You know, you should learn more about the person you're talking about before you actually, you know, talk.

Throughout my 574 days of playing this game I have been ZI'd around eight times. Most recently I was sent to zero infrastructure (twice) by the New Pacific Order for raiding red.

That, and I don't give a damn about my nation.

[quote name='nippy' timestamp='1291286891' post='2527945']
Disagreement with our policy has nothing to do with the chances they'll be raided...hence why some raided nations end up joining us.
[/quote]

You clearly must have forced them to join your alliance.

Edited December 2, 2010 by Mr Damsky

[Haflinger]

[quote name='Poyplemonkeys' timestamp='1291289208' post='2527951']
What policy is that setting for them? The policy of finding protection for their group of nations is the only one I can see being set, which is hardly a ridiculous policy to have?
[/quote]
The policy is that they have to join an alliance that is approved by GOONS. If they do not, then GOONS will make war on them.

[Poyplemonkeys]

That's not an alliance policy? It's a choice every ruler makes. Join a protected alliance, get protection for your alliance, or remain unprotected. Every ruler in the game makes that choice and choosing to remain unprotected means you may get raided, by GOONS, or by any raiding alliance. You're still setting your own policy...

[Banksy]

[quote name='Cortath' timestamp='1291295004' post='2527978']
You misapprehend the argument. It's not that MK/Umbrella lack targets, it's that they lack targets whom they could raid that would be profitable. A high NS nation cannot be profitably raided, almost by definition, because if the nation is active enough to get a high NS, it's high enough to fight back from your raid, thereby making your raid unprofitable.

Now, if you're not raiding to gain individual national monetary profit, but rather some sort of political reason, then sure, you can throw away a lot of money and time raiding high NS nations, but no one pretends you make money off of it, or that it is often properly called a "raid."
[/quote]
I'm a little confused by your reply. Of course they lack targets they can raid for profit, that's why we have fewer raids than GOONS do. A larger selection are 'off-limits.' It's not as if GOONS runs around picking unprofitable targets. You can add your 'profitable' in front of my 'targets' if you like, but we are saying the same thing.

On a side note, I also think you are overestimating the activity of larger nations. Many prime targets are very inactive, as active rulers wouldn't let themselves get into a position where they can be raided successfully (i.e. they join a recognised alliance).

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1291369525' post='2528940']
The policy is that they have to join an alliance that is approved by GOONS. If they do not, then GOONS will make war on them.
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure the easiest way to get out of a raid by GOONS is to join an alliance (unless you're an EoG that is).

[ktarthan]

[quote name='Haflinger' timestamp='1291369525' post='2528940']
The policy is that they have to join an alliance that is approved by GOONS. If they do not, then GOONS will make war on them.
[/quote]
That's still GOONS making GOONS's policy. We decide how we raid. Whether a raid target decides to join an alliance, apply to the mercy board, scrap it out, or simply do nothing is entirely up to them.

[Ecclesiarch De Voery]

Voted option 2, all is fair in love and war, but it doesn't mean I actively do it all >.>

[Lurunin]

i dont see any problems with tech raiding...can they go bad? yes...can you deter much of that by having protectorates/treaty partners/strict rules of engagement? of course

if you want to bannish tech raiding altogether and to imply that it is morally unacceptable then you are condemning CN to be even more stagnate than it currently is

[Schattenmann]

[img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3084/2606848635_e807c891dd.jpg?v=0[/img]
Techraiding still popular, details at 11.

[kevin32891]

I'm cool with the idea raiding "nones" (I don't tech raid myself). But raiding micros I'm not.

[Londo Mollari]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1291091883' post='2526303']
I hate that people are told "This is a good way to make a profit", because once you are of any significant size, it's not profitable.

Long term, if you want to grow, raiding isn't effective. Once you are no longer small, one guy fighting back will kill off all the profits from a lot of raids.
[/quote]


[quote name='Cortath' timestamp='1291295004' post='2527978']
You misapprehend the argument. It's not that MK/Umbrella lack targets, it's that they lack targets whom they could raid that would be profitable. A high NS nation cannot be profitably raided, almost by definition, because if the nation is active enough to get a high NS, it's high enough to fight back from your raid, thereby making your raid unprofitable.

Now, if you're not raiding to gain individual national monetary profit, but rather some sort of political reason, then sure, you can throw away a lot of money and time raiding high NS nations, but no one pretends you make money off of it, or that it is often properly called a "raid."
[/quote]


Raiding is wholly unprofitable at higher levels and you should never raid as it is bad for your nation. Below you can see the horrible effects of raiding on my nation! I also did not conduct a raid approximately 3 days ago, it is impossible to find raid targets at the higher levels.

http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=209188

[size="3"]
Area of Influence: [b]31,451.088 mile diameter.[/b]
19,500.045 in purchases, 11,446.526 in modifiers, 504.516 in growth
[/size]

Edited December 4, 2010 by Londo Mollari

[Baldr]

[quote name='Mr Damsky' timestamp='1291333697' post='2528350']
You know, you should learn more about the person you're talking about before you actually, you know, talk.

Throughout my 574 days of playing this game I have been ZI'd around eight times. Most recently I was sent to zero infrastructure (twice) by the New Pacific Order for raiding red.

That, and I don't give a damn about my nation.
[/quote]

First, good for NPO.

Second, it's like you are trying to make my point for me. You raid regardless of the consequences, and it keeps you from growing.

[Baldr]

[quote name='Londo Mollari' timestamp='1291465286' post='2529936']

[/quote]

Londo, how much damage does one nuke do in your NS range?

One guy that fights back will kill the profits from a lot of raids.

Everyone knows it.

[AnCapistan]

[quote name='Baldr' timestamp='1291529130' post='2530649']
First, good for NPO.
[/quote]

Yeah, they ZI'd an unaligned nation twice. But when GOONS, MK, and PC raided red they cowered like scared little girls.

But good for NPO!