| Welcome to Raidercon. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Alignment of Raiding | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 29 2015, 09:53 PM (124 Views) | |
| Jakker | Jun 29 2015, 09:53 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Administrator
|
How does raiding align in your region's goals? What role does raiding play? Why would a region that doesn't identify as raider engage in the practice? Please discuss how raiding fits in non-raider regions. Edited by Jakker, Jun 29 2015, 09:54 PM.
|
| OnderKelkia | Jul 1 2015, 06:39 PM Post #2 |
|
Discussing why a non-raider region might engage in raiding is the most fundamental of the three broad topics started in this segment of the programme. Yet in many ways this is not a hard question to answer if we can understand the varieties of non-raider region and what motivates them. A raider region exists primarily for the purpose of raiding as an activity in itself; such a region is typically designed as a military organisation and its non-military political structures are limited. The Black Hawks, DEN and Lone Wolves United are good, established examples of raider regions. If the subset of regions following a model of that kind are raider regions, then that leaves the entirety of the rest of the gameplay world as non-raider regions. Within that remainder, of course, various regions identify as defender or, even if they do not actually defend, adopt defender ideals; other regions declare themselves to be neutral or isolationist, precluding involvement in any military activity. Those regions generally will not raid (or will disclaim raiding even if they do raid) because to do otherwise would be contrary to their beliefs. Apart from regions falling into that category, the vast majority of gameplay do not have any defined position, partially because they lack the capacity to undertake military action anyway. Yet why should it be considered normal for non-raider regions to refuse to countenance raiding? Being something other than a region founded around raiding alone does not mean that a region has an inherent objection to aggressive military action. In considering why a non-raider region should raid, we should remember that non-raider regions are a very diverse group and there is nothing intrinsic to being "non-raider" which means one is "anti-raiding". Conflating "non-raider" with "anti-raiding" is the most significant error of Independence's critics. Whether a region or individual identifies as raider does not require them to adopt any particular perspective on raiding. There is no why reason why a non-raider region should be defined as a region which has sympathy with defender ideals or neutrality. "Raider" is a category that refers to the characteristics, traditions and ideology of a specific group of regions. When non-raider regions are categorised as the opposite of a supposed defender ideal, the term "Raider" ceases to possess a definition in its own right and becomes a means of labelling defenders' opponents according to the caricatures which happen to persist in in defenders' imaginations. Aside from being inaccurate, it is profoundly unfair to both raider regions and those non-raider regions which raid to adopt such classifications. Beyond acknowledging that there is no innate reason why a non-raider region would not raid, an examination of the more specific reasons why some non-raider regions do in fact raid is called for. From this angle, the title of this thread, "The Alignment of Raiding", is somewhat misleading. For non-raider regions, unlike raider regions, raiding is not an alignment so much as a form of military action, to be pursued in accordance with a region's actual alignment. Non-raider regions might therefore engage in raiding for a divergent range of reasons, depending on the nature and purpose of their region. For instance, it is possible that a non-raider region that is not especially political (either in its internal governance or foreign affairs outlook) would raid as essentially a form of cultural activity, with raiding being an added side game (so to speak) designed to bring "fun" for its members, without raiding being a political tool. What, however, distinguishes non-raider regions of that kind, who engage in raiding as a cultural activity, rather than political reasons, from pure raider regions, whose members also derive enjoyment from the act of raiding itself, rather than political interests? The distinction lies in that a raider region's whole purpose is tied to raiding, whereas a non-raider region, which pursues raiding as a cultural activity and as a form of fun, would still be about something other than raiding at its core and is unlikely to be governed in the same way as a raider region. Nonetheless, where non-raider regions partake in raiding for cultural reasons, they are less distinctive from raider regions in their motivations than other types of non-raider region which raid. Those members who truly enjoy raiding as their foremost gameplay activity, in those non-raider regions which raid mainly for cutural rather than political regions, would quite possibly be better served in an actual raider region. This means that successful non-raider regions which have, for a sustained period of time, engaged in raiding for principally cultural (rather than political) reasons must have a committed, active member base who (while finding raiding enjoyable) regard this activity as merely one facet of their NationStates experience. Surveying the course of Gameplay history (as well as the present-day situation, although perhaps recent announcements from Albion suggest a partial shift), it is immediately obvious that non-raider regions which raid for political reasons have been far more common than non-raider regions which raid for cultural reasons. If raiding for cultural reasons means seeing raiding as a form of mini-game (alongside activities like spamming or roleplay) for the amusement of some members, what is raiding for political reasons? The politics of raiding normally stems from foreign policy, although the internal affairs of a region can also drive military operations. To give an example, in the early LKE, when the defence ministry was directly under government control (rather than under the monarchy), popular support for raiding could be a key electoral issue and the effectiveness of governments in achieving conquests was a criterion which helped decide elections. Yet (especially with the tendency within the Imperialist sphere, since 2008, to centralise military command under monarchs or professional commanders), the focus of raiding for political reasons among non-raider regions has generally been on a region's foreign policy objectives, making a region's relationships with other regions the key reason for its military activity. For Independent regions, raiding is simply a term to characterise offensive military action. Independent regions, including Imperialist regions, see no reason to restrict their foreign policy tools to exclude offensive operations. In discussing non-raider regions which conduct offensive military operations owing to political reasons, the Independent and Imperialist spheres inevitably loom large. That is signified by the fact that of the three regions asked to participate here, Europeia is a leading Independent region, the LKE is a leading Imperialist region and the third region, while no longer an Imperialist region, grew its military activity out of that sphere as a member of the UIAF alongside LKE and TNI (even if it no longer shares the same political reasons). It is the traditions of Independence and, even more so, Imperialism which have pioneered the practice of raiding for political reasons in NationStates. At this stage, it is worth emphasising that Independent regions are defined by much more than the reasoning behind our military operations. Our sphere is the host to strong, competitive political systems and strong, active communities. Our members are generally more interested in internal politics, diplomacy or cultural pursuits than soldiering (meaning that those who are aspiring to purely military activities might well be better served by a raider region or, indeed, a defender region). An Independent region rejects the raider-defender dichotomy precisely because it chooses to emphasise its own political objectives over its relationship to the concept of raiding. Yet in explaining why Independent regions raid, it is necessary to focus on Independent regions' attitudes to raiding, hence why it is helpful to strike a cautionary note that Independent regions are about much more than this. Independent regions pursue offensive military operations to advance their own material self-interest. In particular situations, the political interest of an Independent region might involve providing reinforcements for their allies, illustrating the extent of their military power in order to increase their diplomatic leverage, waging war on their enemies or performing targeted operations in line with their foreign affairs agenda. Not all Independent regions will benefit from raiding as much as others, depending on who their allies are and on what their foreign policy objectives are. Some Independent regions might not engage in a significant level of raiding, because their foreign policy objectives can be achieved without offensive military action. At the other extreme, Imperialist regions share the same core attributes as other Independent regions. Yet Imperialist regions are distinct, because they pursue an expansionist foreign policy (not to be confused with colonialism) designed to increase their power over other regions through aggressive means. The aggressive element in Imperialism means that offensive military operations are a particularly powerful tool for achieving imperialist objectives, notably the LKE and TNI's wars on the FRA and the UDL. By ruling out offensive military action, an Imperialist region would be disarming itself. Indeed, it would be impossible to be truly Imperialist or even Independent while positively ruling out offensive military action for moralistic reasons. Finally, having discussed why Independent and Imperialist regions might raid from their own perspective, it remains to address two common defender objections to the notion of non-raider regions which raid. First, some defender critics highlight the imbalance between raiding and defending operations among Independent and Imperialist regions, suggesting that the bias towards raiding operations makes these regions raider. Apart from the misconceptions about what constitutes a"raider" region in that line of argument, we must highlight that there are natural reasons why many Independent regions raid more than defend. Raiding is a proactive activity. This carries distinct advantages for a primarily political region. A raiding region can choose where to attack (allowing them to tailor targets to their political concerns) and when to deploy. A defensive mission, with the exception of counter-invasions, is reactive, meaning defenders often have no idea whom they fighting or why, and have to be ready to respond to a raid at a moment's notice. Defending therefore requires a lot more updater resources than raiding does (which is partly why defender organisations have often operated through inter-regional alliances). For a political region, whose members have little interest in military activity for its own sake, raiding is therefore more convenient and more suitable for the nature of a single-region army. If an Independent region was to adjust its balance of raiding-defending missions to eliminate perceived bias, it would be artificially allowing its priorities to be set by raider-defender considerations, as opposed to conducting military operations according to its natural interests. The second objection often raised by defender critics is that the targets which Independent and Imperialist regions select are not necessarily tied to political factors. This is a questionable claim (as any reading of the justifications for raiding regions outlined in United Imperial Armed Forces' announcements will establish) and Independent regions often do raid with specific political purposes in mind, but this defender objection misunderstands the nature of raiding activity for these regions. It is not merely specific missions which can serve a political purpose. Instead, there are political benefits to maintaining a strong and active military, displaying the strength of that military to the world and cooperating with allies on military missions. Raiding brings all these benefits for political non-raider regions. Rather than surrendering military gameplay to the raider-defender game, the LKE will continue to seize on the benefits of raiding, as it has done since its founding nearly a decade ago. That is a period in which the Imperialist sphere has grown significantly. Any who doubt the benefits of raiding for political non-raider regions need only examine the contribution of offensive military operations to the foreign affairs expansion of Imperialism. |
| Kraketopia | Jul 3 2015, 02:05 AM Post #3 |
|
I will post my answer when I get home from work tomorrow. It is a substantial question, and I'd rather give a full answer than a sleepy one
|
| Deleted User | Jul 5 2015, 12:29 AM Post #4 |
|
Deleted User
|
Well aware my view on the matter is not one that is accepted as something positive by the Raider Sphere but here goes... ![]() Raiding is a tool - opposed to a stand alone activity. Merely targeting regions for the lols just feels to me like a waste of time; and rather cruel in retrospect. I've taken part in senseless tag raiding and the like to later on realize what a waste of time it was. Also I know a fair few raiders whom over the last 6 months or so whom have adopted that stance. That tag raiding is pointless. Now I know a lot of people already hold that view but - I do feel it is becoming a far more prevelant view among the Raider Communities. Of course it is going to be unlikely to see such regions founded off the act of tag raiding ending anytime soon - but I would gladly state that I doubt we'll see the rise of "not many (if any)" tag raiding oriented regions. Now in the goals of Sanctum - Eh. It's a difficult question to answer. As I said it's a tool; so in a sense we'll see it being used as a means to advertise our region to other members, build relationships with other like-minded regions and deal with pesky Gradea folk. |
| Knot | Jul 5 2015, 12:39 AM Post #5 |
|
In my honest opinion, tag raiding is not pointless. If you like to continuously do it, fine. If you don't like doing it, fine. However, it's an extremely effective way to train your troops to react quickly, allow them to learn how game mechanics work, and help increase their knowledge on updates. Furthermore, it's one of the many different ways to advertise your region. TBR utilized it so frequently that almost everyone on NationStates knew that the organization was. In other words, there's no need to bash people who like tagging just because you don't, and vice-versa. |
| Deleted User | Jul 5 2015, 04:18 AM Post #6 |
|
Deleted User
|
Did I bash them at any point in time? I don't see how sharing my opinion on the matter and a common consensus i'm starting to see unravelling translates to me bashing on those who decide to take part in Tag Raiding. All I said is I see it's interest slowly dissipating and as such I doubt we'll be seeing more organisations like DEN/TBR who have tag raiding as their daily routine. Raiding shouldn't be just tossed around - Methodically used rather then running out blindly with a tool generated script switching and taking regions executive seats. As I said though this is merely my own opinion and one i'm noticing is getting adopted more often. I also feel a lot of the bashing on tag raiding isn't because Nation X doesn't raid and Nation Y does - but much rather Nation X doesn't want to have to waste their time with raiding at all. Yet Nation Y is forcing in down their throats to a degree. It's the fact there is no escape without having to screw yourself over. I don't feel tag raiding should end of course; Just that is my take on the matter. What makes even less sense to me is detagging - You don't even get to advertise! x'D |
| Kraketopia | Jul 6 2015, 02:02 AM Post #7 |
|
Raiding serves two purposes within Europeia. The first is that it's something fun for people to do. Every region needs activities that boost participation, and raiding is a great way to do something fun with a group of citizens. The second reason is that raiding provides an array of useful tools for increasing the region's international presence. There are two main components to the strategic importance of raiding for Europeia's foreign policy. The first is that it builds a reputation. Possessing a respectably sized military that is disciplined and active makes it easier to negotiate with other regions, and shows the world that our region is active. In this sense, it's similar to having a high WA count. The second is that raiding allows us to work with allies in a productive manner. At the end of the day, partnership are born and maintained from activity, and it's nice to have something to do with allies and potential allies. Raiding is a wonderful tool for accomplishing an objective together, and forging bonds between organizations. So, raiding matters to Europeia from a Foreign Affairs standpoint because it's very useful for expanding our influence. We try to avoid the whole "raider vs defender" morality debate, being an Independent region. Of course it pops up every now and then, but in general most Europeians understand that raiding and defending are both undertaken to secure policy objectives. We do tend to raid more, but this is because our allies have tended to be powers that raid more than they defend. From a pure military standpoint, Europeia enjoys both raiding and defending. |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · July 3, 2015 · Next Topic » |






