General Requests

[hexaus]

Regarding Gaduridos and Valruzia:

1. What are your roleplay intentions regarding that country and how could a ProNat status help with those intentions?
   
2. Do you intend to remain in your country for as long as you are able to implement your intentions for those countries?
   

As explained in my first message, though I suppose I'll add more:

The plan we have together is a long-term pan-Seleyan arc, to eventually form a geopolitical monstrosity that is the "United States of Seleya" based on the Syria + Egypt "United Arab Republic," in that even though we don't share a border and it is probably a bureaucratic nightmare, we share the vibes of pan-Seleyan ideology. But, as it currently stands, neither Gaduridos nor especially Valruzia are "ready" RP-wise for such a drastic transition. The arc will take at least 30 years, as I am RPing 21 political parties in Valruzia, and several competing social movements that I am tracking in extensive word documents on my PC. It would take this long because Valruzia is currently led by a centre-right party, that is only pro-Seleyan because it has to be to get confidence and supply. Over the course of decades, I plan to slowly transition this into an actual pro-Seleyan government led by the Seleyan Social Democrats who will team up with the PSSG in Gaduridos to form the United States of Seleya. The USS will have lots of RP potential, between boring mundane tariffs on cheese imports from Artania to major geopolitical responses that would need to be negotiated between Weim and I. 

This arc is incredibly fragile, as all it takes is a new party in Valruzia and my 21 party RP becomes useless. I can't successfully model a centre-right government with confidence and supply from the liberals and left-wing, if my party controls 151/300 seats because that makes no sense, there's no room left for the right-wing parties in my seat count. All it takes is one new party who doesn't respect my small-scale RPs of county names, city names, mayors, city council majorities, local elections, all of which I am currently tracking. I would be very, very upset as a player if I got hoodwinked on the promise of a ProNat (which Weim and I proposed to Greek to protect players who feel like trolls ruin the game, not for older players who have been active in a nation for a long time) and then crafted endless small-scale details RP just for that to get washed away with the rain.

[Auditorii]

I'd like to request control over Statrica, full disclosure that there is intention to be tensions between Statrica and Mina (which I also control). Prior to Bazgaristan's change from what it was, to what is now, Bazgaristan was a well known supporter of Ahmadi terrorism in Dovani and even launched an invasion of western Medina to support a more radical, pro-Ahmadi regime. I'd like to develop Statrica into that sort've role, while also providing something for states in western Dovani and potentially across the pond to be involved in.

The main focus would be on foreign groups funding a Ahmadi revolution and the main government struggling to contain it while actively engaging in a prolonged civil war. As a note, this would be a "slow burn" and the intention to bring some activity further to Dovani, and as such posting would be alongside posts with Mina.

[journey]

I'd like to request control over Statrica, full disclosure that there is intention to be tensions between Statrica and Mina (which I also control). Prior to Bazgaristan's change from what it was, to what is now, Bazgaristan was a well known supporter of Ahmadi terrorism in Dovani and even launched an invasion of western Medina to support a more radical, pro-Ahmadi regime. I'd like to develop Statrica into that sort've role, while also providing something for states in western Dovani and potentially across the pond to be involved in.

The main focus would be on foreign groups funding a Ahmadi revolution and the main government struggling to contain it while actively engaging in a prolonged civil war. As a note, this would be a "slow burn" and the intention to bring some activity further to Dovani, and as such posting would be alongside posts with Mina.

We'll review this and get back to you.

[hyraemous]

I'd like to request control over Statrica, full disclosure that there is intention to be tensions between Statrica and Mina (which I also control). Prior to Bazgaristan's change from what it was, to what is now, Bazgaristan was a well known supporter of Ahmadi terrorism in Dovani and even launched an invasion of western Medina to support a more radical, pro-Ahmadi regime. I'd like to develop Statrica into that sort've role, while also providing something for states in western Dovani and potentially across the pond to be involved in.

The main focus would be on foreign groups funding a Ahmadi revolution and the main government struggling to contain it while actively engaging in a prolonged civil war. As a note, this would be a "slow burn" and the intention to bring some activity further to Dovani, and as such posting would be alongside posts with Mina.

Farsun, if I recall correctly that'll put you at four nations under your control (Dorvik, Kafuristan, Mina, Statrica) should we approve this. I do not recall someone being in four nations at once in my history of playing in this game (and I haven't heard of anyone doing so either) and what I'm seeing is you want two of them to interact.

I guess my question is three food:
1. Why not have Mina be in the role you wish to put Stratica in?
2. Why should you control four countries at the present moment, two of which are in the same continent?
3. Why should those countries interact? What would Mina or Stratica gain from these tensions and eventual conflict?

Appreciate a response.

---

Journey, your request for Noumonde is approved and the register will be updated soon.

[GreekIdiot]

Regarding Gaduridos and Valruzia:

1. What are your roleplay intentions regarding that country and how could a ProNat status help with those intentions?
   
2. Do you intend to remain in your country for as long as you are able to implement your intentions for those countries?
   

As explained in my first message, though I suppose I'll add more:

The plan we have together is a long-term pan-Seleyan arc, to eventually form a geopolitical monstrosity that is the "United States of Seleya" based on the Syria + Egypt "United Arab Republic," in that even though we don't share a border and it is probably a bureaucratic nightmare, we share the vibes of pan-Seleyan ideology. But, as it currently stands, neither Gaduridos nor especially Valruzia are "ready" RP-wise for such a drastic transition. The arc will take at least 30 years, as I am RPing 21 political parties in Valruzia, and several competing social movements that I am tracking in extensive word documents on my PC. It would take this long because Valruzia is currently led by a centre-right party, that is only pro-Seleyan because it has to be to get confidence and supply. Over the course of decades, I plan to slowly transition this into an actual pro-Seleyan government led by the Seleyan Social Democrats who will team up with the PSSG in Gaduridos to form the United States of Seleya. The USS will have lots of RP potential, between boring mundane tariffs on cheese imports from Artania to major geopolitical responses that would need to be negotiated between Weim and I. 

This arc is incredibly fragile, as all it takes is a new party in Valruzia and my 21 party RP becomes useless. I can't successfully model a centre-right government with confidence and supply from the liberals and left-wing, if my party controls 151/300 seats because that makes no sense, there's no room left for the right-wing parties in my seat count. All it takes is one new party who doesn't respect my small-scale RPs of county names, city names, mayors, city council majorities, local elections, all of which I am currently tracking. I would be very, very upset as a player if I got hoodwinked on the promise of a ProNat (which Weim and I proposed to Greek to protect players who feel like trolls ruin the game, not for older players who have been active in a nation for a long time) and then crafted endless small-scale details RP just for that to get washed away with the rain.

Here's the conundrum.

Both you and Weim fit both criteria. You've both displayed ability and commitment to long-term quality RP and you both have a history of sportsmanlike behaviour and in international RP with other players, as players. That's the spirit of ProNat - aka removing nations from the roster of available countries and giving them to Doc the Kalistani, Hyraemous the Kundratijan, Hexaus the Valruzian and Weimarska the Gaduri.

Unlike Second Accounts and FBCs, ProNats are focused on national identity through a member of our small community of players. It's not about the older players who have been active in a nation for a long time nor the small-scale details RP. 

It's about covering both criteria of ProNats without actually needing a ProNat. Doc has undergone through a lot of trolls. Hyraemous went through a shitload of IC adversity through Kundrati. The Baltusian players also. They're still there. At the risk of sounding harsh, you and Weim already left Gaduridos last time it got visitors who did not adhere to your plans. And your comment above has phrases like "incredibly fragile" and "get washed away with the rain" - indicators that don't exactly inspire confidence of "sticking around" at the point of locking a nation.

At this point you might say, "but Greek, how can we stick around without a ProNat".

Fair question.

Are you Hexaus the Valruzian and Weimarska the Gaduri?

Do you see yourself being that a year from now?

[Auditorii]

I'd like to request control over Statrica, full disclosure that there is intention to be tensions between Statrica and Mina (which I also control). Prior to Bazgaristan's change from what it was, to what is now, Bazgaristan was a well known supporter of Ahmadi terrorism in Dovani and even launched an invasion of western Medina to support a more radical, pro-Ahmadi regime. I'd like to develop Statrica into that sort've role, while also providing something for states in western Dovani and potentially across the pond to be involved in.

The main focus would be on foreign groups funding a Ahmadi revolution and the main government struggling to contain it while actively engaging in a prolonged civil war. As a note, this would be a "slow burn" and the intention to bring some activity further to Dovani, and as such posting would be alongside posts with Mina.

Farsun, if I recall correctly that'll put you at four nations under your control (Dorvik, Kafuristan, Mina, Statrica) should we approve this. I do not recall someone being in four nations at once in my history of playing in this game (and I haven't heard of anyone doing so either) and what I'm seeing is you want two of them to interact.

I guess my question is three food:
1. Why not have Mina be in the role you wish to put Stratica in?
2. Why should you control four countries at the present moment, two of which are in the same continent?
3. Why should those countries interact? What would Mina or Stratica gain from these tensions and eventual conflict?

Appreciate a response.

We've had limited instances where players have controlled multiple FBCs while having a second account, memory betrays me in who has had it but it certainly has been far and few between admittedly.

1) Mina's role has been one of stabilization in the region and the sort've "rock" for East Dovani in being not an absolute mess as often FBCs become or turn into. I'm not interested in turning Mina into something as I've got several storylines, such as the Nefa Ahmadi Democratic Republic that I do not want to abandon. This is not to mention that outside of Xsampa, and now Bianjie, there are no real active Dovani-based FBCs. Outside of Dovani, there is only one other active on Temania.

2) FBCs, while on the same have always been a little different and we've had players control FBCs will having active nations on Dovani and in the past we've had people control 2 different FBCs on the same continent (I controlled Mina and Bazgaristan at one point), I don't think thats entirely new. The one thing that was always not allowed, but has been recently allowed with Vascania and Rapa Pile, was invasion and occupation. The only one that comes to mind outside of that and was RPd very well, was Kurageri and Liore of which Chitin did a stellar job RPing.

3) Why shouldn't they interact? While we've implemented rules to prevent FBCs and secondary accounts from interacting with each other, neither nation is going to have an open conflict, nor could they really given the circumstances. There will certainly be tensions, I encourage you to read the situation between Mina and Bazgaristan, but a full on "Hot conflict" will be very unlikely to happen unless planned in the context of a wider Dovani situation.

[hexaus]

Regarding Gaduridos and Valruzia:

1. What are your roleplay intentions regarding that country and how could a ProNat status help with those intentions?
   
2. Do you intend to remain in your country for as long as you are able to implement your intentions for those countries?
   

As explained in my first message, though I suppose I'll add more:

The plan we have together is a long-term pan-Seleyan arc, to eventually form a geopolitical monstrosity that is the "United States of Seleya" based on the Syria + Egypt "United Arab Republic," in that even though we don't share a border and it is probably a bureaucratic nightmare, we share the vibes of pan-Seleyan ideology. But, as it currently stands, neither Gaduridos nor especially Valruzia are "ready" RP-wise for such a drastic transition. The arc will take at least 30 years, as I am RPing 21 political parties in Valruzia, and several competing social movements that I am tracking in extensive word documents on my PC. It would take this long because Valruzia is currently led by a centre-right party, that is only pro-Seleyan because it has to be to get confidence and supply. Over the course of decades, I plan to slowly transition this into an actual pro-Seleyan government led by the Seleyan Social Democrats who will team up with the PSSG in Gaduridos to form the United States of Seleya. The USS will have lots of RP potential, between boring mundane tariffs on cheese imports from Artania to major geopolitical responses that would need to be negotiated between Weim and I. 

This arc is incredibly fragile, as all it takes is a new party in Valruzia and my 21 party RP becomes useless. I can't successfully model a centre-right government with confidence and supply from the liberals and left-wing, if my party controls 151/300 seats because that makes no sense, there's no room left for the right-wing parties in my seat count. All it takes is one new party who doesn't respect my small-scale RPs of county names, city names, mayors, city council majorities, local elections, all of which I am currently tracking. I would be very, very upset as a player if I got hoodwinked on the promise of a ProNat (which Weim and I proposed to Greek to protect players who feel like trolls ruin the game, not for older players who have been active in a nation for a long time) and then crafted endless small-scale details RP just for that to get washed away with the rain.

Here's the conundrum.

Both you and Weim fit both criteria. You've both displayed ability and commitment to long-term quality RP and you both have a history of sportsmanlike behaviour and in international RP with other players, as players. That's the spirit of ProNat - aka removing nations from the roster of available countries and giving them to Doc the Kalistani, Hyraemous the Kundratijan, Hexaus the Valruzian and Weimarska the Gaduri.

Unlike Second Accounts and FBCs, ProNats are focused on national identity through a member of our small community of players. It's not about the older players who have been active in a nation for a long time nor the small-scale details RP. 

It's about covering both criteria of ProNats without actually needing a ProNat. Doc has undergone through a lot of trolls. Hyraemous went through a shitload of IC adversity through Kundrati. The Baltusian players also. They're still there. At the risk of sounding harsh, you and Weim already left Gaduridos last time it got visitors who did not adhere to your plans. And your comment above has phrases like "incredibly fragile" and "get washed away with the rain" - indicators that don't exactly inspire confidence of "sticking around" at the point of locking a nation.

At this point you might say, "but Greek, how can we stick around without a ProNat".

Fair question.

Are you Hexaus the Valruzian and Weimarska the Gaduri?

Do you see yourself being that a year from now?

The plan, without a ProNat, is "incredibly fragile." As in, if someone joins Valruzia and the project is not protected, the new player can end the project and there is nothing I can do besides wait and hope they leave or I win power again.

Do I see myself in Valruzia in a year? If I have a ProNat and am allowed to do the USS without fear of a player joining in one week and saying they don't want to do that anymore, yes.

If I'm left with no protection of my RP project then no, because in one year a new player will have joined and abandoned the project. I didn't leave Gaduridos due to declining interest, I left because a new player joined and scrapped my entire RP - not changed the direction, straight up said "I don't care about the Senate, I'm not acknowledging it."

If Valruzia had a ProNat, there is literally no possibility of a new player joining and scrapping my RP, so why would I leave like I did with Gaduridos?

I'm just really confused with this criticism, as it reads:

"If you are given a ProNat (which prevents new players), what's to keep you from leaving when a new player joins?"

If I had a ProNat, there would be no new players to derail the RP.

[Elena1012]

Here's the conundrum.

Both you and Weim fit both criteria. You've both displayed ability and commitment to long-term quality RP and you both have a history of sportsmanlike behaviour and in international RP with other players, as players. That's the spirit of ProNat - aka removing nations from the roster of available countries and giving them to Doc the Kalistani, Hyraemous the Kundratijan, Hexaus the Valruzian and Weimarska the Gaduri.

Unlike Second Accounts and FBCs, ProNats are focused on national identity through a member of our small community of players. It's not about the older players who have been active in a nation for a long time nor the small-scale details RP. 

It's about covering both criteria of ProNats without actually needing a ProNat. Doc has undergone through a lot of trolls. Hyraemous went through a shitload of IC adversity through Kundrati. The Baltusian players also. They're still there. At the risk of sounding harsh, you and Weim already left Gaduridos last time it got visitors who did not adhere to your plans. And your comment above has phrases like "incredibly fragile" and "get washed away with the rain" - indicators that don't exactly inspire confidence of "sticking around" at the point of locking a nation.

At this point you might say, "but Greek, how can we stick around without a ProNat".

Fair question.

Are you Hexaus the Valruzian and Weimarska the Gaduri?

Do you see yourself being that a year from now?

With all due respect, I'd like to toss my proverbial hat into the ring and offer my opinions on this. 

It's about covering both criteria of ProNats without actually needing a ProNat. Doc has undergone through a lot of trolls. Hyraemous went through a shitload of IC adversity through Kundrati. The Baltusian players also. They're still there. At the risk of sounding harsh, you and Weim already left Gaduridos last time it got visitors who did not adhere to your plans.

Particularly on this. I understand these are valid concerns. We don't want to hand out a ProNat to someone we trust, then they instantly leave afterwards. However, with regards to the last part. Yes, we did leave last time. But not after exhausting ourselves trying to work with, and cooperate the 2 new players who had joined us (us being me, Hex, Tayes and Journey). We send them messages, tried to work with them, and compromised where we could to make it work. We spent around a week or two trying to make it work. But we exhausted ourselves, and lost motivation to continue work on Gaduridos when it became clear that they wanted to disregard all current RP (even when informed several times.) I do understand that all players are expected to work with new players, and that not all plans are going to stay forever. That's just a matter of a fact. However, when you, and other active RPers go out of their way to work with uncooperative players, or even players who ignore communication until the last moment, what's to be done? Our motivation was drained and we were all exhausted. Hence why there was a general migration to Dorvik at the time.

Again, I absolutely understand your concerns. But when everything is tried, and all efforts fail, are players expected to stay in a nation and slog on, with questionable enjoyment of this game?
I mean, with all due respect, Doc has had to make an entire method to fight off trolls. Was there a possibility he enjoyed having to make an entire method (Operation Monkeywrench) just to enjoy the game? Maybe he did enjoy it, maybe he didn't. I can't speak for him on that manner. But when faced with the risk of another situation arising, in which a new player joins a nation, and all efforts at communication fail or they have no intent to cooperate and want to radically change the narrative, how can anyone remain confident in a nation at that point? 

And your comment above has phrases like "incredibly fragile" and "get washed away with the rain" - indicators that don't exactly inspire confidence of "sticking around" at the point of locking a nation.

Yes. It may not inspire confidence because of how easy it is for a new player to see a union, and decide to undo it. If that player in question had interest in talking and compromising, then there would be no issue. Because at that point, you can work together to create a better story. But what do you do when they show zero intent in working together and tell their own narrative? What way can confidence in a plan be maintained when it's being undone? 

Do you see yourself being that a year from now?

I want to say yes. Keyword is want to. Gaduridos is a nation I am enjoying alot. But if there's another situation where a player comes in and refuses to cooperate, and my enjoyment of Gaduridos is diminished, should I stay and stop enjoying Gaduridos or should I move elsewhere to find enjoyment? 
Again, I say this with all the respect I can put into it. And I understand the valid concerns. But if I'm not enjoying a nation, should I just stay there? Produce RP to meet a quota? RP that is questionable in quality? 
How can I see myself being in Gaduridos a year from now if at any moment, another Gaduri Situation can occur and I find myself exhausted and drained working on Gaduridos?

I want to imagine myself staying in Gaduridos for years. I want it to be a nation I can enjoy, akin to Xsampa. But how can I have confidence in that when at any moment, I can find history repeating itself? If a player can come in and refuse to cooperate and change the narrative of Gaduridos for example, and all efforts at working together fail, should I stay exhausted or move and try new horizons?

[GreekIdiot]

@Weim @Hex - not criticism at all, simply trying to gauge enforcement of ProNats. It's a new thing, we were bound to come across a few bumps on the road till it matures. And being even more bureaucratic about the rule itself as it was written wouldn't have solved the bumps.

Lemme ask you this:

1. What would you guys have done if ProNat didn't exist?
   
2. What should we do with other applicants (i.e. Facts / Pontesi) if we were to grant ProNats for you in Valr/Gad?
   

[Elena1012]

@Weim @Hex - not criticism at all, simply trying to gauge enforcement of ProNats. It's a new thing, we were bound to come across a few bumps on the road till it matures. And being even more bureaucratic about the rule itself as it was written wouldn't have solved the bumps.

Lemme ask you this:

1. What would you guys have done if ProNat didn't exist?
   
2. What should we do with other applicants (i.e. Facts / Pontesi) if we were to grant ProNats for you in Valr/Gad?
   

Absolutely, this is not criticism, it's just a rather hellish amount of bureaucracy for it.

As for the questions in mind;

Honestly. For me personally, I probably would've just stuck to the FBCs for good. Prior to ProNat being conceived, kind of was just running out of ideas and no other PTC nation had interest, the ones that did (ie Gaduridos), well I had hesitations of returning to Gaduridos due to the possibility of a Gaduri Situation happening again. 

As for the second part.

What should be done with other applicants? Should we not treat ProNat as we do with FBCs? Have a plan, have a good history, and meet the requirements? In the case of Facts, he does meet the requirements, and he has a good history. He is dedicated to telling a story for Pontesi, and has continued to do so. 

Personally I believe Facts should be approved. That's my personal opinion as a player. As for others, say Tukarali, well- that one doesn't have a plan that requires ProNat (like Gad and Val in this case) and to be frank, the nation has been unfortunately on and off on in regards to producing RP. 

Obviously we shouldn't see nations with a new player instantly locked because that was asked. But in our small community of 20, do we not trust each other to have the capacity to produce good RP? And to have the capacity to  operate under a ProNat in a responsible manner?