+- Kiwike forums (http://kiwike.yottabyte.nu/forum)
+-- Forum: Community (http://kiwike.yottabyte.nu/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Bin (http://kiwike.yottabyte.nu/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=27)
+---- Forum: Kiwike: Revamped (http://kiwike.yottabyte.nu/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=51)
+----- Forum: Server discussion (http://kiwike.yottabyte.nu/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=62)
+----- Thread: A discussion on raiding (/showthread.php?tid=3098)
A discussion on raiding - Cerce - 04-23-2012
Note: This is from my point of view. I have never participated in a raid; only defensive battles and offensive battles, where the goal was to kill and destroy the opposing force.
OFFICIAL DEFINITION OF 'RAID': An operation, usually small scale, involving a swift penetration of hostile territory to secure information, confuse the enemy, or to destroy installations. It ends with a planned withdrawal upon completion of the assigned mission.
Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. US Department of Defense 2005.
With this definition in mind, a raid is meant NOT to acquire goods via illegal means. Instead, it is an attempt to destroy an enemy or an enemy's equipment. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Destruction of food sources
- Disruption of traffic
- Disruption of redstone equipment, especially those put in place to help move equipment, personnel, or information (I.E.: Redstone telegram lines, Redstone+Piston elevators, Redstone rapid firing dispensers, Redstone powered TNT cannons, etc.)
- Destruction of valuable resources (I.E.: Storage chests containing military equipment, food, or other useful material; blocks of valuable material placed in a secured or unsecured location; etc.)
- Destruction of valuable personnel (I.E.: Assasination or removal of people of diplomatic importance; removal of guards; etc.)
- Destruction of valuable installations or buildings (I.E.: Utterly destroying sections of walls, destroying forts, destroying look-out posts, watchtowers, or any other military establishments or buildings designed or currently used for defense)
IF THESE ACTIONS ARE AGAINST THE RULES, THEN RAIDING IS AGAINST THE RULES!
If raiding is against the rules, then the term raiding should not be applied, and henceforth should be determined as 'acts of thievery'. If raiding is against the rules, then THIS SERVER IS NOT INCLINED TO TRADITIONAL ROLEPLAYS OR REALISTIC WARFARE IN THE SLIGHTEST.
Note that I still love this server - but I would definitely never take part in a war, simply because the administration tends to want to avoid hurting feelings while doing something that is meant to hurt.
Proof that RAIDING AS IT IS DEFINED ABOVE IS A NECESSARY AND INTEGRAL PART OF COMMON WARFARE, BOTH HISTORICALLY AND IN CURRENT AFFAIRS:
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/baedeker_raids_1942.htm
http://www.countyhistory.com/ripley/morgan.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking
If we want to avoid hurting people's feelings, or destroying things that take time to build in-game, then we must eliminate raids and conventional warfare altogether. I, personally, have built every single building with the intent of either destroying it, or defending it at the cost of the building. That means that, yes, the 3 month project that was Castle Tentones was built with the presumption that, at one point, it would be utterly destroyed.
Please, leave your comments here, and keep on topic - this is not me bashing the server. This is me bashing the idea that we can wage war in ways without causing forms of grief.
RE: A discussion on raiding - Seandragon123 - 04-23-2012
Cerce, you just made my day. These are the points I have been trying to make this past week, but have been yet to put it in a official discussion. I can not wait for this to finally reach a verdict.
RE: A discussion on raiding - squiggley1 - 04-23-2012
Just making me love you more and more each day mate....
RE: A discussion on raiding - geckosquid - 04-23-2012
Wait, that makes a lot of sense. Well, maybe we can implement this in the war plugin!
RE: A discussion on raiding - Seandragon123 - 04-23-2012
To the suggestions forum?
I would also like to point out that destruction of food sources is on this list. If this list is used for defining a raid, then my friends need to cease being banned for crop "greifing."
RE: A discussion on raiding - Crashlander04 - 04-23-2012
The word raid isn't meant to be technical - it's only just used as the generic term for killing/stealing/thingsbowserdoesn'tlike and whatnot that fits not constant definition.
Yes, raids are meant to do damage and that is the main point I agree with.
BUT Minecraft is a game about building - and nobody wants to see their creations destroyed in petty raids. Hence grief rules.
It is far to easy to simply take out a few walls here or there, but multiply that by every raider (and I use the term liberally) who walks by, and a whole town is now a crater.
War plugin fits this idea far better
this instead, is like not letting anybody eat cookies because you can't have cake.
RE: A discussion on raiding - Cerce - 04-23-2012
Then the administration must make a new definition of raiding - and add it to the rules. Otherwise, the viewpoint is going to be so extreme that people will take this definition and run with it.
RE: A discussion on raiding - guthriearmstrong - 04-23-2012
Totally agree. War shouldn't be fought by finding loopholes in the rules, the rules should be lightened.
The purpose of a raid is to CAUSE GRIEF TO ENEMY CITIZENS. We need looser rules.
RE: A discussion on raiding - geckosquid - 04-23-2012
(04-23-2012, 06:17)guthriearmstrong Wrote: Totally agree. War shouldn't be fought by finding loopholes in the rules, the rules should be lightened.
The purpose of a raid is to CAUSE GRIEF TO ENEMY CITIZENS. We need looser rules.
I disagree about looser rules; I think we should simply define precisely what we mean by "raid".
RE: A discussion on raiding - guthriearmstrong - 04-23-2012
I was thinking we could legalize the things Cerce listed.