R/D does NOT mean research and development in the context of NationStates foreign affairs.
1 Like
Oh yikes
I messed that up. my bad.
1 Like
I was thinking of another project I had to work on IRL about “R/D!”
Okay, so, to be clear this time: what is your view on the impact of military gameplay (AKA raiding/defending, R/D, or whatever you want to call it) alignment on the foreign policy landscape?
I’m not really seeing how your answers clarify much though. Saying your view “really can vary and change” and “depends on the exact situation” doesn’t provide any insight into what your general foreign affairs philosophy is or whether you even hold one at all.
Do you hold any general outlook on our foreign affairs policy? Or does your policy solely consist of consulting with others?
2 Likes
I theoretically do hold membership in the SPSF, however, I rarely tend to be active in the group.
I’m a pacifist, so achieving world peace (a lot of times through diplomatic negotiations or treaties) would be ideal. I know that’s not always the case.
Additionally, I understand that our defender values are strongly important to us as a region. Defending regions from raider attacks is important, and I will work with the Tsunami Force in doing so.
My time zone is Eastern Daylight Time (soon to be Eastern Standard Time), so the major update takes place at 12 midnight for me. That’s not always ideal due to the amount of IRL (and sometimes NS!) work I have. One night I may be totally free and open and could be online at that time, but most likely not. Reasons vary; mental health, work, going to bed, other stuff, and more. Basically, point is, the Tidal Force is more ideal for me.
I also understand that some of major allies have raided regions alongside raider organizations (TEP, TNP among some) to attack regions. Military gameplay has a huge affect on this game. I’m willing to further devote more of my time to the SPSF and military gameplay itself.
Let’s take the Aegis Accords. Spiritus, one of the signatories, the signing parties, has long had ties with defenderism and defender regions. Same with XKI, with TITO. All of that, military gameplay. All of that too, is important.
In other words, I will devote time to military gameplay and I know it can have drastic effects on the foreign policy landscape. And standing up to SPSF values is equally important, too.,
Consulting is important. And I have a lot of anxiety geared around decision-making, so personally for me it’s always better when I check with someone. But that’s not always the case and sometimes I just have to go ahead and provide my insight straight from my view.
What are some of those impacts, in your view? In particular, how does military gameplay impact foreign policy specifically?
Is there any insight you can provide on what your view might entail? Or is the fact that it “depends on the exact situation” all that we know?
Noted and a priori declined by Introductory Statute of T.O.R.
At least this will give The Author something substantial to write about in Article I Releases.
Well, as said before, military gameplay can help craft treaties, alliances, agreements, and such. I’d support our defender values.
I don’t want to say this, but I do think it truly depends on the situation. We’ll work it out from there.