+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Role-Playing (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Forum: Unofficial Factions and Groups (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=67)
+--- Thread: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback (/showthread.php?tid=84392)
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Thyrzul - 02-05-2015
(02-05-2015, 10:03 PM)HeadHunter Wrote: And daummans please dont be angry if you see 15 probably IMG members posting bad things at this feadback cause that's the way it goes around here they just folow their leader and do what he tells them to do.
I'm the fourth one to post in regards of the latest comms linked by Jack, and I believe the third one who's not a member of the IMG. I tend to argue with Jack on a lot of things because we usually view things differently, but here I can only agree with him. What did you say again?
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Auriec - 02-05-2015
(02-05-2015, 10:03 PM)HeadHunter Wrote: Diamond extractor here , i can only say that Daumman is doing a good job in game and in forum i always had positive interaction with you guys please continue.
I was hapy to mine for your cargo ships last time and kick hessians out of the fields it was realy fun.
Appreciated.
Now, to the rest. Nobody but me can really be blamed for that if it is experienced as terribly bothersome. I was told to deal with an incident, and I decided to go for a bit of an unconventional approach by restricting the discussion only between that one individual and myself while trying to avoid // headers or Skype talks prior. I hoped I could spice things up a little, but that didn't really work out cause of unfortunate slip-ups from my side. I expected that the message would be forwarded and tried to make it apparent inRP that all others but the captain would have to go. Next time I'll avoid trying to explain it inRP and instead simply add // notes ontop to make it much clearer to those involved. This was the first case where my approach to solve everything in roleplay sadly didn't work.
Now, for the conclusion of that? Little unconventional experiment didn't work out as expected, I am going to move on from that. Though I'd like to finish that thread in question anyways with everyone involved now clearly knowing what I had in mind.
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - S A D B O Y - 02-05-2015
maybe in the future you should think before you type
omicega has a point, if you did this to me i'd just go completely ballistic
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Omi - 02-05-2015
(02-05-2015, 10:25 PM)LordVipex Wrote: I hoped I could spice things up a little, but that didn't really work out.
![[Image: dIlBc3p.png]](http://i.imgur.com/dIlBc3p.png)
Gee, I wonder why?
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Doria - 02-05-2015
Perhaps he thought it was you posting?
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Pavel - 02-06-2015
Uh huh huh, from what should I start...
If OSI people have more questions than those already answered, we're ready to explain them.
Now, IMG drama.
First of all, you must remember being mean to IMG is Daumann's roleplay. Next thing is, it wasn't the first time IMG| was caught in Omega-11, or wasn't the first time when IMG showed DHC middlefinger in their actions, although DHC seeked earlier at least some sort of truce when it comes hostile actions - IMG| caught in Daumann mining fields in Omega-7 was spared and the case was treated with great leniency, IMG just had to deliver some Niobium at discounted price inRP to Daumann stockpiles on New Berlin, if I remember right. I can find links if you wish. Jack's character was thanking DHC personally, and short after that gesture of good will whole Omega-9 hype happened, involving quite vocal inRP statements against DHC directed to us, overall hostility, the usual stuff. Later IMG| was caught crossing our part of Omega-7 or Omega-11. Now, what could we think inRP? That it was an answer to our previous good will, pretty much inRP "fk u" message.
Such attitude is noticed, remembered and ensures the next time we deal with IMG| our answer is less and less polite and lenient. Let me add me here generally DHC- already treats IMG| very lenient, we didn't bounty them, we don't actively work to undermine their position in region etc, we limited ourselves to defending our turf - we do so from oorp reasons, to avoid drama which always arises from touching IMG, and frankly we have enough "anti-IMG oorp hate" accusations, skype drama etc.
Now, as I said earlier it wasn't the first time we got clear message from IMG side inRP - "fk u", and so we decided our answer will be harsh. Payments and generally prices in Discovery aren't exactly inRP things, so explanation that single pilot makes probably max few k hundreds credits a month cannot be used here - we all know if someone has free evening, decent transport and a group to fly with, he can make 200M or more in few hours. Ship in question has mounted CAU5, which costs almost 90M.
When it comes to Jack's complaint about blocking acces, that was planned from the beginning when sending that message - that only pilot in question will have acces to it. Imagine school bully threatening newcomer when his teacher isn't atound - that's the sort of roleplay which was thought to be most fitting to our lore and RP here.
"Nothing was posted, there is no such law" - that's true, and I admit it's our fault here that nothing was posted. We all are people busy with real life. However, point about "not being such a law" is a moot one, official Daumann faction posted message in comm channel, saying that fine (larger than normally due to previous interactions) for crossing our space is 30M. Similarily in the past some factions introduced ad hoc large fines (GRN's 500M comes to my mind, mind you though I don't know the details of the case). Prices aren't 100% inRP in this game, and we all know that it's possible to make 200M in single evening in this game with ore. Ship in question had also CAU5, which isn't the cheapest thing, too. All in all it's a good occasion indeed to prepare some Omega-11 law charter, but we didn't have to post it to demand that enormous 30M payment. It's roleplay, we caught IMG in our turf, we remembered how they repaid our earlier good will, and so we posted that message.
I tried to explain issues the best I could, if there's anything else you'd like to ask people, don't hesitate, I will do my best to explain decisions, steps taken and faction's roleplay direction.
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Jack_Henderson - 02-06-2015
With no word you touch the relevant part: the treatment in the thread to a valid roleplay reply is deeply and oorply insulting to a player who knows how to do realistic roleplay. Repeating the lolwut "U hack, gtfo" answer is a very obvious insult.
Accusing me of "metagaming" when it is not the case, and treating me like an oorp lolwut that hacked into a secret conversation (when you even had the IMG| tag in the title and when it even was explained irply) is a grave insult to me.
Re-read what was written there. This is not about IMG crossing O11 space. It is not about the past problems. It is not about a fine or its height. It is not even about roleplay.
It is about a thinly veiled open oorp dickmove, consciously put in place to spite me. This is what it is. And this is my problem.
Let's also add that it is highly unprofessional to put up roleplay if you do not have any basis to back it up (with actual, published laws on forums). But that is just a minor point compared to the real one, in which I feel treated like crap for no reason and no mistake.
It happens seldom that I am still angry after a good night's rest. But you answer managed to put me back into the mood, as you never even tried to touch the real topic.
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Pavel - 02-06-2015
I explained the relevant issue in the fourth paragraph, let me say more about this: I understand your annoyance Jack (although that signature doesn't really help explain the issue for you), as it was used first time by us. I suspect we'd be having drama anyway though, if Vipex wrote in the OP that message is available and reachable -only- by the pilot in question. We'll make sure, that if in future we mean to contact specific pilot and that pilot only, it will be clearly stated in the first post. That's what I can promise you in that case.
As for that minor point about "no previous RP", I don't think it's justified to treat it as such, because it's our system. Previous interactions were taken under consideration when form of answer was planned, I can assure you they do count in that case. Even if there's (yet) no law posted somewhere, that's the roleplay, we sent official message to the pilot in question. Nothing against him personally, I don't even know this guy (although as you said Vipex on skype it's former disco player returning, and I heard he's a cool guy). Previous interactions and IMG's "treachery" to our good will caused this time answer to intrusion into what we consider our turf is harsher than it normally would be. That's roleplay.
Does it explain our point of view to you Jack? I will do whatever I can to help you understand it's nothing about oorp hate but about inRP actions.
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - Jack_Henderson - 02-06-2015
(02-06-2015, 05:07 PM)Pavel Wrote: I explained the relevant issue in the fourth paragraph, let me say more about this: I understand your annoyance Jack (although that signature doesn't really help explain the issue for you), as it was used first time by us. I suspect we'd be having drama anyway though, if Vipex wrote in the OP that message is available and reachable -only- by the pilot in question. We'll make sure, that if in future we mean to contact specific pilot and that pilot only, it will be clearly stated in the first post. That's what I can promise you in that case.
You again failed to deliver the thing looked for.
And I wish you good luck in keeping the faction leader out of a channel when the faction player that you contact invites him to it. There is no way you can do that, as long as the character you contacted opens the channel to the people he/she informed about it.
Quote:That's roleplay.
Become better at it, please. That whole "we want to bully a single pilot but not talk to the invited representative for sums that only the faction can pay" makes no sense.
Passive-aggressive tone, trollish oorp parts and the general use of a "contra-lolwut-appraoch" against a serious well-known and experienced roleplayer who did nothing but give logical roleplay (even though you did not like it), does not feel like "roleplay" worthy of an official faction.
Quote:I will do whatever I can to help you understand it's nothing about oorp hate but about inRP actions.
I had a good laugh at that statement. Perhaps it would be helpful to not treat me as if you hated me when trying to communicate with me. Just read the postings. You have to be blind and numb to not understand why I feel spited on a personal oorp level by the appraoch taken by Vipex.
P.S: Furthermore, if your statement (I do everything to... blahblah) was meant seriously, you would have contacted me long ago via Skype. Not even my advanced meta-hack can find such an attempt.
RE: Daumann Heavy Construction feedback - HeadHunter - 02-06-2015
(02-06-2015, 05:53 PM)Jack_Henderson Wrote:(02-06-2015, 05:07 PM)Pavel Wrote: I explained the relevant issue in the fourth paragraph, let me say more about this: I understand your annoyance Jack (although that signature doesn't really help explain the issue for you), as it was used first time by us. I suspect we'd be having drama anyway though, if Vipex wrote in the OP that message is available and reachable -only- by the pilot in question. We'll make sure, that if in future we mean to contact specific pilot and that pilot only, it will be clearly stated in the first post. That's what I can promise you in that case.
You again failed to deliver the thing looked for.
And I wish you good luck in keeping the faction leader out of a channel when the faction player that you contact invites him to it. There is no way you can do that, as long as the character you contacted opens the channel to the people he/she informed about it.
Quote:That's roleplay.
Become better at it, please. That whole "we want to bully a single pilot but not talk to the invited representative for sums that only the faction can pay" makes no sense.
Passive-aggressive tone, trollish oorp parts and the general use of a "contra-lolwut-appraoch" against a serious well-known and experienced roleplayer who did nothing but give logical roleplay (even though you did not like it), does not feel like "roleplay" worthy of an official faction.
Quote:I will do whatever I can to help you understand it's nothing about oorp hate but about inRP actions.
I had a good laugh at that statement. Perhaps it would be helpful to not treat me as if you hated me when trying to communicate with me. Just read the postings. You have to be blind and numb to not understand why I feel spited on a personal oorp level by the appraoch taken by Vipex.
P.S: Furthermore, if your statement (I do everything to... blahblah) was meant seriously, you would have contacted me long ago via Skype. Not even my advanced meta-hack can find such an attempt.
The message was adressed to specific person so he only should reply on that message.
If he whanted to include an IMG leader in to the conversation he have to do it by stating that in his RP reply post back to Daummans by opening communication to the IMG board of directors aswell bla bla bla... something like that.
You can not simply enter someones encrypted communication saying that you as leader have right to hope in just because your member told you on skype what hapend.