Discovery Gaming Community

Is a very strange rule, sounds to me that it needs to be worked and perfected, so it can be more fair to many factions out there.

For example, Corsairs and Outcasts, are both factions and houses. But if they are houses, they should be allowed to have more factions and more id's, like any other house. So this rule will pretty much kill this two factions/houses.

Other thing is, like so many said before, the police and military factions, well, it could be logic to have some kind of special force, but the way this game works, there isnt much room for it.

So, my idea would be, one player faction per id ONLY on the npc factions inside the Houses. Each houses has several factions, police, military, industry, commerce, etc, so i think that is enough to keep each house running, and anyone that wants to join a faction in any of the major houses will have no problems in finding his place.

Maybe the same for the unlawful factions related to the major Houses, but thats just a "maybe".

Now, for any faction outside the major houses, then this rule sucks hard. Not only Corsairs and Outcasts are houses them selfes, others like Zoners, Junkers, IMG, even the CR, they are like small houses trying to grown and prosper.

What we would need is, to respect the older factions. Create some faction ID rules, that all factions using that ID must follow. Create limits, but dont cut off our legs.

Want for navy/police, do not want for everyone else.

Nice gravedig. One faction per (NPC) faction however is enforced for FR5-ing purposes, so you don't get squabbling over who ends up red with your bases.

There's no reason why you couldn't start an unofficial faction under an NPC faction's ID and become successful with it. Examples: RF, XTF, 13th... to some extent HAF and Avengers. It just means that those won't have access to the faction rights.


What I am worried about when ditching this rule is further fragmentation, to the point where IDs will become meaningless.

I vote "keep it" unless there will be some major changes in IDs.

1. If the faction wants to get official, it should be mature. If we remove this rule, it'll start raining new factions.
2. If the faction get's mature enough to get official and it wants to get official, it can get it's own ID.
3. Most of problems might be solved by adding some corporate IDs like "trading company", "mining company" etc. or tweaking IDs that already exists.
4. If this rule was removed, I can already see situations like (example) "Oh, screw JihadJoe, I'm gonna make my own Liberty Navy".
5. If your RP is good enough, you can build up your factions so it's recognised no matter the ID. You can ask Admins for permission to use ID but with some slight exceptions and such.

Generally, in my personal opinion, the best solution would be to add few more generic IDs so new factions could use it and then, when those factions gets mature and responsible, giv 'em own ID.

I know some of you might not like it, but believe me - I had hell of a headache with Corona Battlegroup as no IDs suited us. After some changes, some better and worse ideas etc. now I know that there's lot of work to do before CB will be ready to either die or become strong and official. Now we use 4(!) different IDs - Merc for snubs and GBs, Zoner/ZG for transports and caps and Researcher for science vessels. And it's really no big deal.

So... I admit that there is a problem to be solved. But it's not this rule.

Just gonna bump

I wanna know other peoples opinion.

I would say.. Remove it (just because i can say so)

1 faction per ID prevent a LN shooting another LN cuz their admiral having quarell about the best strategy to take over Hamburg

Edit : Dang it, trapped by grave digger