+- 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: "New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. (/showthread.php?tid=21052)
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Benjamin - 05-26-2009
The 500 million being a refundable deposit instead of just a goldsink would be good I think. Like whoever said, it's even more of an incentive to get it right. There's 500 million on the line, as well as your faction. And I think some of us would like to RP our factions and play the game instead of powertrading. It's an ugly mechanic and it sends out a weird message.
500 million as a deposit still isn't a great idea, but it is at least less-bad.
I mean what would you rather from an aspiring faction? 20 hours of powertrading, or 20 hours of them actually playing their faction so you can see what it's like, and so they can put effort in to it and develop it?
The ability to accrue money is completely unrelated to the ability to design a good faction.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - worldstrider - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:Effectively, this seems to make factions under the same NPC banner the one faction, if they have to go along with a policy decided in their own council. I'm not saying that this is either good or bad, just pointing it out.
For instance, the Corsair Council decides that Orbital Spa and Cruise are not to be pirated. The OPG say 'No, up yours' and do it anyway. Would they have to obey the Council? If they did, the Council is effectively a faction, whereas OPG is a subfaction.
I'd say that this my primary concern as well. There should be room for dissent but with consequences that can be role played--not "sanctioned and forced".
Good example (imho):
The Junker Shadow Fleet is a group that believes strategic military pressure is essential for Junkers to possess. The Junker Council of Factions cooperatively decide: "Junkers should only collect scrap and fly nothing more menacing than a Salvager."
The JSF responds with, "Hell no--we won't go!" and dissents from this view--refusing to decommission ships or disband.
The council calls for a meeting with other councils of other factions to embargo the JSF as in asking Outcasts to deny them open rights to dock and buy cardamine, the Corsairs to embargo artifacts, etc. JSF ships are told after a successful agreement by all parties (Junker, Corsair and Outcast councils) that they will be forcibly resisted should they attempt to dock and obtain/sell these goods.
JSF begins breaking embargo and action is taken against them. The JSF asks another council of factions (say, the Dragons) to support them--war breaks out when the Dragons agree.
*Clap*--what I have been asking for all along.
Regarding house navies and police--they can have "groups" as squadrons or precincts or fleets that might dissent from the government and be banned from their bases, etc. That would legitimize RP as the 522nd tried. The only concern here is the nature of bans--can they literally deny docking or only threaten violence if caught? Will their IDs remain or require a change? Tougher issues deciding these but I like the general trend overall of the suggestions.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - pchwang - 05-26-2009
Quote:The ability to accrue money is completely unrelated to the ability to design a good faction.No, but it does force you to put some deep thought into actually posting that faction proposal before you do.
It could be 20 hours of your life wasted powertrading.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - worldstrider - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:Unfortunately, there are members of all the current official factions who have a problem with independents. That really isn't representative of the actual factions.
That's why it is essential that legal dissent is allowed and that a council dominated by a particular group doesn't co-opt the rp of any group it doesn't like. My concern still is that if ANY means is given (intentionally or not) that allows a faction in any situation to dominate a "council" and dictate play of all players in the faction (independent or not)--we will see the same abuses of power as in past. Example:
HAF and OPG. Imagine only the OPG was official and HAF was unofficial. OPG is the sole "vote" on the council and can make any lame-brained decree they like--essentially forcing HAF out of play as Corsairs.
Some safeguards need to be in place to prevent such things (no offense but the example makes the point--though exaggerated from reality a little at present)
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Spear - 05-26-2009
While the 500 mill in no way relates to RP ability it shows serious intent, if you disagree with that we should raise it to 1 billion. I don't think it should be refundable.
@Tink: Zoners and Junkers operate with a loose council already and this is great RP, when it comes to military's it should be one faction, groups like the 522nd should change their ID once they make a "rebellion" and not dock on Navy bases that they have "rebelled" against.
I'm not in favour of restricting new RP, I am in favour of military's having an established heirarchy and a small measure of control over their indie counterparts.
What vet on this server does not look back at the Rhienland of old and smile at their facist control. Now you fly through New Berlin and it is almost as bad as New York, Rhienland battleships speaking OOC in system advising some guy about the best smuggling route, massive facepalm I almost broke my nose!.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - worldstrider - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:While the 500 mill in no way relates to RP ability it shows serious intent, if you disagree with that we should raise it to 1 billion. I don't think it should be refundable.
@Tink: Zoners and Junkers operate with a loose council already and this is great RP, when it comes to military's it should be one faction, groups like the 522nd should change their ID once they make a "rebellion" and not dock on Navy bases that they have "rebelled" against.
I'm not in favour of restricting new RP, I am in favour of military's having an established heirarchy and a small measure of control over their indie counterparts.
What vet on this server does not look back at the Rhienland of old and smile at their facist control. Now you fly through New Berlin and it is almost as bad as New York, Rhienland battleships speaking OOC in system advising some guy about the best smuggling route, massive facepalm I almost broke my nose!.
I am actually sympathetic regarding house police and militaries. Its a bit disconcerting to have a military with six different acronyms.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Dieter Schprokets - 05-26-2009
I think there are two seperable things being confused here:
1) Actual in-RP Councils, such as the Council of Zoners, Council of Dons, Corsair Elders, who are existing in-RP pseudo-government entities that decide Zoner/Outcast/Corsair policy.
They exist, they are good, no change needed.
A House Military "Council" makes no sense in-RP. Nor a Police council.
2) Other things which are being called Councils in this thread but are really a discussion group or committee. Discussions would be OORP, not in RP. The discussions would occur in General Discussion forum perhaps, in new subforums.
An example concept for Bretonia:
Bretonian Area Discussion Group Subforum
The following players could start a new thread and post there:
-BAF Official Faction, and Indies
-BPA Official Faction, and Indies
-BMM Official Faction, and Indies
-Molly, Gaian, Corsair, Planetform Official Faction, and Indies
-Mandalorians (we are still centred there)
-Any Unofficial Factions (Groups) that are based in Bretonia
-etc...
This mechanism would allow indies and factions and groups to have a voice in the same forum area, dedicated to Bretonia, but it wouldn't be formalized. Decisions would come out of consensus and discussion.
I THINK this meets the original intent of Korrd's idea.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Benjamin - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:While the 500 mill in no way relates to RP ability it shows serious intent, if you disagree with that we should raise it to 1 billion. I don't think it should be refundable.
There are better ways to show intent than that. Raising a billion credits can also show serious intent to be a massive jerk in a battleship.
Personally I would gladly take the job of faction proposal subforum janitor in order for the 500 million fee to drop.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Spear - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:There are better ways to show intent than that. Raising a billion credits can also show serious intent to be a massive jerk in a battleship.
Personally I would gladly take the job of faction proposal subforum janitor in order for the 500 million fee to drop.
Provide an example of intent? It's true 1 billion could be used for a Battleship but it still takes effort to raise and wont be parted with easily.
Why would you wish that work on yourself in order to see the amount dropped?
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - pbrione - 05-26-2009
Could we not try to limit official House navies / police factions to one faction per npc faction, and instead of a "council" of factions all with the same npc tag, have a "council" composed of the police, military, corporations etc. of a particular House (e.g. faction leaders of BPA, BAF, BMM and Bowex work together to coordinate general Bretonian RP - actually this already happens, and makes sense as "Liberty" or "Bretonia" ought to have common policies, not have a LN council voting one thing and an LPI council deciding something else).
However, I also agree with the already stated consensus that trying to make such things official and admin supervised is totally unneccessary. I mean, come on people - this debate was started by a general consensus that the rules were too complex and restrictive and that official factions needed to be given more "power" (undefined) - now people are suggesting we make the rules more complex, add in these official councils, regulate and oversee their meetings, hold votes, etc. constantly requiring all representatives of the factions and admins to be present at the same time and always on hand to carry out decision making, whilst effectively undermining the control of factions such as the House Navies over their npc factions.
The current system is seriously not all that bad - yes official factions should coordinate their RP more, but Zoner Council, Council of Dons, Elders, Bretonian Government, etc. etc. already exist, factions are working together and all we really need to do is allow them a little more flexibility to conduct RP, enforce good RP on indies and work more cooperatively with unofficial groups and indies. I'm all in favour of reforming the application system, to be sure, but we don't need an admin sactioned official "council" structure regulatory body. It is unneccessary and I suspect it will prove innefficient and ultimately fail.
There should be more cooperation among official and unofficial groups (led and directed by the official groups), but this should be done on a consentual and case-by-case basis. Houses should coordinate all their factions into governments. Corsair, Outcast, Zoner and Junker factions should coordinate their RP. Some groups like IMG don't really need to coordinate with anybody - there is no need to enforce a blanket "All factions form councils or be sanctioned" rule. It will make things worse, not better.