![]() |
Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Printable Version +- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums) +-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6) +--- Forum: Player Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=244) +---- Forum: Official Faction Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=245) +----- Forum: Official Faction Creation Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=134) +------ Forum: Approved Faction Creation Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=136) +------ Thread: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- (/showthread.php?tid=139269) |
RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Kaze - 05-13-2016 (05-13-2016, 02:31 PM)The Inner Phalanx Wrote:(05-13-2016, 02:19 PM)Titanium Wrote: Right. Thanks for clearing it up!
<3 RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - A/)- The Inner Phalanx - 05-13-2016 (05-13-2016, 02:39 PM)Wesker Wrote: You shot RHA before you assisted us, I wasn't in a position to fight 3 factions at once so I hired you. But it still is confusing to me. You actually hopped into a 1v1 between me and an RoS and shot me buying the RoS time to restock and the A snub was jittering (lol).RoS are our allies, hence the shooting you part. As poor form as it was, interrupting a 1v1, at the time we were hostile with SCRA, who RHA are allied with (demandin' my power cell, naughty), and that jitter was Malcolm, who has since fixed the issue. Following the events of Delta, and that winding down, SCRA noted the possibility of negotiating a secession of hostilites in the future, and following the battle in Theta, we've taken a less offensive stance towards both SCRA and RHA to prepare for said potential negotiations, as fighting both of those groups is not something the faction wants, nor would it make sense for us. EDIT: Why? Because we all have a common hatred for the Core and Corsairs. We don't actively seek to try and fight a revolutionary faction and the Coalition nation, as it isn't part of our MO to do so. (05-13-2016, 02:39 PM)Wesker Wrote: Something I'm not ok with either is seeing the Cinncinati shoot an RHA ship than dock on an RHA base to restock and come back. On an SRP ship, than ram itself into tangier because it didn't want to die when corsairs showed up to mop the rest. I already had a lengthy conversation with Fuski about this particular incident as I stated earlier in the thread. He admitted it was a mistake and apologized, but is currently unavailable due to RL issues. I mentioned that to you already, I believe. Hopefully this clears things up for you. If not, and you've got other questions, leave them here or you have my Skype. ~Ven RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Antonio - 05-13-2016 My feeling on your officialdom is completely neutral. That being said there is a thing I'd like to touch and that's your proposed ID, since you're requesting officialdom from the infamous Freelancer ID. 1. Custom made Technology Compatibility Chart for the ID. Should you become official, inheriting the Freelancer ID tech chart would be silly. Instead, manually going over each tech cell and deciding what % you should have on it is a better solution. And just like almost any other Official faction in the game, the tech you don't have any reason to have should go on 10%. Comparing that to the Freelancer ID it would be a noticeable nerf to most of the 75% tech the Freelancer ID currently enjoys (which is dumb, let's not go into that), but seeing as you're currently using all kinds of guns and ships and God knows which of it was actually roleplayed or not, a nerf, or more like a RP restriction, is to be expected. Don't get me wrong, the tech you actually roleplay(ed) for and there is a good reason for it to continue existing can go to 90% or even 100% in some cases (ex. House Civilian, HF, RoS tech).
2. Clearly defined ZoI. We all know you've been pretty much everywhere - from Alaska, Ellesmere, Virginia, Iota, Gallia, Taus to Omegas, Omicrons and all 4 houses, be it in caps or snubs, inRP or ooRP. If you become official, having no ZoI with the current ID would be... senseless and unfair towards other factions, to say the least. From what I've seen you mostly operate in the Omegas and Omicrons,often go to Rheinland and Sigmas and are somewhat seen in Bretonia and Liberty. That itself is more than half of Sirius already, and having it as ZoI would be a good place to start (I personally don't think you should have Bretonia and Liberty in your ZoI, not by your lore and roleplay you showed towards those regions). And no, "it creates activity" is not good enough of a reason to have no ZoI, based only on the fact that you're transitioning from the Freelancer ID.
3. Removal of Cruisers and Battleships line. The reason is simple. If you somehow got your hands on a cruiser or a battleship, which would in 99% of the cases go through forum and ingame RP with the faciton that owns the capital vessel and permission from that said faction or sabotage/hijacking or any other way, why not just proceed to SRP the ship. You've said it yourself, you'd only have a few of them, and an SRP, by an admin's words, "has never been easier to obtain". Saying "we'll only have a few" but having no limit on the ID itself and providing only "we'll behave and keep things under control" as an argument doesn't make a lot of sense.
RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - A/)- The Inner Phalanx - 05-13-2016 (05-13-2016, 05:12 PM)Antonio Wrote: My feeling on your officialdom is completely neutral. That being said there is a thing I'd like to touch and that's your proposed ID, since you're requesting officialdom from the infamous Freelancer ID. This is actually one of the reason we're planning to get an ID, and I probably should've included it in the first place, but a custom techcompat chart for the ID is being discussed within reason of the used equipment. (05-13-2016, 05:12 PM)Antonio Wrote: 2. Clearly defined ZoI. As I mentioned prior, defining a ZoI isn't something we can do at this current time. However, there are plans in place to further solidify where we would operate and why. Expect to see something soon. These plans take time, and have long since been the focus of our various surveys across Sirius. I think you'll figure it out. (05-13-2016, 05:12 PM)Antonio Wrote: 3. Removal of Cruisers and Battleships line. This has actually just been discussed and agreed upon about ten minutes ago. Limiting caps to SRP requests would make much more sense when considering the nature of the faction and its size. Thanks for commenting, Antonio. ~V RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Wesker - 05-13-2016 (05-13-2016, 02:44 PM)The Inner Phalanx Wrote: . Following the events of Delta, and that winding down, SCRA noted the possibility of negotiating a secession of hostilites in the future, and following the battle in Theta, we've taken a less offensive stance towards both SCRA and RHA to prepare for said potential negotiations, as fighting both of those groups is not something the faction wants, nor would it make sense for us. Something to note is that SCRA does not speak for RHA in terms of diplomacy nor are SCRA the larger power in the omegas. You may have discussed relations with SCRA, that does not carry on to RHA. RHA is the larger power in the omegas and I do not let SCRA dictate RHA relations at all. This isn't me being hostile, this is just me saying if you want to be neutral with RHA it'd be best to send comms to us directly. RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - A/)- The Inner Phalanx - 05-13-2016 (05-13-2016, 05:27 PM)Wesker Wrote:(05-13-2016, 02:44 PM)The Inner Phalanx Wrote: . Following the events of Delta, and that winding down, SCRA noted the possibility of negotiating a secession of hostilites in the future, and following the battle in Theta, we've taken a less offensive stance towards both SCRA and RHA to prepare for said potential negotiations, as fighting both of those groups is not something the faction wants, nor would it make sense for us. Understandable. We'll see what can be done in this regard down the line. RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - SnakeLancerHaven - 05-13-2016 a little late kudos but big kudos for the ASF/Auxesia RP we had couple weeks ago, I enjoyed! Wish you guys good luck in officialdom. : ) RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Kauket - 05-14-2016 (05-13-2016, 01:38 PM)Alley Wrote: Before we carry on with this, as initially mentioned on Skype to Nyx, there will be a few anomalies with this officialty request which perhaps were not pointed out to AFC when they posted their own. Discussed. All green. Let's keep going. RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Alley - 05-15-2016 Money taken, added on tracker. RE: Battlegroup Auxesia - A/)- - Omicron - 05-15-2016 Will you set yourself hostile to Order or I have to do something myself to make the point? |