+- 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. - worldstrider - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:Decisions would come out of consensus and discussion.
Consensus being "rules".
What I am saying is make it boil down to role play interpretations--not "player rules councils". Have an rp consensus--not an oorp one.
Rules appeals can be made and discussed but player groups with an ad hoc ability to actually legislate rules concerns me more. You assume responsibility. fairness and good intent in those persons and that will not always be the case. It will just be more opportunity for biased oorp lobbying for power and control--just like we often see now.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Lucend - 05-26-2009
I feel that we shouldn't meta-game the consequences of deviation from the norm. I believe there should be in game consequences for all these deviations that would make a more fun game overall.
For instance, the OPG and HAF are having issues, just like Korrd said they should be able to shoot each other and work it out on the forums and on the server. Now, I do think that there should be a clause that specifically states that arguments should have a RP basis and that the two factions must meet and square terms before rebelling so that when the fighting stops, we are, and have been, friends and collaborators all along.
Because one of my primary concerns about this system as that rivalries can develop past the characters and stories and into a personal hatred of the other player. And if this happens, this idea of shooting it out might get abused. And I don't want that to happen.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Benjamin - 05-26-2009
' Wrote: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.Because I think people would make factions based on wanting to make factions, rather than if they powertraded enough. You can put in other things to stop terrible apps. No applications by people who've been here 3 months or whatever, no applications under a certain length, etc etc.
Why would you wish that work on yourself in order to see the amount dropped?
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Linkus - 05-26-2009
LeMaitre, the idea is that if there is an Official Faction currently but yet another wants to be Official too, they can't be since it's a 1 horse town for a few NPC factions currently. Or there are multiple groups wanting to be Official for the same NPC faction.
OORP Councils that is, as Dieter said.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - worldstrider - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:Now, I do think that there should be a clause that specifically states that arguments should have a RP basis
That's the differnce between rules and role play. We need role play "rules" not rules themselves.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - hack - 05-26-2009
' Wrote: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.
I agree on the Military and the Police factions, trying to have a dozen different wings of the Military or different Precincts to agree on one thing is ridiculous.
House police and Military should be one faction per NPC faction. As it stands now, Liberty has 2 Navies, and there is no need for that.
I also agree that the council should be a house council, I.E. Liberties NPC faction leaders get together and work out Liberties Rp.
Currently Liberty has high command chat that has the LPI leader and his lieutenants, The ln leader and his lieutenants, and the LSF leader and his. It would be easy to expand that into a council by starting another chat and adding Synth Foods, Ageira, DSE, Universal, Xenos, LR, and the lane hackers.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - pchwang - 05-26-2009
' Wrote: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:Wait, are you saying that these safeguards don't exist right now?
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)
Because the last time I checked, when official factions decided to go around limiting what independents could do or not do, they got kicked in the behind rather sharply.
Forming a Council is not going to remove individuals who are prejudiced against people who aren't in their faction. That is the only problem right now that exists within factions, and it is a big problem. 90% of all faction leaders on this server have little or no problem with independents, so long as they don't go around lolwutting and ganking everything they see with little organization or regard to RP.
Many of their own faction members, however, have other ideas. A council is not going to solve these problems.
I wasn't speaking of individuals as in individual subfactions, but as in individual players.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - pbrione - 05-26-2009
' Wrote:LeMaitre, the idea is that if there is an Official Faction currently but yet another wants to be Official too, they can't be since it's a 1 horse town for a few NPC factions currently. Or there are multiple groups wanting to be Official for the same NPC faction.
I do not think that there is currently anything preventing a second faction from arising for those npc factions where multiple player factions is relevent. But frankly for some groups such as House Millitary / Police it is simply not workable, unless the factions work in seperate geographical regions (limiting to RP). Otherwise you will simply have two conflicting groups trying to do seperate things, and I don't think a "Council" is more likely to make them likely to agree with one another on anything. This being the case, I consider it quite unfair for an existing faction to have to "shrink" its RP to one particular region so that another faction can pop up in its previous place. Not all npc factions need multiple player factions. And considering how many npc factions have no player representation at all, I think we should be encouraging people to make factions for different groups, not all clog the same npc groups with more and more factions, diluting each of their RP.
On the other hand I support dieter's idea, if I interpret it correctly, of having factions from different npc groups that work in the same House area having some sort of OORP discussion forum to increase cooperation. But I don't think it should be "official" or run on voting rights or other such regulations making it subject to admin supervision.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - pchwang - 05-26-2009
Quote:LeMaitre, the idea is that if there is an Official Faction currently but yet another wants to be Official too, they can't be since it's a 1 horse town for a few NPC factions currently.It's not about whether it is a one horse town or not. It's about people creating factions that are not necessary except for their own selfish goals - so that they can lead their own faction.
"New faction creation process and representation" discussion thread. - Lucend - 05-26-2009
I just want to play the game and not worry about breaking *server* law. I want to worry about breaking Zoner, Corsair, Bretonian or Hogosha law. I would gladly accept the death penalty for disobeying orders, but a sanction on the forums is a real buzz killer.
I know this is a challenge, and I don't envy the admin team. That's my two cents and hopefully I've contributed somewhat.