The former OSF, as i've heard from several "former members", was not intending to fight the 101st. That said, something apparently happend, leadership-wise, that changed the focus of some players to believe that the OSF goal was to overthrow the 101st (essentially the MR's). The ship pictured in the original thread was apparently trying to start a civil war. 101st utilized FR2 to stop the countless indies and OSF tagged ships from pew pew'ing all over da place. In-RP the pictured ship: Admiral_reped_ship has no affiliations with the OSF. OORP its another char of Chrome, i believe. So technically, if the "civil war" came about.....wouldnt it just be said ship against the 101st? I mean, he wasn't tagged, the OSF dont acknowledge him as theirs....so....it would have been pointless to start a "war" when the "enemy" has 1 man.....so he was "Captured after resisting arrest".
Hmmm... So now we've come down to the real issue. For those of you still confused and kinda going 'er what i don't get it' like i usually do, this is the problem in scenario form:
-An indie screws up and acts stupid purposely
-The faction has a few options:
.....-Teach them. What happens? Nothing. They are purposely being dumb
..... -Shoot them. What happens? Practically nothing. They can just respawn
..... -FR5 them. What happens? Rep is changed and the person(s) are forced to get a new ID.
So a solution to this above problem is essentially what we need. And note that this now has nothing to do about rebellions, that's a completely different subject than that problem.
Joe, or any other admins, would you be willing to hear people out and listen to possible solutions to this? I have a few ideas, and I know if this were more of a 'public challenge' it would be resolved in no time! And also, does the admin team or dev team already have a plan to fix this problem come 4.86? If so, then the latter statement can be considered void.
I would also like to hear a few ideas on issue, especially if there are any dicussions floating around the admin council as a way for factions to be able to counter indies that disobey canon lore, other than shoot them in game. If there are a few ideas floating around that want a bit of community feedback, I'd love to see them. It seems currently that maintaining the balance is really hard.
' Wrote:-An indie screws up and acts stupid purposely
-The faction has a few options:
.....-Teach them. What happens? Nothing. They are purposely being dumb
..... -Shoot them. What happens? Practically nothing. They can just respawn
..... -FR5 them. What happens? ID is taken away. But ship remains, which is 'sanction bait' as said by Joe.
' Wrote:The 101st CANNOT excersize faction right 5 on an individual or group who use an OC ID.
Official factions inability to FR5 their own indies
User was banned for: Griefing others
Time left: (Permanent)
' Wrote:Turn on shiploss on death for that guy's next ONE death?
Or just autosell his ship and give him the money? I mean hed have to get rid of it anyway.
This.
How about we apply this right across the board?
If you have a ship or tech which matches your ID, it's assumed the insurance pays out and it's replaced. If you don't, it's assumed you have permission for it so can go get replacements freely. If you can't because you've been FR5'd, you have a starflier and a sackfull of cash and, depending on which bits you can use, a few bits of tech.
Saves a lot of work by admins and gets the job done.
' Wrote:Hmmm... So now we've come down to the real issue. For those of you still confused and kinda going 'er what i don't get it' like i usually do, this is the problem in scenario form:
-An indie screws up and acts stupid purposely
-The faction has a few options:
.....-Teach them. What happens? Nothing. They are purposely being dumb
..... -Shoot them. What happens? Practically nothing. They can just respawn
..... -FR5 them. What happens? Rep is changed and the person(s) are forced to get a new ID.
So a solution to this above problem is essentially what we need. And note that this now has nothing to do about rebellions, that's a completely different subject than that problem.
Joe, or any other admins, would you be willing to hear people out and listen to possible solutions to this? I have a few ideas, and I know if this were more of a 'public challenge' it would be resolved in no time! And also, does the admin team or dev team already have a plan to fix this problem come 4.86? If so, then the latter statement can be considered void.
Still waiting on a response from an Admin on this.