' Wrote:In lights of recent discovery that the deal between Corsairs and the Reavers was not so neat and public as I thought at first, I am going to state my opinion on the subject.
Reavers requested 15 tizona del cids, 14 del cid turrets, 5 salamancas, and few other guns.
A man in charge of issuing technology gave them a big task in order to get those guns.
They almost fulfilled it, but not completely, thus being allowed to use only del cids they requested.
POOF. Something happened behind the curtains. Some other Corsair elder (?) decided to issue an approval for unlimited amount of weapons.
Reavers are now allowed to use unlimited amount of Corsair weaponry.
Now, there are valid questions to be asked here. First of them would be logical. I hope that the Corsair elder who decided to amend the original deal to 'unlimited' is not part of the Reaver playerbase. So in order to realize who's to blame here, we should know who amended the deal in an oorp way? Can anyone answer this question?
If it was a whole Council of Corsair elders, which I highly doubt, Corsairs are to blame.
If it was any individual elder who is not a part of the Reavers - Corsairs are to blame.
If it was an elder which has ties to the Reavers - He and the Reavers are to blame.
Just to clarify, I don't think the last solution is possible. I doubt it'd go unnoticed.
McNeo,
This all falls to water. There are no conditions to respect if you issue equipment in an oorp way. And that's what Corsairs did.
In that thread which you all mention Reavers got only small amount of weaponry. They got the rest using other means.
At first I thought whole deal was done in an RP way, but now I can't support Corsairs anymore, because they did something stupid. Oorp deals are stupid, and they should be forbidden by the rules.
The big question here is: Who gave the oorp permission for unlimited amount of Corsair weaponry to the Reavers?
Second big question is: When was the oorp deal made, when was the original approval edited?
As the only Corsair leader/Reaver, I am going to say I am a bit offended by the accusation, but no, I didn't edit the permissions.
' Wrote:As the only Corsair leader/Reaver, I am going to say I am a bit offended by the accusation, but no, I didn't edit the permissions.
As you'll notice, I said it's very unlikely. I also don't have access neither to Reaver roster nor do I know all Corsair elders.
It's not an accusation it's one of the possible scenarios. I am not accusing you of anything, since no rules were broken either way.
Do you know, as one of the Corsair leaders, who did edit the permission?
Lucendez Wrote:
It is every Corsair's responsibility to die a beautiful death in defense of Crete, regardless of how OORP or how capwhoring the opposition is. Launch your fighter, joust the battlecruisers and die a beautiful death. Then, drink it down in the bar.
' Wrote:As you'll notice, I said it's very unlikely. I also don't have access neither to Reaver roster nor do I know all Corsair elders.
It's not an accusation it's one of the possible scenarios. I am not accusing you of anything, since no rules were broken either way.
Do you know, as one of the Corsair leaders, who did edit the permission?
I do not, it happened during the year that I was not leading the Brotherhood. I think Connor was running the show at the time for TBH, Viko for Sails and Jose for Benitez, they or Monty would be the ones to ask I guess. As I understood, Monty was kinda "in charge" of the deal.
Well then, as I suspected, Corsairs are fully to blame for amending the deal, and thus should accept the fact they will be shot with their own guns.
All this time we've been discussing this no one even mentioned the deal was done this way, and I wonder why, it'd make things much easier for everyone.
But I guess I'll hang on for a confirmation of who edited the deal in the end.
Lucendez Wrote:
It is every Corsair's responsibility to die a beautiful death in defense of Crete, regardless of how OORP or how capwhoring the opposition is. Launch your fighter, joust the battlecruisers and die a beautiful death. Then, drink it down in the bar.
' Wrote:There are many other things to consider. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.
I dunno, I really think that, after reading this thread, that Cannon's words still might be the best objective here.
At this point, instead of this back-and-forth finger-pointing, why don't those interested attempt to devise a system by which we could actually enforce tech usage via game mechanics?
I gave my personal opinion on this matter back a month or so ago in the Reaver Official Faction Request thead, and personally, when I look at tech requests for OSI (which I generally let Daedric handle anyhow) we take teh same approach as GMG - the permission is permanent, but we reserve the right to bounty the snot out of you.
I'd just be interest in seeing some detailed and thought-out systems by which we could enforce this stuff in game. Not just some "an idea for this and that", but some well detailed concepts with which we could look at, discuss, and tweak. I'd most certainly be okay with being bound by general game mechanics moreso than I would the flip-floppiness of changing factions and leaderships.