ADMIN NOTICE : OFFICIAL FACTION RIGHTS

[reavengitair]

Seeing as I am still awaiting a faction creation request to be accepted/denied, Id like to know,

Approximatley, How long until these are put into place?

[chovynz]

Benjamin, players rights are not irrelevant. They are critical to what we are discussing here, and always have been critical. That is why we've had so much contention over these very issues.

How far will someone go in dictating another person's roleplay? As seen in Disco history, very far indeed. Don't ask me to prove it to you, go and search for yourself. Look for any posts by Akumabito, Tenacity, n00bl3t, Jihad Joe, Jinx, Myself and numerous other posts by numerous other people that have probably been buried somewhere, (the posts...not the people:D)

What exactly can ANY player expect from this server? What are the freedoms that one single person can expect? If they RP fine, (this includes using appropriate ID and tag) then they should not be limited to only fighters as a non-factionized player. Then the questions has to get asked, how does one gain these "bigger" ships? Are they accessible to everyone? is there a clear and direct method for getting one, irrespective of who is acknowledging the application, or potential personal grudges? Should there even BE an application?

This is effectively asking an non-factionized player to join up to a faction to get the "bigger" ships, no matter IF they RP fine. Perhaps "join" is the wrong word, but be accountable to and apply to the "controlling" faction.

Then, why stop at Battleships? Why not go to Gunships and trading ships? Why not make THOSE ships have to apply to the controlling faction as well?

Again, I repeat, what is the limit? what can one person expect as his freedoms on this server?

---

Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.

[Benjamin]

This is what I mean, though. You've taken a system designed to stop morons from using battleships, and disagreed with it on the basis that it would deny all non factioned players gunboats and transports?

You can thread along the logic as far as you want and talk about your rights as an indie or whatever, but I just don't think that's a relevant point, at least not until it's implemented.

---

Join Cryer Pharmaceuticals

[chovynz]

The system has NEVER worked. I don't need to prove anything to you. I've lived it my friend. I didnt say it will stop the trading ships and gunboats, im asking why stop at battleships if we take this approach?

I am not talking about rights. I'm talking about freedoms. What can any player, irrespective of faction or indy, irrespective of loadout or personal grudges, or anything else that will effect one person being able to play in a "big" ship, what can one player expect from this server. There MUST be a clear way that non-factionised players or casual players can get, and use a "big" ship. As someone else said it's not a problem taking them out if they are being silly with the ships, taking them out as in dealing with them inrp or with bombers or with admin intervention with proof.

---

Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.

[eyvind]

Let me just interject, if I may, and say that this discussion does not seem to be going anywhere productive. Perhaps we should take a day or two break from it and gather some perspective, perhaps let any animosity that may have built up dissipate?

---

<span style="font-family:Agency FB">Good Morning!</span>

[chovynz]

I hope I'm not coming across in an "animosity" way, I'm just saying my piece, which I feel strongly about. I have lived through the stuff that people do. I've been the victim, repeatedly, of "lolcaps". I also know that this is a good system of control, that is relevent to *some* factions. However I also have seen good Rping non-factionised players get turned down from having battleships IN THIS "COMMUNITY", because of grudges or some other silliness.

I promised myself I wouldn't get involved to this degree again. Last time I got burned, but it's an issue that has never been resolved. Hopefully we are on the way there. Restricting capships worked with the OC...sort-of, it will not work with the Junkers, and it might not work with the Liberty Navy.

But above and beyond that, does anyone who comes to this server have the freedom to gain and use any ship? For the nomad ships, that is only if you are in the Keepers. If LN IS LN then that is the same. It won't work for Junkers, It will work for RM, but again, is there room for an non-factionised player in those NPC groups that have that type of player?

I suggest a list that defines what factions will be limiting the battleships through this "system", and what factions are free from this requirement.

---

Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.

[Jinx]

another nasty question: ( that was mentioned before somewhat )

"if the factions judge over who deserves a battleship and who does not deserve a battleship. - can i rebalance them to what the "ought" to be?"

now - if you say "no, you cannot" - i d of course ask about the reasons. - if we trust the judgement, we ensure that battleships are not abused ( what a wonderfully subjective term that is, isn t it? ) - so we can make them the ultimate fighting machines, cause those that use them are responsible - aren t they? - so i d question the judgement after all...

i know - not a fair question...


another sidenote.

i remember there was a video of another mod ( can t remember - crossfire? or somethign else ) - where a fighter ship was flying through a LARGE battle between dozens of dreadnoughts that were all firing at each other. - missile trails, plasma and explosions everywhere. - flak shels and shaking screens.

everyone was totally in awe. - now thats what a large fleet battle is like. - its amazing, isn t it? - too bad we don t allow that thing on disco.

we have a habit to "bid ourselves down" when it comes to large ships. - i still read in faction creations that its appreciated to say "but we only have ONE battleship" - another faction says "ha, ... WE only have one cruiser!" ( which sometimes implies - we can do better ... )

i hardly see any faction ( not even those that actually "should" have a real fleet ) to say "well, tough luck you buggers... WE have 20 battleships, eat that!" ( 20 battleships does not mean bad roleplay btw. - bad roleplay means bad roleplay )


large ships become more and more balanced - the more large ships are involved in a combat. - when 20 battleships fight 20 other battleships. - fighters and bombers will have a much easier time, cause you can be sure that they will concentrate their fire on other battleships - hence, we get the situation where a fighter can actually cross the amazing battlefield where cap fire at capships - and the bomber can do what its meant to do.... add in the one amazing dps advantage its meant to be while being mostly untouchable cause its just easier to target and destroy another battleship.

ahh - that didn t really contribute much to the ongoing discussion - but i think i made my points clear about it some posts ago anyway.

edit:

btw. awesome thing - the rheinland / liberty event with everyone that wishes to come - to join.
cause when i saw some event like "rheinland invades liberty" .... and i see a setup like:
- 1 battleship
- 4 bombers
- 10 fighters

i couldn t help but laugh. - that is "rheinland that invades liberty? - like serious much?" - thats not even enough for a recon force. -- and that shows that we have all different ideas of convincable roleplay and enviroment. - for me, a real WAR is something where things are just large scale. - large fleets, large ships, large numbers. - if its not large, we can forget "war" and call it "diplomatic dispute".

---

Shipdesigns made for DiscoveryGC

[bluntpencil2001]

But fortunately for me, I've been around the debate block more than a few times and I don't fall for such cheap tactics.

I think I should use the age-old internet debating tactic of:

LOLIRONY

Indirect personal attack with an accusation of cheap tactics; appeal to authority due to debate experience; also a possibility of some proof by verbosity.

---

[reavengitair]

i couldn t help but laugh. - that is "rheinland that invades liberty? - like serious much?" - thats not even enough for a recon force. -- and that shows that we have all different ideas of convincable roleplay and enviroment. - for me, a real WAR is something where things are just large scale. - large fleets, large ships, large numbers. - if its not large, we can forget "war" and call it "diplomatic dispute".

All in good time. When disco has over 10 thousand fully-rping members after the admins figure how to lift the 200 player total.

Not likely any time soon.

[farmerman]

I do wonder how much wording really comes into play with these threads. If it was about "Privileges and Responsibilities" instead of "Rights" would it make a difference? A lot of the arguing is about rights and freedoms - ideas that get people riled up.

Regardless, it seems the main objection is over leaders being able to block the ability of other ships to do things (even if it doesn't sound like that to me). Without arguing details, why not more suggestions of alternatives?

Here is my proposal, pieced from a couple comments and the like:

1 and 4 exist, no change.

Combine the good intentions of 2 and 5 into the ability to start an inquiry into whether or not a given ship is causing problems for other players in ways that aren't necessarily clearcut violations. Basically an extended view related to the "harming server gameplay" part of the rules. If too many frivolous claims are made, give a warning and block the player/faction from making any more uses for a while.

For 3, getting money back is good and I wouldn't argue if someone put a bunch into my neuralnet account, but instead give the option of getting the money back, getting something like Cap Armor suggested (or perhaps the option to purchase a Cap Armor Mk IX, similar but less insane than was suggested elsewhere), or getting some RP perks. Possibly more than one of these.

For the RP perks, my suggestion is to have the various mission commodities sold at various places, but blocked from being purchased by an FLHook thingy in the same way that the unbalanced trade goods were. However, have an allow list of sorts. Then allow official faction members to be added automatically to this list. In addition, if this were implemented, add a way for non-faction people to also be able to purchase these. The official factions would get the benefit of not having to prove themselves individually (as that would be covered with the approval process).

Another suggestion is to allow them to modify engine visuals (if indeed it's possible, haven't gotten a definite answer) using a command with the same sorts of restrictions as the above. Specifics would need to be laid out in the faction request post. As an example, my thought is that for the LWB, we'd request Rheinland style engines, and anyone with an LWB ID could then use a command while docked at a particular station (Eindhoven) and magic would work. Official factions get the perk of being able to choose such things. This is really only interesting for smaller groups utilizing more generic equipment

And, of course, add more reinforcement to things by specifying official factions should certainly lead by example.

I'd also like to see something where official factions are required to have a faction feedback thread to discuss any potential issues.

I dunno, some positive thoughts and suggestions for the discussion.

---

Faction info links: Samura Heavy Industries : LWB : Watchers