Make Coalition Indie ID more better

[Cælumaresh]

Server should be full of taged ships, not indie one.

Yet you have an un-tagged RHA ID'ed ship.

I dont see a difference between RHA idnie ID and Official ones. Tasks the same, playing alone always.

2.2 Threatening other players with reports and sanctions or attempting to pose as an Admin is not allowed.

For u my friend.

At which point did he threaten to report you or posed as an admin?
Also, I agree that the Coalition indie ID needs more freedom. (And JayDees suggestion of indie cruisers has my support aswell, but thats because im a capwhore )

And for you my dear miner.
Angry miner.

?

Im not a miner

---

This Galaxy is vast; its wonders and beauty are almost unfathomable. But the galaxy also hides dark secrets, some of which have lain dormant since the beginning of time itself. There is a danger in secrets, both in seeking and in knowing. Some things are meant to be hidden from view. Some mysteries defy understanding, and sometimes even the things we think we know are untrue. Some secrets should remain untouched.

Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

[Mímir]

Edit: Add just can attack OC, CC and protect Transports. That's all it needs

No, no no. Nonononono.

Why do people insist on making badguy ID's into goodguy ID's.

NO!

Edit: That's what the official faction is for. But hey you know, Coalition are the reason Sol was evacuated in the first place, they screwed over everyone in Sirius big time; don't attribute them with heroic deeds. We have enough sugar, we need more SALT!

---

[Oldum]

@Shinju , how did you draw this to the terrorist ID ? I don't want to kill anyone on sight, okay , @Mímir does but that doesn't mean anything. However, SCRA can shoot anyone considered hostile, while Coalition ID can sit and wait to be attacked from the same ships before they can shoot back. Coalition ID shouldn't make you shoot anyone anywhere , just shoot hostiles... prettymuch like SCRA can ,so I guess mainly Sairs, OC , Order , NomNoms, Wild , BHG ... can't think of anything big worht shooting, while traders ( if not smuggling) wouldn't have to worry about them.

[Mímir]

I do not understand your reasoning whatsoever.

Why on earth would would the Coalition turn a blind eye to traders, the lubricant of capitalism so to speak? When traders aren't directly aiding the Coalition cause, they are undermining it by the very nature of what they do.

(And please, none of that "We are like China, and also friends with all, while also being archenemies to a bunch of things and establishing trade and forging alliances with monarcies"-stuff. That roleplay doesn't appeal to all.)

So is the reason that the folks at the Coalition have a particularly kind heart towards strangers and bitter political/financial enemies?

Is it a balance thing? That life's too hard for traders?

A player thing, that it's more fun to play the good guy, contrary to what the existing structure suggests?

---

[Shinju]

Because Coalition needs Civilians? Votes, political stuff... You need to get them on your side? That's the main goal of Coalition, Mimir.

---

"No step on Snek..."

my english is my english!

[Mímir]

Why on earth would the Coalition need Libertonian civilians?

I'm down with Coalition not shooting Coalition and allied traders for obvious reasons.

---

[Jansen]

I do not understand your reasoning whatsoever.

Why on earth would would the Coalition turn a blind eye to traders, the lubricant of capitalism so to speak? When traders aren't directly aiding the Coalition cause, they are undermining it by the very nature of what they do.

(And please, none of that "We are like China, and also friends with all, while also being archenemies to a bunch of things and establishing trade and forging alliances with monarcies"-stuff. That roleplay doesn't appeal to all.)

So is the reason that the folks at the Coalition have a particularly kind heart towards strangers and bitter political/financial enemies?

Is it a balance thing? That life's too hard for traders?

A player thing, that it's more fun to play the good guy, contrary to what the existing structure suggests?

How about it being a RP and logic thing, because the Coalition is supposed to be a pretty communistic kind of state, which considers themselfes as a friend of the working class? What you want would be a plain terrorist group without the communistic ideals behind it.
The Coalition is not a vanilla faction and as such relies heavily on the lore created by the SCRA. Problems with this would be that, if the Indie ID gets opened up more and people have no idea what the faction actually is (Yes, people do usually not read the lore behind a faction to act according to it and only look at the ships and ID permissions and in which way they can be abused) Indies would cause a whole lot of trouble and RP headaches. This thread is a pretty good example on why the Coalition ID shouldnt be opened up more.

---

[Oldum]

I do not understand your reasoning whatsoever.

Why on earth would would the Coalition turn a blind eye to traders, the lubricant of capitalism so to speak? When traders aren't directly aiding the Coalition cause, they are undermining it by the very nature of what they do.

(And please, none of that "We are like China, and also friends with all, while also being archenemies to a bunch of things and establishing trade and forging alliances with monarcies"-stuff. That roleplay doesn't appeal to all.)

So is the reason that the folks at the Coalition have a particularly kind heart towards strangers and bitter political/financial enemies?

Is it a balance thing? That life's too hard for traders?

A player thing, that it's more fun to play the good guy, contrary to what the existing structure suggests?

If you want to start a revolution, you need people who will revolt with ya ... but if you shoot everyone who comes around, who will follow you in revolution ? In RP , the original coalition forces are nowhere near enough to destroy the capitalistic system that is all around sirius, so they need more people. But you can't get people to join your side by punching holes on traders ships. What's hard to understand in that ? This coalition is nothing near the Soviet Union , nor it's a terrorist organization..so don't try to make it that. Or at least not the I shoot whoever I want kinda thing. You can keep the revolution moving, but not as a steamroller running through everyone. Easy as pie,.

[Shinju]

Why on earth would the Coalition need Libertonian civilians?

I'm down with Coalition not shooting Coalition and allied traders for obvious reasons.

If Revolution happens, who's going to listen to Coalition? Dont you need civilians for Revolution? If you shoot Civs and Revolution happens, wouldnt Civs want another Revolution?

---

"No step on Snek..."

my english is my english!

[Mímir]

Is a foreign trader, supporting and expanding a hostile economic system, a mode of production that is pure EVIL, as well as enriching foreign and hostile individuals on the expense of the many, a friend of the working class?

Thank you for telling me what I want, but you are wrong. What I would like is a terrorist faction with a strong ideological and poltical component; a component that prevents them from forming the alliances a rationalist-capitalist would forge; supplying a role that offers a radically different world view than other roles. To me, that is interesting. I want to play something other than me, not just me in a Coalition uniform - otherwise what's the point of roleplaying?

How would a die-hard revolutionary, locked in a battle of more than 800 years, shaped by propaganda, look at the world and its inhabitants? There's a lot of interesting social structures at play, philosophically there is much to draw upon, and historically there is a lot of precedence in real-life events.

That opens up to a plethora of different roles one can play within the Coalition, rather than a constricted mish-mash of half-baked ideas that is clearly born out of a clear-cut lack of knowledge of Communism as it were and as it is.


EDIT: But I guess that not playing a constricted (and dumb!) role laid out to you by someone else is "abuse"?

Why on earth would the Coalition need Libertonian civilians?

I'm down with Coalition not shooting Coalition and allied traders for obvious reasons.

If Revolution happens, who's going to listen to Coalition? Dont you need civilians for Revolution? If you shoot Civs and Revolution happens, wouldnt Civs want another Revolution?

Like in all revolutions, EVERYONE is forced to make a stance. That's sort of at the core of what a revolution is, rather than just a change of who sits in the formal seat of power. Instead you are tearing down the seat of power. Did Mao hand out biscuits to random foreign civilians in the hope that one day they might think he's a cool guy and rally for him? Either you are for a revolution, or you are against it - there's no middle ground, and that's why so many people end up dead during them, it's all right there in your history books; Disco-logic aside. You might win elections with rosy words and selfless actions, but you won't win a revolution.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Abuse!111!!!!!!" and the usual Disco-daftness aside (like it really matters if you get shot by a black ship with a russian name or a silvery ship with a italian name - but, of course, obligatory "PVP-abuse!!111!!!!" is warranted); at the end of the day how much fun is it playing the good guy if there's no one to play the bad guy - or even worse, having an ID that won't actually play as the badguy you essentially ought to play as?

Look how SCRA spiralled downward. Same with K'hara/Keepers. When both factions were actually played as sort-of-kind-of badguys, they were somewhat interesting. Now they just want to sit and chat instead, and got nothing of interest to say. Maybe that's the real ID abuse, come to think of it. What good is a game of archetypes if there are no "dark" types to mirror the goods?



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the end of the day, everyone should be free to do their roleplay the way they see fit. I do not mind the official faction doing their think, but I oppose to the fact that it restrains me from doing things that it can very well be argued that Coalition should be doing. I don't see why both can't co-exist without one looking down on the other - it could be a "doves" and "hawks" thing, where outsiders could choose to form their diplomacy with either the softies (most likely) or baddies (not so likely). That would maybe even add some diversity and life to the Coalition.

---