Gaian ID changes

[Lythrilux]

I generally think NAPs are actually bad for gameplay and can be bad for roleplay unless they can be seriously justified and are plausible. However, there one key thing to note here in the Gaians defence.

As for Gaian roleplay, that has been terrible as well. Swapping from being neutral with Gallia and friendly/allied with Corsairs to shooting Gallia, losing the alliance with Corsairs and getting a NAP with Bretonia doesn't make sense to me, not just from an inRP perspective but also ooRP one. As far as I know Gaians were made Gallia's puppets because a) they realised they'd stop existing otherwise and had to, and b) it helps GRN not fight 10+ factions alone. Also what's the benefit of Corsairs to actually keeping Gaians around anymore? You stopped fighting all Corsairs' enemies, you're too small to be worth hauling Artifacts to, you're a huge risk in a war zone at the verge of an extinction - Corsairs have every reason to terminate all ties with Gaians at this point. At least with GRN's protection they could've made a triple pact seeing how Corsairs and GRN are moving forward in negotiations.

A NAP with Bretonia? For what? To be the 11th faction that shoots GRN and throw all previous roleplay into the ground? Let's not even talk about how Islay is still alive despite Gallics occupying and patrolling the system for years now. If I was on the GRN side when Gaians and GRN made their NAP deal, the first thing I'd ask is obviously bases that Gaians have in the war zones. Islay is first that'd (have to) be exposed, otherwise Gaians'd stop existing. To think all this time it's "hidden" inRP is ludicrous.

AFAIK, it was written in an update that Gallia backstabbed Gaians and broke the NAP and went back on all their diplomacy. What really sucks about this, is it wasn't roleplayed at all, and at the least I also don't think MRG| would have agreed to do this. It was a forced development that resulted in the diplomacy we have now. Much like GRN blowing up Trafalgar and drawing the ire of the Junkers, even though there wasn't really a reason to. Recent updates have honestly brought some bizarre forced diplomacy changes for Gallia.

---

[Princess_Stardust]

I generally think NAPs are actually bad for gameplay and can be bad for roleplay unless they can be seriously justified and are plausible. However, there one key thing to note here in the Gaians defence.

As for Gaian roleplay, that has been terrible as well. Swapping from being neutral with Gallia and friendly/allied with Corsairs to shooting Gallia, losing the alliance with Corsairs and getting a NAP with Bretonia doesn't make sense to me, not just from an inRP perspective but also ooRP one. As far as I know Gaians were made Gallia's puppets because a) they realised they'd stop existing otherwise and had to, and b) it helps GRN not fight 10+ factions alone. Also what's the benefit of Corsairs to actually keeping Gaians around anymore? You stopped fighting all Corsairs' enemies, you're too small to be worth hauling Artifacts to, you're a huge risk in a war zone at the verge of an extinction - Corsairs have every reason to terminate all ties with Gaians at this point. At least with GRN's protection they could've made a triple pact seeing how Corsairs and GRN are moving forward in negotiations.

A NAP with Bretonia? For what? To be the 11th faction that shoots GRN and throw all previous roleplay into the ground? Let's not even talk about how Islay is still alive despite Gallics occupying and patrolling the system for years now. If I was on the GRN side when Gaians and GRN made their NAP deal, the first thing I'd ask is obviously bases that Gaians have in the war zones. Islay is first that'd (have to) be exposed, otherwise Gaians'd stop existing. To think all this time it's "hidden" inRP is ludicrous.

AFAIK, it was written in an update that Gallia backstabbed Gaians and broke the NAP and went back on all their diplomacy. What really sucks about this, is it wasn't roleplayed at all, and at the least I also don't think MRG| would have agreed to do this. It was a forced development that resulted in the diplomacy we have now. Much like GRN blowing up Trafalgar and drawing the ire of the Junkers, even though there wasn't really a reason to. Recent updates have honestly brought some bizarre forced diplomacy changes for Gallia.

Yeah are the Junkers now at war with Gallia since they did blow up our station?

Think we need to allow being able to pirate ships in Gallia's zone of influence along with being allowed to attack GRN whenever we see them. I mean the whole part of being a Junker is we are all one big family, you mess with one you get all come at you

Plus were friendly with the Corsairs since they need us to smuggle there artifacts

[Lythrilux]

Honestly, I think it should be retconned. It set the GRI ID up for failure immediately. I personally believe that GRN has no plausible reason to actively shoot Junkers, and vice versa.

---

[LaWey]

I generally think NAPs are actually bad for gameplay and can be bad for roleplay unless they can be seriously justified and are plausible. However, there one key thing to note here in the Gaians defence.

AFAIK, it was written in an update that Gallia backstabbed Gaians and broke the NAP and went back on all their diplomacy. What really sucks about this, is it wasn't roleplayed at all, and at the least I also don't think MRG| would have agreed to do this. It was a forced development that resulted in the diplomacy we have now. Much like GRN blowing up Trafalgar and drawing the ire of the Junkers, even though there wasn't really a reason to. Recent updates have honestly brought some bizarre forced diplomacy changes for Gallia.

Yes, that what i tried to tell, just havent infocards right now to prove. Storyline force gallia act worse than orcs in diplomacy, which left so small place for players rp, and forced unlaws to consolidation against gauls. Just damnit, if there wasnt great place for edinburg separatism, but nah - le roy want this planet right now, naked and served.

[R.I.P.]

Honestly, I think it should be retconned. It set the GRI ID up for failure immediately. I personally believe that GRN has no plausible reason to actively shoot Junkers, and vice versa.

Stuff like that has never made sense to me at all, always seems like if an area starts getting active for some stupid reason things get changed out of nowhere to just kill off an area, never understood the junker ban in Gallia, i was in Congress at the time junkers got rephacked and it pretty much killed off any junker activity in Gallia to the point even the gallic junkers were removed. I do not understand many of the changes over the years to factions, systems and whatever. From an outside perspective of someone who no longer has anything to do with official factions (and NEVER will again) it just seems like over the years some of the crap is changed and drives more people away.

[TheSauron]

Hostility with Gallia comes from their terraforming of Harris. NAP with Bretonia was caused by both us and them wrongly expecting the siege of NL to happen between January and March this year. It was obviously a bad call in retrospect, but it was a logical course of action with the information we had back then.

The Guard also opposes Gallia to try and prevent them from colonizing Gaia. We would rather have Bretonia control the region, as we have a degree of influence over its government and people, not to mention how weakened their grip would be after the war.

No indie is bound by our diplomacy anyway. Want to shoot BAF with your Panther? Be my guest.

---

One MD Admiral

[Omicron]

It's just another testament to how terrible Gallic lore and writing is.

---

[Karst]

Time to put a Corsair ID on all my Gaian ships. I really don't understand how a player faction alone is allowed to make such a decision to gut 1/3 of the indie ID. Why wasn't just the GG- ID changed instead? That player faction can die in the next 2 months and never be heard from again while the damage they left behind is permanent, especially for someone else who comes and takes over Gaians (heck, even if someone wants to make a faction now he's heavily limited). Player factions shouldn't be allowed to make such extreme calls without the story team approving it because it goes in line with other changes.

As for Gaian roleplay, that has been terrible as well. Swapping from being neutral with Gallia and friendly/allied with Corsairs to shooting Gallia, losing the alliance with Corsairs and getting a NAP with Bretonia doesn't make sense to me, not just from an inRP perspective but also ooRP one. As far as I know Gaians were made Gallia's puppets because a) they realised they'd stop existing otherwise and had to, and b) it helps GRN not fight 10+ factions alone. Also what's the benefit of Corsairs to actually keeping Gaians around anymore? You stopped fighting all Corsairs' enemies, you're too small to be worth hauling Artifacts to, you're a huge risk in a war zone at the verge of an extinction - Corsairs have every reason to terminate all ties with Gaians at this point. At least with GRN's protection they could've made a triple pact seeing how Corsairs and GRN are moving forward in negotiations.

A NAP with Bretonia? For what? To be the 11th faction that shoots GRN and throw all previous roleplay into the ground? Let's not even talk about how Islay is still alive despite Gallics occupying and patrolling the system for years now. If I was on the GRN side when Gaians and GRN made their NAP deal, the first thing I'd ask is obviously bases that Gaians have in the war zones. Islay is first that'd (have to) be exposed, otherwise Gaians'd stop existing. To think all this time it's "hidden" inRP is ludicrous.

Edit: And that's without taking into consideration the fact that there was next to no roleplay done about all the abovementioned, it just sorta happened.

10/10 my thoughts exactly. I'm all for officials being able to influence the direction their faction takes, but a near-complete 180° turnaround with apparently almost no documentation should not happen. Any Gaian unofficial faction or indie that focuses primarily on assisting the Corsairs against Bretonia in the Omegas and Cambridge, which was a completely legitimate focus to have, is totally screwed.

But the most important part is this:

A player faction shouldn't be allowed to impact their indie ID so heavily through such 180 turns with ZoI and change of heart whenever they please to. Change your own ID, leave indies alone. It's why every official faction gets its own ID in the first place - to be able to separate from indie ID and make its own RP. I don't mind you doing what you did as GG-, but I do mind you putting that on all Gaians.

What possible reasoning is there for not simply applying these changes to the official ID only? It's bewildering to me that you would even want a ZOI reduction in the first place, but it's completely unfair to drag indies into this that may not agree.
When I requested that ALG's Kusari Civ tech cells be swapped for Gallic Civ, I specifically asked for the indie ID to be unchanged, in order not to screw over indie ALG that may have Kusari ships. That is what should have happened here.

I have absolutely no idea what Gaians are supposed to do now. Fight Gallia? Groan. I think BPA, BAF, BIS, LSF, LN, LPI, Council, Brigands, Maquis, Outcasts, Colonials, and probably half a dozen others that I'm forgetting is a far greater selection of Gallia-pewers than anyone needs, not to mention the Gaian's home base and friggin Planet Gaia itself is in an essentially uncontested Gallic-occupied system.

This development is completely unjustifiable and the Gaian ID is essentially useless now.

---

[Thyrzul]

It's just another testament to how terrible Gallic lore and writing is.

> announcement about changes to the Gaian ID
> debate about those changes
> "It's just another testament to how terrible Gallic lore and writing is."

Of course, everything is. King Charles himself is personally faulty at the insertion of buffer systems between Alpha and Gamma.



About Gallia vs Junkers: Gallic and Sirian Junkers were never all a single family, that part was retconned along with the bits about stealing gate and lane tech these relations were meant to support. Past that it only makes sense for Gallia to make a difference and ignore/outlaw Sirian Junkers in preference to their own. That said, I personally do remember at least Congress opposing Gallia openly way long before Trafalgar got demolished, JT passed leadership, or GJs ceased to be a thing. I don't remember too much of JM involvement in Gaul-Junker relations though, if they ever had any.

I know it's a bit of a derail, I didn't start it, but still continued so it's not an excuse, but I just wanted to make things clear before incorrect info makes its way and embeds itself into the minds of new players... or old...

---

[Lythrilux]

It was only really Congress that openly opposed Gallia. JM wouldn't actively pursue hostilities with them, at worst GRN would just shoo us away if they saw us in the Taus. Our policy was to not take sides in conflicts, just focus on what money can be made as cleanly as possible.

---