+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery General (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Discovery RP 24/7 General Discussions (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+--- Thread: How to make Discovery better? (/showthread.php?tid=31215)
How to make Discovery better? - barrenwzste - 12-19-2009
To All,
We were asked, as a community, to come up with ways to help curb the ooc violations and to
reward the official factions for thier efforts in developing the growth of the players and
the story itself.
*Official Faction Rewards....
First off, lets skip the credit making schemes. It is much to easy to make credits, for all
players, as it stands. A new player can make a million credits in Pennsylvania with the
work of about an hour to an hour and a half. An established character is making ten to
twenty million credits a run, often substantially more. If we make generating credits any
easier we might as well just have everybody start off by picking what ship they want thier
character to have at creation.
That really only leaves three or four things that I can see;
1) More toys. There are two ways to go about this. Either, develope new weapons and shields
that can only be used by official faction members, or, limit a few already developed weapons
and shields to official faction members.
2) More ships. This can be accomplished in the same two ways as the above.
3) More systems/stations. The only realistic way I can see to do this is to limit
independants. Not only is our Sirius Sector large enough, but designing systems and
stations for this matter seems like an exhorbant amount of work.
4) More power. This, of course, can only be achieved by limiting the Independants.
Regardless of what option we go with, the Independants are going to be limited in the fact
that they cannot have access to some things. If the admins and the community really intend
to reward the official factions they are just going to have to put up with the Independants
cries of distress. Keep in mind, if players aren't saying, "Dang, I'd join a faction for
that." It's not really a reward.
*Player based ways of dealing with ooc violations....
The problem I am having here is I cannot see any role-play way to deal with the real problem
players. The new players who err in ignorance are, generally speaking, easy enough to
correct and guide. It's the established players who don't care about the consequences
and/or deny wrongdoing that are the problem. If you cannot reason with them, you cannot
correct them with straight role play, you need to impose some kind of consequence. For
those, I postulate the following.
1) A council board where ooc violations that have been documented can be posted for a
council to sit in judgement on. Four members of the council should be players who were, at
one time, officers or leaders in an official faction, but are no longer. Three of the
members should be independants of known and proven abillity. The council would then sit in
judgement on each case, but only with a majority vote hand out punishment. The council
should be an uneven number, so as to aviod deadlocks. The object is to make descions and
take action, not continue the debates. The council should have more players who were
official faction members than independant members because they have done more to prove thier
abiliity and regard for the role play community. The council of seven should be picked by
the admins, as elections to often turn into popularity contests rather than devices for
electing the person best suited to the position of authority. The players on the council
should use characters as thier persona as thier decisions will be rendered in game and acted
upon in game. Those decisions can include the following:
*First offense: Player is ordered to make restitution to the council. A fine of 10
million is adequate, I believe. If the violator does not have ten million, then he/she
should be required to raise the credits before he/she is allowed to do anything else.
*Second Offense: Player is ordered to sell thier ship and play for a period of time in the
basic fighter or freighter for thier faction. This is to aproximate being reduced in
rank to that of a peon. After the period of time has passed, the violator could once
again purchase thier preferred ship. If at all possible some kind of timer should be
used to ensure the violating player spends that time ingame.
*Third offense: An open bounty of one million is placed on the Character. Any player
that encounters the character may engage on the grounds of council sanction, the player
still has to role play the encounter, and kill the character. Then all they have to do
present proof of the kill to receive thier million. This million is to be taken from the
funds generated by first offenders. The bounty is to last for a period of no less than
five days.
*Fourth offense: The player's record of violations is sent to the Administration for them
to deal with. A post explaining the situation and telling the community to ignore or
shun the offending character should be made at the same time.
2) Expand the official facions own system of checks and balances to cover independants. For
those in such factions as the mercenaries, the official player faction most closely related
to them should have authority. The official factions authority should only extend beyond
thier current authority in matters of ooc violation. For example: the Junker flying the
restricted ship is ordered sell it and purchase one that isn't restricted if he cannot
furnish proof of special role play accepted by the Admins. See above punishments for
suggested actions to take if the character refuses to sell the ship.
3) Each time an Administrator has to reprimand a player for ooc violations, restrict one
class of ships to that players characters, starting with battleships and working down. That
player can only gain these back by proven role play and a record free of violations over a
period of time.
How to make Discovery better? - Alex. - 12-19-2009
In my opinion, official factions should only have the power over independents they have at the moment, no more.
And a bounty placed by something that is OORP? Metagaming.
How to make Discovery better? - barrenwzste - 12-20-2009
Alex,
The problem is, the independants are refusing to follow the rules that relate to that power, as well as to follow the rules of thier faction id's. Many refuse to even aknowledge the fact that there are rules pertaining to these things.
Yes, metagaming. But only in the fact that it transcends the current ruleset. But that is the idea. The current ruleset is not working, or we wouldn't be having this problem. We were asked what we could do to help the situation, this is a solution. Harsher than some would want, but I have a feeling that those most opposed to it are going to be the ones most impacted by it. If that is the case, well, if they would stop breaking the rules they wouldn't be in trouble.
How to make Discovery better? - Shryke - 12-20-2009
Ok, one final attempt at a basic English lesson.
Faction definition from Webster:
Quote:1 : a party or group (as within a government) that is often contentious or self-seeking : clique
2 : party spirit especially when marked by dissension
Now, you claim this doesn't denote organization or leadership. You're right. Reading it plainly like that doesn't imply leadership. But (yes, there is a but as language isn't as simple as mathematics) you clearly don't understand the definition of the word party. It isn't just a good time, you know.
Party definition from Webster:
Quote:1 : a person or group taking one side of a question, dispute, or contest
2 : a group of persons organized for the purpose of directing the policies of a government
3 : a person or group participating in an action or affair <a mountain-climbing party> <a party to the transaction>
4 : a particular individual : person <an old party approaching 80>
5 : a detail of soldiers
6 : a social gathering; also : the entertainment provided for it
The first two definitions pertain the most when it comes to the word faction. So tell me, do you see the implication of organization and structure (without leadership, those two concepts cannot exist)?
One final definition for you, Context from Webster:
Quote:1 : the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning
2 : the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs : environment, setting <the historical context of the war>
As you can see, calling a Freelancer part of the Freelancer faction is not only an oxymoron, but contextually false in Discovery. Freelancers are specifically not part of any faction hence the term freelancer. This also applies to any of the non-factional IDs. In the context of Discovery, a group like the Rogues are a faction. Your average generic pirate trying to make a buck isn't part of some mystical generic pirate faction. It's conceptually and contextually false.
That concludes this English lesson. Back on topic.
Strom, you seem to have this seething hatred for independents in this game. Quite frankly, I couldn't care less why. But a lot of people have independent characters. A lot of people in official factions also have independent characters. You constantly decrying independents as the root of all evil makes you look like a bloody idiot. You would do anything to curb them, to make them weaker, to give official factions vast powers over them.
The fact of the matter is this: it isn't the independent's fault that they don't want to join official factions. It's as simple as that. You cannot blame anyone but official factions themselves. From restrictions, to absurd joining processes, to absurd applications (what is this, a job?). When I first joined this game I applied to join the LSF. Had a write up and everything, made the proper post of the forum and guess what? I never got a reply. Nothing except an acknowledgement that they received the application, but no answer. Most likely, it was lost in the system. They made a mistake, most likely, and I accepted it and moved on. I didn't call for their destruction because they made a mistake, did I (lets see if you understand the context)?
Official factions aren't infallible. There is no evidence to suggest that giving more power to them, potentially metagaming powers in terms of dealing with OOC or rule-breaking behaviour, (as all independents seem to have, according to your twisted view of reality) will result in impartiality. Players will always have bias. Always. It's a natural human emotion. I realize many admins have characters, but I'm fairly sure they place their adminship ahead of their character and faction. Something that regular Joe in official faction XYZ will not, ever do, because there is nothing for them except their faction and character. Do you understand the reason now why police officers deal with the law, and vigilantism is as much a crime as assault or murder? Lynch mobs became out of fashion centuries ago.
Just to re-iterate for you: stop calling all independents as rule breaking idiots. It only makes you look like one.
How to make Discovery better? - n00bl3t - 12-20-2009
' Wrote:Nooblet,
I cannot believe that, you too, will sit there and deny the facts. Let me give the definition again, and break it down to show how it all works together.
Faction:
Main Entry: faction
Pronunciation: \ˈfak-shən\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French & Latin; Middle French, from Latin faction-, factio act of making, faction more at fashion
Date: 1509
1 : a party or group (as within a government) that is often contentious or self-seeking : clique
2 : party spirit especially when marked by dissension
factional \-shnəl, -shə-nəl\ adjective
factionalism \-shnə-ˌli-zəm, -shə-nə-ˌliz-\ noun
factionally \-ē\ adverb
Nowhere there does it express the need of leadership. The only requirements being a group of people within another larger grouping that have a dissenting or differing view, often self serving. Groups of anarchists are still groups whether they have a leader or not. You can keep your civilian ID past 40, now, but all that means is that beyond level thirty you become a faction, rather than a game device.
Now here is the chart showing how this relates:
Sirius = Encompassing Social Entity
Liberty = One large Political Faction within the Social Entity
Liberty Navy = A large Political Faction within Liberty
LSF = A small faction within the Liberty Navy.
I think a good portion of the problem is that players think that being an Independant equates to being an individual with no ties and no set role play. This just isn't true. You can be an individual in even the most tightly controlled faction. Individuality is expressed by choices and attitudes expressed within the society the individual is part of. For example, junkers, for the most part, do not like big corporations. There are several ways to play that, you dislike all associated with the big companies, you only dislike the companies the people are just doing a job, you only dislike the heads of the companies the poor working stiffs are in the same boat as you. The list goes on. And this is just one choice that can be made, within the framework of the faction, that expresses your individuality. That said, you have to remain within the framework of your chosen faction. Independants do not get to ignore the limits and regulations of thier faction ID in preference for thier own limits and regulations. You have to mount an ID, you have to follow the rules of that ID.
I didn't say get rid of rules, I said make them stricter. In particular, make Right 2 of official factions have more sting so it can actually do what it was designed to do. Nor did I say I wanted to get rid of Administrative controls. I believe that ooc violations should be handled by the official factions, yes, but the rest of the infractions should remain in the hands of the Admins. This will lighten the load on the admins and put the power and responsibillity of dealing with bad role play where it should be, in the hands of the players. What would be the basis of what is good role play, your faction ID of course. If your role play falls within the scope of your ID, you are fine, if it does not, you are in violation. Simple and, with screenshots being required, very hard to abuse.
We very definately do not make up Cannon as we go. Cannon has to be tried, judged, and accepted by the community as a whole. What this means is that, no matter how brilliant your role play is, if it isn't part of the written and accepted storyline, it isn't cannon. For example, you could develop a story line to role play where the nomads are paying for kidnapped scientists from the houses because they are engaging in research they don't want thier allies to know about. As a result your character, being the upstanding and community oriented pilot that he is, decides to stop all the traitors transporting scientists to the nomads. With this firmly in mind, you proceed to force traders to dump loads of scientists or you kill them, role playing it brilliantly. However, what you are doing isn't cannon. You are forcing your own made up role play on others. Role play that is in clear violation of rules and regulations. It doesn't matter that you put a lot of time and effort into it. It doesn't matter that you role played it to the hilt. What matters is that what you did negatively impacted the game for others and violated the rules. Being an Independant does not give you the right to change the role simply because you do not like, or do not want, the various limits and regulations attached to it. It simply means you do not have to follow the even stricter limits and regulations placed on you by the official factions.
I already pointed out the reasons why it is difficult to deal with the majority of ooc violations. The fact that it is so widespread proves my point. If it were easily handled, we wouldn't be having the problem we now face. There will always be a handful of violators, of course. But it is so rampant now that we are loosing good, role play oriented, players over it.
By all means handle the ooc violators in-game and while role playing. That is exactly what the admins were asking. The problem is, the devices that the players have for dealing with the problem do not work. The problem characters are not the new players who, in ignorance, committ ooc violations. The problem is the players who know very well what they are doing is a violation, and do not care. Some of those claim they are Independants and can play thier role how they want. Some are simply trying to get around faction limits to make more credits or find more action. It doesn't matter, they are intentionally violating, and most continue to do so even when bounties are placed on them. A good start would be if you changed the bounty so that with a screenshot of the violation anybody can collect the bounty, but untill then, bounties just don't have the sting they need. It's to easy to aviod the bounty hunters and getting killed a couple more times a day just isn't much of a deterrent. If one of the strongest measures you can take against violators is that ineffective, then there is something wrong with the system. The punishment has to be severe enough that when players contemplate violating, they discard the idea as not worth the consequences.
What? You mean as a civilian I act as part of a faction? Is that not OoRP if I act as part of a faction?
If you can be so individualistic in factions, why are people independents in the first place? (Also, if it just OoRP players, why are there good independents?)
Sure, mount the ID, follow the rules and parameters of the ID. If you do not, you get sanctioned by the Administrators. Problems? (Also, the LSF does not come under the LN.)
No. Faction Right 2 becoming stronger only allows factions more power to dictate independent role-play, a power which they do not need. Independents are independents so they make their own role-play, not kowtow to a faction. Giving them power over independents defeats the point of being independent. To clarify that, this is Discovery, not Freeworlds.
The system currently is like this. If someone abuses the system, and someone reports it with sufficient evidence, they are sanctioned. Why open up the power to more people when the Administrators have handled and are continuing to do so?
So widespread? Rampant? Right. The only reason it could be rampant is because either faction leaders are not active and online so they cannot use the current power of right 2, which would be solely their fault, or that they are too lackadaisical to ask for a reputation change or ship removal, and provide sufficient evidence.
Actually, what the Administrators asked for was what would make factions more enticing to join. Not how to trample the independents. Faction role-play and attractiveness does not depend upon independent domination.
' Wrote:Alex,
The problem is, the independants are refusing to follow the rules that relate to that power, as well as to follow the rules of thier faction id's. Many refuse to even aknowledge the fact that there are rules pertaining to these things.
If they are not following the rules, you can report them and the Administration will sanction them.
All of which can be done without giving more power to the factions.
How to make Discovery better? - Alex. - 12-20-2009
' Wrote:Alex,
The problem is, the independants are refusing to follow the rules that relate to that power, as well as to follow the rules of thier faction id's. Many refuse to even aknowledge the fact that there are rules pertaining to these things.
Yes, metagaming. But only in the fact that it transcends the current ruleset. But that is the idea. The current ruleset is not working, or we wouldn't be having this problem. We were asked what we could do to help the situation, this is a solution. Harsher than some would want, but I have a feeling that those most opposed to it are going to be the ones most impacted by it. If that is the case, well, if they would stop breaking the rules they wouldn't be in trouble.
Not all though.
Most of my chars are independants. Am I refusing to follow the rules? No.
Have I ever got one of my characters sanctioned? No. I got a warning. Once. I was a n00b then.
This is probably true for a few people, not just me.
EDIT: Nooblet, Storm makes me look like your sig now. :S
How to make Discovery better? - n00bl3t - 12-20-2009
' Wrote:This is probably true for a few people, not just me.
*Nods.*
I have never been sanctioned for in-game actions.
How to make Discovery better? - Alex. - 12-20-2009
It's mainly the OORPers and general people that don't read the rules that are giving independents a bad name.
What about harsher sanctions for obvious lolwuts and some way of cutting down stuff needed for sanction reports?
How to make Discovery better? - born2kill - 12-20-2009
I too mostly play independent chars and follow the rules and as a result have not been sanctioned. Though that might have something to do with me being here for only a fortnight. Unfortunately there is a lot of characters not in factions and as a result of that have properly been introduced to the rules and don't go on the forums. There is no way to force people to go onto the forums to read the rules besides asking them politely and/or giving them a sanction for breaking a rule, thus introducing them to the forum as they probably want to get un-sanctioned.
How to make Discovery better? - Exsiled_one - 12-20-2009
How about a bank that generates intrest rates for official factions?