bhg core feedback (just kidding this is the old core| feedback lol!)

[Lythrilux]

If you want to make a point, Scumbag, back it up with substance and evidence instead of reducing yourself to petty insults. It does me no favors in improving upon issues with my faction, and it does you no favors other than making you look childish and getting you in hot water with the staff.

So unless you have a real point to make, I'm going to ignore you. Please don't post any further in my feedback thread thank you.

---

[SpaceTime]

Hello, I'd like to ask who were responsible for writing this revised history of the Core.

I did in cooperation with Core| HC, BHG| and assistance from Jammi to help iron out inconsistencies.

Well, as far as I know, the devs are the only authorized people to alter the history and background of a faction, not the faction leader.

Especially when that involves retconning key elements in order to turn a faction into the way that someone prefers it to be.

[Lythrilux]

Hello, I'd like to ask who were responsible for writing this revised history of the Core.

I did in cooperation with Core| HC, BHG| and assistance from Jammi to help iron out inconsistencies.

Well, as far as I know, the devs are the only authorized people to alter the history and background of a faction, not the faction leader.

Core| getting official was pretty much the authorization for me to take the faction in a new-ish direction. The devs approved the necessary infocard changes, such as scrubbing out 'BHG Core' from the infocards and putting 'The Core' in the infocards instead.

Especially when that involves retconning key elements in order to turn a faction into the way that someone prefers it to be.

And can you point out what those retconns are?

---

[SpaceTime]

These have already pointed out in much length by my predecessors in this thread, no need to get back there.

Core| getting official was pretty much the authorization for me to take the faction in a new-ish direction. The devs approved the necessary infocard changes, such as scrubbing out 'BHG Core' from the infocards and putting 'The Core' in the infocards instead.

Developing the faction into a new direction is not the same with changing its background and history. But I am the last person who would not appreciate the effort you have thrown into this, even if I think a more dev-oriented approach would have been better, imo.

[Lythrilux]

These have already pointed out in much length by my predecessors in this thread, not need to get back there.

If you are making a point please out line it fully. I try to address the points made by people earlier in this thread as much as possible and if I have not addressed all of them then you need to outline it as it can get lost in walls of text. From my PoV, I have not made any retconns. Core| is meant to be a continuation of it's predecessor - not wiping them out from their history (to do such would be madness, given the years and years of RP BHG Core had done already).

Developing the faction into a new direction is not the same with changing its background and history. But I am the last person who would not appreciate the effort you have thrown into this, even if I think a more dev-oriented approach would have been better, imo.

Thank you for the recognition. Learning from discussions with them, given how the Devs (aside from Yuri) knew worryingly little about Omicron politics and the Core as a whole, I don't think a dev-orientated approach would have been a good idea.

---

[Echo 7-7]

[2/07/2015 1:44:12 PM] Echo / Star 7: If a faction has its own NPCs, the foundational lore stops being player-controlled.
[2/07/2015 1:44:30 PM] Echo / Star 7: Player factions are welcome to their own interpretations of that foundation, to build upon it or tangentially from it, but the base can't change.
[2/07/2015 1:45:05 PM] Echo / Star 7: In this situation, the Core's base is extremely simplistic (let's be honest), as are many non-vanilla factions to a certain extent.
[2/07/2015 1:46:34 PM] Echo / Star 7: That foundation is essentially what I've said before: BHG Core started as an elite subdivision for super-dangerous missions, grew big enough to require separate command structure, and eventually broke away almost entirely from the BHG (bringing us to present day and dropping BHG from the name).
[2/07/2015 1:47:34 PM] Echo / Star 7: The name adjustment is much like the way a RL corporation might re-brand itself to appeal to a new market.

So, in essence, a player faction is welcome to write whatever they like in their own faction lore description, provided it doesn't violate the server rules or established Discovery canon. However, no one outside of that faction is bound to abide by that lore unless it is canonical. In most cases, official player faction lore is often accurate enough to be canonical, as it is a direct expansion of vanilla lore. In this case, however, there is no vanilla lore from which to draw references, resulting in a vast majority of the faction's lore being player-written. I'm sure that this particular freedom is what gives Lyth the opinion that he's free to adapt the Core's lore as he sees fit.

However, do not take that to be a defense of Core's current writeup - it still has many issues, mainly concerning the relationship between Core and APM. If it's going to be an entity that exists in-game (through infocard references), Core won't be allowed to control it; or if it's controlled by Core, it can't exist in-game (because we do not permit non-canonical references in infocards, and APM was player-created). The reason for that denial of control is because the Core player faction may not have absolute jurisdiction over the BHG tech line, as that would implicitly make BHG subservient to Core in terms of tech supply. Core are welcome to tag their own vessels as Core|APM as an internal subfaction, but that won't make it any more or less canonical. Either way, the writeup should not be focussing on APM so heavily - the faction the Admins approved was called "Core", not "APM", so it's Core who should be the main character in this story.

...

Developing the faction into a new direction is not the same with changing its background and history. But I am the last person who would not appreciate the effort you have thrown into this, even if I think a more dev-oriented approach would have been better, imo.

Thank you for the recognition. Learning from discussions with them, given how the Devs (aside from Yuri) knew worryingly little about Omicron politics and the Core as a whole, I don't think a dev-orientated approach would have been a good idea.

Had there been a proper dev-orientated approach in the first place, you wouldn't have had the awkward experience of having your infocard submission reverted. Not knowing your personal goals/ideas for Core| does not equate to knowing "worryingly little" about Omicronian politics or the Core.

[Lythrilux]

I'm sure that this particular freedom is what gives Lyth the opinion that he's free to adapt the Core's lore as he sees fit.

It's the players who lead factions and bring them back to life from being horribly dead. It's the players who, with their faction, create activity in their wake - specifically in a region of Sirius that has suffered neglect from the devs until recently. In that regard, it is why I am due credit for my factions lore, as I am the one who saved the faction. I know that sounds horribly egotistical, but there is truth in my words.

However, do not take that to be a defense of Core's current writeup - it still has many issues, mainly concerning the relationship between Core and APM. If it's going to be an entity that exists in-game (through infocard references), Core won't be allowed to control it; or if it's controlled by Core, it can't exist in-game (because we do not permit non-canonical references in infocards, and APM was player-created). The reason for that denial of control is because the Core player faction may not have absolute jurisdiction over the BHG tech line, as that would implicitly make BHG subservient to Core in terms of tech supply. Core are welcome to tag their own vessels as Core|APM as an internal subfaction, but that won't make it any more or less canonical. Either way, the writeup should not be focussing on APM so heavily - the faction the Admins approved was called "Core", not "APM", so it's Core who should be the main character in this story.

In terms of faction rights Core right now does control the shipline. Once there is a BHG official faction that will of course change. In terms of 'control' in regards to lore, there's a mutually beneficial relationship between APM and BHG: BHG advertise AP-Line ships throughout Sirius, garnering interest for their purchase.

Previously APM was controlled by BHG| HC and had an in game mention, why is that so problematic now?

In terms of the writeup itself it mostly explains the faction split. Core is the main character of the faction thread as a whole, the history writeup just mentions what needs to be mentioned. It's mentioned so heavily because it is an integral part of the factions previously lore, and thus I am not going to forget it as that would be a retconn.

If the admins concern is the 'main character' of the story, then how can concerns be raised at this point? With Core absorbing APM, Core is still at the forefront of the story - just a smaller aspect of it is being expanded upon because it has relevance.

Had there been a proper dev-orientated approach in the first place, you wouldn't have had the awkward experience of having your infocard submission reverted.

I feel I would've made far less progress than I have at this point if I tried that at the factions inception. The infocards being reverted is the result of ignorance of the factions lore (both BHG and BHG Core) which I have been desperately trying to remedy otherwise it is a crime against role play.

Not knowing your personal goals/ideas for Core| does not equate to knowing "worryingly little" about Omicronian politics or the Core.

There was a point a few months ago at which the storyline devs were clueless on Edge Worlds politics and the full history of BHG Core. I had to outline to you everything as you requested I give you answers. My personal interests for Core| were irrelevant as I firstly had to bring you up to speed so that you would know how to deal with Core|.

---

[Echo 7-7]

Previously APM was controlled by BHG| HC and had an in game mention, why is that so problematic now?

Because current APM is perceived as being distinctly different from the old APM. The description of APM as being a powerful corporation with many different interests is far cry from a small subfaction who simply focussed on building the AP line ships under exclusive contract.

If the admins concern is the 'main character' of the story, then how can concerns be raised at this point? With Core absorbing APM, Core is still at the forefront of the story - just a smaller aspect of it is being expanded upon because it has relevance.

Absorbing APM is ok, but totally changing APM's M.O. is not (the same point as I'm making above).

Had there been a proper dev-orientated approach in the first place, you wouldn't have had the awkward experience of having your infocard submission reverted.

I feel I would've made far less progress than I have at this point if I tried that at the factions inception. The infocards being reverted is the result of ignorance of the factions lore (both BHG and BHG Core) which I have been desperately trying to remedy otherwise it is a crime against role play.

I strongly suggest avoiding such emotionally charged words as "crime against roleplay"; that's a severe over-dramatisation. The reversion was not suggesting that APM cannot be the manufacturer of the AP ship line; simply that it was not a good representation of the tech-sharing relationship between Core and BHG to have them labelled that way.

Not knowing your personal goals/ideas for Core| does not equate to knowing "worryingly little" about Omicronian politics or the Core.

There was a point a few months ago at which the storyline devs were clueless on Edge Worlds politics and the full history of BHG Core. I had to outline to you everything as you requested I give you answers. My personal interests for Core| were irrelevant as I firstly had to bring you up to speed so that you would know how to deal with Core|.

"Clueless" is inaccurate. It can be advantageous for us to get up to speed on a less than familiar topic by having well-informed players offer us their perspective - which is what happened here.

---

Regardless of all the negative comments so far, there is still a lot of potential here. The writeup just needs to be tweaked so it has the appropriate new content (less powergamey mysteriously appearing councils/funds, less derisive "Core is better than BHG"), while reading like the old BHG Core writeup (ie. no forum riots).

[Lythrilux]

Because current APM is perceived as being distinctly different from the old APM. The description of APM as being a powerful corporation with many different interests is far cry from a small subfaction who simply focussed on building the AP line ships under exclusive contract.

Fair enough, I won't deny I evolved APM somewhat too. Although I kept it's original purposes intact. Technically beforehand they actually were somewhat powerful as they had the capability to supply ships to both BHG and Core. Although I didn't like the big reliance

Absorbing APM is ok, but totally changing APM's M.O. is not (the same point as I'm making above).

I would not say it's a total change, merely taking APM and expanding it's objectives somewhat in accordance to a bit of lore evolution that occurred with BHG Core.

I strongly suggest avoiding such emotionally charged words as "crime against roleplay"; that's a severe over-dramatisation. The reversion was not suggesting that APM cannot be the manufacturer of the AP ship line; simply that it was not a good representation of the tech-sharing relationship between Core and BHG to have them labelled that way.

There was no need for the reference of APM in the Alabama Shipyard infocard to be purged though.

Regardless of all the negative comments so far, there is still a lot of potential here. The writeup just needs to be tweaked so it has the appropriate new content (less powergamey mysteriously appearing councils/funds, less derisive "Core is better than BHG"), while reading like the old BHG Core writeup (ie. no forum riots).

Thank you for your compliment. I will say though that there is no powergaming, BHG Council has always been a thing and Core was always held in a higher regard than BHG was internally at least. Externally they were held in a slightly better regard than BHG, as their goals were somewhat more noble. However their reputation was dragged down a bit due to BHG ties.

I'll probably expand the synopsis slightly with more on the ideology and political aspects of Core. Though firstly I want to write that in a big history writeup, before taking the necessary parts of that and putting them on The Core information thread for people to access easily. Basically I'll keep the current direction/structure of my material (as pointed out there are possible 'holes' that may need to be addressed) and not revert the structure, but to instead just add to what's been written and keep it up to date. The last line of the history was written in a way that would incorporate a full history doc or a more fleshed out synopsis or just all RP Core does from that point.

this was written when i was super tired so it might sound weird e.e

---

[Lythrilux]

Forget the lore for now, I'm still tweaking that. I want to put feedback for that aside for now.

Do people have any more non lore-related feedback for Core|? (Try and keep it constructive please).

---