Techmix-nerf and factions which are unique in RELYING on techmixing

[Denelo]

First of all, I would like to offer my congratulations to whoever came up with this. You've managed to come up with an idea so stupid that it's made me break my vacation rule. That's an incredible achievement.

Before I even start, let's go ahead and handle this. What is up with this whole anti-"special people" movement? I mean, we're roleplaying. We're the PCs. The whole point is that we can do the cool stuff in the world, because it would be dreadfully boring if we all ran around playing perfectly normal people. I mean, I don't know about you, but I really don't want to play a character who flies from Manhattan to Trenton every morning in a starflea, spends all day doing office work, then flies back that night. I mean, dude, you better be glad we're all playing special people. If you really feel that way, rather than complain about other people, stop playing special characters yourself - play the 9-to-5 guy I just talked about above. See how long you enjoy playing this game.

Now, to the people saying it's PvPers complaining: Duh. Let's put this in perspective for just a moment. I've been around long enough to remember when PvP was shut off server-wide for a week. Few of you have as well. It led to incredibly stupid situations. Liberty Navy or LPI would come across a Rogue transport sitting above Manhattan, and they'd both say hi, sort of threaten each other awkwardly, and then the lawfuls would eventually just leave and let the Rogue run around NY smuggling at will. Point is, pewpew is inherently part of roleplay. Can't take that out. Problem here is that that you people've decided somehow that anything you deem "abnormal" is PvP abuse, out of roleplay, and somehow deserves to be treated differently in-roleplay because of your ideas about what roleplay is and isn't (and for the record, if you actually roleplayed, you'd realize you're wrong).

Roleplay is about make-believe and storytelling, but willing suspension of disbelief only goes so far. We resolve conflicts in-roleplay with a PvP system. Somewhere, someone has decided they need to change that system and force their beliefs about roleplay on the rest of us. So what is roleplay? Typically, the idea that leads to this kind of response is "roleplay is about characters and talking". The best lies are the ones that have as much truth in them as possible, and that goes for this as well. Characters and talking are part of roleplay, for certain - and those of us who really enjoy roleplaying tend to stretch roleplay a bit to show off our characters. We like to show off our characters like works of art, which of course they are. But you can only stretch things so far. If, in painting Mona Lisa, da Vinci was so eager to show off his art that he fundamentally changed the appearance of the woman, to, say, Cthulhu, he wouldn't be being true to the subject, and it would be something entirely different. Same goes for roleplaying. A character is a dynamic work of art simulating a person in order to tell a story. If you are false to the work in order to show it off, can you even call it the same thing? Real people have emotions, and are on occasion violent. This goes far more for, say, revolutionaries, terrorists, and the like. If a group of pirates off of Somalia attack a cargo ship, they aren't going to stop for a tea and a chat with the captain on how they felt about it. On 9/11, the hijackers didn't have a conversation on motives with Air Traffic Control before they crashed the planes into the WTC. Real people don't stop to talk about things once they've decided to do them. While there are exceptions, of course, most real criminals will engage in acts of crime once they're committed. Those that don't aren't criminals for very long. People are violent. People use force. To pretend otherwise would be a gross violation of character.

Why, then should you punish people who choose to roleplay accurately and be true to their art for doing so? Perhaps you aren't as good at them, and are envious? Guess what? I'm a pretty awful PvPer myself. Perhaps you see their stuff as status symbols? So what? Are you the all-knowing definition of roleplay, to strike down judgment on art as you see fit? Perhaps you should let the art be judged as all art is - by popularity. I don't get to burn all so-called "modern art" just because I don't like it. Other people do. Let them be. Perhaps, then, you think only "popular people" get equipment? Why is that a bad thing? Am I to trust anyone who comes around begging for stuff? If they have good roleplay, sure, but I'm much more likely to help them if they're known and have a reputation to preserve, and thus are more likely to use the stuff in-roleplay.

Now, let's get to why in-game equipment is important to roleplay. Let me spell this out very slowly for you. Roleplay is not a forum thing. I do as little forum roleplay as I can. Forum roleplay is an entirely different format; it's telling, rather than showing. In essence, it's not roleplay. Roleplay is telling a story by showing. Is it important? Yes, but it is not roleplay. Roleplay is in-game; it's the act of playing our characters, of showing people our art. But what happens in-game affects our characters as well. A character who doesn't react to the world around it isn't a character at all; they're a Mary Sue at best.

But what we fly affects the world, and how it works affects the world. Why would my ship be less powerful because I own it, rather than someone else? I mean, since when are two of the same ship necessarily the same? I hate to use an HF example, because people will pounce on it and claim I'm just standing up for my own faction (I'm not, for the record; I'll explain the reasoning behind this post when it fails to do anything, which it will), but I know HF's lore, unlike that of many other factions. The Ven'Gyr is not a Ranseur in the same way as Outcast Ranseurs; it's been drastically modified to be less difficult for HF to repair over the years. For example, its armor plating is based on Legion Iridium-based plating. Its engines burn enriched MOX, same as the rest of the Legion's ships, because we can produce that and transport and store it more cheaply than "normal" MOX. It uses Legion guns because we make those guns, and can keep them in working order. A lot of its insides have had Legion technology incorporated to replace Outcast tech wherever we could. It's less of a Ranseur now and more of a hybrid specifically designed to be maintained by the Legion while retaining its effectiveness. Realistically, it should look nothing like the modern Outcast Ranseur, but due to mechanical limitations, it's still a Ranseur in-game. We use it because it's a ship we already have, and has a certain morale effect; we don't have to build a whole new ship, and its frequent victories encouraged the troops to press on when it shows up. If the Ven'Gyr suddenly becomes ineffective, that entire lore will be suddenly changed for no apparent reason. The Legion will have no reason to have used the Ven'Gyr for the last ten years, yet we have obviously been using it the whole time - apparently, due to this change, for no reason. How can one roleplay when the premise of one's roleplay is retroactively removed? This entire change is based on entire out of roleplay reasons, and will drastically affect roleplay in a negative way.

Not only that, but it will also affect future roleplay. Under even the current rules, the Ven'Gyr could never have existed. Honestly, the Legion could never have started - if the assumption is "everything is exactly what is appears to be based on in-game mechanics", there is no room for development of ideas, no room for original roleplay, and no room for creative art. Instead, we are stifled in our art and straitjacketed into prefitted roles. Yes, there's some slight variation for characters, but we can't even play out our character's motivations. Let's say you're playing a freelancer who works because they truly think the causes they're working for are right, or the ones they are working against are evil. Would they not attack the people they believe are evil, even if they aren't getting paid for it in that particular area? Yet by the rules, they can't. Rules do exactly the opposite of their intent - when supposedly designed to encouraged roleplay, they stifle it. You cannot force thought - and thus cannot force art. Force only destroys thought and art, and in fact does so invariably.

On that note, why do we even accept this whole idea of a tech chart to begin with? The idea that a few players can force other players to fundamentally change their roleplay on a whim? That's looter values, which is to say, evil. Does it harm people badly? No, because it's just a game. Still, the very concept behind it - the illegitimate use of force - is the core of evil. Evil makes a claim on a zero - and continually brings other things to a zero. It's a void and a vacuum, and suffocates others when it pulls them in through their virtues - their choice to live, their freedom, and, in this case, their art. The only reason this affects any of us is because of our dedication to our art. I play my characters because they are fun. I have not made a new character on Discovery in some time, because I do not want that art to tie me to Discovery. Still, I have invested a lot in my art on Discovery. Yoko and her storyline, the lore of the Hellfire Legion (which, by the way, is more extensive than any of you know; we don't publish much of it specifically because it's things the High Command only would know)... they're my works of art. I can't uproot them and move them to another universe; they are so inherently tied to Discovery lore that to do so would destroy them, like a careless stroke of paint across a masterpiece. I am thus faced with a choice: keep this art as my virtue, and consent to this use of force against me, or abandon my virtue to the zero to escape it myself?