In the recent months, the Junker Marauders proved to be a threat to Kusari security, and forced the KNF to be ever more watchful... just like they advertised.
I think the JM have been providing a good dose of activity to the Taus, and spicing a little the slumbering Kyushu system in the process too.
Though I've had few in-game encounters with JM|-, they seem to be a good faction.
(03-02-2014, 09:55 PM)Junker Marauders Wrote:
the Congress, who are official, who are the 'lawful' side of that coin.
If the Congress are going to be the more lawful-ish orientated Junkers, with a few pinches of smuggling in-between; the Junker Marauders would be the more unlawful-ish orientated Junkers, with a few pinches of lawfulness, but only for appearance, which is traditional with Junkers.
the more lawful-orientated pursuit of the Congress.
We want to make Junkers more diverse. We want to add diversity to the Junker roleplay. We want to prove that we're a competent faction that is ready to fill the boots of that role. We attempt to maintain a high standard of roleplay in our piracy encounters, trying to stand up as a rolemodel for a pirate faction.
You're diversifying the Junkers, and following the traditional vanilla Junker roleplay. This is great, however from my experiences you're not really on the different side of the quasilawful "coin" (which I know well, given my experience from UC). The Congress, though they don't pirate, do in fact smuggle quite often. How they manage to get away with it is another story altogether, but I digress - this is the Marauder thread after all.
Though a well roleplayed, truly quasilawful Junker faction would be awesome, the Mauraders will be fun to encounter and I look forward to seeing you folks.
Oh, before I forget. If you're going to include Gallia in your ZoI, you ought to be aware of some things. The Gallic Royal Navy, Gallic Royal Police, and Maquis will shoot you, so they should probably be listed as Hostile. Unione Corse and Council are a definite Unfriendly, with leanings toward hostility, depending on how you interact with them. Gallic Brigands could be either neutral or unfriendly given their other diplomatic ties, but sadly there's not really many players for them.
"You see what your knowledge tells you you're seeing. ... how, what you think the universe is, and how you react to that in everything you do, depends on what you know. And when that knowledge changes, for you, the universe changes. And that is as true for the whole of society as that is for the individual. We all are what we know, today. What we knew yesterday, was different; and so were we."
- James Burke, The Day the Universe Changed (1985)
(03-03-2014, 12:37 AM)Teerin Wrote: Though I've had few in-game encounters with JM|-, they seem to be a good faction.
(03-02-2014, 09:55 PM)Junker Marauders Wrote:
the Congress, who are official, who are the 'lawful' side of that coin.
If the Congress are going to be the more lawful-ish orientated Junkers, with a few pinches of smuggling in-between; the Junker Marauders would be the more unlawful-ish orientated Junkers, with a few pinches of lawfulness, but only for appearance, which is traditional with Junkers.
the more lawful-orientated pursuit of the Congress.
We want to make Junkers more diverse. We want to add diversity to the Junker roleplay. We want to prove that we're a competent faction that is ready to fill the boots of that role. We attempt to maintain a high standard of roleplay in our piracy encounters, trying to stand up as a rolemodel for a pirate faction.
You're diversifying the Junkers, and following the traditional vanilla Junker roleplay. This is great, however from my experiences you're not really on the different side of the quasilawful "coin" (which I know well, given my experience from UC). The Congress, though they don't pirate, do in fact smuggle quite often. How they manage to get away with it is another story altogether, but I digress - this is the Marauder thread after all.
Though a well roleplayed, truly quasilawful Junker faction would be awesome, the Mauraders will be fun to encounter and I look forward to seeing you folks.
Oh, before I forget. If you're going to include Gallia in your ZoI, you ought to be aware of some things. The Gallic Royal Navy, Gallic Royal Police, and Maquis will shoot you, so they should probably be listed as Hostile. Unione Corse and Council are a definite Unfriendly, with leanings toward hostility, depending on how you interact with them. Gallic Brigands could be either neutral or unfriendly given their other diplomatic ties, but sadly there's not really many players for them.
Aye, I will update with the relevant Gallic factions. It is indeed a shame there's no Brigands around, as we did want to try something with them. Alas, that may never come to fruition.
So - I've been reticent to bring it up - I've tried to RP getting an answer for it, but as no one seems to want to answer, I will ask it here:
How does a faction that pirates, kills, and 'rats out' other Junkers to Lawfuls get to be official?
I was under the impression that this was a violation of ID rules.
Yes, I have screenshots, more than one of them, but I'd prefer to avoid trial by forum and instead ask for a straight answer to a straight question.
I didn't come at you crabbed, trying for a 'gotcha' moment - so please don't be deflective or play like you have no idea what I'm talking about.
I have genuine concerns about a Junker faction that could defy Junker lore that 'Junkers watch out for their own' and is willing to violate ID rules while they're at it, and thier ability to 'represent' all Junkers with officialdom.
Now, don't mistake this as an attack, frankly I like that you are acting - for the most part - more like 'canon' Junkers than Congress does, but an official faction needs to be the pinnacle of faction representation, and not a half-measure to be discarded when one or another pilots feels like it.
(03-04-2014, 01:56 AM)Papa Oomaumau Wrote: So - I've been reticent to bring it up - I've tried to RP getting an answer for it, but as no one seems to want to answer, I will ask it here:
How does a faction that pirates, kills, and 'rats out' other Junkers to Lawfuls get to be official?
I was under the impression that this was a violation of ID rules.
Yes, I have screenshots, more than one of them, but I'd prefer to avoid trial by forum and instead ask for a straight answer to a straight question.
I didn't come at you crabbed, trying for a 'gotcha' moment - so please don't be deflective or play like you have no idea what I'm talking about.
I have genuine concerns about a Junker faction that could defy Junker lore that 'Junkers watch out for their own' and is willing to violate ID rules while they're at it, and thier ability to 'represent' all Junkers with officialdom.
Now, don't mistake this as an attack, frankly I like that you are acting - for the most part - more like 'canon' Junkers than Congress does, but an official faction needs to be the pinnacle of faction representation, and not a half-measure to be discarded when one or another pilots feels like it.
OK, first and foremost: JM do not, nor would go out of their way to pirate/harm another Junker. Our attitudes to other Junkers always comes with justified RP reasoning. For example, one situation we had was when one of us tried to pirate a miner, this miner ran from us and docked on a Junker liner. As if it wasn't bad enough that this Junker was making refuge for one of our targets, he then shouts to the local law enforcement, namely the GMG|, that we are pirating within the system.
It basically works on the basis that if a Junker does something that will impact the Marauders operations, the Marauders will deal with that Junker as required.
In conclusion, we don't kill/pirate all Junkers. Only the ones who do something that is deemed harmful to us: snitching, passively assisting our targets etc.
However, I feel I may have not made this clear on our statement, therefore expect an edit within 24 hours.
But it begs the question - does not a 'friend of a Junker' cease being your 'target'?
Shouldn't it?
Also, I do have screens of your pilot(s) demanding 25m from an indie Junker.
There's no excuse for this that will fly - just be on notice that people are watching.
Again - I don't think that there is anything wrong with this behavior - I mean unless it becomes a sanction report, in which case it kind of is - but more importantly, I would suggest that rather than explaining yourselves, that a strict directive to follow more closely the Junker lore that 'Junkers take care of their own' be more tied into your command structure, if you really want to become official.
Official factions have great responsibility charged to them, this is to pay for great benefits.
That responsibility is to be the very best example of your faction, despite what might seem like a great excuse, and in fact in the face of such, in order to hold yourselves in the high regard that an 'official representative' faction needs to.
So thanks for the straight answer - but I might suggest a behavioral modification is in order as well - perhaps in the form of strict rules against turning against your own factional players.
Yet you'll go around and disrupt other Junker operations for the sake of yourselves, this miner you talk of was working for Junkers, he docked on a Junker liner, doesn't that tell you he was working for that Junker, the miner was under the protection of that Junker and had every right to seek refuge from their master.
(03-04-2014, 02:32 AM)Junker Marauders Wrote: It basically works on the basis that if a Junker does something that will impact the Marauders operations, the Marauders will deal with that Junker as required.
This statement above here^^ doesn't that go for all Junkers then, or just the JM? it seems a bit selfish doesn't it,
one law you yet another law for them?
In conclusion you're stating you don't stand for other Junkers and their interests.
I'd support you lads all the way, i love what you's do but everywhere i look, it seems you've passively got it in for other Junkers/Congress included & that's the only thing that keeps your clan from perfection.
Ease off & stop having digs to up yourself, you'll get there without any discontent.
While I do share some of the concerns noted in the two posts above, I do not want to argue any details surrounding these allegations, rather I would like to ask a specific question which pertains to the RP between Marauder and Junker.
Seeing as this--> "It basically works on the basis that if a Junker does something that will impact the Marauders operations, the Marauders will deal with that Junker as required." is the position Marauders take on other Junkers, this of course will (and has) lead to in-RP hostilities between Marauders and Junker ID'ed ships. So I am curious about this specifically.. are ships flying the JM flag (/is the Marauder faction as a whole) comfortable with being openly engaged (with RP of course) by Junker ID'ed ships?
I ask this because as a result of the JM's policies regarding targeting independent Junkers, there will be Junkers who move from self-defence or avoidance to the active engagement of Marauder vessels. Furthermore because of the nature of the "discretionary targeting" against a large group that bases itself in anonymity, it is likely that some of the Junkers that engage Marauders might not be easily recognized or even previous targets.
Simply put, if there is to be large-scale in-fighting by ships carrying the same ID, my concerns lie with being absolutely certain that both parties can actively attack one another.. and not have one group attacking another within their RP lore while independents restrained by the ID cannot retaliate with aggressive action. Everyone hates to see the realization of enjoyable RP include sanction notifications, so we're eager to clear up the ID-related questions.
Thank ya for your feedback
-
[5:57:11 PM] InfernalTater (Lewis) [Formerly TLI-Inferno]:meanwhile, Aces 'I don't always miss my destinations, but when I do, I'm on the other side of house space.'
![[+]](/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
SIGNATURE![[Image: 5tZIDB3.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/5tZIDB3.jpg)
![[Image: SThmQGa.png]](http://i.imgur.com/SThmQGa.png)
![[Image: 45PXH3X.png]](http://i.imgur.com/45PXH3X.png)
