Quote:It's not about recruitment. It's about representation of RP through activity.
How does activity have anything to do with representation of RP?
For example: John plays Admiral Dale, head of the Liberty Navy. Just because John the player can't get online, shouldn't mean Admiral Dale's authority is any less existant.
Next you'll be suggesting that we all buy food commodities and oxygen to keep our characters alive.
' Wrote:How does activity have anything to do with representation of RP?
For example: John plays Admiral Dale, head of the Liberty Navy. Just because John the player can't get online, doesn't mean Admiral Dale's authority is any less existant.
Not if Admiral Dale is a paper pusher. If his authority stems from his combat prowess, then he better damn well rack up the kills.
' Wrote:Not if Admiral Dale is a paper pusher. If his authority stems from his combat prowess, then he better damn well rack up the kills.
Faction leaders are often both - ooRP, there is plenty of paperwork. In-game, some faction leaders are PvP aces.
I find your logic inherently flawed. You are saying that the player needs to be active to keep the character alive. The game world should be considered persistent unless changed; that is, if the player does nothing on a particular day, when the player returns to the character next, nothing has changed. For example, Admiral Dale shouldn't be demoted since he's deserted his post - it is the player who is away from the game, not the characters.
' Wrote:Not if Admiral Dale is a paper pusher. If his authority stems from his combat prowess, then he better damn well rack up the kills.
You've never been the leader of a player faction that represents an NPC faction. Therefore you don't know what it takes.
Want to know an interesting fact? I have less play time than most of the regular OSI members. Want to know why? I have to deal with tech requests, ongoing role play on the forums, update a spread sheet to ensure that our faction role play is monitored, talk with other OSI leaders about future goals, plans, events, talk with other faction leaders about the same, deal with faction feedback if there is any, deal with recruitment.
Being a faction leader means you give up some of your in game time so that those people who join your faction can have fun being members of your faction. No, I don't deal with all of that myself all of the time; Stygian and I have spread the work load to those we trust and those who were willing. RL still makes it so some times one or two of us bear the weight. They do it for me when I am gone, I do it for them when they are gone. So we all have a faction to return come back and log in with and have fun.
Activity standards are fine as is. It is the fact that, that is the only standard enforced upon official factions. If you got 30 hours you are golden. What about the role play said faction is providing? Is any of that monitored? Yes, doing so will mean more work for the admins and such but increase activity isn't going to fix any issues with the quality of role play.
' Wrote:Faction leaders are often both - ooRP, there is plenty of paperwork. In-game, some faction leaders are PvP aces.
I find your logic inherently flawed. You are saying that the player needs to be active to keep the character alive. The game world should be considered persistent unless changed; that is, if the player does nothing on a particular day, when the player returns to the character next, nothing has changed. For example, Admiral Dale shouldn't be demoted since he's deserted his post - it is the player who is away from the game, not the characters.
If Admiral Dale draws his authority from his combat prowess commanding a battlecruiser, then he should fly the battlecruiser regularly and make kills regularly. If Admiral Dale is a paper pusher, he should process forum requests and communications regularly. If Admiral Dale vanishes for a week because of OORP reasons, RP reasons should be created to back this up. Admiral Dale might go on vacation. Admiral Dale might be asked to take a month of leave with pay because of a diplomatic crisis, i.e. his wife is leaving him OORP due to Athenian's gardener. OORP should never be used as an excuse to sacrifice RP. RP can be molded to accommodate OORP practicalities.
Yes, a player needs to be active to keep a character alive. No, a player does not have to play the game like a job to be active.
You've blurred the line completely. Faction leaders are busy doing stuff which is not in-game, Disco related or not.
Just because they can't log in one week shouldn't have repercussions on their characters.
Extrapolationg on your logic, if your characters are not all logged in right now, then next time you log on they should all be dying or demoted or fired or something else.
' Wrote:You've blurred the line completely. Faction leaders are busy doing stuff which is not in-game, Disco related or not.
Just because they can't log in one week shouldn't have repercussions on their characters.
Extrapolationg on your logic, if your characters are not all logged in right now, then next time you log on they should all be dying or demoted or fired or something else.
Carlos mines daily. This is not a discussion of individual characters, anyway; in general, RP should be represented by activity. Faction roleplay should be represented by faction activity. Individual roleplay should be represented by activity. No, not on an hour-for-hour basis. If you want to say you killed someone in your roleplay story post, you should kill someone ingame. If you want to say you mined niobium in your story post, you should mine some niobium ingame. If you want to say you are now arresting all haulers of Engine Components in Liberty, you should arrest a huge amount of those haulers ingame.
If you can't perform your roleplay then what good is it?
Now you're trying to say that forum actions have to be matched action-for-action on the server. That is, quite simply, impossible.
Roleplay is about a hybridisation of forum and in-game actions. It has been like this, and no doubt will continue to be, for a long time.
Saying this is wrong is saying the entire style of roleplay in this community is wrong.
Quote:Faction roleplay should be represented by faction activity.
Get serious. I'm in factions, yet my activity in those doesn't always match the activity performed for them on the forums. Do you know why? Some of those faction characters don't fly ships.
The style of faction roleplay should be consistent across forums and game, yes. Faction roleplay only exists when the players are online? No.
' Wrote:Now you're trying to say that forum actions have to be matched action-for-action on the server. That is, quite simply, impossible.
Roleplay is about a hybridisation of forum and in-game actions. It has been like this, and no doubt will continue to be, for a long time.
Saying this is wrong is saying the entire style of roleplay in this community is wrong.
No, it is not wrong, and that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that roleplay should be represented by ingame activity. A character cannot exist in this community purely through forum stories. Yes, the stories are great. You have a more detailed, vivid character. But if you want to roleplay a flying ace, you need to ace a few people ingame; if you can't PvP for your life, then it's rather silly roleplaying a flying ace, don't you think?
Having an inactive Liberty official faction is just as OORP as having an actively invasive and militant Zoner faction that attacks Rheinland while maintaining peace on the forums.
![[Image: 50px-OSILogo.png]](http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d37/dannflyheit/Faction%20Icons/50px-OSILogo.png)
