Wasn't stuff like this already discussed in the past? I mean, the USCM faction thing can exist, sure. But if someone wants to make a character that is part of the USCM and not be directly tied to the existing faction should be fine. The faction on the server isn't the USCM as a whole, afterall, and, as I stated, this conversation has occurred in the past a few times, actually. The existing USCM faction is only a small branch of the USCM as a whole, at best.
If you people want to discuss the events listed as examples as anything more then how they relate to the topic at hand, make a new thread about them. This is one is strictly for discussion on conflict roleplay and how metagaming/powergaming, and players attitudes effect this.
Right, sorry about that. If anyone wants to continue the discussion further, PM me or CouchPotato360 (I'm sure he won't mind), and we can continue it there. Or, create a new thread if you want.
My general philosophy. 1. You do not need consent to attack, only to kill 2. If you attack someone, be prepared for retibution, shoot a bunch of people, get shot dead when they all turn their guns on you [[Becaue of this, play smart, catch people alone, etc.]] Meta: Dun do it. Just because your character "would" help, doesn't mean they can. If your character has no way of knowing, don't do it. I don't see why this is so hard.
I don't ever try to hide behind consent. However, I'm a firm believer in planning. Not super played out planning but essentially I want to be told: Hey, we're about to fuck shit up at.... or... Hey, Julius, we want to fuck shit up. I'm okay with this. Cause hell, but please, tell me if you're going to do it so that I don't freak out. I don't hide behind consent, but atleast I can be like "Well, the told me they were going to do this so I can act and allow a bit of room for them to have their event."
The Roleplay is Worship Follow the inner path of open consent, and be reasonable. Void only in true need. Way of the Heir.
In this particular instance, you freaked out before there was any indication of hell being caused. However, that's not what this thread is for. I have my issues with things going on about (it's why I've been less active), this thread is mostly to solve/increase awareness of such issues one step at a time more neutrally. If for instance, instead of immediately becoming aggressive and letting loose an attack of OOC, you had simply asked ((What are you doing here?)) or ((Are you here to kill us all?)) or ((Are we being invaded?)) things would have likely been fine. Conflict resolution has come down to voiding. Screaming at something until it's voided. Frustrating people with consent until they void. Threatening mod intervention unless someone agrees to void. Or flat out ignoring people so they are essentially voided in the present tense. It's hardly a way to solve issues. These barriers to conflict are keeping conflict from happening. And it means things have again settled into stagnance. The general population is whiskey-logged with Tavern Syndrome. And as proud of NC as I know you are, that's hardly a way to develop characters in a frontier. If you want to roleplay sitting at home all day, or drinking so much whiskey in one day you should have died of poisoning 38 bottles ago, the Sims is a thing. Particularly when so many characters are dependent on a frontier environment where they can see some action and such. Above all, it's a barrier to the renewed interest that's been whispering around of introducing legitimate antagonists to the server. It's a barrier to having whatever form of economy we could (a barter system is probably the best the population of the server could do in reality). It's a barrier to anything more serious, really.
This is a nifty code to follow, with a good moderation of itself. Along the lines of consent, my own rule of thumb is, "if it makes sense, give consent". If your character picks a fight with armed military or other large group, be prepared to lose that fight, or to be imprisoned. In all seriousness, your character who was ex-USCM has not practiced his occupation, and his skills would have gone down. In a situation where he is fighting trained soldiers from a faction such as the USCM, RA, or Fleet who have state of the art technology, it is unlikely your character will win outright; if they do, then you should be prepared for your character to be chased down by said faction. There have been characters in trouble with every major faction, and still waltzed around populated colonies and screamed consent whenever someone has tried to make an arrest. (I am speaking from experience here, not trying to make a hyperbolic example). On the flip side, if you join aforementioned military, or a bandit faction, your character has a good chance of being killed. These are dangerous factions, and every single character living until they die of old age is unlikely. I know the mods have been trying to stress that Antares is a frontier. This is why the factions are being downsized and monitored heavily now, to simulate that feeling. A frontier is dangerous, and death would be frequent. For a real-world example, look at the Northwest territory in the US. People weren't moving through there in large numbers until the late 1700s for fear of being scalped by Native Americans, or eaten by a mountain lion or bear, or trampled by a buffalo. Same thing with the 'Wild West'. Native Americans, disease, famine, drought, other people, and in some cases government frequently killed off people. I'm not saying your character should die, but I can say that I have personally seen dozens of situations where characters would be dead, arrested, or severely injured and then pulled the consent card. (not sure how consent works with being arrested, but my guess is that it's more trouble than it's worth to argue out). Also, with voiding; The only reason voiding exists is because sometimes a miscommunication leaves someone uninformed and they accidentally do something that's impossible. That's ALL it should be for. There have been countless situations where characters have picked fights and then voided it because something just didn't go their way. Sorry for the wall of text please don't hurt me I swear I'm not DirtyGoblin
The thing about consent is, it's a way for people not to force anything on us. I, for once, am not closed to conflict. You can ask Skipi (Leader of the outcasts) or Atricil (Leader of some criminal merchant guilt or something). The thing about people getting upset about consent is that there seems to be an awful lot of that whining mentality that the Main RP Hub is going to end up like the wolves. or is already to that point. Is consent a problem, no. Most people typically follow the code of Jim and void isn't used so much as a tool for avoiding rp as it is used to clear up confusion. For instance, the event with the USCM was going well until a third party (which I found out much later was completely uninvolved) head ICly threatened Julius then we he told them to leave (Again, Unaware that Tein wasn't with them) Tein attacked and that's when stuff went down. I was going with it too until Tein pulled an "Unsheathes Katenna" move on the entirety of the group that we had to back up the USCM. The only reason (Legitimate IC reason) we freaked out is because USCM (Which is a faction known for forcing OOCly things on other factions simply by virtue of the fact that: Lore faction lol.) supposedly sent seven armed guards (With that weird onyx armor or whatever which kind of violates the rules on faction equipment) on a "peaceful" ultimatum(Which is in standard USCM threat fashion) to the colony of New Chicago. At no point did I hide behind consent and say that when I fired that I intended to fire. The major problem with that situation was when Tein used his "Roleplayed out overpowered armor and sword" to act as if he could take us down left and right(Not to mention the situation the day that followed where he thought he could start exerting control over the colonies law enforcement because, yet again: Lore faction lol). I guess that my point is that consent isn't a problem until you start getting powergamey and pushy with it. I think Julius has been shot over three times in this week alone(mostly unprovoked) and never once did I "hide behind consent". I guess a strong secondary point would be the fact that planning or at least notification is vital to good RP. I don't /need/ to give consent for bad things to happen to me. Death is pretty much the only thing that there's any consent issues with on this server. Even then, these issues are so minor that this thread just makes them seem more drastic. Do we have a "win" mentality (this applies to us as a whole not just ICIA) no, we don't. The Outcasts (or Black Arm, I forget which they've chosen) don't always try and exert control over NC. They build it up properly. Starting by owning the bar and selling drugs, working their way up to the top of crime. Conflict in this server is completely okay, but forcing people to do things because you want to live out your power fantasies in some pixelated world doesn't seem right to me. Honestly, more people hide behind the "Lore Faction, lol" than they do consent. Think I'm wrong? Ask CrackShotCleric how many Miniknog agents we've killed because they came to the colony proudly announcing how many people they tortured and how they were ready to come kill someone for "their crimes against Big Ape" then they think they can pull Miniknog warships out the wazoo without any need what so ever to build that up or staff the ship.
Boop Ask before yo USCM players were actually not the typical USCM players, as in, random group of folk who picked up playing USCM and "borrowed" the former player groups armor design. On Lore Factions, aside from the little miniknog group starting up, there are no regular lore-based factions still around. Most if not all are small custom lore groups. In the past, the big factions basically played a major role in dictating what happened, and even held most hubs. That era has since past, conflict is more manageable with the lack of npc's and fleet bits. Consent hasn't been as big of an issue of late as it has in the past. Although some moderate planning should be put into play before doing stuff on an are like NC which is essentially lawless, and chaotic (Flavor of the Month Hubworld). Often, it's best to give a poke to the party you're about to go down with, even if its just a few minutes before hand, so you can both knockout an consent issues that may arise, and plan for the whole "horde of random folk interupting" and such. If you're gonna try to attack/dmg a colony it's usually in good taste to let the owner of the colony know before hand. Aside from a select few, most are pretty good about such things. I know it's fairly likely the RA will be going low-conflict for awhile, aside from embracing the bounty hunter bit (taking in the USAF folk) and of course FINALLY finishing up the Redcrest Plot (Tax Evasion is serious business.). But faction-faction or colony-colony conflict? Honestly. Those sorts of conflicts are low, low, low priority for us right now because in the past, it's been a headache. Even when uninvolved. I recall the Ygdrasil/Order/Alianthus tension bit, and the back and forth attempts at planning a small conflict to take an itty bitty checkpoint panet from Ygdrasil tribe. Nothing happenned at all, because noone could seemingly come to a compromise that allowed for conflict, that all sides could agree on. That was common fair, for faction conflict for awhile. Noone wants a headache, when they just come in to have fun and chillax. So if you do want conflict, my best advice. Avoid conflict with people who can't handle it ooc, or who don't want it. It's the best route for both parties. If you want your conflict, do it with people you're buddies with ooc. I always had hope for the RA/HF war in the beginning, because Hawke and I would talk it out. We both planned on taking hits, some of his suggestions did make me cringe, just as some of mine might've made him cringe, but the conflict would have played int4o the story as a whole, and been entertaining for all involved had it played out. What made that work out so well? Communication. Getting along nicely. Courtesy. Recognizing that hey, this other big faction is you know, made up of players who take pride in their faction too. Hell, knowing what I know now, a lot of problems could be solved by simple communication. A lot. TL;DR Courtesy, Consent, Conflict with Buddies or Bros, not with folk who don't want it, or cant handle it maturely ooc.
Going off the observations made while there It pretty much fits the stereotypes that have come before it, for better or worse.
There are no rules on faction equipment. Factions don't have "creative property". Two individuals can recolor armor and accidentally happen upon similar cases. Though that's not what happened here, the CoC doesn't have a clause stating: "Factions cannot share armor. Individuals cannot wear armor from factions they are not a part of." I also only counted 5 groups. As for the "USCM forcing events", that was actually kind of the reason the USCM died. They DIDN'T force events. Their events were internalized and they became isolated from the outside factions. If Tein thought he had authority over the ICIA then that's an IC issue/egomania. Not an OOC one (unless it was dragged into OOC, in which case it was.) The USCM Operators didn't pull anything to do with the fact that they were a canonical lore faction. Instead, the USAF has insisted they exert control over all decisions to do with the USCM. When it comes to power fantasies, having an army suddenly appear out of thin air to deal with a crisis, using the camera's as an excuse for omnipotence, and demanding something be voided because you weren't warned is all play to win. Warning is nice, but it's not necessary. Again, part of roleplaying is being able to adjust to unexpected situations as your character would. Not hit them, not know what to do, and demand that it never happened. Again, the Operators didn't even pull their weapons on the ICIA until they were fired upon first, and from my understandings had no OOC intents to even shoot anyone. The most conflict they intended seemed to be actually making that bounty board mean something.
The bounty board was as much to give bounty hunters something to of as it was to actually make EX-USAF members need to keep their head down. Instead of just having USCM after us. It was as mostly to give the community something to do. Make conflict, etc etc. But the majority of the bounty hunters then kinda just sat on their asses, hell you didn't even have to get up and do anything about it. Just give Kelsh a call of where they were. But the community itself did nothing. Rant done. I feel like this was bad. Don't kill me.
Hard to hunt a bounty when the people are protected by an entire city and hide behind other groups, or bury themselves inside a bunker/on a world that no one has the coordinates to. There's keeping your head down and then there's making it impossible for bounty hunters to do anything. In the current situation, there's no reason for the bounty board to exist. It's inflated conflict. It's invented to give the illusion of conflict without providing the potential for any. Which is a shame. I've had a bounty hunter casing NC for a while and he can't make a move because the entire colony would have him dead before he took a step toward a member of the USAF. Just as bad as blocking conflict is creating false conflict.
