Political God-Modding

[Amazeroth]

New players might get frustrated.

I don't know. When I came to the game, I began in such a locked nation, and I stayed there until I could get enough visibility (about two legislative periods set to the longest possible duration) to defeat the single party running the nation.
That's not even real locking of a nation, as it hurts the parties in power just as much, since there is not much they can do now to keep their visibility up. True locking requires a treaty.

If we're going to talk about "nation-locking" in the "RP" sense, then that should not be allowed; that's definitely god-modding, in my opinion, at least.

Then you haven't really understood what god-modding means - this has nothing to do with RP, an exploit of the game's mechanics can never be godmodding.

[Siggon Kristov]

The concept of it is what bothers me (if you haven't read what I'm trying to say).

I was in Indrala already, and they did an "RP Ban" which was only to be lifted if I didn't stop RP-ing as a Republican party. They created a bill for such a ban.

This new bill is related to the concept, that they have in their minds, that they own the nation.

[meritocracy]

Anyway, this bill is unfair

Heh.

[Austrur]

The concept of it is what bothers me (if you haven't read what I'm trying to say).

I was in Indrala already, and they did an "RP Ban" which was only to be lifted if I didn't stop RP-ing as a Republican party. They created a bill for such a ban.

This new bill is related to the concept, that they have in their minds, that they own the nation.

Hold on. Let me get this straight? Because they are using game mechanics to their advantage - they are cheating? Are you not allowed to set the proposal quota to one? IF you aren't then why is it in the game?

Just because you seem to dislike them doesn't give you any right to complain. If you want to overthrow the Monarchy in Indrala, go right ahead, but don't complain about how IG mechanics are being used 'against you.' They aren't.

[Siggon Kristov]

I'm not talking about the game mechanics; I'm talking about the reason they're doing it and the concept behind it.
Of course, I'm not allowed to release the conversation history between the 2 parties and myself, but if I was, you would understand.

One player, in particular, was obsessed with the game. The degree of his obsession (he was contacting me OOC) would help you to understand what I'm talking about.

[meritocracy]

So you want him to be moderated because you feel he was obsessive, and yet abiding by game mechanics?

[Siggon Kristov]

No.

I know why I complained to the mods when I was there. It's possible they're doing the same thing to this dude.
That (what I'm complaining about) had nothing to do with game mechanics.

I was actually lied to, and I had to contact the mods to find out about the crap the guy was telling me.

If your ignorance is hindering your literacy, I suggest you refrain from replying to this thread.
I have made it clear that this isn't about what the guy is doing, but instead about the principle/concept aligned with it, which he repeatedly messaged me about.

[Sir Thomas Hill]

You're being very rude for someone who's asking for help just because people disagree with your interpretation.

Players form an attachment and loyalty to the work they put into the game. That is to be expected and ought to be respected. If players have worked, often for RL years, creating a culture, RP conventions, RP institutions (In Solentia, we have a Supreme Court and Executive Order powers that are respected by fellow RPers), then they have a right to defend them when people desire to destroy them.

You might be irritated at the fact that they're sticking around just to protect their crop, but wouldn't you? If you had spent the better part of 5 years shaping an entire national culture and RP scene and someone wanted to undo it all?

In Solentia, we had a player who stuck around to protect his RP creations. He battled it out against so many of us, we ended up being drawn into the RP ourselves and now, even though he has left the game, we keep what he created out of respect for the work he (and we) put into RPing around it all.

Heritage vs. Progress RP can be fun. Try accpting the RPing conventions of the nation you're in and work within them to undo heritage as an IC effort. Explain OOCly to your fellow players that you're not trying to undo their work; you just want to challenge it IC as a RP matter. Once they know you're not trying to undo their hard work, they'll be much more likely to RP with you.

[SelucianCrusader]

You're being very rude for someone who's asking for help just because people disagree with your interpretation.

Now, you are the one being rude by your obvious arrogance and elitism.

Players form an attachment and loyalty to the work they put into the game. That is to be expected and ought to be respected. If players have worked, often for RL years, creating a culture, RP conventions, RP institutions (In Solentia, we have a Supreme Court and Executive Order powers that are respected by fellow RPers), then they have a right to defend them when people desire to destroy them.

No, that is not how you create RP-drama or attract new and younger players to this game. That's how you found a masonic lodge for geeks. If this game would be near static since everyone had to "respect" the ideas of grumpy oldies, especially like some of the IML-players, this game would die a quick death in a few months. This game is a game of multi-party democracies, one worthy of challenging Nation States one day, and the last thing we need are backwards people boosting their huge ego:s by exploiting game mechanics with nation-locking etc.

You might be irritated at the fact that they're sticking around just to protect their crop, but wouldn't you? If you had spent the better part of 5 years shaping an entire national culture and RP scene and someone wanted to undo it all?

If someone has spent the better part of 5 years shaping an entire national culture, then that person should get a life. There is a game called Minecraft you might want to try if this is your idea of community gaming, or you might just want to go and buy some Lego kit. The nations are for all to take, and someone who gets too attracted to his/her own creation desperately needs to search for something else to do, to make life worthwhile.

[Siggon Kristov]

You're being very rude for someone who's asking for help just because people disagree with your interpretation.

"Rude" is a word commonly used by conservatives who get upset when no-one cares what they're saying. I'm not referring to you, here, but your use of the word just reminds me of old conservative people crying and whining about not being cared about.

Players form an attachment and loyalty to the work they put into the game. That is to be expected and ought to be respected. If players have worked, often for RL years, creating a culture, RP conventions, RP institutions (In Solentia, we have a Supreme Court and Executive Order powers that are respected by fellow RPers), then they have a right to defend them when people desire to destroy them.

You might be irritated at the fact that they're sticking around just to protect their crop, but wouldn't you? If you had spent the better part of 5 years shaping an entire national culture and RP scene and someone wanted to undo it all?

Some people have lives.

No, that is not how you create RP-drama or attract new and younger players to this game. That's how you found a masonic lodge for geeks. If this game would be near static since everyone had to "respect" the ideas of grumpy oldies, especially like some of the IML-players, this game would die a quick death in a few months.

What SC is trying to say is that some players have formed this oligarchy; they believe everything should be done their way, as if they own the game or the nations in it. This turns away new players. I've invited a few persons to play, and the Indrala struggle was fun until the OOC messages started. We were also lied to, that if we tried to change Indrala to a Republic, we would get in trouble for cultural protocol issues.

If someone has spent the better part of 5 years shaping an entire national culture, then that person should get a life. There is a game called Minecraft you might want to try if this is your idea of community gaming, or you might just want to go and buy some Lego kit. The nations are for all to take, and someone who gets too attracted to his/her own creation desperately needs to search for something else to do, to make life worthwhile.

I'm attached to some of my own "creations" like this fantasy novel series that I write, where I even draw maps for the many nations in it. I like games where I build and create stuff. I can add a few more suggestions, like SimCity or Tropico. Tropico is a nice game that combines the whole "builder" theme with politics that will involve more people. It is very detailed; you will love an island that you have worked on to successfully create a functional set of cities.

I play Particray for the whole "debating" thing of it, which is why I've invited real-life friends and comrades to play.
We can see each other's views and we can have nice debates, and something to actually start it off.
I wouldn't randomly discuss some political issues. I never knew my friend, Pierce, was against abortion until we played this game, but I knew some of his other stances.

Without the whole "debating" theme, and players being encouraged to challenge stuff, the game will die. We should allow players to challenge things, even if they're bound to lose. The whole thing that fuels this game is the challenge. If you kill the chance for a player to challenge something, you're an ass.

Like I said, it's the principle that bothers me.
If they could set the proposal quota to zero, instead of one, they would. It's the concept behind the entire thing, and the messages, that were exchanged between the players and I, that bother me. The Labour Party is gone; he couldn't manage to raise enough visibility to win more seats. He got more seats than the first election he participated in, but he still gave up.

Whether you think it's a good reason, for us to be annoyed or not, the fact still remains that new players will be annoyed. If you don't agree with their reasons for being annoyed, it wouldn't change the fact that they are being annoyed, and they'll leave this game.

I wonder how fun it would be if it was only 1 party in each nation; it wouldn't make any sense at all. The game (especially the scope of the game mechanics) is about the internal politics more than the international ones. It's about parties debating. The RP side was just to give players something fun to do. It's an extra. I was told that RP is everything and the game mechanics mean nothing. The mods had to tell me this wasn't true; the player has lied to me. There are games out there for diplomacy. This can go well will diplomacy, but when it's overdone, it kills the original purpose.