Lets Take a look at Revising RP Procedure

[PaleRider]

In my endless thinking bout how to make this game better I began looking at the RP rules....(full disclosure I still support a full game retcon: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5501)
To clear the air I freely admit I am guilty of RP malpractice in times before and im sure we all probably are. That being said PT is a very unique game and I think we can be allowed to be a little less rigid on our RP, esp since we are a small community (which I prefer to the enormous size of places like NS). That being said recent RP's like the one involving Luthori and my own previous malpractice in the last spate of Majatran wars has got me thinking how we can improve RP.
Now given the nature of the PT game and how things are running (and please dont shoot me for suggesting this) I was thinking perhaps its time to weaken the consensual rules for rp, specifically international rp. Simply put a nation cannot ignore foreign threats or war by simply not agreeing to it and I think we could weaken that rule. Of course this shouldn't mean that you get a surprise invasion of a country of your choice (an obvious warning period would be nice and build up rp) but it would mean tht you can be more aggressive in being confrontational with others and they have to respond or suffer the consequences. further I think that if one participant pulls out of an active rp than their fate is completed by a Mod approved opponent written ending. thoughts?

[EEL123]

I think that RPs should still require consent. Maybe it won't be completely accurate and true-to-life - certainly Saddam Hussein didn't give George Bush permission to invade - but in the end, this isn't real life, and if people are pissed off by constantly being invaded without consent, it would undermine the game and the community. However, as for your proposal about people pulling out of RP, I think that that's reasonable. If you give consent, you should follow through until the end, unless your opponent is acting ridiculously, in which case you'd have perfectly legitimate grounds for terminating the RP.

[Siggon Kristov]

I'm with Pale on this.

[soysauce]

I'm also with Pale on the condition that should either player wish to conduct a more detailed war then the level the RP is conducted at is the higher of the two or the side with lower standards must concede. This should ensure that people couldn't just RP an invasion without any effort or similarly ignore one.

[Opakidabar]

I'm also with Pale on the condition that should either player wish to conduct a more detailed war then the level the RP is conducted at is the higher of the two or the side with lower standards must concede. This should ensure that people couldn't just RP an invasion without any effort or similarly ignore one.

I wonder how to measure "lower standards".
I understand the statement "without any effort", it kind of makes sense, but what if that is "some effort"? Where is the border of making "some effort" into "enough effort"?

[soysauce]

I'm also with Pale on the condition that should either player wish to conduct a more detailed war then the level the RP is conducted at is the higher of the two or the side with lower standards must concede. This should ensure that people couldn't just RP an invasion without any effort or similarly ignore one.

I wonder how to measure "lower standards".
I understand the statement "without any effort", it kind of makes sense, but what if that is "some effort"? Where is the border of making "some effort" into "enough effort"?

I mean that if say one person wants to RP the war and their movements at a regimental level and the other one just says something like "50,000 men invaded and took the capital" then the second guy must RP at a regimental level or forfeit.

[Nickmaster]

Support. Consent is needed to prevent abuse.

[PaleRider]

Soy- interesting idea. I agree a degree of depth must be enforced and look on but its a slippery slope to punish people for bad rp. Perhaps we could create a guide to effective rp manual?

As for my broader idea I can amend it to where the person who pulls out must abide by the other sides ending which would be Mod approved. Also I think we should scrap the Rildanor accords. Since all but 2 nations in PT have essentially the same population I think we could have a reasonable rule for military whereby your military is the appropriate size of your defense policies and spending. Also in a war situation as you call up more troops perhaps we could weaken their effectiveness, especially if they are conscript troops and the war is going badly for that side. I think we all agree what is reasonable here.

As for international invasions and such I do believe some form of consent should be required however I also believe that one cannot simply ignore threats from another nation or party depending on size, power and influence.

[Siggon Kristov]

Since all but 2 nations in PT have essentially the same population I think we could have a reasonable rule for military whereby your military is the appropriate size of your defense policies and spending. Also in a war situation as you call up more troops perhaps we could weaken their effectiveness, especially if they are conscript troops and the war is going badly for that side. I think we all agree what is reasonable here.

Farsun was trying to fix this with OTAF.

[EEL123]

I don't think crap RP should be punished unless either they are doing it on purpose to piss of their RP partner(s) or, whether intentional or not, it is so bad that RP cannot reasonably be sustained.