Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Open letter to Game Labs regarding RNoN and DRUNK.


Recommended Posts

That's great. That only goes against the entire point of having a sanbox MMO, as well as against what the developers envision for the game. The player role in NA is a ship captain, not a policymaker. The closest thing you may get to a player-influenced system is war/peace based on how many ships of another nation you attack. A mechanic where every player in a nation will be voting on national policy and the majority rules is wrong both for the player's ingame role and for the ease with which it could be abused (as in the case of this shitstorm) to force a minority to follow someone else's marching orders.

 

When war and peace is decided by the amount of actions against a certain nation, it is still a majority rule... even when a pretty useless one in terms of the ressource mechanic in this game.

Ohh... and in todays societies naval captains are legal to vote, as long as they live in a democracy... and let us not forget we do not resemble the historic society rules in this game, otherwise most people wouldn't even be allowed to play this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should start seeing playing as a Swede in this game from a different angle. You all know about the difficulty level of Swedish Nation = Unplayable. In particular it is most important that therefore all players following the same direction and the majority. If you want to play Privateers you are maybe better kept in a much bigger an stronger nation like England where you are just a happy few or just in Pirate Nation where you won't offend others with your definition of playing in a nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the assumptions above, it is my strong belief that DRUNK and their supporters do not defend the right to play the game as they want, but rather the right to troll the majority of their nation's playerbase in the RvR aspect of the game.

 

You were doing okay up to this point. You can't say "everyone has the right to play the way they want" and then conclude "you're a troll for not helping me play the way I want".

 

It doesn't matter what the majority thinks. This is not a "tyranny by democracy" and any diplomatic arrangements have to take this into account.

 

By way of example, when we make deals in my nation, we never make a "no open sea PvP" part of the deal. That is impossible to enforce. We speak for ourselves and our clans and that's it. This is also why we don't let the enemy keep ports in our homeland. They may have had good intentions with the arrangement and we may trust their major clans but you never know when Goonswarm is going to join their nation and use that to launch an invasion.

 

You never speak for more than yourself and your clan.

 

 

If you can't reason with your nation-mates to play the way you want to play then agreeing to disagree is literally your only choice. Talk about trolling and generally berating people is just pounding sand.

Edited by Slamz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should start seeing playing as a Swede in this game from a different angle. You all know about the difficulty level of Swedish Nation = Unplayable. In particular it is most important that therefore all players following the same direction and the majority. If you want to play Privateers you are maybe better kept in a much bigger an stronger nation like England where you are just a happy few or just in Pirate Nation where you won't offend others with your definition of playing in a nation.

 

Joernson,

 

the easy counter to your reasonable argument would be: "I don't want to play British or Pirate! I want to play the game whatever way I want! How DARE you dictate the way I play the game!" :D

Your turn, if you dare :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When war and peace is decided by the amount of actions against a certain nation, it is still a majority rule... even when a pretty useless one in terms of the ressource mechanic in this game.

 

You'll never get that peace as long as DRUNK attacks Danish players and ports.

 

 

Ohh... and in todays societies naval captains are legal to vote, as long as they live in a democracy... and let us not forget we do not resemble the historic society rules in this game, otherwise most people wouldn't even be allowed to play this game.

 

This is a game set at a time where there was one naval power in the Caribbean governed by a representative government, the rest by monarchy. Why are you getting modern day confused with the 18th century?

 

 

Riddle me this. Why should a minority be forced to play in a way they don't want to play? Are you seriously suggesting that just because more people agree with you, that gives you the right to force those who don't to leave or follow your orders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were doing okay up to this point. You can't say "everyone has the right to play the way they want" and then conclude "you're a troll for not helping me play the way I want".

 

It doesn't matter what the majority thinks. This is not a "tyranny by democracy" and any diplomatic arrangements have to take this into account.

 

By way of example, when we make deals in my nation, we never make a "no open sea PvP" part of the deal. That is impossible to enforce. We speak for ourselves and our clans and that's it. This is also why we don't let the enemy keep ports in our homeland. They may have had good intentions with the arrangement and we may trust their major clans but you never know when Goonswarm is going to join their nation and use that to launch an invasion.

 

You never speak for more than yourself and your clan.

 

 

If you can't reason with your nation-mates to play the way you want to play then agreeing to disagree is literally your only choice. Talk about trolling and generally berating people is just pounding sand.

 

Hey Slamz,

 

I will entertain your argument. I am always up for a reasonable debate. You are misreading my analysis, I think. In no sentence did I condemn the renegades for going out and attacking any ship they see. I am fully aware that demanding that is suicidal. Every nation has dissenters that chose to ignore the majority decision to have peace with a certain faction - the PFK clan disapproving of the Fanco-Dutch peace treaty being a recent example. We let them do their thing and start attacks on the French, it was dissatisfying but the game let them do it and the rest of the Dutch community kinda accepted it.

 

What I DO argue against is attacking an enemy port when there is a "no port attacks" peace deal in place that the majority of both nations' players have accepted. Because that messes with the RvR aspect of the game - and in RvR - and ONLY RvR! - the right of the majority to play the  game as they want (by using diplomacy and self-elected governments) outweighs the right of the few to play their trolling game. That is my whole argument.

 

Cheers,

 

Hugo

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This whole problem would have never existed if the Swedish governement just locked the Rum rations storage.

Now you have to deal with DRUNKs

 

How dare you propose a government monopoly on commodities! Has the Boston tea party not taught you ANYTHING? I should bring your anti-Dutch thinking to the tribunal and have your trading permission in Willemstad revoked for even entertaining such treacherous thoughts against the free market. Restricting the access to rum - are you MAD?!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest we close the topic, since both sides cant get to a compromise.

I suggest we don't close the topic, as I see progression. Atleast when it comes to talking outside of this forum simply because of the existance of this very post. I am sure there is a lot of officers and leaders who in this post can confirm that I've spoken to them, on both sides. 

How about we disable clans :D

I've actually been thinking about that, but I am affraid it wouldnt really solve it in the long run.. It would just cause more confusion I believe to who did what and why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You'll never get that peace as long as DRUNK attacks Danish players and ports.

 

 

 

This is a game set at a time where there was one naval power in the Caribbean governed by a representative government, the rest by monarchy. Why are you getting modern day confused with the 18th century?

 

 

Riddle me this. Why should a minority be forced to play in a way they don't want to play? Are you seriously suggesting that just because more people agree with you, that gives you the right to force those who don't to leave or follow your orders?

 

Because the minority has other options to play as they want, but they decided to play in a certain team, saying afterwards you don't want to play with this team, is like playing soccer and shooting the ball constantly out of the game... or like playing football but not wanting to block for your quarterback.

 

And only because this game is settled in the 18th century, doesn't mean we need to play a society like it was.... I mean you don't shoot your own team-mates in CoD only because you "role-play" a Russian Commissar...

 

And to your first line: DRUNKs actions won't matter when there are far more actions elsewhere.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because that messes with the RvR aspect of the game - and in RvR - and ONLY RvR! - the right of the majority to play the  game as they want (by using diplomacy and self-elected governments) outweighs the right of the few to play their trolling game. That is my whole argument.

 

Unless you know for sure that these clans are taking those ports for the purpose of annoying their teammates, it's unfair to accuse them of trolling. They may have other reasons for taking the ports, like simply having a different view on how to fight for their nation.

 

Again, I'll point out that fighting your enemy is more "correct" than making friends with them in the game as it stands, with the current mechanics. If anything, the ones trying to make peace are "trolling" those who are trying to fight the war.

 

Consider; if the majority of your nation's clans decided that everyone would only use half sails during battles, would it be trolling for some clans to reject that limitation and use full sails?

 

These clans, this council, are asking other players to abide by restrictions that they made up for themselves. I have yet to see a valid explanation from anyone why players should be asked to abstain from enjoying legitimate activities within a game that they have purchased.

 

At the end of the day, the only people that players have to listen to when it comes to what they can and cannot do in the game are the game developers. Anything else is just pointless squawking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 is like playing soccer and shooting the ball constantly out of the game... or like playing football but not wanting to block for your quarterback.

 

No, it's like trying to score goals in soccer while some of the rest of your team have decided they're going to kick the ball back and forth between the teams and not try to score.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

*actually chuckles irl*

 

 

But Privateers were not allowed to attack allied or friendly ships nor even their ports. That would have been an act of war. So when you people still ganking Danes and French and their ports this has nothing to to with Privateers but only with Pirates.

But this peace treaty between Sweden and Denmark-Norway is yet again, not real. It's not real because you once again have no authority given to you by the developers. It's not even partially real because you havent even proved that actually more than 50% (majority) agrees with the peace treaty. You don't know what Sweden actually wants until there is a solid vote where everyone has their saying. And even people that don't care has to vote "blank" in order for it to be correct. As long as this is the case, you cannot continue to claim that there is a peace treaty between Sweden and Denmark-Norway. There is only a peace treaty between KF, HRE and a group of other clans from Sweden and a group of clans on the Danish-Norweigan side. Not the nations themselves. So I sadly have to disregard your argument as a whole.

 

EDIT; And even if you had a majority vote... once again.... no statement from the developers. 

 

:D  you trolls make my day :D

 

Every day, I can be sure that your "logic" can make me laugh. Thank you, Sju, for this and keep it coming :D

So I'm a troll without logic in your eyes too now? For trying to solve things?

 

 

*grabs popcorn*

I did that the second I clicked "post" on the original post. I knew it would cause strong winds, but I was hoping for more attempts to solve the problem than just throwing horse shit at fans. :/

 

This whole problem would have never existed if the Swedish governement just locked the Rum rations storage.

Now you have to deal with DRUNKs

.... what... did you... just say...? L.. Lo... Lock.. away... the rum...?

*mumbles* Jävla åbäke *mumbles*

 

 

How dare you propose a government monopoly on commodities! Has the Boston tea party not taught you ANYTHING? I should bring your anti-Dutch thinking to the tribunal and have your trading permission in Willemstad revoked for even entertaining such treacherous thoughts against the free market. Restricting the access to rum - are you MAD?!

+1

I mean you don't shoot your own team-mates in CoD only because you "role-play" a Russian Commissar...

OH GOD. 

Edited by Sju Sjösjuka Sjömän
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consider; if the majority of your nation's clans decided that everyone would only use half sails during battles, would it be trolling for some clans to reject that limitation and use full sails?

 

These clans, this council, are asking other players to abide by restrictions that they made up for themselves. I have yet to see a valid explanation from anyone why players should be asked to abstain from enjoying legitimate activities within a game that they have purchased.

 

At the end of the day, the only people that players have to listen to when it comes to what they can and cannot do in the game are the game developers. Anything else is just pointless squawking.

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I DO argue against is attacking an enemy port when there is a "no port attacks" peace deal in place that the majority of both nations' players have accepted.

 

Imagine if DRUNK was composed entirely of players who simply turned off chat a long time ago. Maybe they're some Japanese guild who doesn't speak any more common language and they just do their own thing internally. Imagine also that they can field 25 members in heavy ships and they start attacking your self-declared allies.

 

What's wrong with that? They are going to play the way they want. They see all nations as being at war and they attack whoever they feel is worth fighting and they don't even know about peace deals and you can't communicate with them. They are playing the game legitimately within the defined rules.

 

 

Treat DRUNK like you would treat those people and I think you can't go wrong.

 

 

Of course, if you share a communications channel you can try to convince people to do things your way (and they can try to convince you to do it their way) but in the end it's still about various clans each playing how they want to play. "But I can't play the way I want because the way I want requires the total cooperation of everyone around me" is not reasonable.

 

 

You remind me more of people who make "games within games". This happens a lot in MMORPG PvP games. The game rules say we can attack each other at any time, but your game-within-a-game self-declared rules state that we can only do this if we are both full health, not fighting NPCs and we won't use expensive consumables like potions. That's the way you want to play. But you can't impose invented rules like this on other players. That goes beyond playing how you want and becomes trying to force people to play your way, which is why you are in the wrong here.

 

 

tl;dr

You can't invent rules and then berate people for not following your invented rules.

Edited by Slamz
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would recommend the reputation system from jumpgate: classic...

 

best solution i ever saw for these kind of problems... 

 

if u want to check it out, play it for free @: http://jumpgate-tri.org/

 

 

every player has reputation to every nation in the game and by attacking players/npc of another nation u got minus rep and there nation turned hostile to u... if a lot of player did this, your nations turned hostile to each other... and of course u also got a small bounty on your head by attack a non hostile nation... if they were in war, there was no bounty

 

if u wanted to end your own hostility or the war, u were able to perform missions for the hostile nation (and of course every other in the game) to gain positiv reputation towards them... 

 

so if a lot of player decide to do special missions for another nation, u were able to get an alliance with this nation... 

 

jumpgatej_ssphsqs.jpg

there were no diplomatic system... the game reacts on how the players play the game... for me by far the best system i ever saw in over 17 years of mmo's

 

 

 

cheers, abuu

 

i would suggest to post reasonable constructive solutions in Open world section in related or newly created threads

valuable info will be lost otherwise

 

Message to everyone - please refrain from off topic

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end this all comes down to one thing.

 

No clan/council/individual has any authority over its players unless those players allow it. Their is no majority or minority in games there are only players. The only entity that can dictate terms to the said players are the developers.

 

You can either accept this or try to convince the players to follow your lead. Since they are not willing to follow your lead berating them is typically not a proven method of success to change their minds. You can continue trying this OR if unity is so important to you maybe you should consider becoming more like DRUNK.

 

All of you will just have to accept that you are powerless to change this situation unless you give DRUNK a reason to voluntarily abide by your "made-up" rule set.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end this all comes down to one thing.

 

No clan/council/individual has any authority over its players unless those players allow it. Their is no majority or minority in games there are only players. The only entity that can dictate terms to the said players are the developers.

 

You can either accept this or try to convince the players to follow your lead. Since they are not willing to follow your lead berating them is typically not a proven method of success to change their minds. You can continue trying this OR if unity is so important to you maybe you should consider becoming more like DRUNK.

 

All of you will just have to accept that you are powerless to change this situation unless you give DRUNK a reason to voluntarily abide by your "made-up" rule set.  

 

You are right and you are wrong. You are right - technically no player organisation can force other players to do anything that the game mechanics currently allow. But you are wrong, if you honestly thinks that "all of you will just have to accept that you are powerless to change the situation".

 

For lack of other ingame tools available to the majority of the affected player communities, they have moved to the only tool still available: Public naming and shaming of the dissenters and trolls while simultaneously demanding a change of the ruleset by the devs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...