The suggested guidelines feel like too much red tape. If we were to implement something like this, it would be to support the role’s ability to define their own terms. The game itself should not mandate any specific policies.
This is in line with how we treat family leadership; each family leader has the freedom to say how they want their team to play, which is what determines the family’s experience. This Galactic role should similarly not try to force anybody into a single “correct” way to use their powers.
If we build this feature, it should only do 3 things:
- Allow the players to elect somebody for this role.
- Grant this role additional powers.
- Allow the players to remove somebody from this role.
I don’t think this role should be able to monitor any information that other players can’t see. That feels far too much like moderating gameplay vs participating in it.
The more I think about this, the more I wonder if this is something that the Galactic Congress should have been, but never really was able to be. I don’t mean a forum either; we brought that back and nobody used it despite players asking for it.
What I mean is, what if instead of a single role for this, we gave family leaders the ability to vote on behalf of their family for galaxy-wide matters. They could for example, vote to impose penalties on families thought to be partaking in an IA in whatever definition the galaxy decides to use. They could even vote to provide stimulus to bottom families that need it, provided the proposal passes vote.
In an IA situation, It would then be up to the families effected to either clean up their act or to further defy the Galactic Congress if they so choose.
This would effectively make unofficial alliances illegal again if that’s really what the players actually want, and not just what they say they want. A lot of players talk about how bad unofficial alliances are and this would give them the opportunity to put their money (vote) where their mouth is.