Please Orbit, get yourself out of your fantasy-world, and check in with reality please.
Also, your comment had nothing to do with this topic. It’s about unofficial alliances, and that’s a thing that’s fucking up the game at this time, and I appreciate any suggestion to resolve that, but all you do is saying how crap suggestions are - let me know when you have a better one.
1 Like
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.
You want those 3 things only. All are included in my suggestion, altho players could not remove anyone from this role mid-round, because there should be protection for the elected part also. IMO. If other players want the option to vote enforecer out in mid-round too, you just make it happen. IMO that could lead to weak enforcer.
You say players should decide terms and policies, not the game. I am a player. I am defining terms. More like suggesting them. Other players may suggest their own or refine any suggestions. If all other players, well most of them, eventually agree on some terms and want the red tape, written lawyerism and abilities to see more than regular player and powers to force NAPs and tags, will you then allow them to have it?
I think Congress type of enforcer could work too, but I fear diplomatics, friendships, politics and general disagreement would make it dysfunctional.
I will not play until IA or UA problem has been solved in some reasonable fashion. I have no desire to play in a galaxy where friends help each other with market aid. I am not part of their cliques and thus will be their enemy or tool. Not going to participate in that.
It depends.
You’re asking that we give some players the ability to read private messages. That is an example of something that I would not build, regardless of who wants it.
We have to consider new players too, and if I joined a game where my private correspondence was monitored by other players, I would be very wary of how much power the elite have. That idea sounds like it will make cliques even worse.
If your suggestion is for what you yourself would enact if you were elected to this role, that would be “Zanharim policy” and I would support that.
If your suggestion is for what everybody should follow regardless of who is in the role, that would be “Game policy” and I would not support that.
It isn’t clear which of the two is the case. Which is it?
I am saying that we need some common ground for those policies. At least to start with and to evolve from. That would be basis of my first edition if I would be elected. Then I would try to make it better with the community.
Enforcer would be a judge of some sort, so it would be imperative to have some sort of law which would guide judgement and make decisions even somewhat predictable. That is the basis of many civilized legislations.
Of course every candidate for enforcer job could have their own policy made public and they could vary vastly.
Or we could just wing it, trust the persons reputation alone and perhaps end up with ego boost power trips Orbit mentioned. Yeah, could end up with best enforcer ever, but from experience I’d say chances are better with open policies.
I am aware that if I do the base work, ppl are inclined to use that work and thus I have had some say over it by contributing. Now only public policy is the Zanharim policy.
Anyone is free to suggest better policies or even worse, YMMV, and enforce those when elected. In the end, community would judge enforcers actions or inactions and either change or keep.
Privacy of messages is just a decision btw. If you wish to declare them visible to enforcer, all you have to do is warn players about it with some disclaimer. Not that big thing to me either way. If I could not see messages as an enforcer, my policy would just be then; “if you do not tell enforcer about it, it does not exist”. Simple, but a bit harsh. Life is such.
I would not be a good enforcer btw. My view of the game is not popular. I may be too extreme. I would be too harsh. My syggested policy reflects that. Make more leanient version if you will. Not in my interest to make such. Not saying that I would not volunteer to be a candidate. I just would be open about what you get if you vote me and I win the job. 
1 Like
I agree, problem is when someone tries to enforce this A. The whole discord turns against them B. Unless you are game staff the only way to prove it is to cheat C. If your a new player your often flamed. Or a combination of all the above mentioned a new player knows he’s being cheated sets out to prove it gets banned for cheating the whole discord turns against him and he gets flamed letting the cheaters or original problem continue and you lose players over and over because you haven’t addressed the original issue of the cheaters who are allowed to cheat because we don’t have enough players and they don’t want to lose the ones they have or they are chat friends. Discord really is part of the problem
but I’m not sure banning discord will solve the problems when you don’t even have a galaxy running half the time .
It has to be a collective effort if you want to end this everyone has to work together against this sort of behaviour against discord cheating against cheating in general.
Nom!