New Rule - Major Faction Mergers

[Tefka]

MAJOR FACTION MERGERS

1. A Major Faction may not merge its influence cloud with another Major Faction's influence cloud.

2. A Major Faction may not gift another Major Faction any territory or planets.

Link: http://starwarsrp.net/page/articles.html/_/role-play-rules/major-factions-r15


Admin Vote: 5 for, 0 against, 1 abstain.

Reason: The Hutt Cartel is the most recent example of wanting to merge their influence cloud, but this isn't an uncommon issue faced before - plenty of Major Factions have done it. I, however, do not feel it is fair to new factions. Mainly because there's almost never any IC precedent for it - with the exception of the Levantine/Silver Jedi merge, which was hilariously also the reason one of our Admins felt he had to abstain from the vote (since he took part in it). I'm sure there are other examples of it working out ICly, but its almost never the reason.

And it is just taking up space on the map, making mergers more powerful than invasions and dominions combined.

FOs leaving, faction abandonment, inactivity... or its a power move. Those are mostly the reasons, and if it was the last one, I could almost let it slide. But too often a faction grows and then goes inactive, leaving the Faction Owner going "well, I'm not going to let this land go to waste."

Sorry for putting you on the spot, Hutt Cartel. Please realize you only happened to be the last guy in line for this issue, and it had nothing to do with you specifically that spurned this interest and subsequent vote.

 

[Darth Ayra]

If two factions create IC precedent for a merge, would this rule still stop them from merging?

 

[Setzi Lunelle]

I will assume that a diplomatic invasion of a planet is still allowed if both major factions agree to it?

 

[Tefka]

I will assume that a diplomatic invasion of a planet is still allowed if both major factions agree to it?

This would fall under the Invasion's ruleset and would not be treated as a merge.

But if it gets abused...

 

[Tefka]

If two factions create IC precedent for a merge, would this rule still stop them from merging?

Yes.

At least it would prevent them from merging influence clouds.

 

[Matreya]

This would fall under the Invasion's ruleset and would not be treated as a merge.

This seems to be the exact thing being ruled against, minus the fact that it requires work. Was that the goal? So long as the invasions are worked for, one could technically merge parts of another's cloud.

 

[Darth Ayra]

Yes.

At least it would prevent them from merging influence clouds.

This rule doesn't make sense. You're essentially making people redo dominions of worlds that they've already done. This is real hit on the game aspect of Chaos.

 

[Kei Amadis]

[member="Darth Pikiran"]

This seems to be the exact thing being ruled against, minus the fact that it requires work. Was that the goal? So long as the invasions are worked for, one could technically merge parts of another's cloud.

For diplomatic invasions (or any forgone conclusion type of invasion): This would be like a dom then I guess. Unless there wasn't a min post count an RPJ thought acceptable, say 100 . Seems fair to me.

-edited to offer a more comprehensive reply.

 

[Julius Sedaire]

This rule doesn't make sense. You're essentially making people redo dominions of worlds that they've already done. This is real hit on the game aspect of Chaos.

I put an emphasis on what I found particularly odd and confusing in your post... Chaos is a Role Playing Forum.... Not an RTS... So the insistence and focus spent on that map and all the associated issues that spring up around it are irritating to me.

For myself, personally? I'm ambivalent on this ruling. I'll have to see how it plays out. However, initially, i'm all for it. 90% of these mergers i've seen in my (admittedly) short time here seem more OOCly motivated in cornering the map and related resources (i'm hearing Warcrat peasant voices in my mind, ach, help!) than any real quality or believable quality story, at least from what I can see.

So, let it roll, lets see if it actually becomes a problem. I doubt it will though.

 

[Darth Metus]

10/10

I like. I like it a lot.

 

[Darth Carnifex]

I put an emphasis on what I found particularly odd and confusing in your post... Chaos is a Role Playing Forum.... Not an RTS... So the insistence and focus spent on that map and all the associated issues that spring up around it are irritating to me.

For myself, personally? I'm ambivalent on this ruling. I'll have to see how it plays out. However, initially, i'm all for it. 90% of these mergers i've seen in my (admittedly) short time here seem more OOCly motivated in cornering the map and related resources (i'm hearing Warcrat peasant voices in my mind, ach, help!) than any real quality or believable quality story, at least from what I can see.

So, let it roll, lets see if it actually becomes a problem. I doubt it will though.

Me not that kind of Orc.

 

[Julius Sedaire]

Me not that kind of Orc.

Silly Kaine, Trix are for hoomies...

 

[Ben Watts]

I mean this ruling makes absolute sense. It is not fair to just hand over planets, I mean, come one. How is it ruining the "game" aspect of Chaos? You want all the rewards but with absolutely zero work for it? Do you think that a planet and all its inhabitants are just going to accept that a new faction has dominion over them? It needs to be rp'ed out if you are going to just be handing things over. It makes no sense for a faction to just give someone else their influence when, technically, they were supposed to RP gaining dominion over the planet. So, yes, if a new faction is trying to take over a planet another dominion is necessary unless you are just wanting handouts.

Excellent new rule!

 

[Darth Metus]

^This.

 

[Akatan Adasca]

 

[Kyber Salurra]

I don't know how I feel about this. The reasoning you laid out is solid and the explanation as well as the examples are crystal clear, however I still have some reservations. Mainly I feel this way because of the IC precedent this sets. It's basically saying that militarization and the strongest armies thrive, while story driven diplomats suffer. Yes this situation has been highly abused in the past, but saying there's zero chance of letting this happen in the future I think is too much. For that one in a million chance that character's have gone through proper channels and they've done the proper roleplay to get to the point where factions may merge on equal terms, why would they suddenly lose half their planets? This new rule not only dashes the dreams of political powerhouses but makes it so factions should okay focus on heavy militarization, and for peaceful and/or smaller factions it does hurt them.

The rule is obviously necessary, I just think that there should be a clause saying that there can be exceptions every once in a blue moon if the staff can agree that a faction went through the proper channels and works hard in their roleplay to set up a mutual IC merge.

That's just my two cents though.

 

[Julius Sedaire]

[member="Kyber Salurra"] - The angst that 'clause' would add are going to be too damn high, to quote a popular meme. EVERYONE is going to think they are that one exception, regardless of any reason or sense. It's better to make it fair the other 999,999,999 times than allow such idiocy to reign supreme for the 1 time, imho.

 

[Sempra the Hutt]

MAJOR FACTION MERGERS[/SIZE]1. A Major Faction [/size]may not merge its influence cloud with another Major Faction's influence cloud.[/size]

2. A Major Faction [/size]may not gift another Major Faction any territory or planets.[/size]

Link: http://starwarsrp.net/page/articles.html/_/role-play-rules/major-factions-r15


Admin Vote: 5 for, 0 against, 1 abstain.

Reason: The Hutt Cartel is the most recent example of wanting to merge their influence cloud, but this isn't an uncommon issue faced before - plenty of Major Factions have done it. I, however, do not feel it is fair to new factions. Mainly because there's almost never any IC precedent for it - with the exception of the Levantine/Silver Jedi merge, which was hilariously also the reason one of our Admins felt he had to abstain from the vote (since he took part in it). I'm sure there are other examples of it working out ICly, but its almost never the reason.

And it is just taking up space on the map, making mergers more powerful than invasions and dominions combined.

FOs leaving, faction abandonment, inactivity... or its a power move. Those are mostly the reasons, and if it was the last one, I could almost let it slide. But too often a faction grows and then goes inactive, leaving the Faction Owner going "well, I'm not going to let this land go to waste."

Sorry for putting you on the spot, Hutt Cartel. Please realize you only happened to be the last guy in line for this issue, and it had nothing to do with you specifically that spurned this interest and subsequent vote.

The Hutt Cartel Admins take no offense regarding this decission.

The merger and cloud breaking rules has mostly been a strange affair from what we can gather. That said, rest assured that we had a pretty neat story ready to explain things IC way. The fact that it wont be told is however totally worth it!

Our only regret is that these rulings did not come earlier. But again, at least I believe it was worth it if we could help move this decission along!

Well done!

Cheers
Sempra and the "old cartel" FAs.

 

[Jsc]

Sexy rule is sexy.

 

[Strider Garon]

And it is just taking up space on the map,

Yes, I agree. That red blob thingy is taking up a lot of space on the map. It must be removed!