Lorerunner's Forums

The Lorerunner's Forums

Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Keywords

discord  political  game  Trek  Star  WArs  

Latest topics
» Eye of the Storm
Today at 9:23 pm by SilverDragonRed

» Battle of Scales
Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:12 pm by SilverDragonRed

» Discovery Rumination Schedule?
Thu Aug 17, 2017 9:32 am by The Lorerunner

» Turn 9-1068
Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:59 am by The_Wanderer_In_Rags

» Nest of the Koth
Thu Aug 17, 2017 12:21 am by SilverDragonRed

» Star Trek TOS essential episodes?
Tue Aug 15, 2017 6:04 pm by NMdum1

» Turn 8-1068
Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:03 am by FreelanceZero

» The end of a journey (Star Trek: Voyager Rumination)
Wed Aug 09, 2017 3:13 pm by NMdum1

» Is The Federation in Star Trek Fascist?
Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:59 pm by NMdum1

You are not connected. Please login or register

So, The GM Likes Transparency...

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 3 of 7]

51 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:50 pm

The fantasy we never knew Gollvieg had.

View user profile

52 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:50 pm

Everyone being in the Senate is the most flexible in those regards.

View user profile

53 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:54 pm

Adamemnon wrote:Everyone being in the Senate is the most flexible in those regards.

Not when the current age we are in is not stable enough that a group of guys can afford to argue over something for months and instead requires them to say yes to anything the President asks because they will all get killed by rebels in a few hours if they won't

View user profile

54 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:54 pm

Suko Shinpei wrote:I vehemently disagree with actually spliting the regions. Sure, some of the areas I outlined could be used for this, but the main problem remains.

The necessity for X players to be active.

What happens if someone wants to join in? Do we split another region artificially?

What happens if someone drops out? Do we join two regions back together?

Such system will always need outside intervention. Mayoral system is much more flexible. I believe 9 players can and will be active at any point in time, it's a reasonable number. The rest can be assigned to much more flexible system underneath.

What happens if someone wants to be a Governor right now? Same situation will apply. If a Governor drops out, the region is ruled by an NPC, like the Waltens were for the majority of the game. Adding two or three more regions to accommodate the few Senators that still play won't disrupt the game I feel. Most Governors are already active players, merging these with the active Senators should create even more activity. A system where a Governor does not vote after a certain time limit would be count as an abstention, and in this case, they are removed from the overall tally, so at least active players can still pass legislature. This is just a suggestion as I feel the game ultimately requires more simplification rather than adding more complexity.

Merging Governors with Senators isn't a bad idea either, Adamemnon.

View user profile

55 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:57 pm

Why do the mayors need to have a subservient role though? I'm not seeing how this would help?

View user profile

56 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:58 pm

Instead of arguing about everything, can we have everyone that has a system submit it to Lore with the reasoning behind why that system is good so we can have a vote on it...
This bickering isnt going to get us anywhere...

View user profile

57 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:59 pm

Yes it is. Because we spot flaws in our systems and change them accordingly. I'd rather come to an agreement on a system than hold a vote for one.

View user profile

58 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:00 pm

President Grifenknight wrote:Instead of arguing about everything, can we have everyone that has a system submit it to Lore with the reasoning behind why that system is good so we can have a vote on it...
This bickering isnt going to get us anywhere...

I think we are discussing rather than bickering, but I see your point.

View user profile

59 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:00 pm

Whiskey, But it isnt when people arent spotting flaws and only saying that theirs is better...

View user profile

60 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:01 pm

I don't think that's what's happening.

View user profile

61 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:02 pm

What has changed in the systems so far?

View user profile

62 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:03 pm

What flaws have been spotted and what have people done about it to change their original systems?
From what I can tell, and inform me if im wrong, What we're currently doing is literally comparing the current possible systems and agreeing or disagreeing with them...

View user profile

63 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:05 pm

As one example I changed my system to have governor's actions not need to be voted on unless specifically requested by their co-governor/s

How would stopping debate help in any way? We've been told we've got plenty of time for this decision.

View user profile

64 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:09 pm

An alternative would be to simply reduce the Senate to just include the active Senators. E.g. 4 Senators, 1 for North, South, East and West Echain, and carry on.

Right now Grifen, I think we are all just throwing ideas about first to see where everyone is at.

View user profile

65 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:10 pm

Governor WhiskeyWhiskers wrote:
As one example I changed my system to have governor's actions not need to be voted on unless specifically requested by their co-governor/s

How would stopping debate help in any way? We've been told we've got plenty of time for this decision.

Your change is neither major or important and is already similar to the current system we have.

My problem currently is that people are calling out the flaws of other systems and not fixing their own... I'm okay with throwing out ideas and actually changing your systems, but thats not what we were doing for like a whole page...

View user profile

66 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:10 pm

Governor TomRP wrote:An alternative would be to simply reduce the Senate to just include the active Senators. E.g. 4 Senators, 1 for North, South, East and West Echain, and carry on.

Right now Grifen, I think we are all just throwing ideas about first to see where everyone is at.

Well, like Lore said, let's take our time hammering this out. We still need the Senators to pitch in their thoughts

View user profile

67 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:13 pm

We could have the 4 Senators who are most active with 2 Governors per region with less regions. If one of the Governors is less active the other will decide on matters if their is no objection heard.

View user profile

68 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:15 pm

President Grifenknight wrote:Your change is neither major or important and is already similar to the current system we have.

My problem currently is that people are calling out the flaws of other systems and not fixing their own...  I'm okay with throwing out ideas and actually changing your systems, but thats not what we were doing for like a whole page...

And now we've been arguing about how we're arguing for most of a page. Of course people want to argue why their system doesn't need to be changed. That's also good. It can convince someone that a flaw they thought a system had, isn't a major issue.

View user profile

69 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:17 pm

They're all flawed... Thats the problem... Thats nobody is changing...
I'll stop now and allow you all to discuss...

I recommend putting me in as dictator and you can all be my sex slaves, but I doubt that would pass... Sad
You could all play politics and attempt to become my #1 partner. hehehehe ;D

View user profile

70 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:17 pm

I still see the same problem with all the proposed solutions.

They are not flexible.

Now sure, you could have NPC's leading regions, but that would severely lessen the game. Lore can't be as active as a normal player and even one region being NPC severely limits possibilities for alliances and actual politics.

My system would be to get rid of the Senate and replace it with Council of Governors. Along with this boost to Governors, Mayors would be created, to assume more authority on regional level; their gameplay would be less structured and they could exert their influence in mostly unofficial ways.

This means you have a class of very active players as Governors, giving reward for activity and making national government stable, while having flexible number of roles for players who don't have to be as active, but still can be.

View user profile

71 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:19 pm

Suko Shinpei wrote:
My system would be to get rid of the Senate and replace it with Council of Governors.

I fully support this point.

View user profile

72 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:21 pm

Also, one benefit of my proposal is that such a change can be done very easily IC. Completely chaning internal political divisions isn't.

View user profile

73 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:22 pm

I could get behind that. I'd just also make a position for mayors who are very active to be able to have a way for more structured input too.

View user profile

74 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:24 pm

Well, they would still be responsible for a lot of developement in their areas of influence, using the fact Governors would have to use their resources on national level much more than they do now.

View user profile

75 Re: So, The GM Likes Transparency... on Thu Jan 26, 2017 6:26 pm

Anyways, we need everyone to be on this so it's should be a Stream topic anyways.

View user profile

View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 7]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum