[Lordopic]

Originally Posted by ELPIRATA

@Daslog: Did u have in EU 1 GM?


ELP

Did you have one GM on EU, sounds better

And no we had a few and a whole team of em working on the RP, with the help of Op’s

I see your point ELP im just against giving all that power to one person, Unless of course your talking about GM_Lordo who will be the captain of the good ship Amananth.

[Eraser55]

Originally Posted by Viper2c

I never said they shouldn't be 'unprepared'. Lordopic is more inline of what I was thinking. In my experience whenever I started a RP story, and was working on it being public and a continuation, it usually got kicked in the sack by a GM event that suspiciously was designed perfectly to ruin my story. And I'm not the only one it ever happened to.

This is what I hate and fear most. It's almost as if the GMs at the time didn't want people to think up ideas on their own, thinking that their RP couldn't match up to the 'professionals'. "You can't think for yourself, that's what we're here for, do this instead cause we know we are better."

At least that's what it seemed like to me.


Viper2c

this sounds pretty lame to me. Do you always write RP stories with a specific ending and expect everything to go your way? And do you improvise if something unexpected happens? Always expect the unexpected.

Personally I don't enjoy RP that I have much information about. I love to come up with small events/trigger stories and then just see what happens next.

I kind of like the idea of a Factional Head that has "some" (not total) control over his faction. But there should be like 50 or more different personalities(warmonger, peaceful, tactician, ideologist, capitalist, constructionist, and so on) and those could be voted in by players. Then he would lead he faction in a specific direction depending on his personality.

So if octs end up voting a peaceful miner as their faction head, he would mostly focus on getting ore stocks up(with missions) and being peaceful to others.. boring..

[vorlon31]

Experience says that way too much would depend on the personality of the GM(s) so my vote would be no for that very reason. Im all for GM's being seen and NOT heard.

[Montaugh]

Why not tie something like this into the missions system so that it becomes fire and forget on the dev side of things?

Take a scouting mission.. you work for the exploration/development branch.
Take a combat mission.. working for military branch.
Take a mining mission.. working for the blab blah branch.

Anyway you get the idea. When the next faction mission gets offered the game would just tally up all the missions done by your faction and would offer a faction mission to boost what the pilots have been working on. This allows the players to decide on the directions that factions would go by simply playing and enjoying the game as they do. If scouting has no more option and it was the highest tally you would then go to the next highest tally.

prison break is on gotta go. Hope that made sense.

[Viper2c]

Originally Posted by Eraser55

this sounds pretty lame to me. Do you always write RP stories with a specific ending and expect everything to go your way? And do you improvise if something unexpected happens? Always expect the unexpected.

Well, the roleplay that I was 'designing', did not have an endplay to it. Since my character was meant to stay, storyline would continue. It was just the first part of it, which was crucial, was obliterated by a GM-run event. Unexpected, yes. Could I work around it...actually no. It was kind of a paradox to try to work around. The best option was to just drop it.

It was a conflux storyline, and I won't get into it, because I want to try a revised RP at a later date, depending all on how, what, where, and whatever Evolution becomes.

As far as calling it lame, well, we all have our opinions, but that doesn't mean I have to like yours.


Viper2c

[Eraser55]

it is still lame to "whine" about others ruining your roleplay with their roleplay.. sometimes in RP everything goes to hell and you die.


and pls dont whine about me calling your argument a whine. I am not saying that you are a whiner.


but thats my undisputed opinion.

[Jump]

I agree. If you set out to do a role play event you need to accept that it can go wrong and conflict with others. Same as anything in life.

[Viper2c]

But that's the thing...I wasn't whining...

I stated something that happened in the past, and told about what happened because of it, and how I perceived it to be. Then I typed my concern and hope of it not happening again. If I wanted to 'whine' about it, I would have done it then....sheesh.

Now I'll state something else that I 'perceive'...people seem to want to cause unnecessary confrontation around here. I don't know why.

I don't whine, and nothing I do is 'lame'.

[Lordopic]

Originally Posted by Viper2c

Now I'll state something else that I 'perceive'...people seem to want to cause unnecessary confrontation around here. I don't know why.

Welcome to the wonderfull world of MMO forums

[Jump]

Originally Posted by Viper2c

Now I'll state something else that I 'perceive'...people seem to want to cause unnecessary confrontation around here. I don't know why.

It's a gaming forum. Gamers are competitive by nature. But we try to keep the confrontations civil here.

[Radi]

Factional commanders idea sounds very interesting. It can possibly add to the gameplay. Since everything in Jumpgate is player driven, factions should be also (or at least to some extent).

I was thinking along the lines of Battlefront 2. You apply for a commander role, and if you have highest ranking of the applicants, you become commander. Of course players can always overthrow commander if he is doing a bad job. Majority wins.

In Jumpgate, this could add so much on many levels. Great leaders, bad leaders, civil wars etc. Or even a dummy leader positioned by other faction.

Leaders would only give orders, it is still up to players to follow them or not.
Squads could even give support to a new leader. Or not. So many options.....