Captain Enema Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) Seriously, 3 months off.. no way. 4 to 6 weeks max. 21 days without GM permission. Discuss. Edited August 30, 2014 by Tidy Bowl Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillon1102 Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 This was already discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 I'm not opposed to the lock rule itself, what I am opposed to is the policy that apparently the nation locked is always in the right and that any action (even) indirectly against it is declared illegal while not given this same status to actions in support of it. In no rp I have ever been in were locks enforced like that. All they did was grant a nation immunity from direct attack or any kind of movement inside locked territory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Ilyich Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 I'm not opposed to the lock rule itself, what I am opposed to is the policy that apparently the nation locked is always in the right and that any action (even) indirectly against it is declared illegal while not given this same status to actions in support of it. In no rp I have ever been in were locks enforced like that. All they did was grant a nation immunity from direct attack or any kind of movement inside locked territory. Well, you said basically the exact same thing about what this rp does and what cnrp2 does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted August 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 I'm not opposed to the lock rule itself, what I am opposed to is the policy that apparently the nation locked is always in the right and that any action (even) indirectly against it is declared illegal while not given this same status to actions in support of it. In no rp I have ever been in were locks enforced like that. All they did was grant a nation immunity from direct attack or any kind of movement inside locked territory. Ehh, most locks are short enough that people just wait for the person to return and either act then or the person deals with it upon arrival. Most people as far as I recall tend not to directly act against someone who is locked. With a 3 month lock, its becomes more and more of a problem, as if our rp must ignore someone completely absent... yet not at all absent. Mostly, its just far more of a noticed problem. Which is why I say that this lock period needs to be shorter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 I would understand a lock under the most special of circumstances. Career doesn't count. Plenty of us have given up nations during times like this. You move on. I lost a nation that way, Sarah did, Shammy did, Mudd did, Cochin did, many others I never saw that as a source of massive unfairness. I would say a major auto accident or something unforeseen does rise to that level. In the real world you make choices, sometimes you have to give up time in your hobby for career, you deal with it. On Cent's point I agree completely, the idea territory not part of France that France might want was grounds for retcon is ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavour Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 If I may be able to weight in. A lot of these events seem to have happened before I joined, but I've read a lot about the discussion of France being locked and people crossing OOC/IC lines. My question would be that, given the amount of time that apparently proceeded from her wouldn't it also make sense for those countries supporting France to begin questioning the stability of the country. I guess from an IC perspective a country's public might be concerned with a government supporting another government that really doesn't exist. I can't think of any kind of parallel in the real world, because if a government shut down for a long period of time, the nation would just collapse. So if you wanted to look at this from a purely IC standpoint, a lock shouldn't be that long because the government/nation in question would lose all credibility. From a realistic aspect from the nations supporting France. If you see Britain postulating against France as unfair. Isn't it equally unfair that your country's popular opinion doesn't question pro-French movements? Even in dictatorships, there is still underground press. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yerushalayim Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 A lock doesn't mean the government doesn't exist. A lock doesn't mean anything IC. It just means that we, as reasonable players, aren't going to dick over the other person while they're gone. They can RP the lock however they like (e.g.: A period of isolationism, a period where things just are quiet, or they can choose to not mention it at all). Not our place to tell them that their gov is gone, or what's going on with their nation, during a lock. Would be breaking the rules of the lock, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Wilding Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 As far as realism regarding stability, Belgium's government was nonexistent for 589 days. Assuming all of CNRP2 runs on the "3 RL months = 1 IC year" timeline (which I doubt all of us do) then France has only been inactive/keeping to itself for just about half a year. That's nowhere close to the American government shutdown or the Belgian government shutdown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cavour Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 A lock doesn't mean the government doesn't exist. A lock doesn't mean anything IC. It just means that we, as reasonable players, aren't going to dick over the other person while they're gone. They can RP the lock however they like (e.g.: A period of isolationism, a period where things just are quiet, or they can choose to not mention it at all). Not our place to tell them that their gov is gone, or what's going on with their nation, during a lock. Would be breaking the rules of the lock, anyway. Just seems odd to me to have time just freeze and no consequences come from that. And Markus, yes, but then going back to the IC point, were there not massive consequences of government shut down both domestically and internationally? Especially in the realm of economics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 As far as realism regarding stability, Belgium's government was nonexistent for 589 days. Assuming all of CNRP2 runs on the "3 RL months = 1 IC year" timeline (which I doubt all of us do) then France has only been inactive/keeping to itself for just about half a year. That's nowhere close to the American government shutdown or the Belgian government shutdown. Belgium's government very much existed, the way the Belgian parliamentary system works is that the sitting government maintains control until a new government takes office. So while it took 589 days for a new government to come to power the previous one did not leave. The US government shutdown was also not a true loss of government but rather a suspension of nonessential government services. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) As the only other person who would benefit from an extended lock like FHIC's, based on nearly the same circumstances, I would say that locks beyond the inactivity time frame should not exist. No matter what, after the inactivity period, your nation is wiped. Edited August 30, 2014 by Voodoo Nova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 first off, 10 weeks is not 3 months, its 2, I would have hoped that people in this community had basic math skills, but I suppose that extra month allows you to make this into more of an injustice. Secondly, Yeru is correct that an IC lock does not mean that the nation's government does not exist, it simply means they're being quiet. Thing is, Nutmeg is acting IC on OOC information, since if France was here, I sincerely doubt he would have moved against Snow Haven, since France would have returned the land it willingly gave up to include another RPer into this community to France. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 first off, 10 weeks is not 3 months, its 2, I would have hoped that people in this community had basic math skills, but I suppose that extra month allows you to make this into more of an injustice. Secondly, Yeru is correct that an IC lock does not mean that the nation's government does not exist, it simply means they're being quiet. Thing is, Nutmeg is acting IC on OOC information, since if France was here, I sincerely doubt he would have moved against Snow Haven, since France would have returned the land it willingly gave up to include another RPer into this community to France. Fairly sure nutmeg knows what he would or would not do better than you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lestari Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Fairly sure nutmeg knows what he would or would not do better than you. And I'm sure if nutmeg were violating the IC/OOC line they would be totally forthcoming about it, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 As far as I can see if you can't interfere with or mention nations when they are locked if the it is disadvantageous to that nation then in turn you can't interfere or mention nations if it is advantageous. In short a locked nation is left our of ALL RP till that player comes back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) And I'm sure if nutmeg were violating the IC/OOC line they would be totally forthcoming about it, right? I thought the burden of proof was on the accuser and not the accused. Edited August 30, 2014 by Centurius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Would this chain of events occurred had FHIC been here? its a simple yes or no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Would this chain of events occurred had FHIC been here? its a simple yes or no. Well, one more seat in Belgrade then. Or most likely, her instead of Markus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 It would have been her immediately returning to the province, so I doubt it would have come to a meeting, besides perhaps over the swiss region. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 It would have been her immediately returning to the province, so I doubt it would have come to a meeting, besides perhaps over the swiss region. 7 posts, my friend. So, there would need to be some kind of diplomacy, unless she would want to force her way, in which case, she'd be warring Nutmeg (and those backing him). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 Nutmeg wouldn't have moved into the region had FHIC been here, since she would have immediately began the seven posts, which you all seem to wish to ignore since it doesn't fit your narrative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 You cannot presume to know her course of action mogar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 (edited) [14:23] <FHIC> Just as an aside, what's your impression of Orleans 04[14:23] <Mogar> not a clue, they arent a bad writer though 04[14:23] <Mogar> why do you ask? [14:23] <FHIC> I think she's pretty cool. 04[14:24] <Mogar> you think anyone who says oui oui is cool :P [14:24] <FHIC> I felt like I should try to help them out since they wanted to be French [14:24] <FHIC> and then if they quit I can just take the land back surely I cannot, since I was rarely ever in communication with her. edit: Logs were from the 26th of june, the same day that FHIC gave the land to snow Haven, there might have been further discussions if you *really* care. Edited August 30, 2014 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted August 30, 2014 Report Share Posted August 30, 2014 I'm not ignoring that FHIC would move in. I'm just stating that it'd be open to be contested and if the current events are any indication of how much the world is willing to accept her claim, there's reason to believe, that we'd be still sitting in Belgrade. Because, unless Nutmeg would have ceded the territory, or FHIC would go outright for a war, chances are, we'd be seeking a diplomatic settlement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.