Maelstrom Vortex Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 (edited) I appeal based on it being an anonymous poll which was obviously rigged based on information I have about a plot against a particular player . If you want an accurate vote, do a post-vote by active participants. Edited July 10, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margrave Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 Subtle, I've been noticing a trend within the CNRP community for some time moving away from saved stats. I'm merely acting on it now. If it somehow turns out the poll that the community just started swings against this opinion, I'll reconsider the ruling. At this poitn the vote stands unanimous in favor of abolishing.Also everyone else: rule 7. Consider it no longer unanimous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted July 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 Consider it no longer unanimous. 1) The poll we had made at the time was unanimous at 8-0. 2) There's a new poll that I guarantee will work if everyone follows the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 I appeal based on it being an anonymous poll which was obviously rigged based on information I have about a plot against a particular player . If you want an accurate vote, do a post-vote by active participants. Considering this was brought up over a debate concerning Vektor coming back using saved stats and having nothing to do with Sumeragi, your logic fails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted July 10, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 We're done here. Rule 7 guys or I'm going to see about reporting spam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Terra Di Agea Posted July 10, 2009 Report Share Posted July 10, 2009 Alright. Even though there is a poll up, after that one is rued on, I would like a new poll to go up over the legality of quitting/ rerolling and using your old saved stats, because that seems more like the issue at hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iKrolm Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 OOC: And the Fallout Shelter is a Wonder, I believe, so you need to have one ingame to have one here in RP. That's the rule. Could the rule for this wonder be modified? Because having a Fallout Shelter IG hurts you in a nuclear war (I can quote the reasons at length if anyone hasn't seen them), hense many nations which could purchase one (myself included) do not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 Could the rule for this wonder be modified? Because having a Fallout Shelter IG hurts you in a nuclear war (I can quote the reasons at length if anyone hasn't seen them), hense many nations which could purchase one (myself included) do not. Imo, you need a shelter for EXTENSIVE bunker networks to protect not only the entire population, but also vast numbers of your army. Without it, you can RP bunkers and the like, but only for, say, 20-40% of your military and population. My opinion. <.< Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted August 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 The community at large needs to decide on that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted August 15, 2009 Report Share Posted August 15, 2009 I dont mind if you RP making bunkers without a fallout shelter. Because 90% of bunkers cannot survive a nuclear attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowsage Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I want to address the re-emergence of Nordic Technology transferred to Groenlandia before it fell. There was one post detailing the transfer of technology to Groenlandia; no mention of it since. And now they try and create an entire arsenal for several nations using Nordic Technology which Groenlandia, at a Tech Level of 1800 should not be able to produce, much less create in ungodly amounts and store underground. This seems to me to be a direct circumvent of the saved stats ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V The King Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 I also thought about bringing that up - not necessarily concerning the Nordic technology or whatever, but rather addressing the idea of high-end technology "living on" even after the nation possessing it has been long defunct. I feel it's important that such technology is conserved because it emphasizes that there is continuity within the CNRP universe - knowledge does not simply "die off", and it shouldn't. It also adds some flavor to the roleplay as a role. However, as Sage has pointed out, it can be seen as a "clever" way to bypass conventional technological limits guidelines and the whole "saved stats" thing and leaves plenty of room for godmoding. I'd say "They ain't got the stats so they ain't got it", but as I have just said I find it detrimental to RP as a whole to simply say that. So I say let them have it, but they must expect said arsenal to be majorly handicapped by some mean - maybe some information was missing and the weapon is incomplete? A blueprint was torn apart so maybe part of this object won't function properly? We don't quite have the industrial capacity to reproduce this tank en masse. I don't know, use common sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmpaSand Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Does the rules not state that that is not allowed? Rerolling* This is RPing with a RP entity that is not the one you first RP'd with. *When Rerolling, you give up the ability and right to RP anything connected with your old entity. This means that people not present in your current country are unable to be controlled while physical installations cannot be controlled unless you own the land they are on. Only people with the same nation as they had at the time of these being originally used should be able to use them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Does the rules not state that that is not allowed? Only people with the same nation as they had at the time of these being originally used should be able to use them. Grøenlandia has not rerolled. They still maintain the nation they had at the time. The same goes for Prussia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 (edited) Grøenlandia has not rerolled. They still maintain the nation they had at the time. The same goes for Prussia. True, but Grøenlandia already had their OWN tanks and soldiers and tech. They can't have double everything even with blueprints. So really unless the entirety of Grøenlandia's military was placed into an underground storage shelter... Edited August 16, 2009 by Tahsir Re Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 True, but Grøenlandia already had their OWN tanks and soldiers and tech. They can't have double everything even with blueprints. So really unless the entirety of Grøenlandia's military was placed into an underground storage shelter... They can decommission their current tanks and equipment, scale the German tech down, and use the latter instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 They can decommission their current tanks and equipment, scale the German tech down, and use the latter instead. Of course, that would require some good RP... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 Of course, that would require some good RP... Which, I'm sure, Californian can provide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 The fact that you guys are continuing to argue after Lavo made a ruling stating that it could be used, if said nations using it were in the technology range, is really disrespectful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowsage Posted August 16, 2009 Report Share Posted August 16, 2009 That's why it's called an appeal. We're trying to get the opinion of the OTHER GM. And the majority of the community, which is what counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 The fact that you guys are continuing to argue after Lavo made a ruling stating that it could be used, if said nations using it were in the technology range, is really disrespectful. Well, we have every right to disagree with a GM ruling. If it means I'm disrespectful, then rename me "Disrespect McGee" because if I see a ruling as absurd, I will fight it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Well, we have every right to disagree with a GM ruling. If it means I'm disrespectful, then rename me "Disrespect McGee" because if I see a ruling as absurd, I will fight it. His ruling was that they needed X tech level to use the German tech. That doesn't seem absurd to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Well, we have every right to disagree with a GM ruling. If it means I'm disrespectful, then rename me "Disrespect McGee" because if I see a ruling as absurd, I will fight it. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1776763 That is not fighting a ruling. That is basically saying you won't recognize Lavo's ruling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1776763That is not fighting a ruling. That is basically saying you won't recognize Lavo's ruling. Yes, I don't recognize it. And your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 I'd like to get a GMs opinion about this issue that has arisen... if a player says they are going to delete their nation in 12 days and say, explicitly, that their land will revert to white, what is the policy on other players already carving up this player's land while he is still here? Do we, as fellow players, have to respect the leaving player's wishes for their land (a.k.a. reverting to white) instead of making our own plans for it? 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.