Jump to content

Death to Preplanning


Domingo the Honored

  

33 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Markus is fighting the good fight. Keep it up broski, your literally holding up the argument for anti preplanners. Everyone else, stop !@#$%*ing and sniping and get some real points of debate up, otherwise what is discussed in here is worthless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='PresidentDavid' timestamp='1346195611' post='3026109']
Domingo, when Triyun preplanned me he said he was going to roll me and do certain things and that if I didn't agree to the terms he'd just get a waver.... How is that taking up so much time? Patrick and I just preplanned and we worked out all of the details so now we wont have any bickering unless it's about stats and we know the consequences of who wins or loses.
[/quote]

Now that is funny. I say destroy it! War isn't supposed to be fair.

Edited by Chancellor Patrick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='PresidentDavid' timestamp='1346195611' post='3026109']
Domingo, when Triyun preplanned me he said he was going to roll me and do certain things and that if I didn't agree to the terms he'd just get a waver.... How is that taking up so much time? Patrick and I just preplanned and we worked out all of the details so now we wont have any bickering unless it's about stats and we know the consequences of who wins or loses.
[/quote]

It takes a while before a GM will approve a waiver. Ask TBM, he waited 2 weeks before I granted a waiver and this was after LBT didn't respond to the PM at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1346243545' post='3026317']
Markus is fighting the good fight. Keep it up broski, your literally holding up the argument for anti preplanners. Everyone else, stop !@#$%*ing and sniping and get some real points of debate up, [b]otherwise what is discussed in here is worthless.[/b]
[/quote]
It's no official poll, we already went two times through this... I think it is pretty much worthless anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the record I never imposed an outcome on PD. I never said he had to lose. I just said I would not stop fighting until his regime was wiped out, in other words I did not agree to lose in the long term. In other words, in any terms where we take emotions and the natural inclination to cheer for the under dog, PD was the one asking for restrictions on RP, he was the one asking for the imposition of an [i]outcome[/i] not the terms of battle. I was perfectly willing to discuss whether or not allies could enter for either side, I was perfectly happy to discuss the use of nuclear and WMD type weapons. What PD wanted was fundamentally different. He wanted to be guarenteed that he could play the hero in the long run and save Texas from the evil commie yellow peril. Never was there a single instance of preplanning meaning that we had to agree on outcomes which were less than our means to achieve unless we wanted to for plot reasons. Now if PD wanted to give me a reason for that, I would suggest he work on his people skills and not call me the Great Satan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346253074' post='3026363']
... not call me the Great Satan.
[/quote]

Great Satan!

...

That is kind of fun to say though, I'm not going to lie!

In all seriousness though, I'm going to lay down a little bit of an opinion here on preplanning, probably something I have yet to do in one of these community-wide polls (which is not official, sadly). Some people may not know the origins of this preplanning rule, so lets recap, shall we? Preplanning was the result of the TSI-Cochin... War, a conflict that I was party to, and maybe "War" is the wrong word here, it was more of a Debacle, one that spanned the better part of a month and a half, with some of the most bitter out-of-character conflicts over CNRP warfare that I have seen.

The preplanning rule came about after the mods imposed a new system that the GMs at the time (Triyun, Centurius, and later myself), accepted and molded into the current rule we have now. At the time, especially after the TSI-Cochin Debacle, the rule made sense, it had my full support at the time, as well as wide support amongst the rest of the community. The rule was [i]specifically imposed[/i] to help limit unpleasant OOC exchanges and establish dialogues between players before the war went down, it was [i]never intended[/i] to protect anyone, nor be used as an OOC roadblock to an actual war. There have been a number of wars where the preplanning rule has worked well and established the line of communication between players that limits the public rants each has against the other, but the issue here is not its effectiveness, it is the use of the preplanning rule as a shield against attack, basically trying to bore players into not attacking, allowing the person under attack to shield themselves to gain an advantage, or basically make it so hard OOCly to deal with them or stretch out the preplanning time that the attackers cease and desist.

Frankly and in total honesty, it really busts certain parts of my genitalia that individuals in this community are using a rule that I, as a GM (along with others), imposed in good faith that the community would use this to hash out OOC issues before the war, instead of using it as basically an unfair advantage. It is not fair to those who abide by the rules and try to follow them to the letter, and its unhealthy to the community as a whole that this has even come about. I'm not going to point fingers at anyone, but I'm not going to sugarcoat things either, in my completely honest opinion, given this rule is one that people have used to gain unfair advantage over others, I believe it is detrimental to this community, and therefore should go.

I do believe, however, that OOC discussions before any war begins should be encouraged by the sitting GM team, but I believe that preplanning, as a rule, with the components of having to wait for waivers and all of that associated nonsense, should go. It has become a point of contention in this community, it is one that is causing more clamor than it is solving, and any official offensive that moves to dissolve the facets of preplanning has my support.

Edited by TheShammySocialist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1346252600' post='3026359']
I wouldnt say its worthless, it gives the GM team an up to date insight as to what the community wants to do.
[/quote]
Not when it is anonymous. Could as well be some bunch of trolls, rigging the vote while not being part of the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear to everyone involved and clarify why this isn't public: I was intending this poll to gauge public opinion and be used as a discussion. If it were to be in favor of ending it after 3 days (should've mentioned that) I was going to put in a request for an official GM-sponsored and created poll.

I still will if ending pre-planning maintains its lead. And probably if it doesn't. :P

[quote name='Evangeline Anovilis' timestamp='1346271585' post='3026431']
Not when it is anonymous. Could as well be some bunch of trolls, rigging the vote while not being part of the community.
[/quote]

This sounds about as likely as me jumping off a skyscraper in the next ten seconds.

Edited by Domingo the Honored
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Domingo the Honored' timestamp='1346274229' post='3026441']
This sounds about as likely as me jumping off a skyscraper in the next ten seconds.
[/quote]
Please don't do it. Would be a wasted life.

No, really. I think we may all remember the SDI poll, the last one where people found it fun to vote, even without a nation. And we had the same already before. There is a reason we ask for polls to be public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1346253074' post='3026363']
For the record I never imposed an outcome on PD. I never said he had to lose. I just said I would not stop fighting until his regime was wiped out, in other words I did not agree to lose in the long term. In other words, in any terms where we take emotions and the natural inclination to cheer for the under dog, PD was the one asking for restrictions on RP, he was the one asking for the imposition of an [i]outcome[/i] not the terms of battle. I was perfectly willing to discuss whether or not allies could enter for either side, I was perfectly happy to discuss the use of nuclear and WMD type weapons. What PD wanted was fundamentally different. He wanted to be guarenteed that he could play the hero in the long run and save Texas from the evil commie yellow peril. Never was there a single instance of preplanning meaning that we had to agree on outcomes which were less than our means to achieve unless we wanted to for plot reasons. Now if PD wanted to give me a reason for that, I would suggest he work on his people skills and not call me the Great Satan.
[/quote]

I think either I or someone else has all of the logs of our preplan session. I'll post them if I find them. And I didn't want an outcome, I thought the point of preplanning was to negotiate and make things fair so that both sides could enjoy they war but you simply told me that wasn't true and that I would have to RP Texas as a Communist-Socialist regime if you won and that I couldn't RP rebel capitalists/nationalists. Then you asked me about allies. I told you I thought that it sound like you were just trying to troll me and you said that if I didn't agree to your terms you would simply get a waiver since I had come on, told you that I didn't agree, and rejected your plans. Hopefully I still have the logs on my desktop. Regardless, however, I did want to win even though I don't spend as much time as you here so I didn't stand as much of a chance since my allies didn't want to have to deal with you either.

Regardless, this poll still has no weight since it was improperly done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Markus Wilding' timestamp='1346281893' post='3026477']
This poll IS NOT to determine whether we keep the rule or not. This poll is [i]to determine community support for abolishing the rule.[/i] How many times do we need to say it?
[/quote]

And how many times must we say that due to it not being public we can not use it for any purpose. We can't know if the community supports or does not support abolishing as anyone on the forums could make a vote without being a part of the CNRP community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kevin Kingswell' timestamp='1346282110' post='3026478']
And how many times must we say that due to it not being public we can not use it for any purpose. We can't know if the community supports or does not support abolishing as anyone on the forums could make a vote without being a part of the CNRP community.
[/quote]

[img]http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/You%2Breally%2Bthink%2Bsomeone%2Bwould%2Bdo%2Bthat%2B.%2BJust%2Bgo%2Bon_981b71_3201562.jpg[/img]

This is a topic for discussion, I think we all understand that the poll should be made public if there's an official voting thread on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1346283965' post='3026486']
Why are people getting so hung up on the publicity? Official polls are public, discussion polls are not REQUIRED to be public, merely preferred.
[/quote]

As I mentioned if we are trying to use this poll to deem the community's support we still need it to be public to eliminate those votes from random forum trolls and there like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And people posting isnt enough? Its clear that half of us dont want it, and the other half does, making the vote public wont change that, it will just confirm it. Yes it SHOULD be public, but im not going to let it bother me like it is to 90% of the people posting in here.

If people actually posted about the topic, and not !@#$%*ing about the !@#$@#$ publicity of the vote, then we would still know where the community stands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine, I'll make it clear Zoot so people know...I support preplanning. :P
[quote name='Domingo the Honored' timestamp='1346274229' post='3026441']
This sounds about as likely as me jumping off a skyscraper in the next ten seconds.
[/quote][quote name='Evangeline Anovilis' timestamp='1346275101' post='3026447']
Please don't do it. Would be a wasted life.

No, really. I think we may all remember the SDI poll, the last one where people found it fun to vote, even without a nation. And we had the same already before. There is a reason we ask for polls to be public.
[/quote]
yeah, and somehow a bunch of...MK'ers, i believe, voted randomly in it. :P

[quote name='Markus Wilding' timestamp='1346281893' post='3026477']
This poll IS NOT to determine whether we keep the rule or not. This poll is [i]to determine community support for abolishing the rule.[/i] How many times do we need to say it?
[/quote][quote name='Kevin Kingswell' timestamp='1346282110' post='3026478']
And how many times must we say that due to it not being public we can not use it for any purpose. We can't know if the community supports or does not support abolishing as anyone on the forums could make a vote without being a part of the CNRP community.
[/quote]Indeed. the poll is useless.

The discussion, however, is not.

Edited by Subtleknifewielder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll read the complete thread, but before that, allow me to give my bit on the opinion of a GM: Given that the GM in question was so inefficient at arbitration to the point a fellow GM considered some of the discussions to be bewildering, and the fact that a non-GM had been helpful enough to make the preplanning session a relative success, exactly what is the stated problem? The fact that the GM was imcompetent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1346297105' post='3026545']
I'll read the complete thread, but before that, allow me to give my bit on the opinion of a GM: Given that the GM in question was so inefficient at arbitration to the point a fellow GM considered some of the discussions to be bewildering, and the fact that a non-GM had been helpful enough to make the preplanning session a relative success, exactly what is the stated problem? The fact that the GM was imcompetent?
[/quote]

At least have the balls to use my name yeah? You hindered the prelanning more than helped it, it was you that caused me to wash my hands of the entire debacle. Combined with the godmodded wiped post, now PD might think he knows whe he is being manipulated, but he doesn't. 1.8 million reserve militia forces for a nation with 3kns? The frank pig headedness you instilled with PD, making any sort of compromise nearly impossible? The constant snide comments towards me when you didnt agree with what I suggested or thought was a frankly stupid idea, see "to take ireland you will have to kill every single irish citizen".

If your going to try and on up me, your welcome, but to come into this thread, not read it, skip right to the end so you can rant some !@#$%^&* about a GM being "incompetant", when it was actually you that was making things difficult, pestering Patrick in query to make sure PD got his own way without having to compromise anything, even after Patrick himself changed his entire goals and methods to avoid the arguments that followed.

The fact that you were pretty much pushing for impossible terms so Patrick wouldnt agree and PD gets to apply for a waiver, which makes it an open war, and would allow you to get involved.

Your as transparent as glass Kankou.

I have said this for months, until people learn to compromise and not inflict ridiculous terms like FORCING people to RP socialist states or be rolled, for allowing 1.8 million militia soldiers, or "if i dont get my way im getting a waiver" and that sort of nonsense, pre planning will continue to be a point of contention with the community and these polls will continue to arise until its removed. Until people stop doing what i just described and more, they preplanning will never be used as it was intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what was that sensible compromise? Using an out-of-date past ruling that has no place in modern CNRP? Constantly stacking the decks towards your future ally? Sprouting such idiotic statements that everyone was facepalming?

The fact is I moved to get you out of the discussions because you were such a blockhead. The fact you say I'm transparent when you've moved in the direction I wanted you to move shows just how blind you are. Sorry Zoot, but it seems like you're still just putty in my hands as always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...