Uberstein Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 I'm not in favor of a nation in North America having no rp based historical ties nor irl historical or geographical proximity to India and just having rolled merging with a India. It seems way too ooc to me. If a gm decision were to be requested I would push for a retcon. Too much OOC hinkiness to me. As far as the cap goes, I'd say they each control their own forces and each of them are capped independently of each other. India didn't merge with the US. India decided to not exist anymore and the player rerolled into a merger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Personally, I'm not a big fan of mergers, never have been. That said, there's both good and bad things that can happen. Mara and PD's merger is an excellent example of a good merger. I can't for the life of me think of what would be good, fair restrictions beyond the players being unable to control the other's armies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 my personal opinion is if it becomes an issue we can make a rule about it, until then let's all just RP! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 India didn't merge with the US. India decided to not exist anymore and the player rerolled into a merger. Duhhhhhhh.... never mind. So long as they rp their own troops, planes, ships, nukes, and etc.. I've no issue with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 my personal opinion is if it becomes an issue we can make a rule about it, until then let's all just RP! As bad as it feels to say, I agree with Mogar here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knights111 Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Well congrats on merging US and India, hopefully this will not effect our current plans for allying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Wilding Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Honestly, case-by-case basis sounds like a good enough idea for me right now. Both this and Uber's suggestion work pretty well in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bones wizard Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 I am flexible either way. I do like Uberstein's proposal. Just let me know what the final ruling is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 May I ask, what is the difference between a coalition and a merger in terms of foreign policy and military strength? One nation with two players and twice the army can successfully defend a much larger territory and successfully integrate their armies much easier and to a greater effect.YES. And (no offense) if you guys put as much effort into caps and OOC bickering, into ACTUAL RP there wouldn't be a problem. No offense intended on my part either, but if we'd have taken time to lay out the rules before attempting to RP there wouldn't be nearly so much bickering as we lay out the train track just a mile ahead of a locomotive. We can't fix the past, but the rules *do* need to be laid out to have a successful RP experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bones wizard Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 No offense intended on my part either, but if we'd have taken time to lay out the rules before attempting to RP there wouldn't be nearly so much bickering as we lay out the train track just a mile ahead of a locomotive. We can't fix the past, but the rules *do* need to be laid out to have a successful RP experience. I agree to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 One nation with two players and twice the army can successfully defend a much larger territory and successfully integrate their armies much easier and to a greater effect. Not really. Two cooperating players as allies can integrate their armed forces just as much as if they are merged. Standardising equipment, harmonising doctrines and coordinating the war effort is the same challenge between allies, as it is within one nation. So, what's the difference between the two people holding the land as two allied nations, instead of holding it as one nation, apart from the map designation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hereno Posted June 13, 2014 Report Share Posted June 13, 2014 Not really. Two cooperating players as allies can integrate their armed forces just as much as if they are merged. Standardising equipment, harmonising doctrines and coordinating the war effort is the same challenge between allies, as it is within one nation. So, what's the difference between the two people holding the land as two allied nations, instead of holding it as one nation, apart from the map designation? A nation is going to have more than one ally and isn't going to be able to match technologically perfectly with that nation, especially given the two nations are, well, different to begin with. I mean it could theoretically happen but that's just boring. The difference between it being two allied nations is that there's, for one, a large chance they won't be right next to each other. Me sending all of my troops to help Mogar in Japan leaves me extremely vulnerable to being taken over and having half of the forces in the war wiped out. How do you disable one person in a shared state, unless it's a situation like Mara/PD where the territory of one is defined within the other?Which isn't to say that there aren't disadvantages to sharing a state, but then this is getting increasingly theoretical and detached from the point which is "do these differences matter?" Which is precisely why I thought it was best to just handle each case on its own merits so we aren't making a blanket rule for a situation that can, due to the dynamics of the whole thing, be radically different from one case to the other. For the record, I didn't see any problem with your splitting of China w/Horo (and Jesbro, of course) as separate-but-allied states, and I don't foresee the US merger here being a serious problem either, not least because I think the RPers involved are at least fairly reasonable so far. But the discussion still needs to be had either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bones wizard Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 If I want I'll jsut give mona a state as her "own" and we'll do it like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knights111 Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 If I want I'll jsut give mona a state as her "own" and we'll do it like that. what many do not know is that all the US is is a government holding other nations together, just like United kingdom. Each state is supposed to be there own country, bonded with each other, but our current government is bot allowing that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markus Wilding Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 If I want I'll jsut give mona a state as her "own" and we'll do it like that. Honestly, I don't care. If you want to do internal stuff and let mona work the Army, that's fine, but (to me) only if mona's numbers are used in a war and not the combined numbers of you both.* * This is only my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 (edited) This would be an interesting way to do it. Multiple players are allowed to control one country, but you simply use the larger nation's capped stats.. I do not find that acceptable. If multiple people are in a country they should be able to control their own standing armies (1) and (2) should have their IC stats to make the entire country. If, a member of an merger, had a reason to rebel against the other for the sake of RP or because of differences they would have to bow to the member who controlled the standing army. Mergers have always been special cases where people come together to do something exceptional - run a country together and (usually) peacefully. From my knowledge, merged nations usually are not as aggressive as single party nations because you have two or more people thinking things through. But limiting the military to one nation's stats is just silly. Because Mara and I are RPing together, we can justify having a bit more land than just a single party nation. However how would we protect it if we had just my stats? This is essentially amounting to making everyone equal whereas diversity in strength is a good thing because it is realistic and it gives a certain dynamic that the game would be bland without. Mara and I combined are still weaker than our powerful (but so far friendly) neighbor Lynneth, so why should we have to forsake or IC national security and OOC enjoyment just because it gives others the false sense of security that we wont take over the world? I mean if that is the fear we all might as well just RP 100,000 soldiers max and their be no modifiers or anything. EDIT: Though I don't see how America and India could be one country IC or in real life.... I know we don't need to be realistic in RP when it comes to politics or roleplay but that is a pretty big stretch. EDIT EDIT: Uberstein that wasn't directed at you. Just part of the discussion :P Edited June 14, 2014 by PresidentDavid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bones wizard Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 USA and India are NOT combined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 (edited) I apologize for that mistake. I see now that they meant you and Mona simply merged. Well yes, for those of you who are knew here merging is a common thing but I promise you it isn't something you should be afraid of. While mergers can be bigger, their have to make decisions more like a real country that has multiple people and thus their response time is sometimes slower, they typically are more moderate in situations because of differing opinions, they are subject to revolutions and civil wars that tare the country apart, and they typically harbor an awesome place to RP. Edited June 14, 2014 by PresidentDavid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 what many do not know is that all the US is is a government holding other nations together, just like United kingdom. Each state is supposed to be there own country, bonded with each other, but our current government is bot allowing that The United Kingdom is a unitary state, not a federation of states. The United Kingdom has a system in place called devolution, to create parliaments for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but this is not the same as a federal system, especially because US states are far more able to legally defend their rights than say Scotland. Both countries are however also not Confederations, which would be the correct term for what you are implying the US is. The United States of America started out maybe as a Confederation, but over time evolved into a federal state, where it is quite clear that just because federal subjects are called states, they are not a country of their own. And I think the last time the idea of the US being a Federation, not a Confederation was really challenged massively was in the Civil War. And the outcome of that one just reinforced the Federal idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 (edited) Yeah trust me, my State tried leaving the Union and it didn't go well. Edited June 14, 2014 by PresidentDavid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mona lisa Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 so am I allowed to RP MY military forces? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knights111 Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 The United Kingdom is a unitary state, not a federation of states. The United Kingdom has a system in place called devolution, to create parliaments for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, but this is not the same as a federal system, especially because US states are far more able to legally defend their rights than say Scotland. Both countries are however also not Confederations, which would be the correct term for what you are implying the US is. The United States of America started out maybe as a Confederation, but over time evolved into a federal state, where it is quite clear that just because federal subjects are called states, they are not a country of their own. And I think the last time the idea of the US being a Federation, not a Confederation was really challenged massively was in the Civil War. And the outcome of that one just reinforced the Federal idea. Learn the conservative way, my democratic friend. Step out of the cult known as the United States and step into something bigger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bones wizard Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 whats the final ruling? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted June 14, 2014 Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 GMs don't make rulings on this, the community votes on it. If you guys think we've got some good options we can add it to the various polls Monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shave N Haircut Posted June 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 14, 2014 Honestly pretty much all my previous worries have been extinguished. You go people, be one nation with two rulers! Wohooo! 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.