Jump to content

Discussion Nation Lock rule or whatever it is.


Captain Enema
 Share

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Voodoo Nova
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

[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 by Mogar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...