Adrian LaCroix Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 This makes sense. More sense than not allowing people to reroll, in any case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilien Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 PZI and EZI are ridiculous. It's players stepping into the role of moderators. As to your proposal, it essentially makes one a slave of the alliance they've wronged. It would be better to die than live that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diomede Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Except they are let off???No one learns there lesson these days anyways. I think most of the stronger characters that make up this game realize it doesn't matter if Infrastructure reads 0. I'm not sure how they're "let off" when they've already been ZId. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) I have another idea: ZI someone once if you must and then allow everyone to move on. Really, all your idea does is legitimises prolonged punishment and excessive control over nations who have only committed basic IC crimes (nuke roguery and spying), and are therefore not deserving of over-the-top punishment in the first place. Edited March 11, 2009 by Aimee Mann Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incitatus Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I'm impressed. Way to try and put something new on the map. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I have another idea: ZI someone once if you must and then allow everyone to move on.Really, all your idea does is legitimises prolonged punishment and excessive control over nations who have only committed basic IC crimes (nuke roguery and spying), and are therefore not deserving of over-the-top punishment in the first place. Exactly. Also I'll be darned before I agree to report any of my actions (such as alliance changes) to anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomInterrupt Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 Probationary Zero Infrastructure will enact a state in which a member of the community that has committed a crime will be taken to Zero Infrastructure. After that has been done they will be put on lifelong probation or until released by the alliance. They will have to report any alliance change to the alliance that hold the Papers of Probation or PoP for short. That alliance will present the offenders new alliance with the list of crimes, and make it known their new member is on the PrZI list. The new alliance will have to sign off stating that they understand this new member is open to attacks if they violate their probation. I think you should spend a few months with an alliance over your shoulder watching your every move making sure you don't get accepted to certain alliances and making sure you don't hold certain positions before coming up with this kind of crap. All this is is a way to take a crime that once constituted a few weeks of war and keeping it a sentence that will hang over the person's head forever. You state that people change, and then spell out another policy which will prevent people from being able to change and rejoin the game properly unless you decide they can. This is no improvement at all, just more of the same abuses of power with a different hat on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enderland Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) I love how everyone complains about nuclear rogues, but whenever people actually go nuke rogue, people from that alliance are like "sweet more war experience/action/etc" and "lol, you don't hurt us." You'd think, that either a) the alliance is lying or b) alliances would simply punish nuke rogues with a ZI instead of a "quit playing CN" I. like most tend to do. edit: stupid b ) code Edited March 11, 2009 by alden peterson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merrie Melodies Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 maybe this would work if you handed down a specific sentence, say like ZI +60 days or so. Just a thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty McFly Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) P-ZI = Fail In any form, no matter what someone did, unless it was OOC, and even then it should be up to Mod team to take action against them. Such actions are directly aimed at forcing players to stop playing this game and destroy whole communities. Those who order other players to be P-ZI should be banned from this game imo. I agree with you. I bet if someone forced me into perpetual war and barred from doing anything in an alliance I'd quit. Exactly.Also I'll be darned before I agree to report any of my actions (such as alliance changes) to anyone. Yeah, I want to be free to play the game how I want and any way I want. No one will tell me if I can or can not change my alliance (not that I don't love Polaris). Edited March 11, 2009 by Marty McFly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragashingo Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 maybe this would work if you handed down a specific sentence, say like ZI +60 days or so. Just a thought. That certainly sounds better. Of course that 60 might eventually grow to 6000 making it essentially no different than infinite... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diomede Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) I agree with you. I bet if someone forced me into perpetual war and barred from doing anything in an alliance I'd quit. Me too. Then re-roll. Edit: woah, you ninjad a second quote in. Edited March 11, 2009 by Diomede Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ejayrazz Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 maybe this would work if you handed down a specific sentence, say like ZI +60 days or so. Just a thought. No need to further complicate an already complicated system - in a sense. Last thing we need is for a membership base to leave merely due to war or actions - unless it is EXTREME. Like /b/ombing, DDoS, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Janova Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 This is like a PZI but allowing you to raid the person when convenient and not have to go to the effort of actually keeping them down. It is also asking for major diplomatic incidents when you want to re-ZI the person and their current alliance tells you to get lost (paper signed under duress can reasonably be determined not to be a binding treaty). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trout Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) Perma-ZI sucks and EZI suck as well. In my opinion, only admin and the moderators could go ahead and ban them from the game, not the players. I also dislike this idea. They've already been ZI'd, let them be and let them have a chance to "improve". Being constantly on their backs won't make them forget about the "naughty" actions they had done to get ZI'd and it's definitely annoying. But hey, what do I know? EDIT: Damn typos. Edited March 11, 2009 by Boogeyman657 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D34th Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I'm against PZI or EZI, I think PZI should be used only in the worst OCC attacks and EZI never should be used. For other crimes like nuclear rogues or spies, offended alliances should determine an amount of time that the criminal nation should stay in ZI state, like 2 weeks or 1 month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trout Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I'm against PZI or EZI, I think PZI should be used only in the worst OCC attacks and EZI never should be used. For other crimes like nuclear rogues or spies, offended alliances should determine an amount of time that the criminal nation should stay in ZI state, like 2 weeks or 1 month. TZI Temporary ZI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajaxpenny Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I am against PZI or EZI. However, I'm going to support the OP as the only alliances who will even consider starting to use this form of ZI are those currently utilizing PZI and EZI. At the least, it'll be a minor improvement to the current situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaR Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 It amuses me to no end that after 800 days, only now do you figure out that nuclear strikes should not be grounds for removal from the game. However, I must say your proposed policy is a step in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jer Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 At the least, it'll be a minor improvement to the current situation. A minor improvement, sure. In the same way that seasoning a bucket of vomit with salt and pepper is a minor improvement. It still doesn't make it easy to swallow and it certainly won't be delicious enough for the world to want to consume it regularly at meal times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astronaut jones Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 This concept is far more agreeable than PZI and EZI, but there's still quite a bit of room for abuse. The sort of actions which would warrant a PrZI nation being ZI’d again, for example, don’t appear to be defined. I'd favor this to EZI and PZI as is, but with some added clarification I would undoubtedly support it. Part of it is, why would ANYONE in their right mind trust any of these damn people to begin with? Not a single one of them is truthworthy, so why would you trust them to determine what is a legitimate slip up and what isn't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tygaland Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 (edited) I have a question. Is this in any way related to the NSO situation? They have a number of ZI/PZI listed nations carrying their AA and this appears to me to be a way to alleviate that situation. Currently we have ZI/PZI nations allowed within the NSO but unable to grow or be aided. With this new policy would those nations in the NSO on ZI/PZI lists be granted probation? It just occurred to me that this proposal came at a time when ZI/PZI nations and alliance membership has come to be a major issue albeit a localised one. Edited March 11, 2009 by Tygaland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricardo Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I'm against PZI and EZI in general so I can't say I like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firestorm Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 If you made it so PrZI had a time limit on it I'd agree to it. Meaning you are on PrZI for a period of so many months prior to being a free man etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homura Posted March 11, 2009 Report Share Posted March 11, 2009 I prefer the idea of handing out punishments that are meant to teach someone a lesson, fit the crime, and nothing more. This is just outright bullying along the same lines as this "eternal ZI" that was defined several months back. Spying and nuke roguery are part of the intrigue that makes the game special even if there is a good reason to attack nations over those issues, and the only reason for coming up with this is because you can't live out your little temper fantasies and drive people out of the game anymore. 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.