Referencing Events Outside of Roleplaying Thread

[Guest]

Starting this thread to discuss some things that have come up lately, concerning referencing events/actions that take place in the roleplaying thread outside the rping thread.

As I’ve stated before I have nothing against whatever happens in the roleplaying thread (unless they have Earthcom playing as inter-galactic meter maids, then it's war. ) but I strongly feel that whatever events that transpire in the rping thread should remain there.

My impressions of the rping thread has always been that it was “totally” unofficial and that those commanders wishing to participate did so fully knowing that it as all done to help tie us over until we could mix it up in multi-play. I never participate in the rping thread for various reasons such as, not enough time, not a good roleplayer, bad storyteller, etc....

Now when players start to make references to rping events outside that thread and other players start to read them, they may start to believe that it’s official history. And because of that might cast a bad light on certain fleets/persons abilities.

For example a commander posted this reference in the “Fleet Discussion” thread, concerning a rping event.

quote:

---

After the disgraceful performance of GalCOM and EarthCOM after the First Gammulan Conflict, we decided we might actually have some contingency plans in place...as I said -first line defence.

---

Now me being a newbie or vet player trying to decide what fleet to join reads that and believe that, “Hey Galcom and EarthCOM must suck, think I’ll join a different fleet.”

Can you blame him for thinking that? No you can’t because he has no way of knowing that this particular commander is referencing a rping event. He just sees it posted just like it was official history and so why join an organization that had a disgraceful performance?

So as you can see to keep the confusion down and to keep people from going into the rping thread to create their own sense of reality in the BC Universe, it’s best to leave what happens in the rping thread in the rping thread.

[aramike]

I don't agree. That is why we use [rp] tags.

[Tyrn]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aramike:

I don't agree. That is why we use [rp] tags.

---

The post referenced made no indication that the disgraceful performance mentioned was RP related, that's the problem.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: Tyrn ]

[aramike]

Fair enough. There's the new rule, then. Use RP tags or don't reference RP.

Agree?

[Guest]

That's correct Tyrn, the problem arises at least for me when the events in the rping being to take on the sense that's it's official and references to those events began to be posted outside of the rping thread.

Aramike , I’m not refering to when we banter back and forth from time to time in different threads when using tags but when no tags are used espeically when a statement about a rping event that took place is stated, as a matter of fact, when it is not a fact, as far as the BC official universe is concerned.

[aramike]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl Wolf:

That's correct Tyrn, the problem arises at least for me when the events in the rping being to take on the sense that's it's official and references to those events began to be posted outside of the rping thread.

Aramike , I’m not refering to when we banter back and forth from time to time in different threads when using

tags but when no

tags are used espeically when a statement about a rping event that took place is stated, as a matter of fact, when it is not a fact, as far as the BC official universe is concerned.

---

I know. That's why, for now on, when referring to "unofficial" history, everyone should just use RP tags.

Problem solved.

[Blades]

Like it or not, we in the community have built an RP world that others enjoy participating in, or viewing. The fleets we all belong to (and some of us command) are RP creations, and as such are not covered in official history or game manuals. Maybe one day they will, maybe not.

Regardless of that, they exist, and as such deserve a chance to become every bit as alive as the established (GalCom Prime, Earthcom, The Insurgency) fleets documented.

The RP forum gives us a chance to create a history for ourselves and our fleets. This is not a bad thing by any means. The fact that some people may read the RP and make fleet enrollment descisions based on our RP exploits is neither here nor there.

Why is that a bad thing?

People interested enough in registering on the forum, in the fleet database etc are mostly the type of people who appreciate the kind of creativness that goes on here. They see a product with a fan base who is passionate enough about the title to spend their time, effort and imagination on bringing their personas to life.

Personally, I feel that a lot of this has to do with the way I have incorporated some RP history into the Orion website - just the way other fleets have done so. I also believe some of this annoyance is due to some of the recent RP threads that have taken place.

I can understand that the Earthcom Fleet Commander might be miffed by the idea of having an RP story based around the misdeads of his troops. I personally would be horrified to find my persona used in a manner not befitting the characters established parameters. However, in this example, there was never any direct relation to the 'bad guys' in the ITF thread and the existing Earthcom administration. In fact, it was very carefull avoided to prevent any potential RL/RP fallout.

Bottom line, whether we like it or not (I myself like it) what we do in RP is create somthing we can all enjoy and be proud of. The contributions of a hundreds of vets and newbies alike has given everyone somthing they can involve themselves in. The RP passion of these people attracts others to the game and can only do good things for the community.

I personally dont see anything wrong with our RP exploits (So long as they are fair) influencing community members. Im not saying that our recruitment efforts should take examples from RP and say 'Here, this is why we're so good, we kick the Insurgencys ass in *such and such* a scenario, so you should obviously join us. That would be bad. Then again, thats not even going on.

If people want to further themselves or their fleets exploits in RP, they should be allowed to. Sure, it needs moderation to make sure that it doesnt break certain rules or give unfair bias to a character, race or caste, but to deny the existance of the RP history we have created here - be it official or not - would be denying what we as a community have accomplished through these long years.

I doubt there is a person amongst us that hasnt been effected by the RP that goes on here in one form or another, and as a fairly major player in the RP arena, I strongly resist any notion that would limit our ability to expand what we have already created.

Like it or not, RP will always influence people in one form or another. The best way to ballance that influence out is to have more people participating in that arena.

Anyway, thats my rant. I'll be watching this thread very closely.

[Guest]

Blades I’m not disputing or degrading anything that you have said or done in the rping thread. And to tell you the truth I had no ideal what’s been going on in the rping because I don’t read up on it much.

So my stance in this matter isn’t because of anything currently going on in roleplay. And as much as you all would like to believe to the contrary all that happens in the roleplaying thread is purely player created and thus not part of the official BC universe.

It’s nothing wrong with fleshing out your character, ship and it’s crew. My focus is when you bring major events that’s happened in rping (wars, battles, etc...)into other threads treating those events as if they are official when they are not. Now if DS comes in an make something that’s happened in rping part of the official universe then it’s all good. But until then you can’t expect other commanders not participating in rping to abide by events that transpire there.

And if I recall correctly a question was put to DS once in reference to roleplaying thread being part of the history, and he said no. That he would either flesh out the universe himself or hire someone to do it for him. And that nothing that happens in the rping thread would be part of the official histories. I’m sure if I paraphrased him wrong, he’ll be the first one to correct me.

[Blades]

quote:

---

My focus is when you bring major events that’s happened in rping (wars, battles, etc...)into other threads treating those events as if they are official when they are not.

---

When and where did this happen? Your previous example was based upon a single commander that had been influenced by RP events (as far as I can tell) and NOT by quoting another forum members post.

I would like to see where you think this 'Crossover' came from.

Btw, Im not calling you out or anything, I just want to see with my own eyes that which set the alarm bells ringing.

[aramike]

quote:

---

Blades I’m not disputing or degrading anything that you have said or done in the rping thread. And to tell you the truth I had no ideal what’s been going on in the rping because I don’t read up on it much.

So my stance in this matter isn’t because of anything currently going on in roleplay. And as much as you all would like to believe to the contrary all that happens in the roleplaying thread is purely player created and thus not part of the official BC universe.

---

Fleets themselves are not part of the official, written BC universe. But, they still are there. And, a lot of the FLEET NAMES come from RP. Should we get rid of those too?

quote:

---

It’s nothing wrong with fleshing out your character, ship and it’s crew. My focus is when you bring major events that’s happened in rping (wars, battles, etc...)into other threads treating those events as if they are official when they are not. Now if DS comes in an make something that’s happened in rping part of the official universe then it’s all good. But until then you can’t expect other commanders not participating in rping to abide by events that transpire there.

---

Use RP tags. Anyone with ANY knowledge of the game should be aware that there hasn't been MP play yet, anyway.

quote:

---

And if I recall correctly a question was put to DS once in reference to roleplaying thread being part of the history, and he said no. That he would either flesh out the universe himself or hire someone to do it for him. And that nothing that happens in the rping thread would be part of the official histories. I’m sure if I paraphrased him wrong, he’ll be the first one to correct me.

---

There is no reason that a "recruiter" can't use "unofficial" histories as a part of his fleet. I don't see why, nor how this affects recruitment. If a fleet is getting a guy that doesn't realize that RP is different than what has REALLY happened, you should feel sorry for that fleet - that guy ain't too bright.

Perhaps an addition to the fleet FAQ should be made?

Also, if you look at the Fleet FAQ (which is official), you'll notice that each of the fleet's functions are also listed. Considering that, until now, no one has "done" ANYTHING with these fleets, one could also argue that the functions are RP.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: aramike ]

[Guest]

Blades, one reference is the above one that I quoted and other is a exchange about rping and official history here is the exchange:

Commander One

quote:

---

"So long as that it's official"

that's the part im not sure on. Maybe I missed when the SC made this an official part of the game?

---

Commander Two (in reply to Commander One)

quote:

---

Well, in actual fact the Fleets aren't included in the official history of the BC universe either. Derek was simply kind enough to create stations for them! As far as I'm concerned, you can't have the fleets without acknowledging their RP roots. Many of the fleets owe their current form to the First Gammulan War RP thread, so it's pretty difficult to ignore it.

---

That exchange set off the alarm bell as you put it.

Aramike

quote:

---

Fleets themselves are not part of the official, written BC universe. But, they still are there. And, a lot of the FLEET NAMES come from RP. Should we get rid of those too?

---

Aramike SC was kind enough to make those fleets part of the game and it's history and sanction them as such. But that's as far as he went, he never said anything about including what's been going on in the rping thread into the BC universe also in fact he has stated the exact opposite.

quote:

---

There is no reason that a "recruiter" can't use "unofficial" histories as a part of his fleet. I don't see why, nor how this affects recruitment. If a fleet is getting a guy that doesn't realize that RP is different than what has REALLY happened, you should feel sorry for that fleet - that guy ain't too bright.

---

There is every reason a recruiter can't make references to roleplaying events. Mainly because it is not official "roleplaying " histories.

The roles of the fleet that is stated at this site that DS put up is official roleplay material. Can no one else see the differenc between what's player roleplay and the official deal?

Also the only reason I started this thread was to not clutter another thread this debate had started in.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: Karl Wolf ]

[Blades]

quote:

---

Commander One

"So long as that it's official"

that's the part im not sure on. Maybe I missed when the SC made this an official part of the game?

---

Immediate Answer to Commander One

quote:

---

Like I said, official as in it was played out in the RP forum, not just the creative endevour of one person who fancies himself a hero. At no point did I ever say Official BC historical data ... if you get my meaning.

---

Theres the distinction.

quote:

---

There is every reason a recruiter can't make references to roleplaying events. Mainly because it is not official "roleplaying " histories.

---

If thats the way it was, you'd have to ignore the previous few years when the other fleets were created. We cant ignore them, the community members who have become part of them (And may well have gotten so involved in BC BECAUSE of them), or the sensationalised 'histories' that have sprung up.

quote:

---

The roles of the fleet that is stated at this site that DS put up is official roleplay material. Can no one else see the differenc between what's player roleplay and the official deal?

---

Yes, we can see the difference. Yes, we know the difference. But we cant ignore that it has happned and has become a big part of the community. Do you honestly think the community would be as it is WITHOUT the years of RP history we've developed here? People flock to innovation, imagination and the freedom to create and expand beyond the original premis. The sort of gamer this title appeals to enjoy seeing and participating in this sort of thing. If we went back to a three fleet system, it wouldnt be anywhere near as interesting as it has become. What each of the fleets stands for is detailed to a fair extent in our RP endevours, and has been incorportaed into OFFICIAL BC history. When it comes to playing the game, these fleets will play in the manner as they are described (created) in OFFICIAL history. Orion attracts those interested in big assed shooting matches. Wraith attracts those who favor daring hit and run strikes and covert ops. EACH fleet has it's own thing, and during their recruitment efforts, make a point of mentioning that to possible recruits who may decide they prefer the game style that that fleet favors. If these differences can be detailed in RP, mores the better!

End of the day, a player will go where he wants to, and if he see's a fleets RP exploits (Or OFFICIAL Fleet FAQ Data) and finds them to his liking, he is more likely to favor them when it comes to choose.

Why is that a bad thing?

I dont see where the problem is.

If it comes down to you believing there is a biased towards more active RP fleets, then I would suggest that those fleets believing they are missing out on recruits become more active in the RP arena. I would love to see more fleets getting involved, but it's not mine, my fleets, or anybody elses fault if they dont.

The way recruitment happens may not be to everybodys liking, but it's the way it happens and theres no need to change it.

[aramike]

quote:

---

There is every reason a recruiter can't make references to roleplaying events. Mainly because it is not official "roleplaying " histories.

---

Considering that, right now, fleets are PRIMARILY for roleplaying, I ask again, WHY NOT?

quote:

---

The roles of the fleet that is stated at this site that DS put up is official roleplay material. Can no one else see the differenc between what's player roleplay and the official deal?

---

I can, so please tell me where I can go to join in the "official deal". It doesn't exist yet.

Seriously, A LOT of people join fleets based upon a roleplay decision. As long as the recruit KNOWS that what is being said is roleplay, then WHERE IS THE PROBLEM? Why is it a problem?

Look, I've TRIED to set things up so that we ensure that a recruit knows what is roleplay and not, but apparently that isn't good enough. You want nothing less than a total ban of all discussion of roleplay - sorry, no. If someone joins a fleet because of roleplay conquests, oh well. They know it is not real (considering that there hasn't been ANY real conquests).

So, give me ONE, GOOD reason that RP in RP tags should not be allowed. Just one, please.

And if I hear simply "because its not official", I'm going to vomit.

PS: Sure, perhaps RPing fleets get more recruits, but SO WHAT? If a fleet isn't into RP, they aren't very active as there isn't much else to do. If a recruit wants to join an ACTIVE fleet, then let him.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: aramike ]

[Blades]

Heres an RP irony for you.

Orion and Spectre Fleets agreeing on the same thing.

[Guest]

Look I honestly don’t care about Rping fleets getting more recruits than non-rping fleets. I just used those two quotes as examples. And I never stated that I have anything against using tags to identify roleplaying if you read my posts again you’ll see that. I even stated that “events” that happened in the rping thread is a different matter from the bantering we do from time to time in different threads.

My point is that we shouldn't bring what happens in the rping threads into the rest of the forums by making references to "events", "battles" and such, unless SC does so.

Just think about the implications of allowing major events to freely roll over in everything. And just because you have been responsible about creating a storyline who’s to say another will or will not? If a storyline is posted in the rping thread and it adheres to the BC technologies out there, could you or anyone else step in and tell him that, “Hey you are roleplaying wrong.”

Imagine a person creating a storyline that involves insurgents raiding and murdering a civilian colony? Then that same person begins to make references throughout the threads about the “Massacre at Beta 9” men, women and children killed. Would that sit well with you? Remember it’s his storyline and it adheres to BC tech.

Again not disrespecting anything that goes on with rping just trying to make sure to maintain the distinction between player fiction and (here comes that word again ) official fiction.

And you can’t really expect me or any other commander to abide by or agree with anything that goes on in the rping thread.

And not just looking at this from my fleet point of view or from a commanders point of view that doesn't not rp but the whole can of worms that could possible be opened up.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: Karl Wolf ]

[aramike]

[Guest]

quote:

---

I've NEVER seen ANYONE say something like "you can't do that - that isn't RP-proper". NEVER. So, WHAT are you complaining about? I mean, I understand the need for restrictions, but why make a rule for something that isn't necessary?

---

The EXAMPLE to which you are referring to is just that an example, in trying to find out what would happen if someone’s storyline didn’t conform to everyone else.

quote:

---

That's the thing - that has never happened. And if it did, that person would get a stiff STFU rather fast.

---

And what if that person ignored your STFU? Remember when BCM is released there is going to be a hug influx of new players, of all types. And not everyone will conform to the given set of rules established. So what then another STFU?

quote:

---

Please demonstrate how RP tags don't leave adequate distinction.

So long as RP events don't effect the way things are run, there is no problem with them. Please tell me where the problem is if I am wrong.

---

I NEVER said that tags didn’t work, if you re-read my posts you'll see that I totally agree. So why still on this point?

And btw there was beginning to be references made about rping events posted in other threads without the tags. We began to have a discussion about that in two other threads. So I suggested that we discuss it in detail here which Blades agreed.

quote:

---

Again, I don't see this as happening. If someone tries doing that, it is wrong and we tell them to STFU. Why stop people from doing it RESPONSIBLY?

---

I’ve never advocated calling a end to anything going on in roleplay, if I had a problem with any events taking place in the rping thread I would have voiced it a looooooong time ago. I trust the people running those thread and plust I've always thought they had little effect on things outside the rping thread. I think you may have missed some points I was trying to make.

Regardless, I think we’ve beaten this topic into oblivion for tonight. So good night to all.

Hadn’t had a good running debate in awhile.

[ 06-11-2001: Message edited by: Karl Wolf ]

[Guest]

The way I see it, RP and Facts are like sex and dental surgery: They can both be quite painful if mixed.

Quite simply, I ignore any RP events. They are fun to participate in, but they in no way whatsoever should be included into the "history" of the game itself. When MP comes out, THEN we can make some stuff to write home about, until then its just a battle of words and overinflated egos & exploding imaginations.

[Charles Lindsey]

Go patch a couple things and watch what happens.

I can't suggest to someone to not join Earthcom because of what happened in "Into the Fire" thread. That is all Karl is saying I beleive. And I agree. Some players will come to play and should not be influenced by RP stories that are represented as fact.

Some players may enjoy RP more and will be influenced by the RP. That is ok too. Perhaps they only want to RP. Fine.

It appeared to be worked out in the first four posts. That seemed fine to me, with the added stipulation that anyone can police that post and call someone to facts.

I am not denying RP nor it's roots in the BC community. Nor am I denying the fact that Derek saw how much we enjoyed it and made special accomodations in the game for the fleets with entire stations etc.

However, we simply cannot sway an uneducated player's opinion with RP. If they make that decision on their own that's fine.

PS You reallllllly don't want to join Orion. I hear tell the fleet leader has inappropriate relations with a junior officer.

[Guest]

I'm really busy at the moment and have only had a few minutes to skim this thread, but I feel I should reply quickly as the original quote in this thread was actually something I typed.

Can we keep in mind the context of what I said? I was correcting Gallion who had stated that the ISS was simply an umbrella group and had no combat role. My correction was that the ISS had created it's Defence Wing after the First Gammulan War, when it was rightly stated that we, as fleet commanders, had no real contingency plans in place for a quick response to invasion of Terran space.

I agree completely that, if I was to buy the game and install it, I'd find absolutely no reference to the First Gammulan war. Officially, it never existed. But officially, the ISS never existed. Nor did Wraith, or the Insurgency, or Orion.

Fleets are created in role-play. They are inseperable from it. The only exceptions are the Insurgency and Earth Command. If you say that I am unable to extol the motivations for creating the Defence Wing of the ISS, then you might as well say that I'm not supposed to tell people that the ISS deals with intelligence and espionage. In fact, you might as well say that I'm not supposed to tell people about the ISS, because it is not and never was "official".

If someone says to me "I want to buy this game and play it" I'll tell them all about the game. I won't tell them about the fleets because they're not in the game. I might mention the fantastic community, but that's all.

If, however, someone says to me "I want to join a fleet, which should I join?" then they're not saying they want to buy the game. They're saying they want to "buy in" to the fleet community. In that case, we have no choice but to acknowledge the role-playing heritage that created the fleet movement.

And as far as my interpretation of EarthCOM and GalCOM's performance during GWI, the facts state (and they are still available to read in the RP forum) that GalCOM took heavy losses, and EarthCOM were almost completely obliterated, by what was essentially a Gammulan advance force. Because we were unprepared. Now, thanks to the ISS (the details of our defensive network and structure are available at the website) we are not. That is simply the point I was trying to make to begin with.

The game is official.

The fleets are unofficial, and they are ireevocably tied to the role-playing universe that we - the players - have created.

Well, that IS just my humble opinion, but I have to say that I can't see or think of any real argument against it. If Derek, at any stagem wants to alter or add to the RP history we have created - or simply tell us it no longer exists - then we will, of course, all abide by it. But by adding fleet stations to the game, he voiced his acceptance of out contribution. And the fleets do not comer without their RP baggage.

And in closing, correct me if I'm wrong, but is there no an "official" Fleets FAQ on this website? I reference these quotes from it.

quote:

---

Fleets are the Role playing and Multiplayer entities formed by authorization

from GALCOM Supreme Commander, Derek Smart. The Fleets are headed

by a Fleet Leader and have various assets, agendas, structures, and

objectives.

---

quote:

---

ISS Fleet is based in Sol, Saturn(Titan) and is devoted to the

security of Sol, intelligence, and the support of other Fleets

hence it's name: In System Security. ISS Fleet is currently

commanded by Commander Ristar.

---

As long as my comments do not contradict what is accepted role-play results, and as long as I don't put words or actions upon any other fleet, how can I possibly separate my fleet's existence from it's role-play heritage? The ISS _IS_ a role-play fleet. For me to no longer be able to consider it's RP roots would mean the end of the ISS.

[Epsilon 5]

Hmmm... what I see here is officialisation of rp facts.

I think that the fleets should be considered as REAL, because SC has "officialised" them. But it's stories aren't real.

The fleets, officialy wise, are there mainly for mp. I mean, what's more interesting, having one-on-one's all the time or being able to make campaigns 20 vs 20? But they have been created from rp.

Roleplay is a fruit of the collective bc imagination. Fleets are "real".

[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: Epsilon 5 ]

[aramike]

Charles, I said the same thing as you.

If RP is NOT presented as fact, then I don't see what the problem is. Use RP tags.

Seems pretty simple, huh?

[GREG MILLER]

I have been around long enough to know what happens when threads like these are started, We as a community loose!

If this keeps up, I expect Derek to come in here and disban the fleets and bring everyone under either the Earthcom, Galcom, or Insurgent designation.

Karl, I see nothing wrong really, and if it matters all that much, that is what [rp] tags are for.

[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: GREG MILLER ]

[Guest]

Greg,and aramike if you both will look at my last few posts, I've stated that I'm perfectly cool with the use of rp tags and have been since the beginning and so it was never a issue with me.

Now I didn't start this thread to curb what was going on in the rping thread. I started this thread as a civil discussion on the effects of rping events and where the line between player fiction and actual game fiction may began to blur.

Now I believe we've come to an understanding on all these issues. So I'm done with it. As simple as that.

[ 06-12-2001: Message edited by: Karl Wolf ]

[Charles Lindsey]

quote:

---

Charles, I said the same thing as you. If RP is NOT presented as fact, then I don't see what the problem is.

---

None

quote:

---

Use RP tags.

---

Someone may not. That's what Karl was saying. That's where the gentle policing comes in.

quote:

---

Seems pretty simple, huh?

---

Yup, and I got there in one.

Glad everything is solved.