Forums » Role Playing
As if anyone thought the anti-TGFT brigade would reconsider their refusal to accept TGFT's neutrality by the commander change.
If memory serves, the previous Commamders Intent regarding Serco/Itani war convoys was to disable capital turrets without destroying the capital ships themselves. This serves to minimize loss of life and facilitate safe passage of Serco/Itani traders. If memory serves...
As CO of [TRI], I feel I have a similar, but slightly different perspective as the CO of [TGFT] on these issues. As far as I know, I don't think [TGFT] claims to be neutral. What tsreknor said was that they do not allow piracy or nationalism. This is a sharp distinction from being neutral. I have explained before, but let me attempt a quicker explanation.
Being neutral in VO means that one does not officially declare war or alliances. As soon as a guild makes an official agreement with another guild, whether it be in secrecy or public, that guild is no longer neutral. It has sided with another faction and so forfeits all claims to neutrality. Since I've been around [TGFT] has never met these standards.
Not allowing piracy and nationalism is entirely different, as there are far more conflicts in the universe other than those of piracy and nationalism. I have personally witnessed [TGFT] both remove and defend members that were reported to pirate. On this front I can say that [TGFT] has maintained a mostly clean record in my eyes. There were some hick-ups, but as far as I can tell they are far past those.
Now to speak to the point of nationalism. In a broad sense, attacking a blockade that belongs to a certain nation can be viewed as nationalism. But more importantly are the reasons behind such attacks. If those blockades are legitimately detrimental to the trading lanes that [TGFT] claim to protect, then I can see why they claim they must clear them. I see this as a non-nationalistic driven reason and so wouldn't categorize this as an act of nationalism. It could be called an act of terrorism, but not necessarily nationalism. The ultimate proof would come from knowing if they attack both blockades equally or if they prefer to let one nation's blockade remain. This would be telling for me as far as making a decision if what they are engaged in is actually nationalism.
As far as members having poor standing with the opposite nation, I see nothing wrong with this for a free trader nor for a neutral pilot. It isn't an inherent act of nationalism or an inherent act of conflict to buy your nation's top tiered combat ships. As I stated before, the reasoning here is the most important thing in my opinion. If someone wants to buy X1s or SCPs to go kill the opposite nation more effectively, then this is nationalism. But as a super competitive combat pilot, I understand the need of having access to the top tiered ships. Anyone can make the claims that the lesser ships are just as good in combat, but the fact remains that the SCP and the X1 are the BEST fighters, hands down. If you want the BEST possible ship to fight in then you need to access these beasts.
To steal pizzasgood's analogy,
"Psst, kid. I'll sell you a shiny Valk if you go kill my enemies."
"But I'm neutral in this conflict!"
"Yeah, but Valks are so sexy. Look at these curves. These bulbous protrusions. This pale complexion. It could be yours..."
"Oh, okay then. Wait here one moment while I go use this ship for whatever reasons I choose since I paid for it with my hard-earned credits. I will not be a slave to your desires, especially for an act of hostility against someone whom I absolutely consider a friend. thank you have a nice day!"
Maintaining this sort of standing for a neutral pilot is a bit rough as we often have to run from CtC bots as well as blockades. However rough it may be though, it is far from impossible. Now, some guilds will shoot at you based on your standings. I have always found that opening a friendly and non-aggressive dialogue with these guilds has worked out. What most guilds find important in VO is the daily actions that a pilot takes. If the pilot in question has skewed standings towards their nation, but are known to maintain a neutral stance, then, in my experience, most will accept that he is neutral. This is even easier for someone only claiming to be non-nationalistic and not neutral.
Being neutral in VO means that one does not officially declare war or alliances. As soon as a guild makes an official agreement with another guild, whether it be in secrecy or public, that guild is no longer neutral. It has sided with another faction and so forfeits all claims to neutrality. Since I've been around [TGFT] has never met these standards.
Not allowing piracy and nationalism is entirely different, as there are far more conflicts in the universe other than those of piracy and nationalism. I have personally witnessed [TGFT] both remove and defend members that were reported to pirate. On this front I can say that [TGFT] has maintained a mostly clean record in my eyes. There were some hick-ups, but as far as I can tell they are far past those.
Now to speak to the point of nationalism. In a broad sense, attacking a blockade that belongs to a certain nation can be viewed as nationalism. But more importantly are the reasons behind such attacks. If those blockades are legitimately detrimental to the trading lanes that [TGFT] claim to protect, then I can see why they claim they must clear them. I see this as a non-nationalistic driven reason and so wouldn't categorize this as an act of nationalism. It could be called an act of terrorism, but not necessarily nationalism. The ultimate proof would come from knowing if they attack both blockades equally or if they prefer to let one nation's blockade remain. This would be telling for me as far as making a decision if what they are engaged in is actually nationalism.
As far as members having poor standing with the opposite nation, I see nothing wrong with this for a free trader nor for a neutral pilot. It isn't an inherent act of nationalism or an inherent act of conflict to buy your nation's top tiered combat ships. As I stated before, the reasoning here is the most important thing in my opinion. If someone wants to buy X1s or SCPs to go kill the opposite nation more effectively, then this is nationalism. But as a super competitive combat pilot, I understand the need of having access to the top tiered ships. Anyone can make the claims that the lesser ships are just as good in combat, but the fact remains that the SCP and the X1 are the BEST fighters, hands down. If you want the BEST possible ship to fight in then you need to access these beasts.
To steal pizzasgood's analogy,
"Psst, kid. I'll sell you a shiny Valk if you go kill my enemies."
"But I'm neutral in this conflict!"
"Yeah, but Valks are so sexy. Look at these curves. These bulbous protrusions. This pale complexion. It could be yours..."
"Oh, okay then. Wait here one moment while I go use this ship for whatever reasons I choose since I paid for it with my hard-earned credits. I will not be a slave to your desires, especially for an act of hostility against someone whom I absolutely consider a friend. thank you have a nice day!"
Maintaining this sort of standing for a neutral pilot is a bit rough as we often have to run from CtC bots as well as blockades. However rough it may be though, it is far from impossible. Now, some guilds will shoot at you based on your standings. I have always found that opening a friendly and non-aggressive dialogue with these guilds has worked out. What most guilds find important in VO is the daily actions that a pilot takes. If the pilot in question has skewed standings towards their nation, but are known to maintain a neutral stance, then, in my experience, most will accept that he is neutral. This is even easier for someone only claiming to be non-nationalistic and not neutral.
jesus
thanks
Congrats Ronnie fer new position.
I be lookin' forward ye to carry on the tradition of previous CO of shootin' me.
24hrs rate fer safe passage from Jolly Roger members, to all TGFT traders remains the same.
Some will pay, some will blow, nuthin' personal, tis just good business.
Cheers
C'NB
I be lookin' forward ye to carry on the tradition of previous CO of shootin' me.
24hrs rate fer safe passage from Jolly Roger members, to all TGFT traders remains the same.
Some will pay, some will blow, nuthin' personal, tis just good business.
Cheers
C'NB
I have to say it's disappointing that the "new" commander of TGFT has the exactly same entitled, arrogant mentality as the old one.
At least AT LEAST this new commander has a slightly wider vocabulary set than the other one.
At least AT LEAST this new commander has a slightly wider vocabulary set than the other one.
jesus
Yes?
Yes?
Nihilus said "Being neutral in VO means that one does not officially declare war or alliances."
I have to disagree. I have had war declared on me by VOID in the past. This does affect my neutrality. I do not offer assistance to a faction of any kind, be it nation, greyspace faction or guild. I do help out individuals as I see fit, and occasionally boom individuals, again, as I see fit. The nation or guild of those individuals is not a factor in my decisions. However, alliances with other genuinly neutral parties does not violate neutrality, any more than an Itani natty guild allying with another Itani natty guild would violate eithers nationalism.
However, Nihilus also said "As far as members having poor standing with the opposite nation, I see nothing wrong with this for a free trader nor for a neutral pilot. It isn't an inherent act of nationalism or an inherent act of conflict to buy your nation's top tiered combat ships."
It may not be an "inherent act of nationalism" to buy your nations top-tier ships, but it is an inherent act of nationalism to maintain a high standing with one of a pair of warring nations. Totaly fine for a free trader, but not for a "neutral" pilot.
I once argued the other way, and it was pointed out to me that ones standing is a reflection of how much one has assisted that particular nation. It is the very reason standings for warring nations are mutually exclusive. Such assistance could be shooting their enemies, or it could be peacefully supplying them with goods, which furthers their war effort (a good war machine needs a decent economy to sustain it, factories need materials to build ships and weapons, do research on better ships and weapons, propaganda needs to be publicised, and (SEDE rp aside), soldiers need food, meds, and entertainment as much as the next non-existent biological life-form).
While a neutral player may indeed have non-nationalistic reasons for wanting a top tier nation ship, getting the required standing to acquire these ships does require assisting that nation, whether by supplying them with goods, or by shooting their enemies. Doing without these fancy toys is the price of neutrality. It is not something anyone can claim as they see fit because it benefits them. It takes sacrifice, and dedication, just as nationalism does. If you claim neutrality, prove it. EARN it. I am not saying everyong claiming neutrality has to have perfect 0 standing with both Itani and Serco, but as far as I am concerned, being respected by one is iffy, and admired definatly eliminates neutrality. PoS is way off.
I would also like to take this moment to point out that I am not "anti-TGFT". As far as I am concerned, TGFT is simply another guild. However, while it has non-neutral members, it can not claim neutrality, just as a guild that allows piracy can't claim not to be a pirate guild (looking at you, VOID).
I have to disagree. I have had war declared on me by VOID in the past. This does affect my neutrality. I do not offer assistance to a faction of any kind, be it nation, greyspace faction or guild. I do help out individuals as I see fit, and occasionally boom individuals, again, as I see fit. The nation or guild of those individuals is not a factor in my decisions. However, alliances with other genuinly neutral parties does not violate neutrality, any more than an Itani natty guild allying with another Itani natty guild would violate eithers nationalism.
However, Nihilus also said "As far as members having poor standing with the opposite nation, I see nothing wrong with this for a free trader nor for a neutral pilot. It isn't an inherent act of nationalism or an inherent act of conflict to buy your nation's top tiered combat ships."
It may not be an "inherent act of nationalism" to buy your nations top-tier ships, but it is an inherent act of nationalism to maintain a high standing with one of a pair of warring nations. Totaly fine for a free trader, but not for a "neutral" pilot.
I once argued the other way, and it was pointed out to me that ones standing is a reflection of how much one has assisted that particular nation. It is the very reason standings for warring nations are mutually exclusive. Such assistance could be shooting their enemies, or it could be peacefully supplying them with goods, which furthers their war effort (a good war machine needs a decent economy to sustain it, factories need materials to build ships and weapons, do research on better ships and weapons, propaganda needs to be publicised, and (SEDE rp aside), soldiers need food, meds, and entertainment as much as the next non-existent biological life-form).
While a neutral player may indeed have non-nationalistic reasons for wanting a top tier nation ship, getting the required standing to acquire these ships does require assisting that nation, whether by supplying them with goods, or by shooting their enemies. Doing without these fancy toys is the price of neutrality. It is not something anyone can claim as they see fit because it benefits them. It takes sacrifice, and dedication, just as nationalism does. If you claim neutrality, prove it. EARN it. I am not saying everyong claiming neutrality has to have perfect 0 standing with both Itani and Serco, but as far as I am concerned, being respected by one is iffy, and admired definatly eliminates neutrality. PoS is way off.
I would also like to take this moment to point out that I am not "anti-TGFT". As far as I am concerned, TGFT is simply another guild. However, while it has non-neutral members, it can not claim neutrality, just as a guild that allows piracy can't claim not to be a pirate guild (looking at you, VOID).
What's going on here is that some people put WAY too much importance on faction standing -- as though it's actually/commonly representative of the way any player behaves TOWARDS that faction or in that factions protected space; as though people genuinely deserve being discriminated against based on things that really have no meaning or bearing on their nature.
Sometimes, yes, people with low Itani standing are actually hostile towards Itanis, but most of the time it's because of a mistake, or because of a choice to access Serco space / items. And vice versa.
More important indicators of behavior are guild tags, player associations and previously observed behavior.
Expounding further upon what it means to be "neutral" in VO is therefore wasted breath, because those who discriminate in the harshest ways won't be persuaded one way or the other.
TGFT are traders and shoot whoever get in the way of their trades. Plain and simple. It's not a difficult concept to understand.
Sometimes, yes, people with low Itani standing are actually hostile towards Itanis, but most of the time it's because of a mistake, or because of a choice to access Serco space / items. And vice versa.
More important indicators of behavior are guild tags, player associations and previously observed behavior.
Expounding further upon what it means to be "neutral" in VO is therefore wasted breath, because those who discriminate in the harshest ways won't be persuaded one way or the other.
TGFT are traders and shoot whoever get in the way of their trades. Plain and simple. It's not a difficult concept to understand.
TGFT are traders and shoot whoever get in the way of their trades. Plain and simple. It's not a difficult concept to understand.
And if they just said that instead of pretending to be neutral then there would be no discussion. Silly head.
And if they just said that instead of pretending to be neutral then there would be no discussion. Silly head.
I should have been more clear. I am speaking of the neutrality of [TRI] and not that of all neutral pilots in VO. So, to that end....
Faille you couldn't be more wrong in your assessment. Actions are the most important thing to us and to most guilds. Faction standing was important when one could maintain good standing with all sides. As soon as this was taken away, standing was no longer a representation of true neutrality, as it doesn't capture all the nuances of behavior.
As Greenwall stated, this doesn't come down to a presenting a solid argument. Its about defining your axioms. I don't believe that nation standing is relevant to a pilot maintaining a neutral play-style. If you'd like to maintain your standing as neutral in order to say you're "more neutral", have fun with that. In [TRI], I won't expect players to make "sacrifices" of fun for some meaningless (and some would argue broken) stat.
[TRI] will display our neutrality in our actions, as we always have, and I am sure that the universe will see our good actions and understand that some of us are competitive fighters that like having access to the top-tiered ships.
And about supplying weapons to warring nations. What [TRI] believes is that when a sell is made we aren't responsible for the usage of whatever it is we sell. That is the responsibility of the pilots that purchased the item with their own credits. We aren't in the business of policing people to do what we think is right when they buy weapons from us. Do the Swiss say that you can't use their watches to keep time when in war? No, that would be ridiculous. Alas, we cannot sell watches in VO and only weapons.
We've sold weapons to everyone, unprejudicedly, in the universe. Everyone knows this. Without a neutral party that is allowed to sell to everyone, a truly player based economy would never grow and prosper. We would forever remain with the dull and really meaningless player economy we currently have. You in favor of remaining with a shitty player-based economy? I am not. I would like to spend my time ACTUALLY contributing new content to the game rather than sitting in a station to maintain my neutral standing.
I respect your discipline greatly, and I also personally do maintain neutral standing with warring nations, but to this end I do not expect all [TRI] pilots to reach. That is just not practical. If there were more actual meaning behind it, I would agree. But currently, as the faction standing system sits we'll be ignoring it.
Now, if anyone sees a [TRI] pilot killing Itani or Serco bots in order to increase faction standing, this is entirely different, as there are many other ways of increasing faction standing. If this was the only way, then of course I would be forced to agree with you. But alas, it is not. There are many peaceful ways to go about increasing your standing.
Faille, however much so I disagree with you, you are among the pilots which I respect most and I hope you don't take anything I say in offense. I really only say these things in defense of [TRI] and our policies. I look forward to our continued discussion on the topic.
Faille you couldn't be more wrong in your assessment. Actions are the most important thing to us and to most guilds. Faction standing was important when one could maintain good standing with all sides. As soon as this was taken away, standing was no longer a representation of true neutrality, as it doesn't capture all the nuances of behavior.
As Greenwall stated, this doesn't come down to a presenting a solid argument. Its about defining your axioms. I don't believe that nation standing is relevant to a pilot maintaining a neutral play-style. If you'd like to maintain your standing as neutral in order to say you're "more neutral", have fun with that. In [TRI], I won't expect players to make "sacrifices" of fun for some meaningless (and some would argue broken) stat.
[TRI] will display our neutrality in our actions, as we always have, and I am sure that the universe will see our good actions and understand that some of us are competitive fighters that like having access to the top-tiered ships.
And about supplying weapons to warring nations. What [TRI] believes is that when a sell is made we aren't responsible for the usage of whatever it is we sell. That is the responsibility of the pilots that purchased the item with their own credits. We aren't in the business of policing people to do what we think is right when they buy weapons from us. Do the Swiss say that you can't use their watches to keep time when in war? No, that would be ridiculous. Alas, we cannot sell watches in VO and only weapons.
We've sold weapons to everyone, unprejudicedly, in the universe. Everyone knows this. Without a neutral party that is allowed to sell to everyone, a truly player based economy would never grow and prosper. We would forever remain with the dull and really meaningless player economy we currently have. You in favor of remaining with a shitty player-based economy? I am not. I would like to spend my time ACTUALLY contributing new content to the game rather than sitting in a station to maintain my neutral standing.
I respect your discipline greatly, and I also personally do maintain neutral standing with warring nations, but to this end I do not expect all [TRI] pilots to reach. That is just not practical. If there were more actual meaning behind it, I would agree. But currently, as the faction standing system sits we'll be ignoring it.
Now, if anyone sees a [TRI] pilot killing Itani or Serco bots in order to increase faction standing, this is entirely different, as there are many other ways of increasing faction standing. If this was the only way, then of course I would be forced to agree with you. But alas, it is not. There are many peaceful ways to go about increasing your standing.
Faille, however much so I disagree with you, you are among the pilots which I respect most and I hope you don't take anything I say in offense. I really only say these things in defense of [TRI] and our policies. I look forward to our continued discussion on the topic.
And if they just said that instead of pretending to be neutral then there would be no discussion. Silly head.
Look over their guild charter and FAQ again and you will see the error of your statement.
Look over their guild charter and FAQ again and you will see the error of your statement.
We would forever remain with the dull and really meaningless player economy we currently have. You in favor of remaining with a shitty player-based economy? I am not. I would like to spend my time ACTUALLY contributing new content to the game rather than sitting in a station to maintain my neutral standing.
An uphill battle as always, given the complete lack of developer support.
An uphill battle as always, given the complete lack of developer support.
But...we don't NEED developer support. We can create the environment, the plugins and even any supporting missions that will be needed. All is here for those who want to contribute.
I realize that dev support would be....huge, to put it simply. But I'm not gonna sit here and wait, nor will I try to pass blame on anyone, including the devs. I'm just gonna start creating content myself.
Be the change you wish to see.
I realize that dev support would be....huge, to put it simply. But I'm not gonna sit here and wait, nor will I try to pass blame on anyone, including the devs. I'm just gonna start creating content myself.
Be the change you wish to see.
Someone should tell that to TGFT pilots then wally, I'm not the one flying around claiming to be neutral, but while you are at it, care to defend this one for them as well wally?
The same goes for CtC bots that accumulate at Bractus C-5 and Sedina L-2 when someone is running a shop at those stations.
What shop bots in Sedina L2 or Bractus C5? When? Ran by whom? Or more lies to justify nationalistic behaviour?
The same goes for CtC bots that accumulate at Bractus C-5 and Sedina L-2 when someone is running a shop at those stations.
What shop bots in Sedina L2 or Bractus C5? When? Ran by whom? Or more lies to justify nationalistic behaviour?
Yeah I'll defend it: CTC is fucking stupid and nobody cares about it. It hasn't been seen any significant participation in about 4 years.
There certainly has been a shop bot in Bractus C5 in the recent past. I think the name was "The Free Trade Shop," don't know who runs it. Wasn't us. I haven't seen it there in a while, but when it was active, it did accumulate Itani CtC bots for days on end and did force some of our Serco members to shoot them to be able to dock an XC at the station.
This is not a complaint against whomever owned the shop. You pay your sub, play the game as you wish. I'm just stating a reason why our Serco members might, from time to time, be on the CtC score for shooting bots.
-- tsreknor
TGFT Commander
This is not a complaint against whomever owned the shop. You pay your sub, play the game as you wish. I'm just stating a reason why our Serco members might, from time to time, be on the CtC score for shooting bots.
-- tsreknor
TGFT Commander
You only go on the score list for shooting the transports, and they do not build up and do not fire. You do not go on the list for shooting the other bots. You know how the game works, so please do not play dumb. Oh and you do not go on the delivery list for shooting anything, this is for delivery only. https://www.vendetta-online.com/x/ctfstats/6
It is not the CtC greeny, it is the obvious lies, and if your only rebuttal is "nobody cares it is fucking stupid", then you should keep it to yourself; because you are only making yourself look silly. Just because you do not care does not mean nobody does, this much is obvious.
It is not the CtC greeny, it is the obvious lies, and if your only rebuttal is "nobody cares it is fucking stupid", then you should keep it to yourself; because you are only making yourself look silly. Just because you do not care does not mean nobody does, this much is obvious.
yoda I'd be curious to hear your opinion on what being neutral actually implies? I don't say this with any hint of sarcasm. You are also among the pilots for which I have tons of respect and would like to hear your opinion on the topic. Specifically when it comes to faction standing. Although I think I could guess your stance, I would still find it valuable to hear it explicitly.