Regional Officers

[Christian Democrats]

When creating custom officer positions, I think it would be nice for us to have a drop-down list of icons to accompany the names that we're giving our officers.

[Christian Democrats]

I just discovered an error in one of the descriptions.

Communications: Can send region-wide telegrams without stamps, compose Welcome telegrams, suppress & unsuppress posts on the Region Message Board, and control who can recruit for the region.

I think you meant to type "Regional Message Board."

[Khanatah]

Very happy to see this new feature enabled, but disappointed that the ability to rename the Delegate and Founder positions has apparently been removed. Will this be coming back? I had changed the titles for the positions before and it worked, but noticed that they've been changed back to the defaults and the option to change the titles has been removed from the regional controls. Hope whatever issues were caused by that specific feature are fixed soon! Good work by the way, love seeing this site grow.

[Phydios]

Very happy to see this new feature enabled, but disappointed that the ability to rename the Delegate and Founder positions has apparently been removed. Will this be coming back? I had changed the titles for the positions before and it worked, but noticed that they've been changed back to the defaults and the option to change the titles has been removed from the regional controls. Hope whatever issues were caused by that specific feature are fixed soon! Good work by the way, love seeing this site grow.

Isn't that just an NS++ feature? That's how it appears for me in Regional Controls. Were you on a mobile device when you noticed the feature was missing?

[Zemnaya Svoboda]

Very happy to see this new feature enabled, but disappointed that the ability to rename the Delegate and Founder positions has apparently been removed. Will this be coming back? I had changed the titles for the positions before and it worked, but noticed that they've been changed back to the defaults and the option to change the titles has been removed from the regional controls. Hope whatever issues were caused by that specific feature are fixed soon! Good work by the way, love seeing this site grow.

Isn't that just an NS++ feature? That's how it appears for me in Regional Controls. Were you on a mobile device when you noticed the feature was missing?

Yes, it is an NS++ feature.

Eluvatar (aka me) will be releasing an update to it soon (TM) to address the changes in how the regional controls look.

[Khanatah]

Ahhh.... That explains it. I uninstalled NS++ and didn't notice that that was a feature it had. I assumed it was part of this update and had misinterpreted the original news post. It'd be nice to see this feature adopted by NationStates proper. Sorry for being one of those people who mistakes NS++ crap for NationStates

[Cora II]

I think I would most like a 26 hour lockout on appointing or dismissing Regional Officers. It would be consistent with the lockout on welcome telegrams; it would allow Natives, for the first time in a long time, to meaningfully fight back; and it would be simple to implement.

I'm fine with the appointing part but new WA delegates should certainly be able to dismiss officers immediately. Otherwise you'll get a constant and never-ending fight over the appearance and embassies and suppressing posts and everything else.

Also this would basically kill the whole raiding defending part of NS. An officer with border control and high influence could eject any invader who tried to seize the WA delegate. He'd have 26 hours to do so with nothing the raiders could do to respond.

I'm not a fan of raiding but I do think it's an important aspect of the game.

Actually, it works both ways depending on how it is used. For taggers it gives benefits, but also for defenders and detaggers. Active communities benefit most, near-dead puppet dumps least.

Practical example: Tag at http://www.nationstates.net/region=the_ ... _duckcrocs. There was 100+ embassies that Snezzy had withdraw following Cimmerian standard tagging protocol. She granted RO access to me for sharing that mundane, tiresome task.

Vice-Delegate access to all participating raiders would make things even faster to do, but also that would be easily nullified by organised active native and/or defender ROs.

What ever, Raiders' task isn't to organize native defenses, and defender tactics.

[Improving Wordiness]

Actually, it works both ways depending on how it is used. For taggers it gives benefits, but also for defenders and detaggers. Active communities benefit most, near-dead puppet dumps least.

Practical example: Tag at http://www.nationstates.net/region=the_ ... _duckcrocs. There was 100+ embassies that Snezzy had withdraw following Cimmerian standard tagging protocol. She granted RO access to me for sharing that mundane, tiresome task.

Vice-Delegate access to all participating raiders would make things even faster to do, but also that would be easily nullified by organised active native and/or defender ROs.

What ever, Raiders' task isn't to organize native defenses, and defender tactics.

Cora's post above demonstrate how taggers will and do and take take advantage of two things.
One: no delay in assigning a powers once delegate seat is taken and two: retaining power on delegate seat after WA has been dropped.

In my opinion these are two important matters that need to be resolved.

[XKZ Coordination Office]

I'm sorry if this was already brought up, only I don't really have the time to read through 28 pages of this:

I think it would be nice if we could more easily switch custom officers.

As it stands now, if I create a custom office and I want to appoint someone else to said office, I have to remove the old one and then appoint the new one while having to set up the permissions all over again. I think there may be some regions out there who simply want to switch out an officer while retaining the powers of the office.

[Minoa]

I think at this time, a handful of measures seems obvious but we have to keep it simple:

• New WA Delegates should have to wait 72 hours (3 days) before appointing, dismissing or re-assigning regional officers. This forces both the raider and defender to earn power by not raiding or defending too fast.
• Afterwards, WA Delegates with executive authority (which replaced executive WA Delegates due to the founder being able to tailor powers) should spend influence to appoint, dismiss or re-assign Regional Officers.
• WA Delegates and Regional Officers should spend influence to eject any nation (not just those who have been there for some time). This would slow down both raiding and defending.

[Improving Wordiness]

I have no objection to influence cost slowing down defending / raiding. It is very important that these changes empower natives as the first priority with R/D a secondary factor.

[Enfaru]

Executive authority is required to appoint, dismiss, or modify Regional Officers. Only Founders and Delegates can have Executive authority.

I'd like to challenge this. I would love this to be opened up so that it can be delegated to other members of the region.

[Pierconium]

Executive authority is required to appoint, dismiss, or modify Regional Officers. Only Founders and Delegates can have Executive authority.

I'd like to challenge this. I would love this to be opened up so that it can be delegated to other members of the region.

Why?

[Themightymanuel]

When creating custom officer positions, I think it would be nice for us to have a drop-down list of icons to accompany the names that we're giving our officers.

I would also like this option and was considering suggesting it myself

[Lockdownn]

Executive authority is required to appoint, dismiss, or modify Regional Officers. Only Founders and Delegates can have Executive authority.

I'd like to challenge this. I would love this to be opened up so that it can be delegated to other members of the region.

If we could have executive for ROs, I'd like for them only be able to appoint not modify and dismiss.

[Red Dusk]

After reading through 28 pages and seeing constant comments like "There's no need for a delay on dismissing ROs.", I've finally decided to come out from sulking in the shadows.

Alright. So ROs were meant to bring balance, right? That means making defending a bit easier, right?

Well consider this. There isn't a delay.

Defenders manage to get one of their own as an RO (For the sake of example, I'm ignoring the fact of how impractical it would be to have a defender RO in hundreds or more regions). The reason that they had one of these players elected as an RO was to help when it came to an invasion. Now the raiders manage to get the delegacy and can suddenly, and immediately, dismiss that Defender RO. All of a sudden, all that waiting, all that influence building, comes to no point at all. That nation has absolutely no purpose anymore. It's no longer an asset for the defenders to use to help liberate the region. And so what if the raiders have to wait a few updates to appoint one of their own to RO status? They then have an immense advantage. Anywhere from 2-3x the banjection ability, to (If there was no cap on Border Control put into place) 13x the influence base to draw from. There would be almost no need for a risky slingshot maneuver. All they would need to do is make sure that at least one or 2 of them is on for every update.

Now picture what would happen if there was a delay for dismissal.

Raiders take the delegacy. The defender logs in later that day, is alerted by fellow defenders, and promptly logs into their nation and starts planning on some banjections.
Suddenly, a whole new layer of R/D develops. Raiders no longer have the 'endo and forget' attitude. They have to watch and make sure they haven't been banjected from a region.

If ROs are supposed to bring a semblance of balance to R/D again, why make it so that they can't be used as a defender asset?

Sorry if I seemed a bit weird with this response, I'm only half awake.
(Further note: I assumed no system in place regarding influence to banject a non-updated nation.)

[Imperium Anglorum]

I agree with the people who have already remarked that having the pretitle in the RO names just muddles up the list of regional officers. It should either be disposed of or made optional in the Admin board.

[Belschaft]

So, we appear to have become an echo chamber here with people repeating either themselves or others. We have two main strains of opinion; R/D focussed and Native focussed.

R/D focussed: Do not have any form of delay on the dismissal of RO's becuase BC/RO's will make raiding and liberating harder.

Native focussed: Do have a form of delay on the dismissal of RO's so that BC/RO's can give natives a way to fight back against raiders and coupers.

Of the two I, as previously stated, am in favour of the Native focussed side but I doubt further argument will achieve any converts. At this point admin simply has to decide which position to adopt, and what tweaks to make accordingly. If they come down on the Native focussed side, there also needs to be a decision as to what type of delay to implement. The main two proposals seem to be;

1. An embassy style timer on appointments and removal
2. A regional TG style 26 hour timer to gain access to RO appointment/removal

I have no preference either way. The shorter timer of the regional TG style would probably make raider and coupers lives easier as there will be less time for RO's to fight back, so it may be the best compromise between the Native and R/D positions.

[Cora II]

I agree with the people who have already remarked that having the pretitle in the RO names just muddles up the list of regional officers. It should either be disposed of or made optional in the Admin board.

Custom names of RO titles are fun, but there is real point there too. Why not display both custom titles and preset default titles on WFE? In order of authority if possible, making it clear to all immediately who have power in a region.

[Leveat]

I'd like to challenge this. I would love this to be opened up so that it can be delegated to other members of the region.

If we could have executive for ROs, I'd like for them only be able to appoint not modify and dismiss.

I really don't support this, but if it is implemented ROs could be granted permission to modify and dismiss the ROs they appointed. Perhaps with a button accessible to founders and exec delegates to revoke that.

[Gest]

Defenders manage to get one of their own as an RO...

All it would take is one old puppet nation in a founderless region to end any occupation. Founderless regions don't have elections so as soon as a new nation takes the delegacy the natives will know a raid has happened. Then they'll have 26 hours to end any occupation. That's not a fightback option, it's a massacre option. There has to be consequences to being in a founderless region, it's not a natural state.

If a delay in dismissal is implemented then what is the point of the delegate elect change?

[United German Regions]

Defenders manage to get one of their own as an RO...

All it would take is one old puppet nation in a founderless region to end any occupation. Founderless regions don't have elections so as soon as a new nation takes the delegacy the natives will know a raid has happened. Then they'll have 26 hours to end any occupation. That's not a fightback option, it's a massacre option. There has to be consequences to being in a founderless region, it's not a natural state.

If a delay in dismissal is implemented then what is the point of the delegate elect change?

I must agree

[Embassy Master]

PROBLEM:

Ok, I have 9 officers right now, one ceased to exist while in office. I tried to modify and dismiss but it popped up the "This [nation] has ceased to exist" screen. It still says I have 9 officers when I only have 8. Can you please fix it so that I can dismiss an officer that ceased to exist.

[Cora II]

Defenders manage to get one of their own as an RO...

All it would take is one old puppet nation in a founderless region to end any occupation. Founderless regions don't have elections so as soon as a new nation takes the delegacy the natives will know a raid has happened. Then they'll have 26 hours to end any occupation. That's not a fightback option, it's a massacre option. There has to be consequences to being in a founderless region, it's not a natural state.

If a delay in dismissal is implemented then what is the point of the delegate elect change?

The Grand Master of the art of occupations speaks now.

People should listen.

[Improving Wordiness]

PROBLEM:

Ok, I have 9 officers right now, one ceased to exist while in office. I tried to modify and dismiss but it popped up the "This [nation] has ceased to exist" screen. It still says I have 9 officers when I only have 8. Can you please fix it so that I can dismiss an officer that ceased to exist.

I am going to quote this is in the bugs report thread that can be found here : viewtopic.php?p=26328856#p26328856